john stringer

ANOTHER $1m+ defamation suit filed against Colin and Helen Craig today

by Pete

That’s probably not what the Craigs were expecting, just two days before the Conservative Party AGM, but John Stringer has filed a defamation suit, joining Cam Slater and Jordan Williams in seeking redress for the highly unusual “Dirty Politics and Hidden Agendas” mass-mailed booklet.

Colin and Helen Craig, and others, have today (5 Nov) been filed with a defamation suit seeking more than $1 million in damages in lieu of the inability to retrieve their 29 July publication “Dirty Politics and Hidden Agendas” (2015) titled after Nicky Hager’s 2014 book of the same title, from all New Zealand homes.

John Stringer has filed a suit in the Auckland High Court (CIV.2015 404-2524) seeking damages.

His case was assessed by Wellington expert legal counsel in defamation.

Mr Stringer has repeatedly sought reconciliation or an apology from the Craigs for the booklet by text, email and letter, but was formally declined an apology on 18 October.

“We committed to give consideration to your request for an apology. We have now considered this carefully.

I understand that there are many detailed points that you have raised below. Doubtless we will get to these in the legal case. However in review of what we have published we do not consider ourselves to have defamed you. We therefore decline your invitation for an apology.” ~ Colin and Helen Craig.

I’m starting to wonder if I’m missing out on the gold rush. ?I too have had a bit-part in that booklet, and something that isn’t true was published. ? Read more »

Three Men and a Lawsuit


And Stringer makes Three.

John Stringer of Christchurch filed his Statement of Defence in the High Court yesterday to Colin Craig’s $750,000 defamation suit against him. The latter was lifted by the Craigs by $150,000 in September since their televised announcement of 29 July 2015, when they said Mr Stringer would be sued for $600,000. Read more »

Hell hath no fury like Defamation Accused scorned

When Colin Craig announced he was going to take three people to court and claim defamation, the reactions have been as varied as the people involved. ? I’ve learned the power of using silence and time as a strategy since Dirty Politics. ?Williams didn’t even wait to get served and absolutely blitzkrieged Colin Craig with a defamation suit of his own. ?And then there’s Stringer, who’s been on a continous, mad, ?public push to show the world that defamation doesn’t hold up in the face of facts with a relentless series of public statements.

Stringer’s almost been obsessive at digging around and unearthing new lines of investigation into Colin Craig’s conduct. ? Today, Stringer’s told the world he’s laid yet another complaint with police against Colin Craig.

A second police complaint has been laid against Colin Craig with Wellington Police, after advice from the High Court and Justice, and Police, ?related to allegations Mr Craig has been interfering with witnesses to the defence of the $750,000 defamation suit Craig filed against John Stringer in?the Christchurch High Court last week.

“The allegations cite an email Colin Craig counter-wrote to several witnesses Mr Stringer had already written to in preparing his defence against Craig. The email [from Craig] advised how the witnesses should testify. Craig instructed witnesses to not assist the defence and suggested they get together (with Stringer excluded). Police are investigating,” Mr Stringer said.

Colin can now add alleged witness tampering to his list of troubles. ? ?But it doesn’t end there. ? Read more »

Colin Craig writes to, invites, defence witnesses before the hearing

Late yesterday afternoon, Colin emailed defence witnesses to the defamation action and “guides” them on what to do and/or say around the case.



And now Stringer’s response to it ? Read more »

John Stringer reads properly – discovers $750,000 damages claim, not $50,000

Stringer - cock-a-hoop about getting served

Stringer – cock-a-hoop about getting served

It appears Stringer’s a bit of a thicky – within 24 hours he’s gone from crowing that his Colin Craig defamation suit is looking for only $50,000 in damages, down from $600,000, to then actually sitting down and reading it and discovering it having been raised by $150,000 to $750,000.

I was finally served yesterday on ?9/11? (NZ time) by Craig?s lawyers Chapman Tripp (it is ?9/11? today in America). The suit was 44 days late from being sued ?within 48 hours.? Ah well, good things come to those who wait. The suit is 3.5cm thick, and Colin has raised his damages claim against me as he threatened to do. He is now claiming $750,000 in the Christchurch High Court.

CC has added a further $150,000 to his 29 July claim of $600,000. This now exceeds the claim against Cameron Slater of Whaleoil. So, I guess I am now the Big Bad Wolf. He has done this because of new allegations of electoral return falsifications and omissions I made, now part of a Police and Electoral Commission investigation being conducted in Wellington by a Commission senior legal adviser and a Senior Detective Sgt for the Police, who are coordinating their investigation.

In all, Craig is claiming 31 issues of defamation against me in a 3.5cm thick statement of claim. Colin doesn?t really understand defamation. It is really just a list of statements from my blog or personal Facebook that he doesn?t like. He feels he must not be criticised or held to account. In fact, he fled all attempts by us as his colleagues to have him explain in a closed forum (three attempts). If any one does so, that is ?defamation? in his mind. It is not and he will learn that quickly in Court as I prove everything as will Mr Williams and Mr Slater (whom I have still never met).

Seems to have inflated the fool’s ego to be taken to court for more money than the infamous Cameron Slater, but I can understand his confidence: ?Craig is digging himself a hole of biblical proportions. ?Just as well, because it’s going to need room for Stringer, Williams and myself to come play a very straightforward game of Prove-the-Fact.

