Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Okay ... just now on Morning Report, Annette King has just named the officer who brought the bestiality video to the party in 1980.
Who is also the person who has been shopping this story to the media (the HoS bit, the ODT didn't).
The person is ...
WAYNE IDOUR
Holy crap.
Geoff Robinson admitted that RNZ news knew that - and apparently most news organisations do. WTF?
-
From Scoop:
Ms Clark pointed out that some of the allegations had been made by a woman in Christchurch Women's Prison. According to the PM allegations of improper behaviour in Dunedin had been made to current Health Minister Pete Hodgson who had then asked his Labour colleague and Christchurch central Mr Barnett to visit the woman behind the allegations. Apparently the woman had not been willing to put her name to any of the allegations. The PM pointed out that her MPs were not necessarily 'sleuths'.
So they covered up by, um, sending someone to investigate ...
Wishart has the woman's affadavits online now. They really read like the statements of a mentally ill person.
The matters raised in the latest Investigate magazine have however been referred to the Police Complaints Authority. The PM also implied that former Policeman and current Private Eye Wayne Idour may have had something to do with the allegations contained in the June 2007 issue of Investigate. Mr Idour was revealed late last year to have been employed by the Exclusive Brethren to dig dirt on Labour Party MPs.
And if this is true, someone needs to go ahead and crucify Wishart. From September last year:
STATEMENT FROM INVESTIGATE MAGAZINE
We would like to point out for the record that no information we've used has ever come from Idour or the Exclusive Brethren.
And:
The magazine continues to generate news tips, even from within the Labour Party - because the public have come to realize that Investigate will always protect its sources.
I can confirm, however, that we are now actively investigating reports that Labour hired a private investigation firm to dig dirt on National leader Don Brash and MP John Key.we only became aware of this while watching Campbell Live.
Guess Ian got sidetracked.
-
I must have had a remarkably sheltered upbringing - being raised in a convent by wolves, only let out to deliver soup and prayer cards to the virtuous poor and all :) - but I'm fairly confident most poeple act decently because... well, they're fundamentally decent human beings (however flawed) not because it might FUBAR their career prospects. I know you mean it like that, but it's pretty insulting - not only to cops but men in general - to just shrug your shoulders and treat what most people would regard as an extreme form of pornography as *meh* just what went down in rugby circles in the early 80's.
Bestiality's gross (much more so when it's used to degrade women, which doesn't seem to have been the case here) and I'm feeling icky reading about it so much, but the fact that it's covered under the same censorship law as child porn. doesn't meant the social sanction is the same. It's clearly not.
But mainly, again: Broad was a 23 year-old constable who didn't formally report an objectionable film that he didn't see to superior officers who already knew about it. But, according to Broad, he did informally complain. Really, I'm hardly about to have the man fired as police commissioner on the basis of that.
-
Um ... yes he does. Via the DomPost:
I stand corrected, whilst noting your note at the end.
One major difference might be that one involves allegations of criminal misconduct, the other (group sex etc.) did not.
Uh? The Bazley investigation into police culture was sparked by allegations of rape and sexual abuse, wasn't it? Some of which were found in a court to be true.
'Though, to be honest, I'm not actually sure what offences the Cinematograph Films Act 1976 actually contained. Maybe viewing was one. Or owning premises in which they were shown? Or maybe no-one committed an offence.
From what I can tell, the offence would have lain in exhibiting the film, which would presumably have passed the test of being "injurious to the public good". Those who viewed it would have been the victims.
-
Sure, it's hard to write comedy. And it's hard to imagine a Russell Brown of laffs who belts out ten minutes of great new material every day before lunch. But surely comedians don't stop being funny people. If you have a comedian who's been doing this for over a decade - you'd think about 10% of his or her funniest stuff would issue from the last year.
Heh. But if you've heard me make more than a couple of public speeches, you'll have noticed that there are a few greatest hits that get incorporated into whatever I'm doing at the time, before being eventually retired.
OTOH, I've never been able to bring myself to have a stock presentation (with PowerPoint!) that I roll out every time. That's just too dull.
True fact though: I tried stand-up a couple of times back in the day, as a means of trying to share the stage experience of my muso buddies whilst having no talent for music.
The first time really came off quite well. The second didn't, in part because I didn't know you were allowed to use the same material twice (and also because I didn't know about having "heckle lines").
I do find that there are some comedians who are able to brilliantly extemporise or at least (Jermaine from the Conchords) make whatever they say sound very funny, and I learned a lot from working with comedians on Off the Wire: it really is all about timing.
But has Brendhan been suffering writer's block? Wasn't there some controversy about the provenance of the material he did on Rove?
-
Perhaps, those same people aren't the now Police Commissioner who thinks criminal offending of this nature is best dealt with through "internal action", however.
Does he think that now? No. You're condemning a junior constable for failing to make an official complaint to senior officers about something at least some of those senior officers already knew about.
And let's be clear: while the film would have been illegal to possess, it wouldn't have been illegal to watch, and Broad maintains he didn't even do that.
And arguments of this nature didn't seem to work in the eyes of most over the Abu Gahraib guards who didn't blow the whistle:
Eh? I think most of the people concerned about Abu Ghraib were disturbed that it was only junior personnel who took the rap, when everyone up the chain of command knew what was happening. And that's also a very adventurous comparison.
-
But if this does not happen then Labour is dead in water.
Angus, Labour has been "dead in the water" as a result of Investigate exposes quite a few times now. It seems to truck on. Check Your Views on the Herald website - most of the people there seem to be raging against the "political correctness" that makes the story an issue.
Amusingly, many of the same blogland dwellers who accused Helen Clark of conducting a PC vendetta against individual police officers with the Bazley report are now screaming for heads to roll in this case. Plus ca change ...
-
I know a number of people who try contact Wishart on his views, but get nothing back. But I'm not sure he deliberately lies; it's that he probably gets so wrapped up in some sort tunnel vision he borders being mendacious.
And I know one person who has conclusively demonstrated to Wishart that major elements of a story concerning them have been flat-out wrong. Not a flicker.
-
And just an FYI, Darryl, Mr. Wishart was around long before the election of the Fifth Labour Government. Trying to paint this man as some kind of National Party sock puppet is (at best) a wee bit disingenuous.
Aw, c'mon Craig. You know very well that Wishart has pursued an obsessive ideologically-driven campaign against the current government. Remember the secret lesbian cabal led by Head Lesbian Helen Clark? For goodness sake, his cover illustration for this issue is a full-page portrait of Michael Cullen.
Danyl was pointing out that the Kiwiblog commenters lapping up the current controversy might not be so happy if and when Wishart starts targeting liberal National MPs.
-
The differences with Broad of course are that:
1. It was his house and he DID know - not might have known
2. He's a cop, and I prefer than cops don't ignore the law.The other way of looking at it is that there were far more senior policemen than him there, who may actually have seen the video. I think it would have been more incumbent on them to take action than a 23 year-old constable.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 … 2279 Older→ First