Odgers in s**t

30 comments on “Odgers in s**t ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Truth Will Out 1

   22 January 2015 at 4:29 pm

   Kerry Grass, the former NZ govt regulator/enforcement officer who wrote the report describing the process used by the government against Allan Hubbard to sink South Canterbury Finance as “materially flawed and unlawful”, also runs a company which investigates money laundering.

   She has a masters degree in international finance and knows her way around the kind of issues this article raises.

   She can be reached through her business, AML360 (Anti Money Laundering), by clicking this link if anyone wants to dig into this further: http://www.amlcft.co.nz/
   • rawshark-yeshe 1.1

     22 January 2015 at 10:42 pm

     any chance of a link to the Kerry Grass report on SCF you mention ? looked on her website but can’t see it … many thx if you can direct me.
2. reason 2

   22 January 2015 at 4:46 pm

   Odgers aka kactus Kate is a vile woman not fit to lick Princess Xena’s boots …….

   She is part of Nationals Dirty Politics shit slinging team as detailed in Saint Nicks book.

   As part of team DP she carried the banner in Whale sludges smearing of Tania Billington ………. their smear/claim was that Tania invented the home invasion and attempted sexual assault against her because she was a green party member and wanted to embarrass John Key and the Nats.

   But aside from Odgers being a politically motivated rape apologist and national dirty politics player it appears she helps the rich and criminals to hide their money and avoid tax.

   This seems to be a national party trait ………….
   http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/8515361/Money-trail-leads-home-to-New-Zealand
3. Cactus Kate 3

   22 January 2015 at 5:00 pm

   Again I am more than happy to speak to the Samoan regulator regarding Pacific Fiduciaries of which I resigned as a director 16 September 2014. Another matter Richard failed to research properly. Definitely not going to talk about matters to hacks and bloggers.

   Richard has a special skill of misunderstanding the legal role of registered agents and offices. if every company agent was named like this every time a company ended up on the Internet written about by a hack or blogger well…..they often are and again it’s part of the job to put up with the shit that follows. If you are in the business long enough you eventually are chucked in front of the client for public consumption. It happens so much now it is no longer special it’s just a matter of who is next.

   I think you will actually find I was critical of MFAT for letting the Malaysian diplomat escape the country! But you know never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
   • The Murphey 3.1

     22 January 2015 at 5:07 pm

     Q. How long until your ‘mates’ let you swing you think ?

     Make sure your backups are safe eh
   • tracey 3.2

     22 January 2015 at 5:12 pm

     Cathy

     Did you offer to appear before Justice Chisolms inquiry?
     • ghostwhowalksnz 3.2.1

       23 January 2015 at 11:17 am

       Her name appears 40 times in Chisholms report

       This is the money quote:

       “Cathy Odgers and Carrick Graham had also been approached by Ms Casey
       about appearing before the inquiry. They raised similar issues to those raised by
       Mr Slater. ”
       Casey was Victoria Casey, the barrister assisting the enquiry.

       “Following email
       correspondence with Ms Casey, Ms Odgers provided a sworn statement and I
       decided that it was unnecessary to interview her. ”

       This was an example of the ‘once over lightly’ of this whitewash.

       This bit was interesting about the email that Key obtained.

       ” Ms Odgers informed the inquiry that she passed the email of 5 October 2011 to a trusted “intermediary” for advice and that person eventually passed it to the Prime Minister’s office. Ms Odgers’ concerns in doing so were expressed by her as “purely political”.

       Doesnt that intermediary sound like David Farrar to you ?
   • David 3.3

     22 January 2015 at 5:34 pm

     A bit rich of you to call anyone a hack, [deleted]. How goes the ‘kill Hager’ masterplan? You and the Slater couldn’t organise a pissup in a brewery.

