How Slater manufactures smears

Written By: - Date published: 9:45 pm, October 14th, 2014 - 55 comments
Categories: blogs - Tags: , , , , , ,

One of the interesting things that came across my desk today came from Matthew Blomfield. It was a PDF of a letter from the IPCA chair Judge Sir David Carruthers.

It shows pretty clearly the way that the “journalist” Cameron Slater makes up a theory out of nothing much. Then he routinely distorts whatever is written about it to carry on the fantasy. This works on the foolish and credulous, but fortunately not on the courts.

It relates to something pointed out to Mr Blomfield last week. That was a tweet that read…

The link was to a image of a letter from the IPCA on June 13th that said (my bold):-

You believe that the incident Matthew Blomfield claims to be his reporting of a burglary was in fact reported by Warren Powell. You further state that Matthew Blomfield filed an affidavit in the High Court which referred to his reported burglary, and he stated that he laid the complaint. This is an act of perjury. However, the Police advise that Warren Powell made a report of burglary on 21 April 2010, and Matthew Blomfield made a complaint to Police on 9 May 2012. They are two separate Police files.

That seemed clear enough to me – there were several complaints. The writer at the IPCA had spent the entire email repeating Cameron Slater’s assertions back to him. That was most likely because it was the usual incoherent and illogical drivel that Cameron does whenever he has to write something with some logic in it. The writer needed to clarify what Cameron Slater had attempted to write, and then concluded with the clear statement:-

You also say that Constable Guest was acting on two false complaints. The Police state that while Matthew Blomfield’s initial statement lacked information, his second statement outlined a number of possible offences. These were all investigated by Police.

The Authority accepts the explanations provided and is unable to identify any clear situation where there has been a neglect of duty or misconduct by the Police. The Authority will therefore take no further action in the matter and in the absence of any new and compelling evidence; your file will remain closed.

However it wasn’t clear enough. It seems to have been the basis of a number of subsequent questionable statements by New Zealand’s most inept “journalist”. Specifically the statement in the tweet that the hard drive “wasn’t stolen” and the Blomfield had perjured himself. In both cases Slater cited statements in the letter.

I queried Mr Blomfield about it. After the swearing had subsided, Mr Blomfield said that he’d already followed up on it after Slater had repeated the perjury allegation in court after this letter.

Mr Blomfield had a email clarifying it on the 26th of June from the IPCA. It clarified that it was actually Cameron Slater who had asserted that it was perjury not the writer, Mr Blomfield also sent the email to Cameron Slater, who curiously has never bothered to publish it. In my view, this is probably because he’d look like the inept delusional fool even to his own readers.

However Slater has continued to promulgate his assertions about perjury and other matters drawing on his own strange but probably deliberate misinterpretations of the IPCA letter. Apparently this has drawn other credulous fools of “journalists” such as Larry Williams from Radio Live into allowing a repetition of Slater’s defamatory “facts” about the IPCA letter.

To cut a long story short, Mr Blomfield sent off another letter to the IPCA outlining this continued smearing by Cameron Slater using the name of the IPCA. He rapidly got the following most unusual response letter from the IPCA Chair Judge Sir David Carruthers.

It reads in part (see the link for the full letter).

I am sorry that in our earlier letter to Mr Slater, which was subsequently made available to you, it was not made clear that the comment “This is an act of perjury” was part of Mt Slater’s allegation to the Authority”.

He then quotes part of the quotation above from the letter of the 13th of June.

In context it is clear that all of that is part of the assertion made by the complainant and is not a finding made either by the Police or by us after investigation.

In other words, it was Cameron Slater assertions, not those supported by the police or IPCA about “perjury”.

I can confirm that Police had reported to us that their investigation had “found the missing hard drive to have never been stolen”.

I can however now also confirm to you that Police are currently reviewing the investigation and that finding.

So the Police are now trying to decide if a junior officer got that decision right.

My personal guess in the wake of the Police’s raid on Nicky Hager for the same kind of allegedly stolen material is that Cameron Slater is going to wind up in court. Either facing charges on receiving stolen goods or as “witness” like Nicky Hager. Somehow I think that trying to cover himself with a figleaf of being a “journalist” is going to be less successful in court than a action of a real journalist like Nicky Hager is likely to be.

Unlike other recent cases about data copying that Slater’s legally ill-educated wits have been quoting, this would be a criminal matter rather than a civil or privacy case with a quite different burden of proof. We await the long and tortuous processes of the police thinking when they don’t have Ministers doing it for them.

