But does that mean that Key should not have to answer any questions about Ede? That Collins should (almost) stay a minister? That Katherine Rich should stay on the HPA?
There hasn't been a question time in a while. Surely it's at least possible that this will come up? :-)
EDIT: And of course, the list of people being slammed and smeared as “hackers” included … Keith Ng.
What are the salient facts that mean that Keith is not a hacker? (especially as might distinguish him from from Cameron Slater and Jason Ede and the Labour Party website?)
Remember, the Espiner interview hinged on his point-blank, repeated refusal to answer a reasonable question about the conduct of a Minister of the Crown.
Why did Richard Worth have to go as a Minister?
I read earlier that Labour only won the party vote in five electorates. I’m not sure that’s true, but it feels it.
Te Tai Hauāuru
Te Tai Tokerau
Te Tai Tonga
So if it’s not what the story says, what is he being prosecuted for?
He is not being prosecuted. He is being sued.
Prediction: Slater will be successful in getting an injunction against "Rawshark".
That is my prediction too.
Cameron Slater is now ... being prosecuted for breaching the privacy of businessman Matt Blomfield
You cannot be prosecuted for breaching privacy, and Cameron Slater isn't being prosecuted for it.
The court has decided the offence didn't merit a conviction -- and we don't let the Crown challenge that in general. So why should this one form of decision be challengeable?
To me, this seems more like a sentencing exercise than a conviction exercise. We let the Crown appeal "this offence doesn't warrant imprisonment", and I can't see that this assessment is fundamentally different from that.
I do have concerns, but thinking about it, I think they're mostly rooted in a concern about whether the Crown should be able to appeal at all.
Have now remembered I should have turned comments on. I hope the withdrawal wasn’t too bad :-)
Serious question though - when have the police ever actually progressed an Electoral Commission referral to the stage of pressing charges?
They do it sometimes in relation to people who "double vote". But in regards other matters … never, to my knowledge.
A couple of elections ago, before this all became a big thing, with lots of complaints, I understand TVNZ was prosecuted and convicted for airing an advertisement during the closing statements.