     [lprent: If you want to be a misogynist, then I’d suggest other places may be safer for you to try to raise your limp dick in. This is your warning – read the policy. ]
     • David 3.3.1

       22 January 2015 at 7:21 pm

       Sorry, but if the poster above can liken her to typhoid mary, but calling her a certain animal isn’t acceptable? I apologise to anyone who didn’t like my comment, except Catcus Kate, she can piss off.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 3.3.1.1

         22 January 2015 at 7:34 pm

         It was a gendered insult, whereas the comparison with Typhoid Mary is apt.
         • David 3.3.1.1.1

           22 January 2015 at 7:47 pm

           Yeah, fair enough, mea culpa. I’ll try better to keep my insults gender neutral from now on, would poisonous weasel be better? Or just a plain old piece of shit?
           • One Anonymous Bloke 3.3.1.1.1.1

             22 January 2015 at 7:51 pm

             You can do better than that. How about National Party associate?
             • David …

               22 January 2015 at 8:34 pm

               Oh whoa, even I have limits about labelling anyone that, that’s rough 😛
   • dave 3.4

     22 January 2015 at 6:37 pm

     [deleted]

     [lprent: that is well over the bounds of even our lenient policies. Banned two weeks as a gentle reminder (and sufficient time) to read them. ]
     • Te Reo Putake 3.4.1

       22 January 2015 at 6:47 pm

       Could be you if you keep using misogynist language, dave.
       • adam 3.4.1.1

         23 January 2015 at 3:03 pm

         *HUGS* for Te Reo Putake
   • Banjo 3.5

     22 January 2015 at 6:37 pm

     Wow Cactus Kate has crawled out of her hole.

     “But you know never let the facts get in the way of a good story.”

     You didn’t let the facts get in the way of the false narrative you pushed during the Ports of Auckland dispute Cathy. How much did you get paid to write that bullying nasty bullshit about the workers at the port? Do you ever stop to think about the ripple effects of your vileness on the people caught up in a melee, or does feeding your ego just outweigh any consideration towards others?
     • One Anonymous Bloke 3.5.1

       22 January 2015 at 7:19 pm

       Cathy’s indisposed. Better call Saul.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 3.6

     22 January 2015 at 6:44 pm

     “Part of the job”. You’re paid to provide legitimacy. Deniability. Fraud.

     Have a cigar.
   • Macro 3.7

     23 January 2015 at 6:43 pm

     Yeah! Right…
     All lawyers are upstanding and honest!
     But then I grew up with, and went to Uni with, Pat Renshaw so know otherwise.
     http://www.lawfuel.co.nz/news/1282/renshaws-back-facing-another-42-set-charge-sheet.
     If you really want to convince people that you are, what you say you are, then you should change the way you live, and act, and with whom you associate.
   • Richard Smith 3.8

     23 January 2015 at 10:09 pm

     “Again I am more than happy to speak to the Samoan regulator regarding Pacific Fiduciaries”

     Well, get on with it then.

     .”..of which I resigned as a director 16 September 2014. Another matter Richard failed to research properly.”

     Untrue. Checking on the Samoan Companies web site (company number 0530), I find that the filing date of your resignation is 4th November 2014, more than two weeks after I wrote my post. So the director change (effective 16th September, as you correctly remark) was backdated by about 7 weeks, or roughly 35 working days, and at the time I wrote my post, you were indeed recorded as a director.

     In some jurisdictions, submitting a backdated change of such magnitude is actually an offence. Otherwise, you see, dishonest people would be continually rewriting history.

     As it happens, jurisdictions taking that severe line on backdated changes appear to me to include Samoa, where, if you remember, Pacific Fiduciaries is incorporated. See Section 88 of the Companies Amendment Act 2006, which requires a resignation to be notified within 20 days of the effective date.

     Reading further, it seems that the late submission of your resignation might make you, your fellow directors and Pacific Fiduciaries itself each liable to fines not exceeding 50 penalty units (whatever those are).