I do not intend writing to Mr Slater about such an obvious matter and you may of course use this letter for whatever purposes suit you.

Since I’d queried Mr Blomfield about it, it was sent to me among others. I really couldn’t resist pointing out the lessons in it.

This is classic Cameron Slater. Make up a headline friendly fantasy. Go and wave his dick around dispatching letters off to all and sundry complaining about the actions he has had a fantasy revelation about. Take whatever comes back as a result, deliberately misinterpret it and then puff it up. All the time bullshitting to all and sundry (especially credulous and foolish shock-jocks like Larry Williams) and try to get them buying into getting involved. Getting paid for attacking someone else’s enemies.

You can see this vividly in “Dirty Politics”. Which is probably the reason that there appear to have been many journalists like John Roughan who appear to have not read the book in case they have a crisis of conscience.

Fortunately in the case, a victim of Cameron Slater’s obnoxious and probably paid for bile has chosen to push it through the courts.I am aware of many other people and companies who (to date) have not. Fortunately I think that is changing. It appears that many others are starting to use the slow processes of the courts to deal with this arsehole “journalist” and “blogger”.

55 comments on “How Slater manufactures smears ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    14 October 2014 at 10:09 pm

    Gee with Cameron you have to check every freaking thing.

    I saw his tweet and the letter and thought “I must have a look at this at some stage when I have time”. I am not surprised that things are not the way he presented them.

    It is like when he tried to spin the High Court decision that he was a journalist as a success but forgot to mention that the Judge thought he was a piece of slime and did not deserve the protection that real journalists get.

    • Chris 1.1
      15 October 2014 at 12:51 pm

      “I am not surprised that things are not the way he presented them.”

      I have to say, MS, that this is some understatement. I’m now never surprised to see the amount of shit that comes out of his mouth. The guy’s a cartoon character. If I go to his site it’s for light relief. Never cease to get a smile. He’d be good material for a Bro’ Town episode. This is how we need to treat him.

    • Lan 1.2
      15 October 2014 at 4:41 pm

      Definitely not “twinkly” eyes, or even face if one looks carefully! Does Mike Smith comment?

  2. adam 2
    14 October 2014 at 10:48 pm

    I hope more people take this blight to court. What a truly despicable turn of events -again – and of course members of the the corporate media lap it up.

    We have fallen into a nightmare, where the vicious and the villainous are treated like winners, and worshiped like heros. Has liberal economics and its penchant for obduracy written all over.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 2.1
      14 October 2014 at 11:23 pm

      Burying the guy in legal action and making his “occupation” cost prohibitive in terms of time and money might be the only way to shut him down. Unfortunately most people would be unable to afford to defend themselves in this manner so would never get to a courtroom.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1
        15 October 2014 at 9:59 am

        Unfortunately most people would be unable to afford to defend themselves in this manner so would never get to a courtroom.

        And that is the major failing of our justice system – it’s only available to the rich.

        • Tracey 2.1.1.1
          15 October 2014 at 11:05 am

          or those with rich helpful friends. it is only the wealthy who get to defend their reputations, the rest can be shat on from a great height with impunity.

          • minarch 2.1.1.1.1
            15 October 2014 at 2:54 pm

            personally I prefer to hand my own punishments rather than rely on the state when i have been wronged

            and you can guarantee mine is a lot more “working class’ than the courts would hand out 😉

            and i dont care if your rich or poor, its all the same to me !

            (actually I prefer the rich as they are usually soft as F#$k ! )

            • karol 2.1.1.1.1.1
              15 October 2014 at 2:57 pm

              And that works really well for most women, elderly, children, etc….?!

              • Tracey …
                15 October 2014 at 3:22 pm

                i was wondering how that would work for me too karol. i cant afford to take someone to task for their lies and know they will do it to others but cannot afford to pursue it. this person is a lawyer, knew better, knows better, and tgrough their behaviour is charging peolle way more than they should be, but i can do nothing. law society is not an avenue… i wouldnt revert to violence anyway, not sure what that achieves in terms of changing the persons future behaviour

    • greywarshark 2.2
      15 October 2014 at 2:12 pm

      adam
      +1

  3. Northland 3
    14 October 2014 at 11:37 pm

    If I may be allowed to provide some pertinent background. This whole perjury thing got started in 2010 when an office Matt shared with a then Director of Hell Pizza was the subject of an alleged burglary. His office mate made a complaint to the Police. When the hard drive was later found to be missing, Matt deduced it had gone in the burglary.

