Ben Rachinger, Cameron Slater and the journalist that wanted to pay in blow jobs

Selection_008

Ben Rachinger, Cameron Slater and the journalist that wanted to pay in blow jobs

Ben has had a rocky ride with media in New Zealand.  As it appeared he had information about Cameron Slater that was going to be negative, media were drawn to him as a moth to a flame.  Cameron Slater stories sell papers and get people to tune in.

After he released intimate private photos of a New Zealand journalist however, that relationship between Ben and the NZ Media turned sour.  Nobody wanted to be anywhere near him, with the exception of Lisa Owen and Tim Watkin of Mediaworks/TV3/The Nation.  

Dragging up the history of Ben doing something that low is an easy way to fill a blog post, but I decided not to do it.  In spite of the journalist’s feelings about me, which are hostile to the extreme, I saw no reason to rip that story back open just to kick Ben in the shins.

That story was dead, buried and irrelevant.  And yet, here we are.  What happened?  

A few days ago, Ben, anticipating that some of his correspondence with me would end up on the Internet (what a clever boy!), decided to go into damage control mode.   Now, if you haven’t understood the basic problem:  Ben is responsible for releasing intimate photos of a journalist, and I have Ben’s own words describing his feelings and thoughts as he talked to me about the journalist and the photos.

He decided to blurt all this out in public.  On twitter.   Just a few days ago.

Selection_132
Him being me.  And you being the journalist.  

Selection_133

I’ve needed to repeat this a number of times now, and it appears I need to do it again:  I did not send the pictures to another web site.  I did not send the pictures to other journalists,  especially not David Fisher!  So let’s cut the “I/he” rubbish. They were Ben’s  pictures, he sent me some.  I didn’t send any to anyone.  They were widely distributed among media and none of them got the photos from me.

And guess what?  The journalist knows it too.

Selection_134

How dramatic.  At this stage it should be clear to readers we can’t believe anything written down or said by Ben.  It may be that he’s genuine, but who can tell?  I mean, this sounds so good, until you put it all in context of all the other stuff he’s said and wrote, and more specifically, the timing of this outburst:  days before he knew that suppression would come off the material that I wanted to publish, including the logs that prove he sent them to me.  So his contrition seems a little “well timed”.  He had months to do it, but chose to do it a few days before it all went public.  Well done that man.

Selection_135Yes.  The police have evidence of Ben sending erotic photos of a journalist to me.  Because I gave this evidence to them.  Amazing, eh?  It’s also part of what I filed in court Ben.  So I could defend myself from your wide-ranging theories.

Selection_136

Ben claims he also sent the police “full and unredacted” chat logs.   I don’t know if this is true.  Because when I tabled my logs in court a few weeks ago, there was what you might call a “mild panic” from the police prosecutor.

Some of these Threema logs have now been suppressed.   I can’t report on those portions, or allude to whatever they contained.

Had Ben truly provided “full and unredacted” evidence to the Police, I really would not have expected the police and the court to react so surprised and then subsequently order the whole Threema conversation sealed.

I then pointed out to the Court that with the suppression being lifted and the evidence sealed, I had nothing left to defend myself with in public.  The judge then changed his mind a little.  I now am allowed to use it, quote from it and publish it, as long as I do not mention the suppressed portions.

But back to Ben’s attempt at damage control, and his attempts to reverse the damage he had done to a journalist.  A journalist who he acted for as a source telling her about Hager’s secrets.  The journalist also was part of the plan to get Ben work at a media organisation to consult on security matters (oh the irony!  I wonder how long their networks have been compromised since…)

I of course knew the reason for this sudden public outburst of “contrition”, but nobody else understood why.  And why now?

People on Twitter weren’t impressed.  And when you apologise, I would imagine you’d do it to that person’s face – if they’ll see you.  Or on the phone, if they’ll talk to you.  And at least through an email.   You don’t have a stream of consciousness on Twitter about it unless your true motives are for the public to be informed.

Selection_137

People on Reddit that are clearly smarter than I am commented on this affair 11 months earlier, and had his measure.

Selection_138

I’m not sure who Ben hasn’t upset by now.  Family won’t have anything to do with him.  The left won’t have anything to do with him.  The right won’t have anything to do with him.  The media (apart from the complicit The Nation crew) won’t have anything to do with him because of this matter here, and Rangi Kemara and other “security consultants” and “hacktivists” also have seen that Ben talks too much and leaks too much.  He even managed to put the police off-side, and says he will sue them for not looking after him properly.

Plenty of “evidence” behind the hacking scandal.  Goodness knows if any of the crap he created along the way has any veracity at all.  Although I do believe the police hold much more valuable information – information gathered directly from other people through direct engagement in encrypted chat rooms while they still thought Ben could be trusted.

