Prosecuting Key

42 comments on “Prosecuting Key ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ianmac 1

   2 May 2015 at 11:33 am

   That is a relief. I was bit worried that she could have been sucked in. I expect the Key advisers will be saying, “Damn and Blast! We needed a connection to undermine Amanda.”
   The Unite Union on the other hand is good news.
   • HumPrac 1.1

     3 May 2015 at 3:27 pm

     Nice reversed psychology there. It doesn’t work on me.
2. Lanthanide 2

   2 May 2015 at 12:17 pm

   Hopefully Cready will do the sensible thing and withdraw his case if Amanda launches her own.
   • weka 2.1

     2 May 2015 at 12:38 pm

     +1.
   • Tracey 2.2

     2 May 2015 at 12:40 pm

     McCready
   • higherstandard 2.3

     2 May 2015 at 1:32 pm

     I don’t believe that things sensible and Graham McCready have much in common.
     • HumPrac 2.3.1

       3 May 2015 at 3:24 pm

       Clearly you believe something that is not true.
   • HumPrac 2.4

     3 May 2015 at 3:26 pm

     And hopefully he will do the sensible thing and reinforce his case if Amanda does not launch her own. Given that Amanda could easily be blackmailed, we need someone to fill the void with which the blackmail would create.
3. veutoviper 3

   2 May 2015 at 12:33 pm

   These two articles/interviews on RNZ National Checkpoint on 29 April are worth listening to.

   Firstly, an article with an audio link re McCready which indicates that Bailey had refused to talk to him.
   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/272346/court-action-filed-over-ponytail-pulling-pm

   And this excellent interview with Shaana Reedy of Unite where Shaana is very clear that they are putting all the options to Amanda, but ultimately the decisions as to what action if any is taken will be up to Amanda.

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/201752375/the-unite-union-is-representing-amanda-bailey
4. music4menz 4

   2 May 2015 at 12:33 pm

   I would imagine that some Labour MPs such as Annette King are somewhat worried lest the Darren Hughes affair returns to haunt them if Amanda Bailey does indeed intend to launch charges against John Key. The hair pulling incidents would seem to be a mere trifle in comparison with the alleged happenings at Annette King’s home that resulted in Darren Hughes’ resignation from parliament.
   • Tracey 4.1

     2 May 2015 at 12:38 pm

     Or actually very similar… because both involved unwanted touching…

     Everyone assumes they know exactly what Hughes did or did not do, but they don’t. We know the extent of the Bailey actions because Key has admitted them. Most significantly when Bailey finally said NO directly to Key, he did it again. Hughes, it appears, stopped any advance when it was rebuffed. So, nice try spinner… they are far more similar than you portray. Oh, and Hughes resigned and no charges were ever laid… That Bailey was fully clothed is not as big a difference between the two as some are trying to spin.
     • Dave 4.1.1

       2 May 2015 at 3:09 pm

       And in the light of day, to use a Keyism, where is Hughes now? In parliament troughing still?
   • joe90 4.2

     2 May 2015 at 12:40 pm

     the alleged happenings at Annette King’s home

     Do tell.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 4.3

     2 May 2015 at 1:07 pm

     Whinging for Men will have to go and whinge to the judge.
   • felix 4.4

     2 May 2015 at 1:20 pm

     “I would imagine that some Labour MPs such as Annette King are somewhat worried lest the Darren Hughes affair returns to haunt them “

     I would imagine that if anyone was even slightly interested (beyond a handful of creeps who work with Cameron Slater) then it would have “come back to haunt them” a long time before now.
   • Murray Rawshark 4.5

     2 May 2015 at 10:03 pm

     I doubt it. You sound desperate.
5. mary_a 5

   2 May 2015 at 12:47 pm

   If Graham McCready is successful in getting a prosecution against Key, then all well and good.

   However, the final decision to take action is Amanda Bailey’s and hers alone and must be respected whichever way she decides to go. She’s doing the right thing at this stage in distancing herself from McCready’s action, for her own good, even though I’m sure he means well.

