He all took a leaf out of the OJ playbook and said he was going to devote himself to find the "real abuser".

I wonder if he is really willing not just to threaten legal action, but to take the stand?

Paul Potts was on DWTS this week and I watched his clip again a few days ago...

with this performance they spent more time getting sneering crowd shots and judges reactions before hand...they also?

and I still find it moving

I think reading her story makes it even more amazing and poignant.

Of course on Breakfast yesterday morning (why do I watch it) Paul Henry cued in with his now standard character assassination along the lines of" she's unemployed, well she must be if?

The more I watch Susan Boyle the more I get the nagging feeling it was staged...

Probably true, but I think she (and Paul Potts) deserve to milk it for all she can get rather than the usual assembly line of reality stars

He all took a leaf out of the OJ playbook and said he was going to devote himself to find the "real abuser".

Maybe like OJ he'll write a book. He could call it "If I Kicked Her." Because he doesn't appear to have taken genuine responsibility for the appalling?

Yesterday, I held my nose, and checked the NZ herald's 'Your views' thread on this subject. There seemed to be a number of commentators on that thread who said essentially 'I don't watch sports, or Veitch, but?

Honestly how is this vile man still on television?

Because he's so vile. I have workmates who love him because he's so utterly offensive.

Probably not relevant to this debate, but it shows he?s rubbish as a journalist too.

The more I watch Susan Boyle the more I get the nagging feeling it was staged...

Yes, very true. I think everyone bar the judges had already had a "taste" to get her on the stage (I doubt anyone that wants to can just rock up and sing/yell/swear without a?

geoff

My other objection to Veitch is that he's a boofhead. Probably not relevant to the debate, but a good reason to keep him off the telly.

You cant use that against him, I thought you had to be a boofhead to be a sports broadcaster?

As far as I can see there are two ways Veitch could have handled this – he could have come out and said:
"A terrible thing happened and I am sorry. I pleaded guilty because, although I didn't mean?

He seems unable to say "I did wrong, sorry" and leave it at that. I remember his first?

Maybe like OJ he'll write a book. He could call it "If I Kicked Her." Because?

He gets?

Must be a dilemma for the Sensible Senticing dudes

No dilemma, Geoff. We aren't allowed to suggest there were three "strikes".

I think everyone bar the judges had already had a "taste" to get her on the stage

That's how all those shows work. I remember reading that American Idol contestants, for example, are weeded into three groups before the judges even lay eyes on them. The middle group – the?

He (or his lawyer) lost me when they wheeled out the celebrity whanau. Once upon a time you called on the parish priest or your old school teacher for a character reference. But I'm really not inclined to doff my cap to the opinions of people who happen?

hope this posts.

Entirely right Mr Pound. My impression is we have?

"It wasn't me. And it never will be me."

Well la-de-fucking-da. If it wasn't him, after a guilty plea and all, then who the hell was it?

On t'other hand, my colleague copped one glance of the Herald lying on the smoko room?

To me – one of these approaches is the one that a man who realised it isn't ok to break a woman's back would take, and the other, well the other is not how any man I would respect would act.

Almost. I think the way this one goes is?

We were ready to brawl... we would've been brawling next week... there would've been blood?

A plague (a really nasty one that makes them poo themselves relentlessly) on all?

Given the nature of his client's offence, his choice of language was?

Apparently it wasn't just an image though.

"Which I let myself be driven to that point," "If I had been allowed to walk away", "How I could be driven to a point like that."

...are exactly what sunk his credibility for me. Obviously they?

poo themselves relentlessly

Isn't this what they do day in, day out on our televisions, in our newpapaers and in our magazines anyway?

Whaddaya mean, it wasn't metaphorical?

What I loved about the Susan Boyle vid was her reaction to 3 yes's: gold. Who cares if the thing was setup? The hairs went up on the back of my neck. That is A Voice.

I like the way the Sunday papers ran their front page leads as 'exclusives', even though their competitors were running the same story on the same day. There are lots of interesting?

I now look forward to working with the charities who I love and that is the best thing about this sentence, I can get back to working with the charities and doing my community service with charities that I am passionate about.

Ccommunity service on the box, I'd wager -?

