David Fisher

Banksie fights back

John Banks was the victim of a Dotcom/David ‘tainted’ Fisher hit job. I well remember meeting David Fisher for lunch at Soul Bar to discuss some stories with him. He was totally distracted having just been up to the Town Hall to look at donations returns after being given the heads up from his pal Kim Dotcom. He was very excited.

Later when the verdict was handed down by Justice Wylie in the High Court Fisher was seen to do a little jig celebrating at his big sting. Justice Wylie will have to apologise for that judgment in due course but we are seeing no apologies from David Fisher.

Meanwhile John Banks is fighting back against the legal malfeasance performed against him by crown lawyers.

John Banks has lodged a complaint against the Queen’s Counsel who prosecuted the politician for electoral fraud.

The parliamentary career of the former Act leader ended after he was convicted in the High Court for not disclosing two $25,000 donations from internet mogul Kim Dotcom to his Auckland mayoralty campaign in 2010.

The Court of Appeal then quashed the conviction after the “obsessed” detective work of Mr Banks’ wife, Amanda, who was stung by the trial judge’s opinion of her credibility when he preferred Mona Dotcom’s evidence about a lunch which was crucial to the case.

Mrs Banks tracked down two witnesses from America who corroborated her version of events and whose evidence the three appellate justices said was “likely to have changed the outcome of the trial”, if accepted.

What the three appellate judges – or Mr Banks’ lawyer David Jones QC – were not told was that Dotcom, when presented with the the evidence of the two American businessmen, changed his evidence.

Dotcom and his missus perjured themselves. Why he isn’t on charges I can’t imagine.
Read more »

Why did Hager only choose TVNZ and RNZ?


Further to my musings on Hager and the media colluding on a hit on National and John Key, it kind of came to me that I could explain why TV3 was being cold shouldered by Hager (because John Campbell is now with Radio New Zealand).

I also figured out why Fairfax are outside the tent (because Andrea Vance is now at TVNZ).

But then it struck me.   What on earth has happened to the NZ Herald?

Matt Nippert and David Fisher were donkey deep running the Dirty Politics campaign along the Labour Party, Rawshark and Hager play book.  The New Zealand Herald were having pool parties diving through reams of my emails, mocking me and my friends on a daily basis through the paper, online and through social media.  They also phoned companies and key people with one sided stories, even managing to get some people sacked.
Read more »

The ends justifies the means for the left-wing

The left-wing are all over the “Panama Papers”, like white on rice.

They were all over Nicky Hager’s illegal use of my private correspondence.

Both cases involved criminal hackers illegally obtaining private documentation and then shopping that to left-wing activists who laundered the documents, published them and claimed public interest…all as a result of a crime.

But dial back on the personalities and the politics and put what has happened in a different context.

Let’s say a group of criminal defense lawyers kept a database of their confidential conversations with their clients.  That would include clients charged with murder, robbery, DUI, drug abuse, and so on.  In turn, a hacker would break into that database and post the information from those conversations on Wikileaks.  Of course a lot of those conversations would appear to be incriminating because — let’s face it — most of the people who require defense attorneys on criminal charges are in fact guilty.  When asked why the hack was committed, the hacker would say “Most of those people are guilty.  I want to make sure they do not escape punishment.”

How many of us would approve of that behavior?  Keep in mind the hacker is spreading the information not only to prosecutors but to the entire world, and outside of any process sanctioned by the rule of law.  The hacker is not backed by the serving of any criminal charges or judge-served warrants.

Yet somehow many of us approve when the victims are wealthy and higher status, as is the case with the Panama Papers.  Furthermore most of those individuals probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal shell corporations.  Admittedly, very often the underlying tax laws should be changed, just as we should repeal the deduction for mortgage interest too.  But in the meantime we are not justified in stealing information about those people, even if some of them are evil and powerful, as is indeed the case for homeowners too.

Read more »

Banksie gets some justice at last

John Banks has got some justice at last, though not nearly enough to cover the expenses of clearing his name against a campaign of spite run by Dotcom, David Fisher and the Solicitor-General’s own office.

Former politician John Banks has been awarded $66,200 in costs from the Crown for the Court of Appeal hearings that resulted in his acquittal for his electoral return for mayoral donations.

Mr Banks said a further application for costs of $190,000 had now been lodged in the High Court for the earlier trial which convicted him of electoral fraud before that conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal.

The case related to donations Mr Banks received from Kim Dotcom for his 2010 mayoral campaign which were not disclosed on his electoral return and which Mr Banks claimed were anonymous.

The decision by the Court of Appeal to overturn its earlier decision for a retrial meant Mr Banks was acquitted of filing a false return.

Attorney General Chris Finlayson confirmed the Court of Appeal costs had now been resolved.

Read more »

She’s barking mad, clearly

Poor old David ‘Tainted’ Fisher, he’s so badly tainted he has had to resort to writing stories about mad dog ladies at war with her neighbours.

The first article he wrote was edited online several times as the story changed, literally before readers’ eyes. Initially it started off in support of the mad dog lady, but then subtly changed once facts raised their pesky head.