   As Amanda has the Unite Union prepared to advocate on her behalf, can it be expected anytime soon for the union’s offices to be broken into again? Wouldn’t be surprised if there was a repeat of the earlier incident. Speaking of which, anyone know how that one is going? Gone very quiet on that front, well in msm it has!
   • Tracey 5.1

     2 May 2015 at 1:15 pm

     I remember when Paul White suffered a break in in 1992 during his Citibank case…

     Very odd when the property at the centre of the case was already in police custody (having been siezed under a false affidavit filed by Citibank lawyers suggesting the disks had been stolen – they had not, they were sold legitimately, with a receipt BUT Citibank had forgotten to wipe them first – Citibank;s lawyers knew this when seeking intervention by the police)

     This is a link to Wishart’s paradise conspiracy where break ins, misuse of police powers ad all kinds of stuff people at the time didn’t believe could happen in NZ was revealed.

     http://briefingroom.typepad.com/files/paradiseconpreview.pdf

     If you use “sis” in the search you will read of how they were involved.

     John Carter is named as White’s new lawyer, in fact it was me doing all the work for Mr White… But Mr Carter and Citibank’s lawyer (S McCabe) were old adversaries from when they had been partners together at McElroys. McCabe and Carter were like red-rag to a bull… so when I told him about the police executing a warrant on the basis of theft, which citibank knew was false, he jumped to intervene and this included letters to John Banks, Minister of POlice who promised all kinds of things… until White “died”, and then he did nothing.
     • les 5.1.1

       3 May 2015 at 10:51 am

       was interested to learn that the Saudi crown prince who Key just met with is a big shareholder in Citibank…Citibank that had to be bailed out with U.S taxpayers money.
       • HumPrac 5.1.1.1

         3 May 2015 at 3:20 pm

         Funny how one of the richest people in the world got a “bail out” from some of the poorest income earners in the world.
   • hoom 5.2

     3 May 2015 at 12:15 pm

     Thats actually an interesting link.
     What was the timeline around that breakin vs this story?

     If she had been in contact with Unite before the story broke there could be some shenanigans over surveillance/spying involved.
6. ropata 6

   2 May 2015 at 12:48 pm

   Stocks in John Key have reached peak of the "ponytail curve" – #ponytailgate cartoon by @Slanecartoons in Listener: pic.twitter.com/AQhEgr4zRw— Bryce Edwards (@bryce_edwards) April 30, 2015
   • Clemgeopin 6.1

     2 May 2015 at 11:38 pm

     That is such a clever and funny cartoon!
     • ropata 6.1.1

       3 May 2015 at 11:36 pm

       Yep, I wish TS would let me embed tweets and images in comments … o well
7. Penny Bright 7

   2 May 2015 at 1:01 pm

   I worked very closely with Graham McCready on the private prosecution John Banks which set an historic precedent and resulted in his leaving Parliament.

   As one of three people who made a complaint about John Banks – which resulted in the Police ‘dropping the ball’ – I was thrilled that Graham McCready, of his own volition, then ‘picked up the ball’.

   The rest is history.

   Graham McCready has told me that he has (unsuccessfully) tried to contact Amanda Bailey.

   The process being followed is very similar to that followed in the private prosecution of John Banks.

   Graham McCready has presented for filing an application for the hearing of oral evidence in the Auckland District Court.

   In the John Banks case – once that was agreed to by the Judge, I was the ‘process server’ who personally served witness summonses upon Kim Dotcom, Wayne Tempero. Greg Tower (lawyer) and the EA of the CEO of Sky City Nigel Morrison.

   ‘Heresay’ evidence was then transformed into ‘admissible’ evidence at the hearing of this oral evidence.

   On the basis of the hearing of this oral evidence – it was the. ruled that there was a case to answer and John Banks went to trial.

   Just saying ….

   Penny Bright
   • weka 7.1

     2 May 2015 at 1:31 pm

     It’s a bit different when there is a direct victim whose wishes should be respected.
   • ianmac 7.2

     2 May 2015 at 1:33 pm

     If Mr Mcready wins a prosecution that will be OK and hats off to him. (See Mary @ 5) On his head be it.
     However it is important that Amanda deals with her case perhaps against the PM and perhaps against the Herald, on her terms and with the best advice available. The top priority is that Amanda stays safe. There will be Retallitory acts to discredit her and any association with Mr McCready could increase her risks.
     • Tracey 7.2.1

       2 May 2015 at 1:45 pm

       and her employer who perhaps misrepresented stuff to her to get her to a meeting to discredit her to help their business recover from what they thought was a PR disaster… or to shore up support for Key, so that he would keep coming and so would others wanting to rub shoulders with him (not literally of course). And who did not keep her place of work safe.
       • ianmac 7.2.1.1

         2 May 2015 at 3:03 pm

         I fear that it will be the word of a waitress against the words of two prominent business people. “We made sure that Amand knew it was for the Herald. And Mr Currie phoned us to make sure that we knew.”
         Mr Currie did not speak to Amanda of course but that would be OK -wouldn’t it?
     • HumPrac 7.2.2

       3 May 2015 at 3:41 pm

       “COULD increase her risks”.
       There is an exposure threshold with which once you get to a certain point, the risk of backlash becomes diminished due to the number (and quality) of people watching the scenario.
       Therefore association with McCready “COULD” decrease her risks.
   • barry 7.3

     2 May 2015 at 3:51 pm

     The comparison with Banks is not very good. The Banks prosecution was definitely in the public interest.

     A better comparison woud be with Mallard. I opposed that prosecution on the grounds that an ordinary person wouldn’t have been prosecuted in those cirumstances and I think the same thing applies here. Yes it was unwelcome attention and technically against the law, but prosecuting Key would reset the bar for prosecution at an unreasobaly low level.
     • Murray Rawshark 7.3.1

       2 May 2015 at 10:35 pm

       An ordinary person who began to harass a waitress to the extent that FJK did would likely have been trespassed from the cafe the first time. He was only able to continue because he is not an ordinary person. Not prosecuting him would set the bar for appropriate behaviour at an unacceptably low level.
     • HumPrac 7.3.2

       3 May 2015 at 4:04 pm

       Are you saying that it is not in the public interest to not to have their daughters being harassed by the most prominent figure in NZ? Is it not in the public interest to have someone who will repeatedly harass a girl, as influencing a large part of the decision to send our men and kids to invade a country?
       It is very much in the interest of the public to have someone in the top position be able to make rational decisions regarding the deployment of troops.
       The ‘hair pulling’ incidents PROVE that the decision-making process with which the Prime-Minister engages in, is more likely to be FUNDAMENTALLY flawed than it is to be FUNDAMENTALLY sound.
       This behavior shows a tendency to either domineer-ism, naivety, fetishism, or elitism. None of those tendencies are what I would class as ‘desirable attributes’ with regards to local policy and especially foreign policy.
8. The March Hare 8

   2 May 2015 at 6:06 pm

   I’m just waiting for someone to take legal action against Glucina and the Herald. I’m no legal expert but if Glucina has behaved dishonestly as the victim alleges then haven’t some rather serious laws been broken?
   • Paul 8.1

     2 May 2015 at 8:07 pm

     Wonder if they ‘ll fire her.
     • tc 8.1.1

       2 May 2015 at 11:59 pm

       FFS she works for the herald where the job is to protect the shonky one if anything she will be counselled about being more subtle and circumspect next time.
9. Jake 9

   2 May 2015 at 7:23 pm

   Graham McCready is right to make a complaint to the IPCA. To witness Male Assaults Female repeatedly and not arrest the perpetrator must be investigated.
10. The Murphey 10

    2 May 2015 at 8:06 pm

    The ‘prominent new zealander’ will not stand trial until at least April 2016 so it looks like the machine has swung in behind ‘whoeverthatis’

    The ‘prominent new zealander’ is apparantly not the prime minister so one can imagine how difficult it could be to bring charges let alone prosecution against the pm
    • tc 10.1

      3 May 2015 at 12:16 am

      It’s sending a big signal that’s for sure
11. esoteric pineapples 11

    2 May 2015 at 8:28 pm

    There won’t be an email, phone call etc between Bailey and the Union that isn’t going straight to the NSA ready for any request from New Zealand’s spy agencies. What are the chances that John Key or one of his advisors will be able to resist the temptation to look at them, given he has already used the SIS to slur the then Leader of the Opposition Phil Goff.
12. Upnorth 12

    3 May 2015 at 11:13 am

    firstly i respect amanda’s position

    but please do not go with unite – it has labour connections all over it
    • te reo putake 12.1

      3 May 2015 at 11:32 am

      Yeah, right. What Labour connections would they be, upnorth? What union do you recommend she use instead?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS