Rob Gilchrist on Sunday

Written By: - Date published: 10:58 am, October 6th, 2013 - 28 comments
Categories: activism, police - Tags:

The Sunday programme this evening has Rob Gilchrist, police spy and provocateur, breaking his silence about the decade he spent amongst mostly peaceful activists. He was one amongst the very many sworn officers and informants that the police, spy agencies, and their civilian detective agencies use to monitor and often to disrupt democratic change. At this point he is running a case against the police and now breaking a long silence.

Due to the lackadaisical oversight and poorly written laws governing our police and security forces, the only time we get to know about some of the paranoid gits and their rather strange ideas is when a insider speaks up. Or they manufacture charges and try to get them through the courts.

In the latter case, much of the detail is hidden in in the form of suppression orders, undisclosed evidence, or evidence that is only seen in camera or by a judge only. The current government, embarrassed by how often the paranoid jerks in the police and security forces have overstepped their explicit legal boundaries, have enacted retrospective legislation to override Supreme court decisions.

So far the government appears to be ignoring the real problems inside the police organisation that has allowed these abuses against our laws and democracy.

28 comments on “Rob Gilchrist on Sunday ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. greywarbler 1
    6 October 2013 at 1:49 pm

    How long should you wait for a link to go through? I’ve just counted to 60. Is this lag normal for the time of day? Or something likely my end?

  2. Jenny 2
    6 October 2013 at 2:03 pm

    Funny that you should mention Rob Gilchrist again Lynn. I had been thinking of this despicable individual since you tried to compare him to me in a nasty piece of character assassination.

    The last time Gilchrist made an appearance in the public eye, was when this perverted agent provocateur, publicly announced that he was going to take his police handlers to court, that is, unless they paid him $200,000. I would have thought that the police in fear of having all their dirty linen exposed in a public court, would have caved in to Gilchrist’s blackmail. That they are being blackmailed by their own degenerate pawn is surely rich irony.

    What we do know about Gilchrist; Was that while Gilchrist was on the police payroll he inveigled his way into left groups and tried to incite people to do criminal acts. That he took embarrassing intimate photos of female acquaintances and sent them to the police, that he gathered lots of detailed personal information about peoples’ relationships which he also passed on to his handlers. For what purpose, who knows. But blackmail purposes is a strong possibility.

    Other disgusting acts committed by Gilchrist against activists, while in the police’s pay included; Under the pretext of a game, setting up young activists to dress up, and pose with guns. Gilchrist then sent these falsely incriminating photos to the police.
    If Rob Gilchrist’s cover had not been exposed. There can be little doubt that these incriminating photos would have used to make the police case that there were terrorist cells operating in New Zealand. As it is, Rob Gilchrist is known to have given secret evidence in the Police Terror Trials against at least three of those originally charged, but who later had their charges dropped when the police case fell apart. If Gilchrist had not have been caught it is quite possible that those he tried to frame and smear would probably, be doing long jail sentences right now.

    It will be interesting if any of this is brought up on TV.

    [lprent: I didn’t compare you to Rob – read the damn comment without your stupid and bigoted blinkers on.

    Pascal’s bookie had commented and intimated that you might be a cop, Murray disagreed. Actually I was disagreeing with both. You seem to have seized on Murray Olsen’s even later misinterpretation and never read my comment. But I guess that actually reading the actual content of the comment was kind of beneath you; right? Or you were simply incapable of actually parsing what I’d said.

    The reason Rob was in the comment was to demonstrate the difference between idiots employed by the police to spy on movements and people in movements who were in my view mere idiots. Unlike PB and probably you, I’ve known police informants who have come all the way into my family. Moreover I’ve read the discrepancy between what happened and what they reported. That was the context of Rob in that comment.

    You came up in that comment as being a mere credulous fool because I said that you frequently failed my sniff test about the logic of their position. Much of what you say is in my view full of misinformation, unworkable, extremist, and a detriment to any movement that you care to support. This isn’t exactly a isolated view of your comments.

    Anyway, this is about the third time you have lied about what I have said or what my position is. You are no longer welcome to comment on any of my posts. If you do for any reason then I’ll start with a 12 week ban. If I see you distorting any of my comments or posts on this site without a link to them, then I will give you a permanent consignment to auto-spam. ]

    • Win 2.1
      7 October 2013 at 8:36 am

      What about family members paid by the cops to spy on you and wreck your health? Has anyone heard of that?

  3. QoT 3
    6 October 2013 at 3:20 pm

    Do you think they’re likely to ask him about his shitty behaviour towards leftwing activist women? Or whether it was in fact he who posted a woman’s photos and personal details on a Stormfront website and emailed photos of naked women to his handlers?

    Honestly, I’d be fascinated to hear his thoughts on how some leftwing men’s embracing of rape culture made it easier for him to infiltrate their circles.

    • lprent 3.1
      6 October 2013 at 3:36 pm

      I have no idea on what he is going to be talking about.

      But I suspect a lot of it will be related to the way that the police misuse informants who are hung out to dry after their effective use has finished. I gather that is what his current case against the police is about.

      Gilchrist is probably the extreme example in Nz because of the manner in which rocky ensured he wouldn’t be doing any such actions again. It made him notorious and rather unemployable. His years working for the police also appear to have atrophied his existing skills and screwed him up in the head.

      I also suspect that his shitty behaviour towards women is more related to that of the culture inside the police towards women. While I’ve met the odd left-wing misogynist amongst the thousands that I have met, I’d have to say that the much smaller numbers of male police I’ve met were overwhelmingly misogynists – and quite willing to throw their powers behind it.

      For instance if I ever locate the arsehole from the police who suggested to rocky that if she continued to take my great-nephew to peaceful demonstrations he’d sic CYF on her to take the child away, then they will be in a world of legal pain for many years

      • QoT 3.1.1
        6 October 2013 at 7:14 pm

        But it’s not just his shitty behaviour that’s the problem, lprent. The problem is that Gilchrist was shitty and downright abusive to multiple women, and when they complained, a heck of a lot of supposedly progressive dudes suddenly trot out misogynist stereotype there is – even when they had to act like complete toddlers to do so.

        I mean seriously, women were saying “I think this guy is a cop” and leftwing dudes were falling over themselves to say “well he says you’re the cop and you’re lying about that other guy raping you”.

        Police culture is misogynist, sure, but leftwing activist culture is in no place to throw stones on that score.

        • lprent 3.1.1.1
          6 October 2013 at 7:42 pm

          I know some women in the AAA to whom he was not shitty or abusive to (that aren’t family – fast way to lose anatomy in my family) who were some of his greatest defenders up here.

          Personally I didn’t like him much, nor did most of the rest of the immediate family, and I thought rocky was kind of nuts. But she could make up her own mind. I did like her eventual response. Fast and decisive.

          • QoT 3.1.1.1.1
            6 October 2013 at 8:15 pm

            Jesus Christ, lprent, people are entirely capable of being shitty to some and polite to others. It’s irrelevant to the point. He WAS shitty to people, and he WAS defended by leftwing men.

  4. Anne 4
    6 October 2013 at 4:58 pm

    if I ever locate the arsehole from the police who suggested to rocky that if she continued to take my great-nephew to peaceful demonstrations he’d sic CYF on her to take the child away, then they will be in a world of legal pain for many years

    I’ve had the misfortune to come across a few unbelievably arrogant, ignorant police officers… so much so, I doubt I will ever trust any of them again. But that comment is the most vile I’ve heard. I gather your niece doesn’t know the name of the ‘bastard in blue’ responsible because if it was me, I’d be making sure his name was emblazoned in lights for everyone to see!

    • Murray Olsen 4.1
      6 October 2013 at 6:55 pm

      I have been abused by a uniformed sergeant at a petrol station on Jervois Rd because I disagreed with him that young women threw themselves at football teams with such promiscuous abandon that the the players were actually the victims of these “scheming sluts” and it weren’t for Helen Clark with her coterie of lesbians in the Beehive and the “soft cocks” in the Labour Party, this distasteful job would not be forced on the police force. I told him I shared his despair that no such thing happened to police sergeants with beer guts and would possibly think the same way if I had brain damage as well. This ended with him punching my son’s friend in the face on the forecourt for lying to him, because Maori don’t have jobs and shouldn’t lie to the police about their employment status.

      I am not surprised at all that Gilchrist found distribution of sexually explicit photos as totally acceptable. The creep should sue himself, or at least face a jury of those he pretended were his peers.

  5. karol 5
    6 October 2013 at 7:18 pm

    So Gilchrist is suing for loadsamoney? But what about the people & groups he illegally spied on?

  6. karol 6
    6 October 2013 at 7:21 pm

    So that’s it? What a lame report!

    Poor wee Rob…. and little sympathy for the people and groups he spied on.

    • lprent 6.1
      6 October 2013 at 7:44 pm

      That isn’t surprising. I’ll watch it when it comes through on the net.

    • Anne 6.2
      6 October 2013 at 8:30 pm

      Rob Gilchrist is right. Spying and interference in the lives of innocent citizens has been going on for decades.

