EXCLUSIVE: “Grandma” strikes back. Your move, Mr Craig

If you didn’t catch last night’s article where Colin Craig sent a rather impressive letter to someone, you’ll need to catch up first. ? Then come back and read this.

Whaleoil has obtained “Grandma”‘s reply to Mr Craig’s letter.

19 November 2015

Mr Craig

Re your email of 18 November 2015.

LEAVE ME ALONE! I consider your post-litigation email between us, which decided in my favour, a re-opening of matters already decided by the court and you harassing me because you did not like that result. This appears to be the case, from your reference too!

“You will recall that you previously made allegations of fraud (or theft) at the ERA hearing between us and you were required to retract these allegations at the hearing after we had independent auditors show you were wrong.” You are silly re-litigating the Court’s decision which was in my favour

I would suggest that you do not contact me in any way, not by phone, txt, email or visit me. In failing this I will have no alternative but to go to the Police. You are therefore on notice from today, being 19 November 2015.

You provide no evidence that I have “been corresponding with Mr John Stringer.

You assume I have made “a number of defamatory statements” but these are assumptions on your part.

You also provide no evidence that the two examples you give, are quotes from me. They appear to be copied from the coNZervative website ? you are assuming this came from me!

What others do/or do not do, is no concern of mine. “It is very regrettable indeed that you have chosen to make these statements.” That is an assumption on your part. You make lots of assumptions, and they are often wrong. Threatening me with litigation based on assumptions is harassment!

I will not provide you or your company “with a copy of all communications between myself and Mr Stringer (both facebook and email) and a signed letter certifying this is the complete record of the exchange.” Who I talk to, is no concern of yours, and I will not be bullied by you in my private life.

And further I will not provide you with “a written apology and retraction to myself and Centurion Management for the specific allegations you have made.” based on assumptions you have made.

Also, I will not provide you with “a written apology and retraction to myself and Centurion Management for the specific allegations you have made.” based on assumptions you have made! ?[ I know, confusing, it was in there twice ?- CS ]

I will not provide “a written undertaking you will not make further allegations about myself or the company.” New Zealand is not a totalitarian state with you at its head. You have no right or basis to direct and intimidate me like this.

I will not provide you with a “written undertaking you will make no comment to the media about these allegations.” If I choose to speak to the media, that is my choice, not yours. You cannot bully and intimidate me as you did previously at Centurion while I was your employee.

I will not “write to Mr Stringer and advise him that you retract in full and immediately all allegations about Mr Craig and Centurion Management and provide us with a copy of that letter/email.” That is ridiculous. You have provided no proof I have even spoken to Mr Stringer on the issues you raise.

Your threat of defamation against me has no basis or foundation. I understand you are already involved in several defamation actions and adding me to your aptitude for vexatious law suits may result in me seeking relief from the Court against you.

You are a disturbed and bullying person. I warn you (and “Mr X”) TO LEAVE ME ALONE.


You might wonder what is going on for Mr Craig to be contacting people like this, making random connections where there are none, and -in my lay opinion- making things very much worse for himself.

What on earth is it that he’s trying to achieve?

I understand, but am?still checking, that Mr Craig has been trying to identify one of Stringer’s defence witnesses, first by getting his lawyers to ask who it is, and now by approaching a number of people and probing around.

The reason not to name these people until the court case is exactly because there is a concern that Mr Craig will react in a manner similar to what you saw yesterday. Other sources tell us, that Mr Craig is already being investigated by police for approaching?several of Mr Stringer’s other defence witnesses, suggesting how they should testify and ?offering to write affidavits for them in exchange for no longer communicating with Mr Stringer.

What Mr?Craig appears to be doing now, is trying to flush Mr Stringer’s?witnesses?out and either gagging them or getting them to agree to sign statements he has written on their behalf.

Since none of these things are before the courts yet, we can all enjoy the sunlight on Mr Craig’s tactics. ? These tend to work well away from public view, but once everything you write to people has the potential to be published, it gets a lot harder to keep the lid on.

It’s not defamation to publish someone’s own letter. ? Even when it asserts it contains statements that are defamatory.

Whaleoil can reveal that “Grandma” did not make both of those statements. ? So not only has Mr Craig made ?the huge error of putting his guesswork and “if you don’t do this, I will…” promises in writing, he’s barking up the wrong?tree.