Ex National MP back in court over naming “NZ’s Rolf Harris”


via TV3

Former MP Tau Henare is due back before the courts charged with naming a prominent man granted name suppression over an indecent act claim.

Henare, who retired at the 2014 election, is scheduled to return to Waitakere District Court today charged with breaching the suppression order.

He made no plea when he appeared on December 2 but could make a plea when he appears today.

Henare is accused of naming a man who pleaded guilty in 2012 over the incident but was later discharged without conviction and granted permanent name suppression.

The complainant, Louise Helmsley, successfully applied for her own name suppression to be lifted in October this year and has argued that the man’s name suppression should also be lifted.

Henare said outside court that it seemed unfair that the man granted the suppression order over the 2011 incident could get off “scot free” when cricketer Jesse Ryder was the centre of media attention for pulling out of a New Zealand A tour despite doing nothing wrong.


Previous poll result

I have been reluctant to name him as it would lead to complaints that it would enable people to simply see what Tau has said and then find out who it was.

A number of main stream media outlets have not had that concern, so now that the cat is well and truly out of the bag, I wonder if there is anyone left who doesn’t know who “Rolf” is.

Please note, you can still not name “Rolf” or leave any instructions or clues as to how to find out.  You will receive a commenting ban if you do.

Last time I ran a poll on this, about a 3rd of you didn’t know who “NZ’s Rolf Harris” was.  Let’s see if that has changed.



– TV3


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.

  • dgrogan

    I still have no idea who he is. But then I was never any good at charades in any case.

  • zotaccore

    I’m itching to put a sign outside saying who this filth is – maybe one day it will all be out. In the meantime, kudos to Tau – telling it how it is (whether you like him or not).

  • STAG

    This is getting ridiculous, name suppression is an important part of our judicial system and can’t simply be sidelined because people don’t like how it is applied.

    This man should never have been granted it, but because he has it must be left in place to prevent the undermining of the system.

    If the courts bow to public pressure and reverse this decision what’s to stop any pressure group from mounting a campaign to name anyone they feel is protected by the law against their skewed views.

  • unitedtribes

    Im one of the other 79 who don’t know and frankly I don’t care

  • Reaper

    So, still around one third don’t know. It doesn’t seem as if Tau’s contribution had much impact.

  • rua kenana

    Yeah. it’s easy enough to find out if one wants to. I did but was more interested in knowing who it wasn’t than who it was. The poor guy had/has problems. I see little point at this stage in making them worse. It won’t change the past.

    • Rod

      The fact that you were more interested in knowing who it wasn’t is the whole point. Calling someone a “prominent New Zealander” puts a whole lot of innocent people under suspicion unnecessarily.

      • KinaRolf

        This is true, and another major flaw in the system. Everyone stuffs it up, it is how you get out of the mess that counts, and what people will remember. Now the guy will be known for the rest of his life as that coward that did not have a backbone that could hold up his hand and say, OK – I was a bad boy, I learned the lesson, and I’ll prove it.

  • KinaRolf

    The man has been named extensively in the web papers overseas. We must remember that it is no longer possible for a judge in this little god forsaken nation called Aotearoa in the bottom corner of the map to dictate what the world should be able to say or not. Law is territorial and the suppression order is only valid in New Zealand, and is actually a violation of law and an offence in countries as the USA and China, both countries has freedom of expression.

    • Richard

      In light of what is happening currently around the rest of the world, I would argue that NZ is one of the few countries that isn’t “god forsaken”.

      • KinaRolf

        Anyone’s opinion is dependent if you are inside the bubble of propaganda or outside it. The problem with these frequent secrecy orders is that we will se more and more people fighting them, and many of desires of sensation, and people that should be left alone would be hurt. Secrecy order by courts does no longer work, but just fan the fire to fight them. Read a bit of other media around the world and you will find how incredibly narrow minded, self censored and limited the New Zealand media is. It is actually quite scary how issues are silenced in New Zealand.

    • Bruce Wayne

      Extensively? I’ve not seen that mentioned in any major overseas publication. Law is territorial and so is the media’s interest in this case.

      I suggest you visit Tiananmen Square and try some freedom of expression, before calling NZ a ‘godforsaken’ nation.

  • Teletubby

    The truly stupid thing about this which really highlights the shortcomings of our legal system and our judges, is that if the courts are consistent and hand down a similar punishment to Tau as they did to Cam then the consequences for Tau will be very to the consequences for “Rolf”

    • KinaRolf

      I agree with you, the main difference is that Tau and Cam are people within reach of the powers. So are Assange and Dotcom. I am not. Consequently they can be destroyed if they do or say something that the establishment, which I often call the modern feudal lords, does not approve of. Even if I use my real name, it would be impossible to track me, and get hold of me. I am well protected by other countries laws, and of technology. If a New Zealand judge orders tracking, he becomes a criminal under foreign local law, there is no exception, and if he can be apprehended, he may spend time in prison. This is a new world emerging, and New Zealand is not adapting well. I know who the guy is, I have not disclosed it, and I do not intend to do so, but that is of personal respect, not any court orders from that remote pacific island Aotearoa.

  • Bruce Rayner

    good on Hearae for doing this, but come on whaleoil don’t join the likes of NZHerald etc coz fact he is a x Nat.mp has nothing to do with this.
    Noticed past couple weeks you guys coming down to the level we have praised and supported you for not doing so don’t turn us against you

  • HemiMcK

    The problem with the name suppression issue is the Permanent bit.
    One way to address this would be introduce legislation allowing or possibly requiring permanent name suppression to be reviewed. Give the Courts the power with historic cases to consider whether name suppression is still required and appropriate.
    For future cases only allow time bounded name suppression for criminals and have them come back and re- argue their case to the court.

    • KinaRolf

      The real problem with all court suppression is not just the parliament, but the rest of the world where New Zealand is just a little dot in bottom corner of the map. Unimportant. At the same time courts and judges are behaving as they were emperors ruling the world. The real problem is an antiquated justice system, and attitude, that has not evolved since 1840 when it was wholesale imported from England to this colony. We also see a new development in media, not so much here but in EU, USA, and China, anonymous media. Everyone heard of Pirate Bay. The entire US government and copyright industry (note the Dotcom and Assange cases but also this site), with its enormous resources has been trying to shut it down since 2003, and it is still running. Everyone not complying with the establishment and say the “wrong thing” gets harassed, fined and imprisoned. Now we see news sites on the same concept as Pirate Bay. The “editorial office” are in the “cloud” and not known and can not be shut down or tracked. Nobody can know who the editor is who published the suppressed information.

  • Tom

    Name supression should have a time limit. Like a week maybe.

  • KinaRolf

    “Bruce Wayne”, I don’t know why your comment disappeared, I don’t feel it was controversial. But what I mean with “extensively” is that I made one search, actually on Baidu because it is not as highly censored as Google, and I got pages of links to web papers with the suppressed name. I was dumfounded. Papers like The Guardian and New York Times are not really interested, but many others are. Thanks for the advice to go to Tiananmen Square, but I have been there many times. Freedom of expression is great, I whish just New Zealand would open up to it, but it is also a double edges sword. It can be used for sedition and creating conflicts and it was extensively in Chinas past and it cost millions their lives. Survivors are with us today and can tell their story. We know what happened 1989, people have told their stories, on all sides, and today there is a code of conduct in China not to use freedom of expression to aggravate to violence and conflict, but in fact, as an individual, you freedom in China is better than New Zealand, and New Zealand is still not too bad even if it badly need improvements.