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…
Fisher left this out "Police note that their investigation found the missing hard drive to have never been stolen." http://t.co/9NwUSG9i5N
— Sir Whaleoil (@Whaleoil) October 9, 2014
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”.