Hard News: Veitch
652 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 27 Newer→ Last
-
Email Web
I have always understood the best defence against action for defamation to be having the money to pay for expensive lawyers. It is not an area of the Law which is predicated on fairness.
Coming in rather late, this point still bears repeating. For all the talk of defences to an action for defamation, you still have to go to court before you can earn vindication using said defences. That's a very expensive proposition, especially when the legal arsenal arrayed against you is a) talented (I guess it's a bit arguable, but they're definitely not mediocre whatever their other faults), b) well-funded, and c) very demonstrably happy to take on even major media outlets, with said outlets also possessed of very capable legal advisors and fairly deep pockets with which to fund a response.
As for the rest, if what Russell's intimated about a major smear campaign by Team Kveitch through the Sunday papers is accurate, it's just a shame that the judge can't overturn her original sentence and decide that, actually, there's zero remorse and he's really worthy of a spot of sub-standard housing (whatever Garrett and McThicker may have to say about prisons, you can be sure that Veitch wouldn't find being inside a step up from his ordinary lifestyle) at one of Auckland's premier incarceration facilities.
-
Bingo! I can see this whole nasty business has touched a nerve with you
Well, I can say it's very complicated, with some deeply mixed loyalties at a personal level. Beyond that, I'll let discretion prevail.
-
Email Web
it's just a shame that the judge can't overturn her original sentence
The answer is likely to be "no" but a question occurs: If the judge feels that the court was misled by the material presented on Mr Veitch's behalf (and Devoy and Currie seem to be saying that they were misled as to the nature of the references and therefore the material is out of context), and the judge's comments indicate that the references carried great weight in the decision on sentencing, can she order a review? Or is that the end of the decision unless the Crown appeals the sentence?
-
Email
To get on my soapbox, if you see that a woman's refuge is collecting, give.
Word.
In fact I 'd be honoured to pledge the first $20 bucks to the TV Guide to Women's Justice and Recovery from Violence fund.
Anyway, I'm serious. Rename it so as we don't perpetuate the trivialisation already afoot but why not direct this anger and frustration into a good old-fashioned positive doohickey.
And we can always be noisy about it too. No point TV Utd/Ltd getting all the action.
-
I'm curious: could anybody name a single case in which the strategy of blaming the media has actually paid off?
Winston Peters made it an art form.
-
Email Web
There's not a whole lot I can add to this very informative thread, other than to say that, for my money, one of the most obnoxious things the guilty party has said relates to the spying-and-snooping he authorized:
"I did some investigating and I went and I dug and I went through records and I went through disclosure and you know what ... I had a good time and I found stuff," he said.
So he admits to getting his kicks this way. What a prat.
Reminds me of the behaviour of some people who act on behalf of a certain governing political party, but that's by-the-by.
Unfortunately, the resulting tattle-tale in this case will likely go down a treat with the public at large. Afterall, 3.1% of our GDP is generated by scuttle-butt regarding local C-list celebrities.
-
Email Web
I refer back to what Sue said up thread. Veitch keep's said on mourning report that he's "Maned up" because he say's he's had counseling, as if that makes amends. As I have said here before, the entire city of Porirua has only one clinical psychologist available thru the public health system. therapeutic treatment from a clinical psychologist is a privilege, that few can afford. And Veitch grumbled about how he has had to spend over three hundred thousand dollars on his legal team.
What a dick.
-
Email Web
What's more, his $300,000 seems to have been very well-spent, in terms of the outcome from his perspective. He really should STFU.
-
Email Web
What's more, his $300,000 seems to have been very well-spent, in terms of the outcome from his perspective.
I'm still not convinced of that. Given that this was a first time offense, his character as presented to the court (testimonials, charity work etc) and his decision to plead guilty it seems that a $10,000 fine and 300 hours of community service is a pretty reasonable outcome - esp since the victim seems to have been opposed to a custodial sentence. I suspect that he would have gotten an identical outcome if he'd spent a tenth of what he paid on QC's, private detectives and media advisors.
Indeed, the money paid to Glenda Hughes looks to have been a very bad investment, ensuring that the whole horrible saga had maximum media coverage has basically destroyed her clients career. My impression is that she's exploited Veitch's poor judgement and desire for revenge against his former partner to maximise her fees and help her friends in the industry sell newspapers.
