- Date published:
8:30 am, May 11th, 2016 - 32 comments
Categories: Dirty Politics, Judith Collins, law, police - Tags: #dirtypolitics, cameron slater, dirty politics, felix geiringer, judith collins
For trying to procure a hack of this blog Cameron Slater was offered the soft option of diversion – community service with no conviction. In a series of tweets last night Nicky Hager’s lawyer Felix Geiringer set out 7 reasons Slater didn’t qualify. The text of the tweets was –
1. Before offering diversion, the Police MUST consult the victim. In this case they did not even tell the victim there had been an arrest.
2. Reparation is one of the two primary purposes of the scheme. In this case, Slater was not required to do anything by way of reparation.
3. Diversion is generally only offered to first time offenders but http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10673417
4. Diversion is only offered for minor offending. In Hager case, Manukau District Manager described offences under this section as serious.
5. To qualify, Slater had to admit responsibility and show remorse. His media statement claims he has never done so and still does not.
6. Diversion is “unlikely to be appropriate” where the “offender refuses to identify co-offenders”. Who was Slater’s mysterious “funder”?
7. Diversion is “unlikely to be appropriate” where offender was the organiser. Eg, the offender was soliciting others to commit crime.
I’ve run out of steam. There are probably more.
In surely unrelated news –
— Alastair Thompson (@althecat) May 10, 2016