      A woman joined the Mt. Albert Labour Party in the 1970s and many years later sufficient information came my way for me to conclude (correctly) she had been an informant who had been spying on us for years. She made a particular effort to befriend me, and she used me to gather information about individuals in the Labour Party and the L.P. in general. During the 70s and 80s she was involved in unlawful politically motivated activity but was never caught or brought to justice.

      karol said:

      So Gilchrist is suing for loadsamoney? But what about the people & groups he illegally spied on?

      The people who are illegally spied on don’t count karol. In the minds of the police in particular you are being spied on because you are bad. In the 1970s anyone who joined that commie outfit called the Labour Party was bad. And if you dared show your face on an anti-nuclear or anti-apartheid march you were seriously bad. You deserved everything that was coming to you. I’m not sure too much has changed since then except the nature of the causes regarded as being bad.

      • emergency mike 6.2.1
        7 October 2013 at 12:53 am

        To paraphrase Nixon, “When the cops do it, that means it’s not illegal.”

      • Tiger Mountain 6.2.2
        7 October 2013 at 9:02 am

        There are many examples of govt spys from the WB Sutch/Vietnam/’81tour/No Nukes days up to recent times. (I am not going to name names, Trev Louden ex ACT has named a few, http://www.trevorloudon.com/2008/03/the-kiwi-spy-who-penetrated-moscow/) NZ has more special units, agencies and extended surveillance powers than a small nation should ever need in 2013.

        Anne’s (6.2) experience is common to many who have got involved in a political party or popular issue for a while.

        Undercovers and snitches rarely have a wholy gleeful time of it particularly on exit, some quite ill, or addicted after service and then inevitably abandoned by their “handlers”. Which is a small compensation perhaps for some of those snooped on citizens who had the misfortune to spend time with these scabby double dealers while exercising their democratic rights.

        In “Seeing Red–Undercover in 1950s New Zealand”, By George Fraser, Dunmore Press 1995 isbn 0-86469-255-2 NZ Police ‘Special Branch’ recruited Fraser in 1951 to infiltrate the NZ Communist party which he did for nearly nine years during which time included the formation of the NZ Security Intelligence Service in 1956 that he was transferred to. His eventual conclusion was that many party members were kiwis of good intent and he became disillusioned, eventually being involved in protests against the 1977 SIS Amendment Act.

        The ‘embedded’ filth like Ghilcrist deserve what is coming to them, and I don’t mean compensation.

  7. Psycho Milt 7
    6 October 2013 at 8:36 pm

    I did enjoy his dismay at the fact that he’s received hate mail since his duplicity was revealed. He should count his blessings – if the people he was betraying for profit actually were criminals, he’d have got a bit more than the odd angry phone call…

  8. Theonewhoknows 8
    6 October 2013 at 8:45 pm

    Actually Jenny, about 99% of your post is totally inaccurate and shows you have less than 1% knowledge of the whole thing. If you’d care to share where you got all of your information from, it would be amusing.

  9. Rodel 9
    6 October 2013 at 10:02 pm

    Got a friend who has been a cop with her husband for over ten years. In spite of an upbringing with both parents and siblings being avid Labour supporters, the years of dealing with crims and the culture of the police has turned them both into rabid ACT party members.They’re not the sharpest knives in the drawer but otherwise good people. Sad to see.

  10. Rogue Trooper 10
    6 October 2013 at 10:35 pm

    Maybe the police can “look” into this…

  11. vto 11
    7 October 2013 at 9:35 am

    The culture of police is well known across pretty much all of society. Society turns a willing blind eye to the lies, deceit and police criminal actions provided they are “kept in check”.

    This actually reflects on all of society that we willingly allow police to smash some accused in the cells, for example.

    Just like society is happy to kill thousands of innocent people in times of war, as if it is somehow justified.

    Then of course we ourselves are not permitted to partake in physical sanction in resolution of local disputes – that is the preserve, apparently, of the state. They are allowed the jack boots nobody else.

    It is all rather sick, with no society or community coming out with much cred.

    Bullshit. Keep your pitchfork at the door.

  12. Cemetery Jones 12
    7 October 2013 at 11:26 am

    At the end of the day, Gilchrist will be looking over his shoulder wherever he goes for years in case pissed off SAS veterans ever come after him for all those years of walting he did.

    They REALLY don’t take kindly to that.

  13. AsleepWhileWalking 13
    7 October 2013 at 11:55 am

    He got paid for taking illegal actions. No sympathy here.