-
Email
Sadly, this (yet again and again I am sure) is a lesson to all in, lack of information determines the out come. Unfortunately for Dunne Powell,not informing the hospital correctly,(causing permanent medical problems) and the police getting the info late, has allowed the media the chinese whispers they so relish and consequently, the judicial outcome.I support our democracy of benefit of doubt but a plea bargain is exactly that, it's a deal and I know Lawyers are very good at making deals and jumping to the front of the queue may have been in the deal because it (the case) did pop up all of a sudden this time Perhaps it's a good deal in her mind,finally her prerogative. I know what I think of that man and I will tell others.I'm not giving him anymore time on here.
-
Kristin Dunne-Powell explains in some detail her side of the story, including about media coverage, timing of telling the police and even the nature of her relationship with Veitch.
Worth a read - like the Campbell interview she comes across as self-aware and balanced despite what she has been through.
-
Good point, Danyl. Seems it's not just the media wing of his expensive servants whose behavior has attracted attention. DomPost reports 'Team Veitch tried to intimidate me'.
Auckland journalist Stephen d'Antal, who had spoken to Ms Dunne-Powell about the case before she complained to police, was served with a court summons by Veitch's defence team.
He believed Team Veitch was running a campaign to intimidate Ms Dunne-Powell and her supporters.
A private investigator had knocked on his door at 9.30 one night to deliver a court summons and he believed another court witness was visited even later at night.
"It just seemed very deliberate to me," he said.
"I think it was trying to unnerve and unsettle the prosecution and Ms Dunne-Powell to try and get her to back down."
-
Email
Kristin Dunne-Powell explains in some detail
yeah I just read that too.I'm glad she is not moving,but he can fuk off
-
Kristin Dunne-Powell explains in some detail her side of the story, including about media coverage, timing of telling the police and even the nature of her relationship with Veitch.
I think at least some "detail" in that story may have been lost at the last moment. I guess we'll see tomorrow what the Sundays do with the handiwork of Veitch's PI.
But in the Herald's lead story, Team Veitch admits none of luminaries who provided character references were told what was going on -- and it seems some were actively lied to:
Former Olympic triathlon champion Hamish Carter told the Weekend Herald he had understood the reference he gave to Veitch was for a job interview and was connected to the broadcaster getting his passport released. He said Veitch asked him this week for a reference.
Veitch's lawyer, Stuart Grieve, QC, did not return phone calls. Veitch's spokeswoman, Glenda Hughes, yesterday telephoned all those who wrote support letters for Veitch.
None knew Veitch was going to plead guilty, but Ms Hughes said only Mr Currie and Dame Susan had raised concerns.
The true reason for the references being requested was kept secret because the sentencing indication the day before Veitch pleaded guilty was totally confidential.
"We couldn't tell anyone about this, only that the references would go before the court," Ms Hughes said.
She could not say who removed the paragraphs referring to the passport.
It'll be interesting to see whether any more comes of this.
But anyway, that "I had a good time and I found stuff" quote from Veitch in the Dom Post about employing a PI to snoop on Dunne-Powell is nasty .
-
Email Web
Devoy is talking to her lawyers about this. I doubt anything will come of it from a judicial standpoint (based on my zero seconds of experience and extensive ignorance of the law), but in terms of Veitch's ability to return to work the last 48 hours have been brutal. Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.
-
Posted a couple of hours ago on the TVNZ site:
A lawyer following the Tony Veitch assault case says Dame Susan Devoy should tell the sentencing judge she felt misled by the Veitch team ....
Lawyers believe it was unethical and would certainly upset a judge.
"It's pretty bloody rough,' said one criminal lawyer, who did not want to be named.
It was unlikely the case would be recalled but he had no doubt Judge Doogue would be very upset she had been given doctored documents, he said.
"I would say the legal profession is very surprised a reference given in good faith was amended."
I'm not surprised Mr Grieve is proving difficult to reach at the moment.
-
The arrogance that Veitch and his team have displayed is incredible. This editing of character testimonials shows how low they were willing to go.
I won't watch or listen to anything with him in in future.
-
Email Web
Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.
Just as surely, it's all self-inflicted. What a dick.
-
Email
Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.
I'll wait until Sunday to get more of an idea of the man's half-life - but yeah, what Michael said.
-
The true reason for the references being requested was kept secret because the sentencing indication the day before Veitch pleaded guilty was totally confidential.
