defamation

Labour’s Dirty Politics – Coward Parker defames and smears with no evidence

We have now seen Labour’s Dirty Politics tactics in actions with the brazen coward David Parker standing in the General Debate yesterday and outrageously smearing and defaming Mark Hotchin, Carrick Graham, Cathy Odgers and myself.

I have had two people make worrying allegations to me. One is a former staff member of the Serious Fraud Office who told me at the time the Serious Fraud Office commenced their investigation, a former advisor to Hotchins contacted this person and said, “Hotchins plays a rough game. You watch out. He will use underhand tactics to undermine the Serious Fraud Office and their staff”

The second allegation I have had made to me was that Mr Hotchins used underhand tactics to take out some of the potential witnesses against him in respect of his conduct by Hanover.

Now I can’t name either of those sources and I can’t prove those allegations to be true and they are both hearsay allegations to me, but these allegations must be investigated.

He can’t name them, he has no evidence, it is hearsay at best and yet he demands an investigation? Is this man really a lawyer?

Not a shred of evidence. Even Winston Peters produces evidence.

It is obvious that he has spent too much time running one up his crippled mate’s missus instead reading the Chisholm report.

After days in the house with Andrew Little claiming that National runs a smear machine it was David Parker who displayed the most outrageous smear seen in the parliament in a long, long time. ¬†¬† Read more »

Brian Gaynor Made To Eat His Own Humble Pie

Brian Gaynor threw the cloak of sanctimony around his shoulders and rode his high horse during Dirty Politics crying about being sued for defamation and invoking an argument that being sued for defamation suppressed his freedom of speech.

Well, well, well what a difference a few weeks makes.

Yesterday in The Herald both Gaynor and the Herald have had to apologise to Mark Hotchin and Hanover for their Hotchin derangement syndrome on page B12, buried sufficiently back in the rag so as to not be noticed.

I wonder why it wasn’t online? No matter I borrowed someone’s paper so I didn’t have to buy one.

gaynor-defamation Read more »

Why look for news when you can make Stuff up?

The Dominion Post seems to be plumbing the depths that the Herald usually inhabits.

unnamed-1

I guess they figured the Taxpayers‚Äô Union wasn‚Äôt so good with the record keeping. ¬† Read more »

Who would want to be Chris Cairns now?

229602_373675819410727_312404663_n

Dylan Cleaver reports

Lalit Modi has issued legal proceedings against Chris Cairns to claw back $4.9 million in damages and costs.

Mr Modi, the former head of the Indian Premier League, has also applied to the High Court in London to have the libel verdict won by Cairns in 2012 to be set aside on the grounds of fraud.

In an email to the Herald, Modi’s lawyer, Rajesh Vyakarnam, said: “Mr Modi has issued proceedings to set aside the 2012 libel judgment on the ground of fraud and is claiming the return of all damages and costs paid which are in excess of ¬£2.4m. Read more »

Face of the day

Alastair Thompson

Alastair Thompson

To be fair, Alastair Thompson has many reasons for his intense dislike of Cameron Slater as he has been exposed a number of times on Whaleoil for his dodgy dealings.

However he has now resorted to making things up in order to try to get his revenge. Actually that is too polite. He is defaming Cameron with statements that he knows very well are lies.

It is one thing to hit your opponents by exposing facts, it is quite another to deliberately defame them.

Read more »

McCullum vs Cairns: Only one can be right

collage_650_052014024443

What are the odds of both Brendan McCullum and Chris Cairns speaking the truth and both stories work in together flawlessly? ¬†¬† Read more »

Colin Craig suddenly not so litigous

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman and Conservative Party leader Colin Craig have resolved their dispute over Norman’s comments about Craig at the Big Gay Out earlier this year.

Craig had filed a lawsuit against Norman after the Greens co-leader claimed that Craig thought a woman’s place was in the kitchen and a gay man’s was in the closet.

A joint statement issued by the Greens said both accepted that the comments were made on a political occasion, but they disagreed about what the comments were understood to mean.

“Neither party considers there is value in continuing with the dispute in the courts.

“They jointly issue this statement to draw a line under the dispute. There is no issue about damages, since Mr Craig never sought them, and both parties have agreed to bear their own costs.”

Didn’t Russel Norman get a boat load of money to fight the lawsuit? ¬† Wonder where that ended up?

 

– Stuff

EXCLUSIVE: Another Hager and Fisher lie exposed

“Mr” Hager, using my stolen emails, drawing conclusions based on incomplete information, writing a narrative and not checking it with the people involved,¬†any of the people involved for factual correctness before publishing, has been pushing the idea that I was involved in having a prisoner moved. ¬† He’s published a lie that Minister Judith Collins organised this.

David Fisher, in his partial and very sanitised “Mea Culpa – I used to be manipulated against my will by Cameron Slater” piece in the Herald the other day may also take note of the fact, instead of how he likes to present things.

Below, is an OIA reply from the Department of Corrections.  All personal details have been redacted to respect the privacy of the person who requested the OIA.  A non-redacted copy is in my possession.

1a

Read more »

The Simpson Grierson Challenge

Yesterday, Kim Dotcom revealed that two “junior” lawyers are tasked with keeping up to date with Whaleoil every day so they may compile material for a rumoured defamation suit.

It’s nice to know we have you here. ¬†I’ve called you Tom and Jerry. ¬†It’s so much nicer to have names. ¬†After all, you know mine.

il_340x270.565679397_rsuv

Not really Tom and Jerry. Actually, I don’t know this. This may in fact be Tom and Jerry. But I’m fairly sure it isn’t Tom and Jerry from Simpson Grierson

Now, I don’t see why you should have your enjoyment of Whaleoil spoiled by actually having to do real work.

Just so you know I’m thinking of you, I’ve encrypted something truly defamatory. ¬†Your challenge is to decrypt it.

d7 42 c4 13 ba 08 f3 eb 23 35 82 1b 27 96 96 5f 72 89 a5 cc e7 aa 1f 19 c3 08 69 4a dc 7c a3 2e 05 22 12 5c 11 b7 bc f8 fd 46 d3 5a 69 dd d3 46 17 2e 9d 7c 6f 0d 87 5e 62 7d ba 83 b7 30 82 5a 77 52 b3 dc 8d e2 59 86 d3 f7 02 1a 7a 07 e8 23 2a ff 3e 5a 79 cf c0 0f b7 8b 5d a8 5f 1b 95 11 69 06 be 6e 9e 57 4a 7d 87 e8 7a c6 a2 c8 84 d9 75 17 c1 9c 9e ff eb 36 f8 94 10 15 ec 76 9e 4b e8 99 73 1f 27 c5 b4 58 48 8c fe 5e 39 99 c3 61 bf b8 36 e4 c5 e9 d6 28 ec ad 54 e0 21 ae 53 b8 63 b6 3e aa 2d 48 d2 11 5c 44 6f 20 67 c4 82 d2 06 f5 26 16 c8 ae bc 78 d5 7c cf 44 03 a1 d1 9b 5b dc d9 1b 65 dd 2a 24 91 df 65 09 08 c3 f6 d3 86 a8 57 21 09 23 b9 4c 01 5c 06 7a e3 eb d5 6d 80 03 e8 f8 b2 e6 57 aa b1 9b e0 99 7b 43 a8 cd 70 46 34 14 3f f8 1b b8 2e e1 40 6c c5 a0 f7 60 93 bd 4f 49 9b 48 0c 03 9a 3e 40 a9 bc 6e 27 bd 0f a0 bd 64 86 25 b2 56 02 f0 d6 5f 82 26 fd f5 af 1b ff 49 6b f2 1f ab d9 2a f5 44 1f 7a 24 ab a2 e9 8c cb c5 ab c7 ce 54 30 41 a4 3e 1e 6e 4a ac f4 de 13 26 1c c4 14 fc 92 27 0e 2a 89 57 8b 1e a7 f3 ba 44 b5 63 fa 0e a7 f7 69 7e 6c 8b 85 50 20 18 97 01 a8 88 8f d4 c1 11 84 72 d7 51 0d 28 12 03 fd dd ab cd 78 96 4b a3 10 94 d6 16 e6 b2 e4 6a 0a 24 d1 d2 f4 be 49 87 52 a6 e8 6e eb af 1c 62 7e 3f 86 02 99 45 be ef 1b 25 1c e0 ed 5b d3 a2 c1 08 02 9d 37 2b 87 2a d3 85 2a b6 0a f7 5b b0 90 85 ec 43 c0 24 6a d6 3d a8 25 c8 81 88 a6 4a 7b e6 4c ff ad 7d df ef 3b 96 b4 26 Read more »

More impertinent questions

Is Kim Dotcom the person with the most active court actions in NZ right now?

Is he McCready’s 2nd cousin?

How many of those did he start himself?

Why so many?

Is Whaleoil the¬†only media organisation that hasn’t had a legal letter yet?

When will the bullying to silence criticism stop?

Was the Church of Scientology analogy reasonable?