When is a threat not a threat?

NZ Herald

Bronwyn Pullar is a piece of work. She has issued a statement to the NZ Herald where she says the emails that I published aren’t a threat to the minister concerned:

With regard to the leaked emails, Ms Pullar said it could not be construed as a threat to go public, “as it was openly copied to five people in the media at the same time”.

Ms Pullar suffered a head injury in a 2002 bicycle accident that she said left her unable to work fulltime, and has been battling with ACC over its assessments of her ability to work.

Perhaps she was pissed when she wrote up that excuse, perhaps even as pissed as when she fell off her bike.

Anytime a correspondence with a government minister has media copied into the message openly that IS a threat. An implied threat at least, that if you don;t get any resolution to the issue that those very same media people will get more information…or perhaps they will start chasing the story.

he final point is that media are not the public…so she very definitely was threatening a minister some time before her fateful meeting on December 1.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Symgardiner

    This must be one of the few times I disagree.
    This wasn’t a threat. This was an attack. The copying in of the entire world was the end game.Really the issue, which has stuffed it for the Police, is the ACC ‘managers’ didn’t document the meeting properly back in the letter. If they had immediately escalated it, sent a letter saying all comms are ceased because of the threatening nature of these ladies and that the case was going to the Police… then it might stick. The FACT that they sent an engaging letter summarizing the meeting means it is purely a he says/she says and the documentation is on the side of the she says ladies.There’s an old public service adage… if it ‘aint documented, it didn’t happen. These ACC amateurs failed when it matters. 

    • Euan Rt

      But it shouldn’t be hard to prove that they knowingly held on to information which they knew was wrongful, in order to gain a pecuniary advantage. That is blackmail and I would have thought, not difficult for police to pursue.

      • Symgardiner

        Not if the ACC ‘managers’ didn’t make file notes of the meeting that included those discussions. Which it sounds like they didn’t at the time. 
        This will disappear into the abyss of political “under investigation” cases the Police have on their desks and die a death with time.
        I’m not saying these two ladies are clean. Just that the opportunity to land a real punch was lost the moment those ‘managers’ didn’t do their jobs and escalate something that was way out of their league.

    • Peter Wilson

      Aren’t we being a little naive here?

      Didn’t document the meeting? Was it because ACC staff were doing something they didn’t want documented. No, that couldn’t be it, surely.

  • Deep blue

    Puller and Mistress Boag are now causing such an issue for the Government that they should never be allowed back into National Party conferences. Now that’s strong considering all the other useless hangers-on that attend these batshit boring conferences, but Boag has yet again caused the National Party embarrassment.

    By emailing in the press gallery hacks, it is a demonstrable threat to the Minister and his political staffers, who will then have had to go and have a quiet chat with them. No doubt they told them that this woman Puller (and oh God that Boag woman) are mad and can’t be trusted.

    What a fucking shambles and its running into day 3 now. When’s Hooton going to have something on the demise of Boag on ipredict???

  • politically unstable

    “With regard to the leaked emails, Ms Pullar said it could not be
    construed as a threat to go public, “as it was openly copied to five
    people in the media at the same time ”

    So there was no leak? She openly admits to sending the emails elsewhere? Or have I missed a step.

  • Anon

    ACC do not send letters of support to medical assessors. The whole process is to find out what jobs the claimant has the skills to do, and the medical assessor decides which of those jobs the client can do given the injury. Nick Smith wrote a letter which was clearly ment to be sent to the medical assessor and clearly ment to second guess his medical opinion. It is obvious that this chick can work, but she wants to hold on to her benefit, maybe she earned heaps in 2002 can know she cant get a job which will pay as much. ACC were doing what their minister told them to do. After all the lies he told about ACC at the beginning I am pleased he stepped up and said he did wrong. She must be a piece of work!