     Perhaps that is a matter you’d like to take up with the Samoan Companies Register. When you’ve finished talking to the Samoan regulator, that is.

     Or would you rather leave it to me, again? I am, as you know, quite happy to oblige.
4. reason 4

   22 January 2015 at 5:48 pm

   cactus kate as part of of nationals Dirty Politics Henchpeople brigade was pushing the smear that Tania Billington allegations were made up or exaggerated.

   Cactus referred to the home invasion and attempted sexual assault as ” unwanted attention”.

   She’s displayed other gutter ethics and a rather disturbed mind by offering Saint Nicks address to some of the Chinese criminals and thieves she works for ………..

   But perhaps that was just fucked up trash talk that Cactus and co have to do to be part of the national DP club ………….

   Either way shes vile and not fit to lick Princess Xenas boots 🙂
5. Penny Bright 5

   22 January 2015 at 5:52 pm

   Yes Cathy Odgers – I have personally experienced one of your wee ‘spinner’ stories, arising from the John Banks trial?

   You remember?

   I don’t remember your checking the FACTS with me before you had it published on WhaleOil – a blog from which I am banned – (thus could not directly reply) because apparently Cameron can’t ‘handle the TRUTH’ ?

   In my considered opinion, ‘practising what you preach’ and ‘seeking truth from FACTS’ aren’t exactly your strong suits Cathy Odgers?

   Kind regards

   Penny Bright
6. One Anonymous Bloke 6

   22 January 2015 at 6:05 pm

   Cathy Odgers is a perfect embodiment of the National Party and everything it stands for.
   • tracey 6.1

     22 January 2015 at 7:20 pm

     and ACT
     • ghostwhowalksnz 6.1.1

       23 January 2015 at 11:04 am

       She was allways an ACT girl.
7. Rosemary McDonald 7

   22 January 2015 at 7:41 pm

   Yo! Cathy!

   Remember this?

   ” Dear Michael

   Stop posting anonymous comments on my blog.

   Your blog is boring crap, the only interesting comments on it are from insolent prick and several other right wing commentators.

   You write like an intellectually handicapped dyslexic one legged mouse and you are so serious that I am sure even your own mother finds you dull to be around.

   I am trying to get you more readers by referring those who do not like an interesting blog (ie.mine, IP’s or Aaron Bhatnagar’s or Dave Farrar’s) to your blog, but alas there have been no takers.

   Quite simply – you suck. I am honest enough to just tell you.

   Cathy
   31/8/05 5:17 PM”

   http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2005/08/bertrand-bargolias-is-still-a-sook/

   Now, it could be unreasonable to expect your mate Cam to hold to the same standards of moderation as holds here on TS, however, one would have thought that someone of your obvious(sic) intelligence could have done better than to use “intellectually handicapped dyslexic one legged mouse ” as an insult.

   Unless your contacts amoungst the world’s elite has facilitated a personality transplant, please don’t come over all righteously indignant here…it won’t wash.

   We know who you are…and perhaps the moderators here should let the ‘lady’ take her lumps.
8. millsy 8

   22 January 2015 at 9:47 pm

   So Cathy Odgers is into dodgy stuff.

   Tell me something I dont know.
9. Murray Rawshark 9

   23 January 2015 at 4:48 pm

   Someone who tells the reader how much fun they’re having in 73% of everything they write is patently trying to fool themselves. An ex-member of ACT (he grew up) told me that the cactus thing was the most racist against Maori of anyone he’d ever met. He was not surprised at all to see her in Dirty Politics.
10. Michael 10

    23 January 2015 at 6:33 pm

    Does Odgers hold a practicing certificate as a barrister, solicitor orwhatever equivalents are specified in the relevant statutes? if so, in what jurisdictions? While, of course, there’s nothing legally wrong with learned counsel representing dodgy clients (including the corporate ones), counsel are obliged to conduct themselves within the bounds of those statutes. If not, they face professional consequences. I think we should be told.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS