Written By: - Date published: 9:00 am, January 12th, 2010 - 103 comments
Categories: child abuse, crime -
Tags: cameron slater
The other day on the telly, Cameron Slater said why he had breached suppression orders intended to protect the identity of sex attack victims in two cases involving an alleged celebrity assailant, but not a third. ‘It involves a kid’ stated he. How noble. How fine. He’s making a point. He won’t hurt a child to make it though.
Pity it was bullsh#t.
The media coverage was over. Endorphin high was falling off as fast as his blog’s pageviews. Media had moved on. Slater needed more attention to fill that hole inside. He breached another suppression order. One that was put in place to help protect the identity of a girl. A child. Supposed morals gone. Slater needed his fix of hits.
Prick seems to think he could put this child’s identity into the public arena with his stupid coded message and get away with it. (Don’t fool yourselves, pathetic righties. The identity of the alleged assailant will have identified the victim to those who know them). He actually said the Police should have better things to do than nab him for his blatant, unrepentant crime. He thinks he has the right to add to the suffering of sex victims to get himself some more airtime. (Congrats, btw, to news outlets that are refusing to name his blog and its URL).
But Police are investigating. They’re not going to let this dick spit on a law that protects child sex victims. I’m no big city lawyer. But I reckon that committing another offence while on bail awaiting trial awaiting a hearing on related charges has got to be in contempt of court. That’s imprisonable. So is a more serious charge. Like perverting the course of justice.
I can see him now. Being lead to jail. Yelling his site’s URL to anyone who will listen. Pitifully asking the warden if they get broadband.
Nah. He’s a son of privilege. He’ll be right. No jail for a rich boy.
Slater just wants a bit of attention. A few more hits to make him feel better about himself. Some more ad revenue now the insurance company has stopped paying out his income insurance. When things get too scary Daddy, a former President of the National Party, will be there.
Eh, Cameron? Daddy will be there for you. He’ll protect you from the consequences of your actions. From the people you’ve hurt. Like he always has in the past. You piece of crap.
lprent: Cameron John Slater isn’t on bail. He was summoned, not arrested, and therefore has no bail conditions.
Perhaps he should be arrested for this latest breach and in view of his current activities; denied bail to prevent him from re-offending as he isn’t prepared to wait for the courts to make a judgment.Thanks Mako.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
I wonder if the Standard’s efforts could be put into more substantial issues like it normally is. Much as I detest Whale and oppose the damage he is doing to the victims of the people whose names he is publishing I wonder if he should be ignored rather than focused on.
His recent use of biblical passages as justification for his political views are really scary. This is normally not a good sign. Professional help is often required.
The media is focussing on him. I would prefer that it was focusing on the policy decisions being made by this Government that are causing huge harm.
[well, we have discussed the merits of ignore vs condemn. We feel the angle taken by Zet hasn't been addressed by the msm. Typically, they just give the surface events, and hadn't started looking at Slaters' motivations until we raised them. And this is the biggest political story of the day, we can't just ignore it. Plus, since the media aren't giving out his url, probably for fear of breaching the suppression orders themselves, so lots of people are goggling 'cameron slater', 'whaleoil', etc and a hell of a lot of them are ending up reading what we have to say about him, and our stats package shows a fair portion of people who enter the site having googled a topic to do with this affair end up reading our substantive posts and comment threads too. Worthwhile, don't you think? Eddie]
In general I’d agree. However it is the summer holidays. There is no longer the queue to get content posted. Posters write what they choose.
Apparently Z is writing about a bug.
And I don’t have an overpowering to urge to defend or stop. In fact I feel like writing a post…..
Yeah although I guess I am always disturbed that a nonentity like Cameron should occupy the centre of political debate in NZ. I am conflicted because I really think he needs help right now.
I’ve been wondering whether this needs to be approached as both a medical and a criminal issue.
It is likely a crime has been committed, even now the name of an ex-MP is decodable off CJS’s site, and having done a bit of whale watching over the last six months or so I can only conclude he is probably quite unwell.
Though the cynical side of me wonders whether this is just a ploy and he is trying to prove something to his insurers.
Capcha – oils, how did you know?
In regards to the biblical quotes, he started follow some sect earlier this year, Mor(m)on rings a bell, I can’t be sure off the top of my head. Its the same one that Glenn Beck follows, looks like whale is trying to model himself off that creep.
(9-10 years ago Slater was actually a relatively normal person and quite a good role model, oh how times have changed.)
Slater reckons he’s a good SDA who attends Papsda
I can’t understand some of the thick sh**s that are coming out and defending this deluded tosser Slater. There are reasons we have name supresion orders in countries like NZ. Its to stop loud mouthed unhinged vigil-ante’s like Slater and his small band of followers deciding who should and who shouldn’t have the right to anonymity in high profile court cases.
I can’t believe that loser Slater would stoop as low as he has. I lie, I can believe it. He turns crimes into chances to get attention. Really he’s like any other tory, loving the photo ops and attention. And he’ll certainly do anything to get it. That poor girl. What happened to her was bad enough without Slater giving away suppressed information that could potentially reveal her identity. Having what happened to her was awful, and if people found out who she was it would only make her feel worse. People would always treat her differently. But none of that matters to Cameron “the jerk” Slater. And of course, on top of this, he’s deluded enough to believe that he did the right thing. People don’t pay attention to him because they think he’s the brave blogger fighting for victims and for freedom of speech or anything. He thinks he’s that person. People pay attention because he posts the stuff no one else has the bad taste to publish. I think he’s had too many chances. He needs to get a wake up call that all of these things he’s doing aren’t just little things that won’t get him into heaps of trouble like petty theft. He’s an attention seeking loser who can’t think of anything but promoting himself, and people need to give him a kick in the behind.
Well said Hayley.
The laws surrounding name suppression really do need a good looking at. The huge publicity that Whale is getting stems from the mere fact that people WANT to know who the offenders are. Sadly people don’t give a shit about the victims because of the huge amount of secrecy surrounding the offenders.
How many people rush to Google to find out who a 14 year old victim is? Compare that to the incredible amount of interest from nosy Kiwis (including I bet everybody here) who wanted to know the who the entertainer/ex MP/sports figures were.
It is mischeivous to call Kiwiblog the sewer when all you seem to be doing is attacking Whale for being “mental” etc. I am sure with the combined intellect on this blog *somebody* might be able to write something a little more clever than that.
[lprent: I think that authors here are usually calling him a scumbag. I think that you've got us confused with Cactus Kate. ]
waiting, waiting, waiting
Just because people want to know doesn’t mean their right to know outweighs the right of the victim to privacy.
Never seen an author here attacking Slater for being “mental”. Very rarely a commenter either, and they get jumped on when they do.
Attacking him, on the other hand, for being a fuckwit, a bigot, a fool, a philistine, a nasty vicious prick? Sure. And why not?
Compare that to the incredible amount of interest from nosy Kiwis (including I bet everybody here) who wanted to know the who the entertainer/ex MP/sports figures were.
Not me. Not even an inclination to look. In my observation in abuse cases the courts show pretty good judgment about these orders.
Maybe next time the hidden message should be done this way:
http://xkcd.com/257/
I cannot believe the virtiol expressed in this blog. Perhaps Slater is tastless, but The Standard is plumbing new depths with this post. What is the point of this blog if it is just to crudely abuse someone? You’ve lost all credibility, regardless of the other side’s views. Quite awful really.
No. He earned it. We don’t usually condemn people in such terms. Take a look at the other posts. Deep, analytical, informed.
This guy is levering children’s suffering to get the fame he craves. I’m proud to damn him unconditionally and completely.
Hamish – There is airing your veiws in a cvilised manner and then there is Slater’s odd idea of political debate of just making vicious s**t up or breaking privacy laws just because it suits his deluded self PR. I’m a big one for attacking the issues not the man. On this occasson, and like many before, the issue is the man and his lack of judgement, intentional or not, about what contstitutes informed political debate. Sadly the few vigil-ante’s that prescribe to Slater’s anti-social rhetoric still be seem to be confusing bullying and social harrasment as informed debate.
The man and the issue are fundamental inseperable here. He is doing this for his own self-aggrandisement. Not because of any actual concern about the law. Therefore, there is no point engaging in a debate over the law. Rather, expose and attack what he is actually doing.
Once again, justifying your own repugnant behaviour. The Standard used to be fairly thoughtful, even enjoyable and thought provoking. Now it’s just descended to the depths of name calling and condescension. “Deep. analystical. Informed”? Maybe once upon a time. You’re proving to be a real turn-off for the left-wing perspective. What a shame.
If the guy wishes to act like a scumbag, then writers here will call him that.
Having you go about an unspecified repugnant behavior doesn’t help the debate. It simply looks like a troll whining.
i believe a poem:
wail – boil
flail, toil
mail – soiled
hardluck self (pausepause)
foiled