    In May 2012 when Matt initially complained to the Police about Slater having his hard drive, he opined it had gone in the burglary and stated that the said office mate had reported it to the Police at the time. In an affidavit to the [District] Court, he said “and it was reported to the Police at the time”.

    In the meantime, Slater knew this was not true because he (as he has subsequently disclosed) had received the hard drive from the very same office mate, via an intermediary.

    Exactly as you have suggested, Slater used his devious inside knowledge to manufacture, not just a slur, but a further allegation of serious criminal offending, suggesting that Matt had lied on oath about what was reported missing and who reported it.

    When the IPCA, in a letter dated 13 June 2014, whilst repeating the gravamen of Slater’s complaint, carelessly said “This is an act of perjury.” without attributing that statement back to him within the same sentence, Slater thought he had hit pay dirt.

    Slater tried unsuccessfully to produce the letter to the High Court, with the assertion that, shorn of any context, those words meant the IPCA believed Matt had committed perjury. Matt wrote immediately to the IPCA and obtained a letter of clarification dated 26 June 2014 stating that they meant nothing of the sort. Slater received a copy.

    Rather disingenuously, Slater following last weeks extremely enlightening NZ Herald article, and much to the delight of his online army of trolls, published the original letter, ignoring the clarification.

    Sir David Carruthers has now weighed in, apologised to Matt (not that he would have needed to but for Slater’s deceit), and put this matter to bed once and for all. In doing so he has confirmed that the Police are re-investigating the untutored opinion of the junior Constable who initially investigated and who was able to conclude that, as what was taken was a copy, nothing was stolen. That daft notion did rather ignore the hard drive, the filing cabinet, the paper, staples, paper clips and the fact that copied data is indistinguishable from the original and is certainly capable of being stolen.

    Check with Matt if you like and he will confirm the truth of this. I only wrote this because he is sick of talking about it and wants to move on. When he gets this guy to Court, I think the judgment will be very damning indeed. Really this little shenanigans does represent Slater’s last stand.

    • Lanthanide 3.1
      15 October 2014 at 9:14 am

      It’s almost as if Slater behaves as if there aren’t any consequences for his actions.

      • Tracey 3.1.1
        15 October 2014 at 11:10 am

        and others happily feed that tiger for their own purposes while pretending they have ethics. i believe farrar and hooton, amongst others fit this analysis. they happily feed and encourage slater at times and then falsely believe that distance from the resulting act leaves them clean. they and all those pulling slaters strings are complicit. imo.

    • Tracey 3.2
      15 October 2014 at 11:07 am

      thanks for this.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 3.3
      15 October 2014 at 11:07 am

      What is the quality of police college training if there seems to be a grey area over what constitutes ‘stolen’.

      Contrast the treatment of Don Brashs emails, which were eventually classed as ‘not stolen’, because partly the police knew from security services that Nicky Hager had them long before Brash was aware something was missing.

      Of course Brash jumped before he was pushed, as police tipped him off there was much more material to come ( which didnt eventuate).

      • Tracey 3.3.1
        15 October 2014 at 11:18 am

        it can be difficult in a company situation where directors act on behalf of the company… if a director takes a computer have they stolen it from the user or taken property of the company. not saying this is the situation but just giving an example of grey.

    • grumpyrawshark 3.4
      15 October 2014 at 2:53 pm

      Thanks for your summing up.
      Basically:
      It doesn’t matter if the physical drive was stolen or not. The recipient of the data new they weren’t authorised to have it and under NZ law that is a crime.

      • lprent 3.4.1
        15 October 2014 at 4:57 pm

        Yep. The only real defense is public good (ie like Hager looking at dirty politics) or ignorance.

        It has been clear for some time (dirty politics merely the latest) that Slater doesn’t do much out of the goodness of his heart.

        He appears to be in it for making money off others in his dirty PR business, which seems to let the ignorance bit out (unless he wants to claim he is a lousy businessman (as the IRD looks at his tax payments perhaps)).

        Plus it is hard to see a public good in a dispute between a few business people.

  4. Rob 4
    14 October 2014 at 11:55 pm

    Is this the same person who John Key is on the phone to very often?

    • the pigman 4.1
      15 October 2014 at 1:40 am

      Look at where the other members who made their table reservation at Wildfire under the name “VRWC” have ended up.

      Then-blogger Nikki Kaye is a 3rd term MP and the Minister for (Crypto-Privatisation of) ACC.

      David Farrar is probably the National Party’s highest paid consultant (he maintains an entire polling agency on almost exclusively their business) and gets (*whoops*) thank you dedications from Keys on election night.

      Prodigal son Slater is definitely doing the worst of the lot, but I don’t see the National Party allowing him to finish in deep(er) disgrace given his importance to their two-track politicking and candidate selection processes.

  5. ropata mako shark 5
    15 October 2014 at 12:55 am

    lprent, instead of linking Roughan directly I suggest you direct readers to this comprehensive takedown of the “complacent braying dunce”.

    • lprent 5.1
      15 October 2014 at 7:59 am

      Nice. I knew I had read that somewhere…

      • Tracey 5.1.1
        15 October 2014 at 11:21 am

        dont mean to be picking but using “a” before a word begining with a vowel should be “an”. you dont usually do it but this post seemed riddled… i wondered if you were typing fast through red mist?

        thanks for the post and the reaction of his sirship is quite astounding.

        • lprent 5.1.1.1
          15 October 2014 at 1:06 pm

          I was doing it whilst also doing several other things at the same time..

          No the red mist one was about shearer yesterday. The one that I didn’t put up.

          I will try to find a few spare mintutes to tidy it .

  6. Scott1 6
    15 October 2014 at 6:53 am

    Do any normal people read Slater’s blog?
    I thought it was just bots and media circle j*rking and maybe Slater and his friends under 50 different pseudonyms.
    Simply it just isn’t very interesting site with all the click bait paid articles and whatever.

    • CnrJoe 6.1
      15 October 2014 at 7:41 am

      Scott1 6
      15 October 2014 at 6:53 am
      “Do any normal people read Slater’s blog?” –

      And one John Phillip Key – regular reader.

      • les 6.1.1
        15 October 2014 at 10:00 am

        might not bother reading these days.Superego will want to undermine Key now hes been marginalised,and keep spruiking Collins.

      • ianmac 6.1.2
        15 October 2014 at 10:48 am

        One of the reasons people go to the Slater blog is because it has allegedly a very high hit rate. Double what any other blog gets. I am not technically computer literate but it is possible that the hit figures are hugely inflated by the use of “bots” whatever they are. Good place for advertisers then? Newspapers used to publish the number of papers sold but now it is the number of people who read the paper which is a hypothetical figure.
        So Whaleoil under false pretences? Surely not!

        • Tracey 6.1.2.1
          15 October 2014 at 11:24 am

          well carrick graham posts as several different peole, as do others, so the actually contributing comments may be much fewer than many think. if slater can be paid to pretend he wrote stuff, why not pay the slave wages to those parts of tge world that will do clicks for hire?

    • Tracey 6.2
      15 October 2014 at 11:22 am

      the point is many in the media read him, his and farrar’s press releases and make them into apparent factual stories for tv, radio, and print, which “normal” people use to get their knowledge of the political situation in nz

      • srylands 6.2.1
        15 October 2014 at 12:29 pm

        Can you point to any such “press releases” by David Farrar? He wil issue press releases on public interest stories by Curia. What political press releases does Farrar issue? The answer is “none” You are making things up as usual.

        • framu 6.2.1.1
          15 October 2014 at 12:48 pm

          ok then

          the point is many in the media read him and his press releases and make them into apparent factual stories for tv, radio, and print, which “normal” people use to get their knowledge of the political situation in nz

          DPF then comes along and plays “reasonable cop”

          happy now?

          does that make what ede, slater, key, collins, graham, odgers, DPF et all get up to any better?

          • Tracey 6.2.1.1.1
            15 October 2014 at 3:28 pm

            slylands cannot know what press releases farrar makes unless he is farrar. slylands gets very defensive about farrar… running quickly to his defence, seeking to defend him here, seeking to defend him there. its a kind of hero worship. i think he, farrar, probably parks his car in the building where slylands is a parking attendant.

        • Tracey 6.2.1.2
          15 October 2014 at 3:26 pm

          taxpayers union and farrar on wrongly stating that kill the pm was funded by nz on air. i am sure you will split hairs and say farrar isnt the taxpayers union, but as you state he does issue press releases so you yet again make a confused posting defending your hero… you really do seem fixated with him… rose tinted glasses and all that

          swoon slylands swoon.