 

One thing is clear:  if you talk to Ben in private, you have no idea where that conversation will end up.  It could be hackers, the media, politicians, the police.  Anyone.  Some of our evidence was made public by Ben before I was even allowed to release it.  If there is one thing that’s hurting my head it is this:  just exactly what side is Ben on, and what is he trying to achieve?

 

But back to defending myself against Ben’s allegations that I am part of damaging “the journalist’s” career.  Below are portions of conversations as they pertain to the journalist.   Most of it has nothing to do with the photos.  Here’s the first bit.

Although I’m aware the identity of the journalist is already out and publicly known, I don’t want my  defence against Ben Rachinger on my own blog to add to the volume of searchable material on that journalist’s name.  As such, I have redacted the name from the logs.  Unlike Ben, who dumped a load of documents on the Internet yesterday with all sorts of people’s names in them, including someone that has blanket name suppression (where does this end?).  So this is the best I can do under the circumstances.  As I said during my opening remarks, I had already decided not to cover this part until Ben made it all current again by implicating me in something I haven’t done just a few days ago.  

 

Selection_139

Ben essentially lays a link between the journalist having had a boyfriend that people have accused of being Rawshark.  So not only is the journalist spying on me through Ben, and on Hager through Ben, she’s also linked to someone who is being speculated about as Rawshark… according to Ben.  Trust me, it doesn’t make any more sense if you look at it longer.

Selection_140

And a knife in the back.  Notice to Lisa Owen:  Ben has a history of back stabbing media.  Just an FYI there.  Before you get all excited over Ben’s credibility.  Look at my reaction: “Oh ok”.  Not, “great”, or “let’s do it”.   I wasn’t impressed, and it never happened.   But somehow, setting the journalist up was very important to Ben

6 days later, Ben reminds me, once again.

Selection_141

I had no interest in running disinformation campaigns.  All I wanted was to see the people responsible for the hacking and dissemination of my emails to be charged and walked into a court.  Whatever games Ben wanted to play, I kept pushing for information that could help me solve the hacking case against Whaleoil.

It’s time to warn you.  The next two conversations is where things get nasty.  I thought long and hard about it, and in the end I don’t owe Ben nor the Journalist any favours.

Selection_142

John being John Key.   But note that I don’t bring up the subject of the journalist.  Ben is the one that opens up.  Again.   Where it says [IMAGE] I received a photo.  And those two were just to prove it was the journalist, but it contained nothing inappropriate.

You may also note I didn’t immediately beg for the photos.  I didn’t ask for the ones that were sent, and I didn’t ask for more.  Yet Ben was keen for me to have them.  It seems to me now that was “revenge porn” on Ben’s behalf, and he expected me to ask for them all and spread them around.   Ben shouldn’t believe what people say about me.  The Bevan Chuang photos never got released.  I have other photos, never released.  It’s not my style unless it is relevant to the news piece.

Let’s carry on:

Selection_143

I finally ask for one naked photo.  “For insurance”.  It’s a side of politics you may not like or respect, but I trust you can clearly see my mindset is one of information gathering and not about getting salacious photographs to use for a story.  Ben had already told me that the journalist was trying to use him as an informant on me.  To have one photo is definitely “insurance”.

 

 

And there you have it.  The truth that Ben Rachinger knew what was coming out because I tabled it in court, and the court sealed all of it, and then I had to fight hard to get it back.

Imagine if I couldn’t tell my side of the story, and just Ben’s was allowed to stand?

The point to take away from all this is that Ben Rachinger presents himself as a friend and cooperative ally to people while at the same time screwing the same people over when he talks to and works with others.   I have no doubt he had the journalist on the end of leash with promises about information about me.

I really don’t think the journalist would have flown to another city to “rape him” and “pay him in blowjobs”.  What you can be assured of is that he had spun a story that he had all the dirt on Cameron Slater, and what sane journalist wouldn’t want that scalp?

They clearly did have a parting of the ways, a quite ugly one where Ben tried to use me to inject the intimate photos into the public. He tried a number of times.  “Don’t share these, wink wink!”. As that had failed, they made their way to the media before they ended up on another web site. Even [self-redacted while checking timeline] claimed he had seen these awful, personal photos, and [self-redacted while checking timeline] is also on public record having seen them.  You can be assured that I wasn’t the source there either.

Selection_145

Ben was getting operational information from his police contacts about the Hager Raid, and he was blurting them to the media.  Some informant.  Basically, whatever you tell Ben ends up somewhere else.  You just never know where.

He was even trying to get to Andrew Little.  Nope, not kidding.

Selection_146

But, readers, it’s all my fault.  Or John Key.  Pick one.  

Remember folks: The Media Party have all claimed that what Ben Rachinger has said about me is all true, and so if that is true then they must start believing that this is true too.

 

More about Ben and back stabbing media tomorrow.

 


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.

