Which I think is a credit to the South African bowling and fielding attack. So many cracking shots were held to singles, every single one of which was never quite enough, drove the required run rate up a little more. But their mistakes were extremely costly.
Exactly. It was the excellence of their fielding (and Morkel's bowling!) that created the pressure that almost took away New Zealand's chances of what was beginning to look like a very reachable win. But that same pressure told on them in those handful of game-changing moments.
And we should not lose sight of the fact that the rain was (mixed metaphor alert) an incredible windfall for New Zealand. Things might have been very different had we been chasing 360 in 50 overs.
Shameless self promotion
Always encouraged :-)
Would it have been hard or a shoo-in to get a warrant to seize the phones and computers of the youths accused? Because it seems so obvious, it’s hard to comprehend that it wouldn’t have happened.
I have thought this for a long time.
Amen. Lest we forget the persecution of the alleged Christchurch light bulb looter, whose name I won’t invoke out of respect for his presumed desire for privacy.
Arthur Alan Thomas, David Bain, Teina Pora
victims of the police
Or Nicky Hager, who had his house turned over by a team of cops as a witness.
So a complaint from Cameron Slater was important enough to justify an over-the-top search and seizure on a prominent investigative journalist –– but Waitemata police didn't think it necessary (initially) to even talk to the alleged offenders and their parents, let alone seek a warrant. Even though that could have protected more children and young women from being sexually assaulted.
The IPCA says no it wasn’t a factor. I presume they investigated that angle before making such a firm statement.
They hadn't even made the connection in the case of the first two complainants.
I’m sure the Edge will correct me if I’m wrong, but I think there is already case law on this (see http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/online-defamation-nz-google-case-supports-aust-not-uk-conclusions-ck-132351) which definitely points at the owner of the house.
Yes. And the fact the terribly defamatory things get said in the comments of certain other blogs every day is no impediment to someone taking action on something said here.
We are in the process of becoming Press Council members, which does offer an alternative process, one I would be happy to embrace.
Does this make all the cheap Asian ones good or bad value and are they the real thing?
They’re everywhere over there.
See also: Avondale Market. I did buy some knock-offs there one time, and they are really flimsy. Real Dres are heavier and better engineered, just not good for what you're paying.
Given that it’s your blog, you are the “publisher of record” and therefore liable for any libel raised (correct me if I’ve misunderstood you, Rich)
Yes, I am. Let me look at that.
Like we didn't already suspect it ...