John Stringer is served Defamation suit by Colin Craig


Stringer writes

CC has dropped his trumpeted $600,000 damages in the suit, which he said he would increase after I went to the Police (investigation ongoing), pitching instead for $50,000 and unspecified amounts he wants to cite at trial (which could be an award to me, depending on how this goes). I have received a WHOLE lot of more delicate information from several sources since Colin made his threats and began this punitive expedition. My armoury is bursting and my quiver is full. Read more »

Craig can?t see the forest for the trees ? a secondary school student’s response

I love feedback from my readership and none is better than from a previous Craig Supporter that has given me significant insight into what Colin Craig is up to, and how he has likely destroyed his ability to maintain that he has been defamed, and that he can proceed to trial given that he has conspired with others to breach my right to a fair trial before a panel of my peers.

Here is what I received from a Year 13 student:

Dear Sir

Having previously been a supporter of the Conservative Party, its leader, and its stated values, I must report that I have, once been in receipt of the pamphlet titled ?Dirty Politics and Hidden Agenda?s ? Colin Craig VS Dirty Politics Brigade ?.And their campaign of Lies? formed the view that Mr Craig has been in receipt of some egregiously incompetent legal advice.

I say this for the following reasons.? I am a year 13 student who attends Baradene Catholic Girls College in Victoria Ave Auckland and have an interest in the ?justice system?, wanting to study law somewhere else other than New Zealand.

Colin Craig was subject to what he terms as a strategised defamatory ?attack? from persons within his party and from the Internet media.? He has called press conferences wherein he has made serious allegations against Cameron Slater, Jordan Williams, and John Stringer of effectively ?criminal slander? under the Crimes Act 1961 [repealed in 1992 when the Defamation Act was updated].

I wish to refer the allegedly aggrieved Mr Craig and his allegedly erudite counsel to the defamation cases of Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [1997] 189 CLR 520, Lange v Atkinson [1997] 2 NZLR 22 [HC], [1998] 3 NZLR 424 [CA] , [2000] 1 NZLR 257 [PC], [2000] 3 NZLR 385 ? defamations in tort.

The other cogent cases to be considered are numerous but include inter alia;? Horrocks v Lowe [1975] AC 135, 150, Invercargill City Council v Hamlin [1996] 1 NZLR 513, and the Law Commission Report, preliminary paper 33 DEFAMING POLITICIANS ? A RESPONSE TO LANGE V ATKINSON ? a discussion paper.? In the Court of Appeal decision [unreported, 25 May 1998, CA, 52/97, Richardson P, Henry, Keith, Blanchard and Tipping J?held in Lange;

We hold that the defence of qualified privilege applies to generally published statements made about the actions and qualities of those currently or formerly elected to Parliament and those with immediate aspirations to be Members, so far as those actions and qualities directly affect or affected their capacity (including their personal ability and willingness) to meet their public responsibilities. The determination of the matters that bear on that capacity will depend on a consideration of what is properly a matter of public concern rather than private concern. (para 1) ? ?

Read more »

A letter from Colin Craig’s lawyers

I received this letter (below) late on Friday afternoon from Colin Craigs’ corporate lawyers.

It has all the hallmarks of a rush job following a very public press conference.

As you will see, he is threatening to take action unless I apologise for unspecified defamations.

I stand by everything I have publicly said and published, but more importantly I reject the allegations contained within his booklet that he shilled to the media in a press conference.

Observant?readers will have noted that the Conservative party has removed not only the defamatory document, but also the defamatory press release from Colin Craig from their website. NewstalkZB has also removed the defamatory booklet. Other outlets have been and are being contacted for the removal of this defamatory booklet. ? Read more »

John Stringer gets a stern note from Colin Craig via his lawyers


I suspect I’ll get mine later then. ?So far, nothing.

The thing worth noting is that defamation proceedings do not yet exist against Williams, Stringer or myself. ?The letter is simply to inform Stringer that lawyers have been asked to prepare a case.

As I said yesterday, Colin’s running this like he’s run the others (Norman, The Civilian) – lots of bluster, but no actual appetite for a multi-year, costly, drawn-out legal battle.

It is meant to intimidate but, rather counter-intuitively, Stringer is like puppy on a lead – he can’t wait to debate these issues in court on a point-by-point basis.

Read more »

Behind the Scenes of the Colin Craig Catastrophe

Conservative Party board member John Stinger was essentially pushed out and shut up. ?But he’s now putting some of the harder details in public.

It?s been said over and over again by people who work with him, that Colin is ?manipulative,? ?unChristian,? tells lies, and can?t cope with people who stand up to him.

As one of a few of us prepared to stand up to Colin Craig and ask relevant questions at Board meetings, even oppose him, I was certainly in his gun sights. For me it was never personal; just about robust debate and responsible management. Some on the Board have a negative view of me, simply because I spoke up. They are uncomfortable with conflict and perhaps want everything to be ?nice,? kind of like the Anglican church. Shoot the messenger and sweep stuff under the carpet. I am not that kind of a person.

It was well known around the Board for some time, that ?Larry is gone?you?ll be next, John, followed by RM and then Brian.? Of course, that is exactly what happened. Colin witch-hunted ex-MP Larry Baldock out of the Party, then there was a campaign to discredit Brian, RM and myself, and then finally, an attempt to drown me as ?last-man-standing.?

It is becoming more apparent as documents come to light, and people start to speak out, that there was a conspiracy to undermine me; discredit the final Board member and therefore invalid the Board itself (Colin needs this, so he can elect a whole new Board that he will control). This centered around the fake ?suspension? of me on 25 June, conveniently emerging just moments before the Board was to meet as scheduled on 27 June and after I had made it clear in the media, that senior members of the party would be elected to the Board, to strengthen it following several resignations.

The Conservative Party always was Craig’s personal plaything, and he’s managed to manipulate the process to the point where there are now two boards. ? ?The legitimate board not recognised by Craig, and Craig’s board.

But as Craig physically controls all the Party’s resources, like membership databases, hoardings, accounting system, etc, he appears to be in control. ? Read more »