"We couldn't tell anyone about this, only that the references would go before the court," Ms Hughes said.
Yet clearly at least three referees were *not* told that the references would go before a court. "Passport office" and "potential bosses" /=/ court.
It's almost fascinating, in a really sick way, to see just how deep Veitch and co. can manage to dig themselves.
-
He did, after, all have the opportunity of a press conference and a enabling interview with one of his media friends.
A media friend who was, apparently, giving Veitch advice on that press conference and how to "manage perceptions". But here's what really offends me: I understand the editor of the organ concerned was aware of the enabler's blatant conflict of interest, but didn't think the readers deserved to have that little factoid disclosed.
Its hard to be disappointed by people you expect nothing from in the first place. But when you're editing a newspaper that likes to take a very high ethical tone (at least, where the competition is concerned), you win the arsehole of the week award by default.
-
Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.
Surely Clint Rickard's chances of being considered a person of suitable character, demeanour and judgement to practice law were low to non-existent...
-
Reminds me of the behaviour of some people who act on behalf of a certain governing political party, but that's by-the-by.
I don't see any need to kick Mike Williams while he's down, Red.
-
A couple of typical overly verbose points:
Firstly given that Veitch's job is as a journalist reporting on high profile so-called elite sports, does anyone else see the conflict of interest situation arising if you are one of those high profile sports people asked to supply veitch a reference?
Saying yes and giving a glowing testimonial would mean that if Veitch got his gig back, the sportsperson would be entitled to feel he/she had one in the favour bank with someone influential in the sports media. The ordure can hit the ventilator any place any time for those who live from/in the public eye. What's not to like about having a sports journo owe you one?
If Veitch is never rehabilitated (unlikely - see further down) then it is a 'nothing ventured nothing gained' outcome.
However if he is rehabilitated and you, the elite sportsperson knocked back the offer to get in on the ground floor of team Veitch shareholders, life could be difficult should a sunday journal fix it's sights on you in the future.
At least one member of the 'straight press' (irony intended) could feel he owes you no favours, you refused the opportunity to aid him we he was down.
Many of our current crop of sports people appear to be individualistic neo-liberal careerist types. Just the sort of person who could make a cold decision to write a glowing testimonial about a man despite his being convicted of assaulting a woman, if it could stand the writer in good stead at some future date.
I would have thought that issue alone would make Veitch's re-employ by state broadcasters impossible.
Of course a career end just won't happen. I'm sure someone somewhere has obtained a Ph D in communications or public relations or the semiotics of tabloid reporting, for their thesis which set out the methodology for determining the length of 'cooling off' required to 'spin up' a piece of media revisionism.
That is NZ's news media aren't famed for their institutional memory when it comes to national political matters let alone something as inconsequential as a sporting journalist's domestic relations.
So when Ms Hughes and Co do determine what the cooling off period for Veitch is and that has passed, they only need to promote a couple of stories about something peripheral to the Veitch case, preferably something derogatory about Ms Dunne-Powell and slyly inject what they are currently claiming to be the case as a fact in that future story, to have all NZ's mass media accept currently wild claims about set ups, insinuations about blackmail, as fact.
In no time at all, that most easily led section of the public, our swing voters so to speak, will be clamouring for Veitch's return on a Game of Two Halves, Close Up, Breakfast, the 7 o'clock news.
Watch and see.
It happens with everything else from global warming to crooked tory pols, so why wouldn't the same technique work for Veitch.
As for the elephant in the living room, how does an employee of a state broadcaster manage to afford such a vast PR campaign, seemingly extended over years? I dunno, but I believe that goes to the heart of everything that is wrong with TVNZ.For me, Veitch is the epitome of why TVNZ is the only public broadcaster in the world I refuse to use. Which is really saying something considering the appalling broadcaster the BBC has become since the Hutton inquiry.
-
Sue,
Email Web
watching those interview again today
what i cannot get over 2 things
- it feels to me like he truly believes that he was forced into the situation. which disgusts me, unless she laid the first hit nothing justifies it at all
- he keeps answering JC with 'what more could i have done',1. at the same time you admit the crime say that nothing justifies that crime (NOTHING) no sitution no stress, nothing in this earth made his acctions acceptable, and stop couching his guilty with insinuations the crime is partly her fault
2. not lie to the people at the hospital about the injury
those are 2 things i keep thinking about
Post your response…
You may also create an account or retrieve your password.