  • [MOD notice] The naming of “the journalist” in any way, shape, fashion, through cleverness or malice will result in a permanent ban.

  • metalnwood

    The journalist is a very lucky one as any journalist that would pay with those favours is certainly a journalist that would put that same unethical behaviour of someone else front and centre for the world to see.

    • spanishbride

      We don’t know what really happened which is the whole point. Ben told us so many lies we no longer know what was real and what was made up.We can only logically conclude that he did the same to the journalist and The Nation and The Police and whoever else he has had dealing with.

  • Mike Houlding

    Please explain Pete. Permanent ban from what?

  • Boondecker

    Wow! The reality is definitely stranger than fiction? This just gets more bizarre as each revelation comes out. When it’s eventually over, I hope there is a book (or books), looking at what’s come out so far) and a movie deal. I would be first in line to purchase a copy and tickets.

  • oldmanNZ

    my god, one would not think this is real, it sound more like a hollywood caper.

    He(ben R) is truly piece of work. he will gets what coming. the hole just gets deeper.

    • Kevin

      On another blog he tried to “out” me as the same “Kevin” who comments on Whaleoil. In response I sarcastically congratulated on him on his immense detective skills. I wouldn’t believe a word that comes out of his mouth or fingertips. And I would advise other bloggers (they know who they are) and of course the media to have nothing to do with him.

      • Dave

        My opinion. There is a whole movement out for anything on WO, and if a bright young wannabee pops up offering up info, its champagne time for them, they would believe anything if it was going to make WO look bad.

        The MSM likes to think they can do what they want to, and they move to protect their own, criticize a repeater on twitter or similar and watch them all pile in to silence the originator. Then, a “disruptor” appears and does not adhere to their old MSM network, of course that person or organisation becomes their enemy, they must silence them, gather info and have them conform. I ask, Why is a few from TV3 / MediaWonks so interested in Ben’s story, why are they so hostile to WO – Why are they NOT interested in Balanced Journalism.

  • Rebecca, why would I take a photo of my phone when I already had the data. If I wanted to spread the photos around I could just have sent the photos without the subterfuge of taking a photo of my phone….and think about that for a minute…Why would I take a photo of my phone that clearly identifies it as my phone and then leak that? It doesn’t make sense.

    • Keith Ng

      Also, I think you just admitted that it *is* your phone. Unlocked and being photographed.

  • Miguel

    Cam – was all this effort ultimately just to take you down?! Mate, you must be someone they’re scared of if so many people can be bothered to go to such lengths. Heck, even hopping on a flight to Auckland seems a bit much when you consider you’re “just a blogger.” The way they talk, you think they’d no bother to spend any money whatsoever – just let you self-implode.

  • Justme

    The one pertinent data fact that interest me is, the # of visits the whaleoil site is getting these days. It must be through the roof. Even outperforming the Bachelor.

    • [MOD] if you can’t stay on-topic, you’ll enjoy some quiet time

  • gtiso

    “and Giovanni Tiso is also on public record having seen them”

    I normally ignore your lies about me because, well, there’s too many of them plus clearly it was Ben who was feeding most of them to you, but not this one. Could you point to the piece of public record that says I saw those photos? Thanks.

    • Honest opinion based on this statement. How would you know what it is if you haven’t seen it. [image]

      • gtiso

        Nice try. That was the day after the pictures were published by the blog i won’t name, as it should be made utterly obvious by the reference to revenge porn (not to mention, the date of that tweet). The claim by your boss is that I saw them *before* they were published, which I would very much like evidence for.

        • [MOD] I’ll remove the reference while I check the timeline

        • anniem

          stop splitting hairs

  • Catriona

    Oh my giddy aunt. This is all ‘cloak & dagger” stuff. Not difficult to connect the dots.
    So journalists are definitely not to be trusted – this one in particular -. What the hell was she thinking? – or not. Once again, waiting for the big scoop, waiting to become really, really famous. Well she certainly is famous now (in NZ anyhow) and for the wrong reasons!

    • This isn’t about The Journalist. I doubt that any of what Ben wrote actually happened.

      The point is that Ben Rachinger wanted Cam to believe it did.

      • PhantomsDoc

        But she did send him photo’s of herself so it’s not beyond the realms.

  • We have gone to great lengths to protect the identity of the journalist. It’s a pity the same journalist is going to great lengths to identify themselves by tweeting up a storm.

    • biscuit barrel

      Do we have a parallel system of name suppression in this country for journalists ?
      The other week the OCR leaker, which isnt too hard to work out, doesnt seem to be allowed to name publicly.
      And the journalist here is the same.

      The front pages of the media are all about a local TV show where adults meet and they may or may not have sex.
      Its not dirty or disgusting that adults meet and have sex.
      if prison officers have sex with prisoners we know about it, if doctors have sex with patients we know about, if teachers have sex with (18 yr) students we know about.

