John Banks

Kim Dotcom, Mona Dotcom and alleged perjury

via msn.com

via msn.com

The Judge didn’t believe John and Mrs Banks, instead choosing to believe a convicted fraudster and ¬†his wife. ¬† John Banks has consistently claimed that there were others present, but the judge essentially labelled¬†the Bank’s liars.

A meeting at Kim Dotcom’s mansion during which electoral donations were discussed is likely to be revisited in John Banks’ court case.

The evidence of two American businessmen, said to be at the event where Mr Banks is said to have asked for donations to be split into two, will be presented to help the former MP’s appeal.

Earlier this year the former MP was convicted under Electoral Act charges but his sentence, delivered last month, has been deferred pending appeal. Read more »

McCready’s latest political stunt fails

Convicted fraudster, blackmailer, tax cheat and serial litigant, Graham McCready’s latest political stunt has failed for lack of evidence.

He is essentially wasting court time and taxpayers resources. He should be hammered for costs now every time he appears in court.

An attempt to prosecute the Prime Minister and a top policeman over the mayoral donations fiasco has been thrown out after a judge ruled a Leonardo DiCaprio movie wasn’t compelling evidence.

Private prosecutor Graham McCready, who last month claimed the scalp of former Auckland mayor and ex-police minister John Banks, has promised to fight the new decision from Judge Russell Collins, which was released to the Herald on Sunday.

McCready successfully prosecuted Banks for filing a false electoral return during the 2010 Auckland mayoral campaign. That case related to Banks’ receipt of two $25,000 donations from controversial internet mogul Kim Dotcom.

Banks was convicted, and sentenced for falsely filing an electoral but plans to appeal.

McCready wanted to prosecute Key and police inspector Mark Benefield. He presented 16 charging documents to Auckland District Court but Judge Collins said there was nowhere near enough evidence to proceed. ¬†¬† Read more »

Ass Nasty Lolly Stealer is trying to frame the argument

werwe

She knows what’s coming her way with the investigation into her alleged use of police resources for political purposes. ¬†So why not start acting the victim now, and throw yourself into the same pile as one of New Zealand’s worst offenders of political corruption.

Because Taito wasn’t guilty, just like her.

This won’t end well for Asenati, mark my words. ¬† She could be looking at jail time herself.

Take a bow Allan Dick, journalist

Alan Dick  Photo/Facebook

Allan Dick
Photo/Facebook

This is a man I probably oppose in his political views, but a man I can respect for what he has written yesterday.

Allan Dick wrote this on his Facebook page yesterday.

I have an admission to make. It will forever brand me but this is too important.

All my public life as a journalist and broadcaster I have kept my political persuasions private.

I believe in free enterprise and the rights of the individual to make his or her own way in life. I despise social bludgers and those who will legislate for the weakest links in the chain.

But I am also a socialist and believes in support for those who aren’t as self=supporting as I think I am. I have voted Labour all but once in my life when I voted Social Credit.¬†

Today though, I am regretting it. I have read the pure evil and the hatred that’s been directed at John Banks and I am ashamed to be from the same political camp as those making these comments.¬† Read more »

Judge runs out of patience, McCready gets his beans on costs application

Graeme McCready, serial litigants, bankrupt and convicted blackmailer and tax fraudster has got his beans today after Wylie J ran out of patience with his grandstanding.

McCready was seeking $45,000 in costs and sent a demand to Wylie J for costs.

Wylie J. has lambasted the fool.

banks-courtminute Read more »

If the Herald is in contempt then perhaps Kevin Hague and Tariana Turia are as well

Earlier I broke the news that the NZ Herald is facing a possible contempt of court charge after they published a poll.

The text of the article, which the Herald has taken down also quoted two MPs.

Given the trouble that the NZ Herald appears to be in it may be that Kevin Hague and Tariana Turia are also in trouble.

Green MP Kevin Hague favoured a conviction, though he said it was rightfully for a judge to decide, not a politician.

“It seems to me that the magnitude of the offending, and Mr Banks’ repeated denials of any culpability, indicate that a conviction would be appropriate.”

But Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia said Banks did not deserve a conviction.

“I don’t think so. It’s not the worst thing in the world. ¬† Read more »

NZ Herald in contempt of court over John Banks article?

The other day the NZ Herald ran a story about poll results regarding the sentencing of John Banks on 1 August.

The article has been taken down but remains on Google.

nzh-banks

This has potentially landed them in a spot of bother with Wylie J issuing a minute concerning their apparent contempt of court.¬† Read more »

That is what you should not do, so let that be a lesson to you.

A Classic story book called ‘The Bike lesson ‘springs to mind when watching recent media reports of donation’ scandals . ‘

It seems to me that a new version of the book called,’ The Donation lesson,’ needs to be written for the edification of both future and current politicians.

In the original book a well meaning Papa bear attempts to teach his young son how to ride his brand new bike. Every attempt ends in disaster but the ever resourceful Papa bear uses each accident as a lesson for his son. Each time he says, ‘ Now that, small bear is what you should not do, now let that be a lesson to you.’

Now that, Small bear is what you should not do...

Yes. That, is what you should not do…

So what lessons should present and future Politicians take from all the Political accidents so far?

Read more »

Stephen Franks on Labour’s Liu Legal problems

Stephen Franks has highlighted Labour’s little legal problems with the Donghua Liu revelations.

Since the link between Donghua Liu and David Cunliffe surfaced early this week there has been widespread speculation that Labour breached the law in failing to declare two campaign donations made by Mr Liu in 2007.

Though Labour maintains it has no records, the Herald has reported that in 2007 Mr Liu contributed $15,000 for a book signed by Helen Clark, and an unknown amount of money for a bottle of wine.

Under the current law, a candidate donation can include:

‚Äúwhere goods or services are provided by a candidate under a contract or arrangement at a value that is more than their reasonable market value, the amount of the difference between that value and the reasonable market value of those goods or services.‚ÄĚ

Corresponding terms govern party donations. Assuming the second donation was for more than $1500, they would capture both of Mr Liu’s transactions. The candidate or responsible party agent who knowingly failed to report them could face up to two years imprisonment (section 207I of the Electoral Act 1993).

But¬†until 19¬†December 2007 the law governing donations was different. Until then the Electoral Act 1993 defined ‚Äėdonation‚Äô to include goods or services provided¬†to¬†the party at an undervalue, but did not expressly capture a sale at an overvalue.

This loophole was partly closed by the Electoral Finance Act 2007 but untl then it was arguably legal not to report the alleged Liu donations if they were provided by way of auction price.

The fact that the law was changed to capture the second transaction increases the strength of the case that parliament realised there was a legal loophole under the old provision.

Read more »

Fran’O on cash for favours

Fran O’Sullivan dives the murky depths of large and undisclosed political donations

Business people have been directly hit up over the years to support campaigns by key politicians for election to public office. Not just Banks within Auckland. But also current mayor Len Brown, who managed to impress enough donors – primarily from business – to kick in $581,900.95 in donations to back him against Banks for the 2010 mayoral contest.

Business people will have been treated to the absurd platitude that it’s all about “supporting democracy” from various bagmen; or have used similar words themselves when justifying why their company or organisation has donated to a particular politician’s campaign.

Others will simply be out to buy influence. And quite open about it too by being very direct indeed that they support a particular politician because their policies will be good for business – particularly theirs.

Many simply believe a particular candidate is the best bet for Auckland’s progress.

Of course you want your candidate to win. ¬† But that doesn’t always equate to buying a specific policy or having someone look the other way. ¬†Not always. ¬† Read more »