A couple of years ago, while I was running the bar at Downstage, I was lucky enough to share a couple of conversations with acting legend (and Laureate) George Henare who was playing Dracula at the time. He told us some tales of?

con selling has it's place in life, but it his current attitude is the result of counseling. then the man needs proper treatment

"Despite what may have been said, I never shied away from anything that happened that night over three years ago."

"That wasn't me, and will never be me again."

Hmm, doesn't "That wasn't me" sound a teeny bit?

Read: "Given the money I paid and the emotional power?

well Mr Vile veitch has gained online immortaity in the Urban Dictionary – will he also sue them?
link text

hope this posts.

He's successfully fought to clear his name. The surname, now, that's another matter entirely.

I also suspect a setup with Susan Boyle, but after watching the video I am glad that she has finally had at?

Isn't that Contempt of Court, or even Perjury?

No.

Isn't that Contempt of Court, or even Perjury?

It isn't perjury, because all she did was write a letter – not give a sworn statement.

And I can't see how she would be in contempt for writing a letter if she didn't know exactly what it was for. If, hypothetically?

Paul Henry will slap him on the back telling him how he understands what men have to put up with and that "The B***ch" deserved it for being so pushy.

Veitch's behaviour is a completely different kind of disgusting to Henry. Neither of them are particularly pleasant individuals.

But what?

But what point does dreaming up this kind of scenario serve?

We need entertainment.

on the other it attributes opinions to Henry that are unfair and unsubstantiated

Poor Paul Henry.

Why not stick to criticising them for their actual beahviour?

On Checkpoint, Mary Wilson spoke to Stuart Grieve QC, Veitch's lawyer. He spoke of his side's thwarted desire for a defended trial, saying that they wanted a "rumble" and that there would have been "blood on the carpet."

That's inappropriate to the point of being seriously unprofessional. I would hope?

1. Yes the sentence seems light, but actually I don't think sending Veitch to prison would help anyone really. It'd make me feel a bit better, for a little while, but then what?

2. What would help is Veitch actually *getting it*, ie what he did and?

Yes the sentence seems light, but actually I don't think sending Veitch to prison would help anyone really. It'd make me feel a bit better, for a little while, but then what?

Mmmh... conversely, what message does *not* sending him to prison send? And besides the law has to apply?

1. Yes the sentence seems light, but actually I don't think sending Veitch to prison would help anyone really. It'd make me feel a bit better, for a little while, but then what?

I deliberately didn't dwell on it, because I am of the mind that a judge who has?

I've also lost nearly any respect

Isn't this like a 'quantum change'?

It seems to imply to that you nearly lost some respect ... i.e. you nearly lost some, but in the end, you didn't actually lose any.

Maybe you "lost nearly all respect"?

Isn't that Contempt of Court, or even Perjury?

It's not contempt or perjury, but if she was deliberately misled as to the purpose for which the reference was sought it is (at least arguably) a breach of the lawyers' obligations as officers of the Court.

I imagine the judge will?

Maybe you "lost nearly all respect"?

Yes, you pendant you.

I typed "lost any respect" then qualified it with "nearly" without changing "any" to "all".

Is 300 hours of community service light for a first time offender making a plea bargain? I'm not playing devils advocate, just asking.

Hey, I got one year of community service back home for being a male of the species. Community service is like an interesting holiday. And a 10,000?

Paul Henry ... " Honestly how is this vile man still on television?

Because people forget there is an option – well several actually
on/off button
RNZ breakfast
numerous web sites
numerous cable channels

and, if like me, you still want light fluffy news while that first coffee slowly activates?

Is 300 hours of community service light for a first time offender making a plea bargain? I'm not playing devils advocate, just asking.

We are talking about a man that said six hours in a police holding cell, is the second worst experience he's ever had.

1. Gosh, Dunne-Powell was really calm and eloquent. I was very impressed by her.

2. When Veitch said that he wasn't 'allowed to walk away' that night, I got just a tad, um, completely infuriated.

I thought his worst experience is when that evil media went public about what he?d done (and always owned up to) ?

My mistake, It was the time he when into a councilors office and had to hand over hard cash.

