Posts by Rich of Observationz

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Hard News: Dirty Politics,

    You want my based-on-nothing theory? Someone in GCSB doesn't like Tories. After the "feral" post, they used their bugging-fu to find out who was running the DDOS attack and then sent them a little package with Slater's traffic on a memory stick.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Privacy and the Public Interest, in reply to Trevor Nicholls,

    Yes, they all will be because the candidates are all running for component parties, so Hone Harawira is a Mana candidate and Chris Yong is Internet Party.

    Any seats they win count against the party vote for Internet Mana.

    It's all by design.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Privacy and the Public Interest, in reply to Trevor Nicholls,

    No, they are a party with component parties as provided for by s.127 of the Electoral Act*

    http://www.elections.org.nz/news-media/electoral-commission-releases-party-and-candidate-lists-2014-election

    Electorate candidates can be Internet Party or Mana Movement, but there is a single list. The number of list MPs will be the quota of MPs proportionate to the party vote, minus the total of electorate MPs from either the Internet Party or Mana Movement.

    * I'm not sure, but suspect this provision may have originally been put in to incorporate the Rātana Labour members?

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Speaker: On the upland road,

    On one side, you have a government that helps its mates to avoid justice for stealing money from old people.

    On the other, you have investigative journalism.

    If you can't see the difference.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Speaker: On the upland road,

    I actually think this has gone beyond "dirty politics" and into outright corruption.

    The UK police distinguish between cops who are "bent for the job" (those who use illegal and unacceptable practices to pursue those they honestly believe to be guilty) and those who are "bent for themselves" and protect criminals for personal gain. Of course, one often tips over into the other.

    I think there's a similar thing in politics. The right is intrinsically "bent for the job" - they seek to promote the interests of the wealthy as a group through "legitimate" policy settings and laws. But this has, as can be expected, tipped over into being "bent for themselves" and taking money from individuals for privileged treatment (ranging from a photo with the Minister through to escaping prosecution for large scale fraud).

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to Phil Wallington,

    I think the traditional threat of "we know where yer live" is regarded as unlawyerly, even in Belfast.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to A C Young,

    Labour or the Greens could also do this.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Why we thought what we thought,

    So basically, a bunch of finance company directors stole money from NZ investors, and their mates in the National Party were complicit in bullying the SFO to help them wriggle out of their accountability for this. Not to mention several of these National Party people taking money to help out.

    I wonder how this will play with the fleeced investors, most of whom will be lifetime voters for that very same National Party.

    Labour and or the Greens should be promising legislation to make finance company directors retrospectively accountable and watching National standing up for their mates and contributors against ordinary NZers.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Legal Beagle: Crown appeals in criminal cases,

    While I'd agree that violence and bullying by children needs to be reduced, it's hard to judge where the full force of the criminal law needs to be brought to bear. If every kid who hits another ends up going through police action, suspension from school and a criminal record, we'll just get a lot of young violent criminals.

    In general, I'd say that discharge without conviction should only be used in fairly exceptional cases, where a case should really not have reached court, but it wound up there and the judge needs to correct that. I'd think that working on making the long term effects of a conviction less devastating is better than not convicting those who are clearly due a punishment, but can make a case for disproportionate effects (For instance, one could envisage imposing a community sentence but suppressing all identification details, including withholding them from foreign states).

    In the case in question, there is a reasonable argument that had the assault not had tragic consequences, the culprits would have got diversion and that lead the judge to reasonably sentence to a discharge without conviction,

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: UPDATED: Media Take: Election…, in reply to DeepRed,

    I will wait for Slater, Farrar, Hooton and Odgers to be charged for their rather more substantive conspiracy, then. Think I'll be waiting a while.

    (Paremoremo's convenient for Warkworth though - maybe they'll give Farrar day release to attend foo camp?)

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4467 posts Report Reply

Last ←Newer Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 447 Older→ First