Now he has had a second go and we find out that the woman is obviously barking mad, but not mad enough to have first enlisted Fisher to tell just her side of the story. As is usual though, Fisher has used her to firstly raise the story, and now he uses her to smash her up, reinforcing his predilection of burning his sources and contacts.

A dog owner at war with her Auckland neighbours has progressed to a new home – and a brand new controversy – a little further south.

When the Weekend Herald introduced readers to Ms de St Croix last weekend, she talked of the battle with neighbours in Orakei which had led to a police investigation over her application to keep two dogs at her home. It was an inquiry she claimed came out of a class war: “We own a Porsche. I don’t work and my husband’s a qualified doctor. That’s why they hate us.”

In contrast, neighbours talked of constant barking and a dog permit application form which carried their names even though they had never given consent.

Well, it turns out Ms de St Croix is moving – and she’s already embattled with her new neighbours in one of Tauranga’s leafier suburbs.

It means an unexpected move for their tenants Scott and Brooke Nicholls and their three children, who say they will miss living in a place where they get on well with their neighbours.

Read more »

Finally. Fatty’s Fanbois at the Ferald turn

Even the Herald is seeing the writing on the wall for Mr Dotcom.  Or, more realistically, they can’t see any more money in them thar hills and have finally joined the rest of New Zealand in wanting him gone.

Judge Nevin Dawson has found prima facie breaches of copyright on a massive scale in Dotcom’s operation. It is important to note that prima facie findings are not proven guilt; they mean simply that the evidence offered by the prosecution is strong enough to support his extradition. Dotcom and his co-accused offered alternative explanations for the alleged offences but these can be considered only at a trial.

To avoid extradition, their lawyers had to show that the evidence against them was unsound, or the application faulty. They did not do so.

Dotcom and his co-accused should now take their explanations to a trial in the US. Unfortunately they are determined to stay here and take full advantage of our glacial legal system. They lodged an appeal against the district court decision the day it was delivered and Mr Mansfield said they would go all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary. Once they have exhausted those appeals, the Minister of Justice can make the extradition decision, which can also be appealed on issues of procedure.

It has taken nearly four years for the case to come this far. We may expect years more to pass at each stage of appeal. And all the while it is costing this country a fortune in court time and expenses.

The district court hearing took nine weeks and it followed countless procedural hearings since Dotcom’s arrest in an almost paramilitary police operation in January 2012. Read more »

The disgusting, disrespectful actions of David Fisher and the NZ Herald

Photo/ Supplied

Photo/ Supplied

The NZ Herald and David Fisher in particular, have been hounding the family of Jonah Lomu.

David Fisher has a habit of preying on the families of dead people, once secretly filming the funeral of a police officer despite being told not to at the time.

Now he is smearing a dead man who can’t defend himself and mis-representing public statements.

Yesterday a press release was issued by the family of Jonah Lomu. The NZ Herald reported it but rather maliciously edited out a few key sentences in the press release and made it look altogether different from that which was issued.

The key part was quoted in the NZ Herald like this:

“Thank you to New Zealand and the world for the support and love you have shown my sons Brayley and Dhyreille on the passing of their Daddy,” Nadene said.

“While this is a hard time for us, I am grateful for the support from all of you that have over the last week spared a thought for our family.

“On behalf of not just me, but Brayley and Dhyreille, I would like to thank those in the media that have given us space and time as a family to grieve.

“Once again, thank you so much for your love and support, have a safe and happy Christmas with your family these holidays and enjoy every moment you can with your loved ones, you never know how long you have them with you.”

Read more »

The mendacity of the NZ Herald and David ‘Tainted’ Fisher

Yesterday David “Tainted” Fisher wrote an article in the NZ Herald. He contacted me on Friday afternoon for comment, but I didn’t respond. There is no point responding to David “Tainted” Fisher because he has an agenda and is on a mission to protect Nicky Hager and to ultimately protect himself.

He is a mendacious scumbag.

The NZ Herald appends each of his stories about Nicky Hager’s predicament with this rider:


But even that isn’t really truthful. You see in the documents released from the court and the common bundle we can actually see that David “Tainted” Fisher actually swore his two affidavits for and on behalf of Nicky Hager.  Read more »

Posted without comment

Not just Nicky, it also means you David, and Matt and anyone else who worked with the hacker

David ‘Tainted’ Fisher has yet another article in support of his partner in crime Nicky Hager.

This time catching up on something everyone else has been talking about since last week…that a recent Supreme Court decision regarding data as property and what that means for people working with criminal hackers.

Dirty Politics author Nicky Hager may face criminal charges over accepting the hacked material used to write the bombshell book, according to documents obtained by the Herald.

Police will not say whether the investigative journalist is again a suspect, instead of simply a witness, after a pivotal Supreme Court decision which ruled computer files were property.

Documents show the new definition from the court puts Hager back in the frame over the computer files he was given by a hacker which he used as the basis for his book.

An Official Information Act response to Hager’s lawyers in June saw police lawyer Carolyn Richardson explain there had been a decision – apparently just before the journalist’s house was searched – to treat him as an “unco-operative witness as opposed to a suspect”. It was based on legal advice over an earlier Court of Appeal decision which said computer files weren’t property, she said.    Read more »