I am of the mind that a judge who has heard the evidence, considered mitigating and aggravating factors and eyeballed the defendant is the person we want to pass a sentence

Surely the judge hasn't heard the evidence if they were only now gearing up for depositions. I thought the?

I thought the whole (to me, only) point of the decision to plead guilty was to avoid having the evidence presented to the court.

I'd have thought victim impact statement etc would count as evidence for sentencing purposes, but perhaps I have my words muddled.

I'd welcome advice from anyone who was familiar with the sentencing guidelines.

Those spin doctors were a good investment:

Doctor Bill Hodge, associate professor of the University of Auckland's Faculty of Law, said when comparing it to a range of similar cases, Veitch's sentence "appears not to be on the harsh?

Yes the sentence seems light, but actually I don't think sending Veitch to prison would help anyone really. It'd make me feel a bit better, for a little while, but then what?

Well sending him down for the same sentence as your average unwhite man would get, would demonstrate to?

I can see the odious little creep needs help...

It appears these pricks are serious, and that a a heavy phone call has gone in to?

He is a broadcaster, that's his work; and it would be a grossly unfair punishment to declare that he cannot work. Broadcasters will make their own calculations on how and when they ought present him to an audience.

Let me put my hand up and say now that never would?

Well sending him down for the same sentence as your average unwhite man would get, would demonstrate to those who blindly follow the sensible sentencing trust's rants, just how destructive throwing people in jail really is.

Hear, hear. Speaking of the SST (I love how it acronimises just like the?

They "tend to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, or that tends to cause the person to be shunned or avoided, or that tends to cause the person to be exposed to hatred, contempt or ridicule." From http://www.howtolaw.co.nz/html/ml146.asp

Around 20 young men a year die just in Mt Eden prison

Are you sure?

as euphemistic as it sounds, reckless disregard causing injury is likely to be (without having read this post or any other articles thoroughly) the lesser charge in exchange for the guilty plea. Repeatedly kicking someone?

i'm so glad i'm not married to you as i would be very worried about my future.

There are a number of defences available to someone who is being sued for defamation, including:

– that the statement was true ("truth" or "justification")
– that it was a statement of honest opinion on a matter of public interest ("honest opinion" or "fair comment"),?

Seven failed attempts? That is some serious incompetence!

I have my doubts about the number, and about what he considers an "attempt".

It also speaks to an ego out of control.

It's always hard to know exactly what the judge took into account when sentencing, so I prefer not to?

The actual offence is injuring with reckless disregard for the safety of others

OK, that makes sense. Thanks Graeme.

Thanks for the link to Hodge's comment, he'll know how Vetich's crimes compare but the fact that the sentencing guidlines have a maximum custodial sentence of 5 years and?

Veitch's rape and associated bashings would force at least some of these mental midgets to realise exactly how it is we are creating so many sociopaths.

First, I don't know that prison rape and bashing are actually necessarily part of a prison sentence, but maybe more likely, and with more?

Then I could stand up in court – with the media rabble standing by salivating – and say it again and again and again...

How in the Hell does someone admit to what Veitch admitted to and walk out without even an assault conviction? Reckless disregard causing injury?! Are we now to think of this incident as an... accident? I'm speechless. The notion that justice is blind has, IMO, been again revealed?

Okay, I need everyone to be careful about what they say and not make actionable claims about Veitch

I promise to behave now – though I don't think anyone's said anything in this threat that can't be justified in some way.

The actual offence is injuring with reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Well, that'll teach me for listening to the news media (again.)

1 It's not OK
That should be a given but it isn't. He has admitted violence on his partner that resulted in injury. It is simply not acceptable in our society and the sentence reflects that (although some may argue that last).

2?

Speaking of the SST (I love how it acronimises just like the Sunday Star Times – destiny in a name, or two), have they asked for his head on a stick yet?

Last year they (the trust) were keen for him to go to prison if convicted.

Very apt, and I suppose the handlers are trying to avoid this, unsuccessfully it sems –

"Reputation, reputation, reputation! O, I have lost my reputation, I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial!"

[see my post at the top o' the page]

Oh well.

On a happier note, thanks to all concerned for the PA Social last night – great to meet some of you at last....

I'd like to second that, because I've had a crap day and I'd like to end it on a happy note!
Great to meet some of you.?

3410 – this is an assault conviction. It's just a more serious one that has the injuring in it instead of the word assault.

Thanks. I see that now.

"Reputation, reputation, reputation! O, I have lost my reputation, I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial!"

I think the words excessive-narcissism some that up.

Google has some interesting results:

"reckless?

But hey, I understand?

I do wish that the "Preview" button would update the page as well as previewing the comment.

Great idea for the cactus elves!

180 hours community service and ordered to pay reparation for willfully damaging a bag of feta cheese.

As Plutarch might say: Veni, vidi, veitchy offski

"injuring with intent to wound" vs "wounding with intent to injure"?

A wound is more serious than an injury (which is more serious than an assault)

Injuring with intent to wound is where you injure someone, but were intending to do worse to them.

Wounding with intent to injure is?

Lets not all forget how humiliating it will be for tony veitch, to serve the community; more than the average criminal?

Yeah, he'll probably have to go on Dancing with the Stars.

I have always understood the best defence against action for defamation to be having the money to pay for expensive lawyers.

I've this hope in the back of my mind that once in my legal career I'll successfully defend a defamation suit by arguing consent .

Can you or someone else remember the name?

Good, cheap Malaysian food –

If they're good let us know so we can go too :).

I have always understood the best defence against action for defamation to be having the money to pay for expensive lawyers.

Or the opposite. I vaguely recall a story told by the eminent Jonathan Boston, of when he was a young reckless student and got on the wrong side of?

A broken bone is an example of injury. A stab wound is an example of a wound.

Thats interesting. So it's prudent to go out on the town tooled up with base ball bats rather than knifes.

Some times I forget where I am:)

I thought she was good, but if you took a recording of her without the backstory and without seeing her it wouldn't be remarkable.
I Dreamed A Dream was a good choice though – that's always a good one for getting people to cry and it suits the "backstory" she?

Defamatory statements have a pretty wide definition.

They "tend to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, or that tends to cause the person to be shunned or avoided, or that tends to cause the person to be exposed to hatred, contempt or ridicule."

The guy's?

Susan Boyle

The posted clip is a trimmed-down version. A more complete version (hat tip: Spareroom.co.nz) is...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY

I've just heard something that really shocks me about what Veitch's people are doing.

The Sunday newspapers are going to be very, very ugly.

I've just heard something that really shocks me about what Veitch's people are doing.

The Sunday newspapers are going to be very, very ugly.

Not just this?

Veitch: Henry, Devoy distance themselves

Tell us more Russell!

I'm all ears as well – specially as I never read the Sunday papers – but surely if it could be said without repercussions Russell would be saying it outright...

Although I doubt it can be as bad as what I'm imagining right now (but, note?

I now look forward to working with the charities who I love and that is the best thing about this sentence, I can get back to working with the charities and doing my community service with charities that I am passionate about.

So, how many charities want to taint themselves?

The guy's admitted beating his partner. It's hard to see how anything we say could damage his reputation more than what he has already publicly admitted himself.

This really doesn't fly.

And you really don't have much imagination :-)

I'm all ears as well – specially as I never read the Sunday papers – but surely if it could be said without repercussions Russell would be saying it outright...

Yes. Sources and all that. But there are lawyers at the High Court.

And you know where that will lead...

Remember how Veitch's team hired a private investigator to dig up things about Dunne-Powell that could be used in the forthcoming trial?

Imagine if that information was somehow "leaked" to the Sunday papers, in the most unflattering way possible.

And imagine?

I'm mentally drafting the letter I'm going to send to the first broadcaster that avails itself of the services of this?

Quitting NZ and carrying on a business while insolvent.

Stealing a pre-production copy of Sione's Wedding (note, Robbery, this is?

I wonder if the papers are going to act as his PR machines, given the reaction so far.

And the final paragraph from Susan Devoy's reference, referring specifically to a passport application, was deleted from the document presented to the court.

Seems to me that that is misleading the court, if the judge is so inclined (I would be, but that's me). Also, IMHO, Dame Susan would be?

Seems to me that that is misleading the court, if the judge is so inclined (I would be, but that's me). Also, IMHO, Dame Susan would be justified in taking Grieve to the Law Society for "conduct unbecoming". Graeme?

Grieve is claiming to know nothing and that it was Veitch's?

Seems to me that that is misleading the court, if the judge is so inclined (I would be, but that's me). Also, IMHO, Dame Susan would be justified in taking Grieve to the Law Society for "conduct unbecoming". Graeme?

Grieve is claiming to know nothing and that it was Veitch's?

However, I find this to be particularly vile (sorry, I don't mean the poster, I mean the actions by Veitch):?

I think the judge did a judgy job to the best of her ability with all information to hand.That is what Law seems (to me)to be.Justice on t'other hand.......

I do agree, alas. The legals system that must be supported is the worst of all possible systems – except for?

people who use it and its effect on people around them

If that's true, it's disgusting – but it is nothing more than speculation right now. Although we were guided in our earlier discussions about this by assessments of character and probability, I respect the current vulnerability of this forum?

Despite the guilty plea, National Network of Stopping Violence Services national manager Brian Gardner told NZPA there were aspects to Veitch's behaviour since the sentencing that suggested he did not fully accept responsibility for his actions.

Like many men he had?

to continue to try and prosecute this matter via PR and media

And I quote from this story:

Meanwhile, Veitch was asked about speculation that his legal team had "some dirt on her" that led to the plea bargain.

Veitch replied: "I did some investigating ... I went and I?

If that's true, it's disgusting – but it is nothing more than speculation right now

Maybe, but it was used by the defence, with Veitch's approval, apparently to his benefit. Admittedly, I do not know what the judge thought of it and I'm likely relying overmuch on my own experience?

prosecute this matter via PR and media

But wait, there's more:

Mr Grieve said Veitch was "stitched up" over several issues, including publicity of the agreement for him to pay Ms Dunne-Powell money to compensate her for loss of income, medical and other costs.

"I have got information established to?

apparently to his benefit

Can't argue with that – and "who benefits?" is a very useful question in most situations.

To get on my soapbox, if you see that a woman's refuge is collecting, give.

Why wait to be solicited? Their online donation form is very user friendly and if you happen to be an idiot and, erm, enter the wrong credit card details, they'll get in touch and be?

By "c***" I presume you mean "c**k", right?

Why, no, Sacha. I don't.

Hahaha excellent. This is why I spend my precious procrastination time here. You guys rawk.

So often it seems one would do better to simply walk away and spare yourself the agony.

That, Kerry, is the thing I am bothered by.

It worries me too, considering the statistics of rape and abuse – that which occurs versus that which is reported... and the police's willingness?

the decision to publish it by the Dominion Post (the Wellington newspaper which broke the story) was made by senior executive level, not by journalists," he said.

What's Grieve saying here. Decisions on what gets published are never made by journalists, they're made by editors. If he thinks otherwise, he's?

IIRC, the decision to prosecute does not rest with a journalist, or editor, or even the victim.

I'm curious: could anybody name a single case in which the strategy of blaming the media has actually paid off? There may be several, but I can't think of any and have always?

I'm curious: could anybody name a single case in which the strategy of blaming the media has actually paid off?

As a strategy, no, but as a reflex... well in that case, payoffs aren't consciously considered.

some people who are emotional narcissists/sadists try to inflict as much pain as they can on other people (often those they have selected precisely because they are vulnerable) by any means at hand so as to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions.

Bingo! I can see this whole nasty?

2 He was in a bad relationship.
This is not meant in any way to excuse his actions – but –

Bart, having just spent the evening reading through this entire thread, and also watching the Campbell Live interviews (her: impressive and restrained; him: looking even more a dick)...

...today?

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?

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.

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?

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?

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.

"I did some investigating and I went and I dug and I?

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?

Worth a read – like the Campbell interview she comes across as self-aware and balanced despite what she has been through.

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?

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?

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,'?

I won't watch or listen to anything with him in in future.

Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.

Just as surely, it's all self-inflicted. What a dick.

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*?

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?

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.

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?