      • boldsirbrian 6.2.2
        15 October 2014 at 1:48 pm

        @ Tracey (6.2)

        Nicky Hager predicted that Whaleoil will go on, but will become far less significant. I think that is already happening. Whaleoil readership was high for two reasons
        (a) Slater manipulation of the number of “hits”
        (b) The *power* that he had … to receive inside information that was not available elsewhere.

        Slater will continue to do the same hit manipulations. But the main ingredient of his “success” has been taken away. The ‘inside’ knowledge from his friend, the Dishonourable Judith Collins

        Mr. Botany (B.)

        • Tracey 6.2.2.1
          15 October 2014 at 3:30 pm

          i disagree. the msm have used him as a source for articles since dirty politics was published. collins is not his only inside source, and the kinds of people who use people like slater dont disappear overnight. dirty politics publication may even have scored himself new clients.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 6.2.2.2
          15 October 2014 at 3:37 pm

          Collins was never the only one pulling his strings, the market for his services has probably increased if anything.

          The Blomfield case may be the end of Slater and it will be business as usual for the National Party abuse of power machine.

        • ropata mako shark 6.2.2.3
          15 October 2014 at 8:31 pm

          it’s relatively easy to fake your blog traffic stats but i doubt whale’s technical competence extends that far. perhaps his national party handlers are taking care of that.

          with fawning MSM coverage whale is bound to have some legit traffic, but i am frankly shocked to see that according to open parachute, whaleoil’s traffic was through the roof last month.

          # Blog Visits PageViews
          1 Whale oil 3716364 5309045
          2 Kiwiblog 695190 1093806
          3 The Daily Blog 504304 813779
          4 The Standard 429438 868342

  7. Jrobin 7
    15 October 2014 at 6:53 am

    Slater should begin a new career as a fiction writer as this appears to be his only talent. He appears to exist in his own private reality. Fortunately we still have a Justice System and thanks to Nicky one which is now minus the dishonourable ex Minister who was doubtless protecting this insect.

    • Tracey 7.1
      15 October 2014 at 11:26 am

      isnt woodhouse now minister of police? remember him, the guy who lied about his liu/cunliffe involvement and personally met with liu after he was charged with domestic violence on two women?

  8. les 8
    15 October 2014 at 7:49 am

    I wonder if the ‘spanish bride’ will now appear to defend the Slug…somehow I doubt it.

    • veutoviper 8.1
      15 October 2014 at 11:57 am

      The Spanish wife has been commenting on Herald opinion pieces relating to her husband regularly over the last few weeks as Juana Atkins. The nature of the responses led me to google the name which revealed who she was.

    • Tracey 8.2
      15 October 2014 at 3:31 pm

      who is the spanish bride?

  9. SHG 9
    15 October 2014 at 12:24 pm

    Slater’ll be the first to admit he’s not the world’s most handsome fellow, but did you have to photoshop together a FAKE picture of him to try and make him look less appealing?

  10. Halcyon 10
    15 October 2014 at 8:37 pm

    I would suggest that neither Slater nor Hagar are good examples of Investigative Journalists. Both use the peer of sensationalism to seek their products.

    A good Investigative Journalist builds a strong case founded on irrefutable evidence and not on opinion or conjecture.

    • Tracey 10.1
      16 October 2014 at 8:00 am

      i guess you havent read many of hagers books. ive read three. the first two were about a third of references to his direct evidence. the last was backed by the subsequent release into the public arena of tge emails he referred to. subsequently the owner of those emails demanded them back suggesting they were not fake. i believe the later term was invoked by way of defence by the then minister of justice.

      slater doesnt write books. its even open to conjecture if he writes posts because it has been proven he posts the writing of others under his name. he hammered the last nail into a coffin of a newspaper once, but to even compare the two is ridiculous.

      hager was awarded the bruce jesson lecture, has won an overseas award and is described universally as an investigative journalist.

      slater calls himself a journalist ONLY when it suits his legal argument.

      lastly, the media including herald, tv news and sst ascribed the following to hagers book,

      namely that slater had forced hide to resign with bribery.

      in fact the book made no such assertion. it, relying on the email exchanges, stated they were ready to bribe hide, planned to bribe hide, but states that hager had no idea if they carried it through…

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.