      When journalists have sex with their source, whats the taboo here ? Im not including pics as that is truly private.

      • Well, I guess it could be argued it affects objectivity. It also can be used to blackmail the journalist. It’s generally not clever.

        But the point is, this is only Ben saying this happened. There is absolutely no reason to believe it is real.

        Unless, you believe Cameron Slater ordered a hack (or 7 now, I’m told), then you must also believe everything else Ben Rachinger claims.

        The cherry picking so far seems to be

        1. Ben says stuff about Slater: solid gold blue chip facts
        2. Ben says stuff about others: vile lies

        • biscuit barrel

          I couldnt agree more on images that get passed about, but even the ‘media group’ issued a statement about ‘the journalist’ at the time( I dont remember much so I was helped by things that dont forget), so the name is not top secret.
          Its in the public domain already, so why does it mean theres a now a no names policy. Rachinger will get his lies exposed when hes convicted of his crime, the existence of relationship , however brief, doesnt change much of the narrative.
          The OCR case, whats the reason here ?, do important people want to keep it hidden ?

          • [MOD] I implemented the no names policy. We can’t avoid referring to the event itself, because it is relevant, but who is involved is irrelevant to the article. The article shows what people who deal with Ben have faced, are facing and will face. That is, there comes a point at which he turns on those who helped him and there isn’t a lot of dignity in any of it.

        • gtiso

          I wonder if you could clear something up for me, then: in order to get diversion from the police, wouldn’t your boss have had to accept responsibility for the very charge you are denying now (ie soliciting a hack of the Standard)? And why did he accept responsibility for it if he didn’t do it?

  • PhantomsDoc

    Was just looking through this and thinking that a book by Ian Wishart released before the next election on the duplicity of the left and the MSM would really throw the cat among the pigeons.

  • biscuit barrel

    A senior cleric was named the other week, and lost his job, about something that happened 20 odd years ago.
    Are you saying there are no career choices for journalists outside of the public journalism. Is that the reason the woman at the OCR story too has ‘hopes and aspirations’ ?
    Having a heart would make some sense if it was a workable policy for all professions/occupations and not just scribblers

  • gtiso

    I did. That’s why I’m asking you.

    • gtiso

      Wow Pete you self-censor quickly! Where’s your reply gone?

      • Refresh. It’s the auto-moderation that kicks in based on certain words. I even have to moderate myself out of the sin bin :)

        it’s sitting there since about 30 minutes ago

  • How would I know? Why don’t you ask them? I certainly never sent it to LF, and if you bothered to check what they have written about me and my wife on their site you’d understand why I want nothing to do with them at all.

    But hey, why don’t you keep on believing Ben, keep on investing in him Keith. You were certainly enjoying yourself in court the other day.

    • Keith Ng

      Yeah, I was also outside of court, watching you take the photos of the camera crew that ended up on LF. I suppose you have no idea how those photos got from your phone to LF either?

      • Why are you lying Keith? If you were there, and you weren’t, what time were those photos taken?

        Secondly, I know I didn’t take those photos. I was there. Unlike you. I would be prepared to have my phone independently audited by forensic experts to prove it. But I doubt you can prove you were at court when the photos were taken.

        • Keith Ng

          Uh huh. So, you didn’t take those photos, you were just there when they were taken by someone affiliated with LF who you knew, and who just happened to have been there on the second floor of the Manukau court late in the afternoon??

          I’m not sure how that helps your “I have nothing to do with LF” case.

  • gtiso

    It matters a lot when I saw them, as to suggest that I saw them before they were published implies I have some sort of relationship with Ben, and I could be a source for the leak. Slater wouldn’t have lied about it if the timing didn’t matter, don’t you worry about that.

  • Dave

    From my perspective, and I have watched with interest since Ben first had his video’s posted, he has had many episodes and fights with people, his twitter battles, or wars as some turned into, different twitter accounts, the list is endless. His activities around the journalist were well documented on twitter and other platforms, and very very shameful, it was unbelievable what was going on. As to her hopes and aspirations, and the child, a lot of this is also her doing, someone sent Ben the pics, either she sent them to him (foolish) or he stole them, or someone else sent them to Ben. She as above, has also been very very active on Twitter in the past, and now, so she is fanning the flames back to her. A few people have suggested to Ben, step away from the keyboard, go overseas, take a break, he hasn’t, but it would be sage advise for her as well, take a break, 6 to 12 months work in a local cafe or similar, remove all social media accounts, reinvent – move on. The ball is in her court.

  • And another note. I have not published those images, not here, not anywhere. The only people responsible for publishing images are those who publish them. I still have not published the images, nor named the person. Who is being responsible here?

  • gtiso

    I just corrected an obvious lie about me. One of very many on this site, though I never bothered before. When Cam starts lying about things you’ve said or done, feel free to respond however you see fit.

61%