web analytics

Crushless Collins drops lawsuit

Written By: - Date published: 5:50 pm, November 14th, 2012 - 18 comments
Categories: Uncategorized - Tags:

Judith Collins pledged to take Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little to court for defamation after they suggested she was involved in leaking Bronwyn Pullar’s name via Slater-Lusk.

Today she dropped the suit after a letter from Mallard and Little in which a) don’t concede defaming her and b) deny intent to do so.

A huge back down from Crushless. She has failed to back up get bluster with a win and desperately taken a letter that concedes nothing instead. That can only mean she thought she had too much to lose in a case that would have seen fellow ministers in the witness box and crippled her leadership bid.

Now, what involvement, if any, did she have in the leak?

18 comments on “Crushless Collins drops lawsuit”

  1. Raymond A Francis 1

    Who knows, but the Labour MPs now say
    ” That was not their intention and wish to make that clear publicly that in the event such meaning was taken they regret it.”
    So unless you know something they don’t, “nothing much to see here, move on” as rather better PM than we have now used to say

    [in paragraph 1) Collins concedes they had the right to raise questions over the leak, in par 2) the parties disagree over whether its defamatory, in par 3) Mallard and Little say it was not their intention to defame even if Collins thinks that they did. That’s the exact opposite of conceding defamation. Eddie]

  2. Jim Nald 2

    Great, so now move on to investigating the real story about the leak.

  3. Luva 3

    Little and Mallard have publicly confirmed that their respective comments were not intended to imply that the minister falsely assured the House that neither she nor her office was responsible for the leak.

    Furthermore they regret it if their statements were taken as meaning that.

    This after they repeatedly claimed they had done nothing wrong.

    And you call that a huge back down from Collins. Really. How Partisan can you be?

    As she was only ever after an apology, I would call this a draw.

    • Pascal's bookie 3.1

      They still don’t say they did anything wrong. “regret if” other people thought something.

      Collins was quite clear what she wanted:

      1 A declaration that she was defamed
      2 An apology for that defamation
      3 Her costs.

      3-0

    • One Tāne Huna 3.2

      Luva, the wording of Mallard and Little’s statement is an expression of contempt.

      They “regret” Collins’ misinterpretation of their statement – to put it another way they are apologising for her state of mind, not for their remarks.

      It’s like me saying I’m terribly sorry you lack the cognitive ability to grasp this, but it’s clear as a bell to anyone who’s been paying attention.

  4. Rich 4

    Did she make a statement under oath or in an affadavit that she wasn’t involved in the leak?

  5. PlanetOrphan 5

    Love the picture Eddie, Spock eyebrows and all M8! 🙂
    Half Gnat Half Vulcan … and not the good halves
    Gojiras’ Sister M8!

  6. higherstandard 6

    “The parties continue to differ over whether the remarks made by Messrs Mallard and Little respectively on Radio New Zealand implied the minister falsely assured the House that neither she nor her office was responsible for the leak,” the statement said.

    “Messrs Mallard and Little have confirmed to Ms Collins that was not their intention and wish to make that clear publicly and in the event such meaning was taken, they regret it.”

    With politicians as inept and fatuous as Little and Mallard it’s no wonder that National continue to enjoy an easy ride despite their obvious inadequacies – useless fuckers both of them and yet another example for the general public of why we are correct when we hold these tools in Wellington in contempt.

    • One Tāne Huna 6.1

      hs: I regret your inability to grasp that Mallard and Little have not apologised.

      • higherstandard 6.1.1

        OTH

        I regret your ability to grasp that Little, Mallard and their ilk and the associated sideshows have far more to do with Labour’s dismal polling than Shearer does.

        • One Tāne Huna 6.1.1.1

          You regret my ability? Sorry to hear that. I regret your inability to articulate what would otherwise have been a pretty good rejoinder.

  7. tracey 7

    They all just wasted our money and precious court times on their egoes…

  8. felix 8

    Oh dear.

    I do hope Collins hasn’t made any rash promises to the PM about how she had nothing to do with the leak and would sue anyone who said she did.

    Otherwise he’ll have to sack her.

  9. tsmithfield 9

    If Mallard and Little had such a shit-hot case as seemed to be the opinion here awhile back, then why didn’t they just let the case run to its conclusion? They would have then had the joy of a victory over Collins, and would have made a public spectacle of her.

    In this case, Mallard and Little have blinked first. Making a public statement to end the matter is the same as losing IMO. Although the statement issued isn’t technically an apology, I think in the court of public opinion it would be considered one, which is what really matters.

    So, IMO, a clear victory for Collins on this one.

    • One Tāne Huna 9.1

      Collins has dropped the case, none of her demands have been met and Mallard and Little have issued a statement saying they regret her state of mind.

      I’m so sorry that you fail to understand 😆

    • felix 9.2

      Hey smitty,

      Using terms like “a clear victory” implies that at least some of your aims have been achieved.

      What are they in Collins’ case?

      • Pascal's bookie 9.2.1

        That’s so unfair. Smittums was quite clear that it’s a clear win to Collins because a bunch of stuff he just made up = facts.

        You can’t argue with facts Felix.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere