What happened to the Newshub article about Nick Smith and the Pike River film?

Written By: - Date published: 9:56 am, July 8th, 2017 - 41 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, disaster, Mining, national, national/act government, nick smith, same old national, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

The Newshub article seemed straight forward enough. Nick Smith had yet again been caught out directly contradicting reality. He had said that there was no film showing any Pike River bodies when the police and Solid Energy said there was.

But then the article disappeared. Why did that happen?

The article said (from googlecache):

The minister in charge of Pike River Mine is at odds with both police and Solid Energy over whether video footage from inside the mine shows a body.

Nick Smith said he asked police whether the footage exists, and claims police said it didn’t.

“My advice from police is that they have had specialists look all the way through the video imaging and they have not found any evidence that would confirm bodies in the mine,” he said.

But police told Newshub there is a body that can be seen in some of the footage.

“It is widely known that footage taken from within the mine has potentially captured an image of a body,” a police spokesman said.

“Police has viewed all the video and still imagery we supplied to the Pike River families and hold the view that only one body has potentially been captured.”

The mine’s owner Solid Energy also believe that footage from Borehole 47 contains images of a body. When Newshub asked for a copy of all footage from Borehole 47, Solid Energy declined because it shows human remains.

“Solid Energy does not agree to provide video footage of Borehole 47 that Solid Energy believes contains images of one body,” said legal service manager Rob Page.

The article is still on MSN.  But not on Newshub.

So what happened?

Did the police actually say there was film showing a body?  This is pretty likely as they have in the past.  They deny that bodies are shown but have acknowledged in the past that a body has been seen on film.

This article also states that Solid Energy chief executive Tony King has said he was aware one body had been seen on video footage, but not that more bodies might have been seen.  There is also this OIA request where the applicant was given the run around in his attempt to obtain copies of the video.

The Nick Smith quote above seems pretty clear.  And it directly contradicts what the Police and Solid Energy have said.

So why did Newshub pull the story?  And why did Nick Smith directly contradict what the Police and Solid Energy have said.

41 comments on “What happened to the Newshub article about Nick Smith and the Pike River film?”

  1. Draco T Bastard 1

    So why did Newshub pull the story?

    What pressure was brought to bear and from where to cause the story to be pulled?

    • Ed 1.1

      Cover up.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1

        That seems obvious but who did it? Why was it so important that it be pulled?

        We need the reasons and the who to see if it was a) criminal and/or b) immoral.

      • Red 1.1.2

        CIA probably, I suggest both parties want to stay away from belt way issues so close to an election and simply debate policy re neoliberism and conservatism vs miserablism and regression

        • Keepcalmcarryon 1.1.2.1

          Lol.
          All the same someone could actually ask newshub. There is plenty of grime all over this national government but it’s a leap to assume this story was pulled because of outside pressure without evidence?Could be as simple as someone checking a quotation etc.

    • Ed 1.2

      Follow the money.
      The owners of Newshub will not want this government unseated.

  2. Gristle 2

    My take on Nick Smith is that he truely believes that he is the smartest man in the room and his memories and analysis are the most correct. As such, he spouts all sorts of (let’s be charitable) less than perfect thoughts that fit his carefully constructed interpretation of reality.

    Just last week Nick claimed ……we have issued more building consents in Auckland than ever before. What’s this WE Nick. Last time I looked it was the Auckland Council that did the issuing.

    The Nick Smith version of the Pike River video is another one of his SMITR syndrome.

    • dukeofurl 2.1

      The numbers of houses completed around 2005 are also more than currently.

      I think his idea of of ‘more than ever before’ is limited to nationals last 8.5 years.

      It would fit the weasely words of this person TWICE convicted for contempt of court for witness tampering and publishing a family court case details.

      Englishes response at the time ?
      ‘National leader Bill English said Mr Arnold’s[Solicitor general] threat to prosecute Dr Smith was a threat to every MP doing their job of representing their constituents.”

      Its Bill and Nick all the way.An Mp breaking the law is just fine with him

    • Wensleydale 2.2

      If Nick Smith was in a room with nothing but a pot plant, he’d still come a distant second.

  3. mauī 3

    Dodgy as. Brings back memories of dirty politics. But of course if you vote National your party is clean as a babys bum. Yeah right tui.

    • NZJester 3.1

      Yep, the babies bum is so clean according to Nick Smith. But the stench coming from its nappies is now getting so strong and I think stuff is starting to leak out the leg holes. We need to change those nappies right now New Zealand!

  4. RedLogix 4

    Pike River has become NZ’s equivalent of 911 in some ways. Your instincts just scream that such a monumental accumulation of cockups and inconsistencies can scarcely have an innocent explanation.

    Yet at some point you also realise they’re never going to come clean.

    • Keepcalmcarryon 4.1

      Hence change the government, get some people in there, retreive who they can, gather evidence and begin the royal commission.

      • RedLogix 4.1.1

        I would like to think, but we’re not going to get another Royal Commission unless something utterly dramatic breaks open. It would take a brave political outsider, and aside from Winston’s tentative foray, no-one else looks interested.

    • Ed 4.2

      Or NZ’s equivalent of Hillsborough.

  5. Bill 5

    Well, when “not found any evidence of” and “confirm” (Nick Smith) is stacked against the police using the word “potentially” (twice) and Solid Energy referring to “belief” …. then, yeah, that’s a whole lot wriggle room right there.

    And according to their own article, police did not tell Newshub that there is a body, though Newshub writes that they did in spite of supplying quotes that most definitely do not add up to that stark assertion..

    So I’m picking shite levels of reporting.

    And no, I haven’t checked through the other links yet and no, I’m not making any call on whether there is or isn’t footage of a body. I’m only making a call on bullshit levels of reporting.

    • mickysavage 5.1

      That is an extraordinary amount of wriggle room. If we allow politicians this amount then nothing they say will be wrong because it cannot be proved 100%.

      Also the RNZ quote suggests that Solid Energy accept that a body is shown.

      “Solid Energy chief executive Tony King said he was aware one body had been seen on video footage, but not that more bodies might have been seen.

      He told Morning Report the company has been asked by the government to look at the feasibility of a robot entering the drift of the mine, but not the main part of the mine.”

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/333408/pike-river-police-deny-footage-reveals-several-bodies

      And it is a BS statement by Smith to say there is no evidence to confirm bodies are in the mine when it is clear there are and that it is likely they have been captured on film.

      This sort of weasel words should suffer a repercussion.

      And making the story disappear is the issue here.

      • gsays 5.1.1

        it seems to be the zeitgiest, mickey.
        akin to the prime minister, the tape, no tape, might not be a tape, a tape listened to in a non ministerial capacity.

        although smith seems to excell in this decietful behaviour.

        yes disappearing story is strange but not surprising that mr joyce’s former interests should be involved.

      • RedLogix 5.1.2

        You’d think any sane human would, if there was even an outside chance there were bodies to be recovered, would actively pursue a recovery.

        But no. Smith, contrary to what many people say here, is no fool. Nor is he a sociopath. So WHY the obduracy?

        Is it just the usual political reluctance to avoid controversy if at all possible? Or does it run deeper?

        • Bill 5.1.2.1

          Completely agree with your first sentence.

          But then…remember how mine rescue were prevented from mounting any rescue attempt before the second explosion? And remember how it was said that the mine was on fire and at temperatures of some whatever degrees?

          Far too many heads are on the chopping block over far too many bad calls if entry is made and clutches of bodies are found wearing respirators that only had (from memory) 30 minutes of oxygen…even worse if any such bodies are discovered around broken down equipment (a possibility).

          For my money, I’m putting the “safety first, ‘tick box’, do nothing” culture that’s pervasive in NZ as the principle reason feet are being dragged. Yes, the whole Pike River debacle is very bad for National and potentially disastrous for them, but the possibility of fall-out going much, much wider and further than a mere political party is fairly high in my opinion.

          And that means a lot of people, not just the National Party, are desperate to have “no possibility of entry” cover their collective arses.

      • Bill 5.1.3

        Is there video that shows what might be a body?
        Or is there video that shows a body?

        There’s a huge difference between those two things and the article that’s been taken down ignores that difference.

        Is Nick Smith cynically playing on that difference?

        If he’s asked about video evidence of a body and the police and who-ever are saying only that there might be a body, then he’s right enough to reply that no such evidence exists (that being evidence “of a body”).

        If he’s asked about video evidence suggesting there might be a body, then he has to answer that evidence exists (a video containing an image that might be that of a body).

        I wonder what Tony King actually said? Did he say categorically that there was a body or did RNZ make assumptions based on what he said, or did he even simply mis-speak? (Haven’t listened to the audio yet – assuming it’s available)

        You say that “making the story disappear is the issue here”, but all I can see is a crappily written article that got published and then taken down. And my honest initial thought is “big deal”.

        The story of Pike River hasn’t been made to disappear and none of the questions being asked about Pike River and the aftermath have disappeared.

        • Gristle 5.1.3.1

          A video is always going to be circumstantial evidence. It is always going to be “might be a body.” Circumstantial evidence is needs a lot of it and to be coherently framed. Evidence of a body is going to be a body.

          I think you are splitting hairs and not moving the topic forward.

          • Bill 5.1.3.1.1

            The post was about an article disappearing from Newshub. And I’ve spoken to that.

            What topic is it that you think needs to be ‘moved forward’ in relation to the post?

        • Carol 5.1.3.2

          Yes, Go to YouTube.

  6. Mrs Brillo 6

    Curiously, I was one of the people rung for the last NewsHub/TV3 poll, and along with the political questions were three about my opinion on three current news topics. I thought it must have been TV3 deciding which angle to take on news stories.
    One of the most offbeat questions was “Did I think we should be entering Pike River Mine to retrieve bodies” (or words to that effect). My reply was that this was a decision to be made by experts, not the general public, which they recorded as a Don’t Know.

    • NZJester 6.1

      So many polls read like “Would you like person A to kick you in the left leg or person B to kick you in the right leg” and no option to say I would prefer not to be kicked at all.
      So not wanting to be kicked would be undecided.

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2

      My reply was that this was a decision to be made by experts, not the general public, which they recorded as a Don’t Know.

      A major problem with polling, and a number of other questionnaires for that matter, is that they have a fixed set of answers to the questions and people could, and probably do, have different answers to those questions. Answering outside those pre-supplied answers is essentially impossible making the end result of the questionnaire wrong and it’s not just a couple of percent but so far out as to make the questionnaire useless.

  7. Ian 7

    You guys need to stop using Pike River to muster votes. It is too long ago , most victims families want closure , health and safety laws have been vastly improved and it is starting to feel ghoulish.

    • DoublePlusGood 7.1

      Don’t lie, the victim’s families want justice, not pretending it never happened.
      The question you have to ask yourself is why you are happy with the people responsible for killing the miners getting away scot free.

    • Wainwright 7.2

      Liar. The families are the ones drivign this campaign. If you really cared you’d know.

    • Ed 7.3

      What a blatant lie.

    • Rae 7.4

      Is that how you would deal with most homicides?

  8. EyeSpy 8

    land public should have started smelling a rat when the suppression orders were placed on the evidence.. They do not want the Government and many of it’s employees held to account.. Ministers signed off on that mine and failed to check on the legals associated with it.

  9. Cinny 9

    What date was the article published please? Ok I see it was yesterday, dang that blows. A 404, far out smith is a 404…

    “Page not found… Sometimes, things go missing. This is one of those times.” Yeah newshub, no shit

    A few online articles from the Herald I had bookmarked have disappeared since they changed their website and I noticed the same thing happened when TV3 switched to Newshub, Really pisses me off, all the ones I’d bookmarked were political.

    If article was online only then it really blows.

  10. Cinny 10

    Thanks Eyespy and Reason, will do that in future.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    3 weeks ago