Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The real problem with the #teapottapes decision

53 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha,

    "we are clear that the actions of Mr Ambrose were unlawful."

    Don't our courts make that sort of determination, rather than the police?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    In the view of police investigators, the recording was “most likely” on purpose, but at the least “reckless”.

    There's your headline:

    Police: Ambrose Innocent

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3011 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Sacha,

    Don’t our courts make that sort of determination, rather than the police?

    No. They make it as well, but if police don't think what you've done is unlawful, they won't charge you, so they have to answer that question.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3011 posts Report Reply

  • John Morrison,

    Don't you think this decision is the most 'helpful' to get the saga off the news cycle, and everyone saves face?
    Regarding the real problem with these tapes, they're saying somebody else will worry about that in the future. A typical stance considering who the main players are.

    Cromwell • Since Nov 2006 • 79 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    There's your headline:

    Police: Ambrose Innocent

    Yeah, quite. Police fail to establish to themselves beyond reasonable doubt that an offence was committed.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19019 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    I understand there's a role in referring for prosecution. But isn't declaring something "unlawful" at that stage far too definitive without any court process involving challenge to evidence? Saying 'failed to establish' seems more like it.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to John Morrison,

    somebody else will worry about that in the future

    On the contrary, every media organisation has now been 'warned' that they may face the same action. Respect my authoritah, etc.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    More:

    Mr Ambrose's lawyer Ron Mansfield said his client maintains that he never recorded the conversation on purpose and has not done anything illegal.

    "The team of lawyers assisting Mr Ambrose were confident no offence was committed or could be committed in the circumstances, and this has been clearly conveyed to the police."

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19019 posts Report Reply

  • mic weevil, in reply to John Morrison,

    Don't you think this decision is the most 'helpful' to get the saga off the news cycle, and everyone saves face?

    Not really sure why helping the Police and politicians involved to save face is important.
    As stupid as this incident was, the circus around it majorly derailed the already abbreviated farce of an election. I'd like to be rid of the memory of it, but I also would like to see it spelled out that no law was broken and the PM had no real justification for sending the police off on a taxpayer funded search for who-knows-what in the offices of our media bases...

    auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 51 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to John Morrison,

    Don't you think this decision is the most 'helpful' to get the saga off the news cycle, and everyone saves face?

    Now, why should the police be concerned with anyone 'saving face'? Their job is to enforce the law. Of course, now, without a test case, we have no idea exactly what the law is, which I think is Russell's point.

    ETA Snap, Mik

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2189 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    everyone saves face?

    Except Ambrose, who's now painted as the perpetrator of a "clear[ly]... unlawful" act, and without any chance to defend himself.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Homer,

    Does he have a defamation case now?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 55 posts Report Reply

  • John Morrison, in reply to nzlemming,

    Now, why should the police be concerned with anyone ‘saving face’?

    I agree, but considering the politicians involved here, a so-called solution has been found for now but a mess has been left for someone else to resolve in the future.

    Cromwell • Since Nov 2006 • 79 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Brislen,

    I would say the police comment that he's committed an "unlawful act" without any opportunity to defend himself against those charges would and should become the basis for a defamation case against either the police the PM's office or both.

    And given the number of times he was called a criminal in various other publications, I'd say that if Ambrose wanted to feather his own nest he'd probably be able to do so quite nicely (well, the nest of his lawyer that is).

    Of course, he'd never work in this [media] town again.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 177 posts Report Reply

  • mic weevil,

    Andrew Geddis on this: here

    and free half-a-babies...

    auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 51 posts Report Reply

  • johnno,

    The Herald has put up some of the raw vision Ambrose shot on the day. Man, that was a hard-core media scrum! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/video.cfm?c_id=1&gal_objectid=10794733&gallery_id=124741

    wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 108 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to johnno,

    The Herald has put up some of the raw vision Ambrose shot on the day. Man, that was a hard-core media scrum!

    1. I'm struggling to spot the "reasonable expectation of privacy".

    2. If Ambrose had really planned the recording, wouldn't he have been hell-bent on getting the pictures to go with it? Perhaps that's just not included, but what's there seems to show him doing just what he said: getting "colour" pictures of the event itself.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19019 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to johnno,

    Hmm, with all that crowd, one does wonder how he could "accidentally" leave a recorder on a table he could barely see.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2189 posts Report Reply

  • andrew r, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    No the police, even once a charge is laid, only go as far as alleging an act is unlawful - they certainly don't determine that issue.The Court does at Trial. In charging someone with any criminal offence the Police *at best* believe an act to be unlawful,and would say they have evidence to support that contention.
    I would suggest the Police statement by Bugress is gusto - veiled mumbo jumbo - definitely without doubt face saving only. The police probably want to forget about the whole case full stop. The law in NZ on this specific factual issue remains identical to how it was before the whole lame complaint was ever made . That is - untested and uncertain.
    My advice to the fourth estate - if your acting in good faith, don't panic Mr Mannering.

    auckland • Since May 2007 • 78 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to nzlemming,

    Hmm, with all that crowd, one does wonder how he could “accidentally” leave a recorder on a table he could barely see.

    He says he tossed his mic there (still in its bag), along with others', but was pushed out before he could retrieve it. Nothing in that video contradicts that story. Rather the reverse.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19019 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to andrew r,

    face saving

    or sucking up to the current govt. not reassuring in either case

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX,

    Holy Shit How Silly is everyperson – what looked over is, are Key and Crown guys still seeking costs against naughty but honest Ambrose for the earlier Court Case? You know that one, Ambrose want judgment whether the conversation private or public domain - the Judge say Sorry Ambrose me no make a ruling impending police case clarify that thing you want to know all right.

    What I imagine has really taken place is Key and the Crown not pursuing costs against Ambrose resulting from the earlier civil proceedings, in return he say sorry everybody about everything and issued the "apology" to Key and Banks on the stipulation Police do no charge him - Key no have to withdraw complaint, have a conference with the Police. Key sought matter not be pursued by the Police, hence the Police are complicit in not laying charges against Ambrose - it is their masters wish regardless of what else they are saying or presenting – Public Interest blah, blah, blah waste of money blah, blah, blah no basis for a case etc, etc. Police know John Key is great he tax everybody and pay Police - he is big boss,

    Master stroke this happens media stuff about it all when Key out of it – the Country I mean - it is sign of greatness he make everything work like clockwork tick tock - First Citizen manage the police with much skill at a distance.

    The only one who gains from this is First Citizen John Key the First - he is so great he is so clever - he have a one seat margin - he save eroding waning credibility further – what a guy genius – this gone via Ambrose being charged – Key and Banks would have been called as witnesses and would have had egg foo hard baked permanently on their public faces and private parts. Who wants to sit next to Banks - really think about it - imagine if his gerbel escaped in Court..

    Where is the principle, the right to privacy bollocks that Key so fabulously grandstanded upon? Well not matter really happy smiling people everywhere - no problem everybody much joy.

    How influential First Citizen John Key the First he control Police, how clever solution, people say how asinine that thing with tape, but they overlook the heated crucible of intellect John Key possesses in his mind – he make everything happen for everybody he is so great. He get election - he stand proud very erect.

    He no longer beating up on Ambrose - Key too busy - he now in Korea saying to them what you wanna buy? The say what you got - he say we sell 49% of everything except police – Key own them for himself he is First Citizen of course.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1203 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Mr Edgeler summarises succinctly what the police should have said.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to DexterX,

    it is sign of greatness he make everything work like clockwork tick tock

    me likee pidgin

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Sacha,

    Sorry that is right but it is also very wrong as it is not what First Citizen John Key the First wanted said by his police.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1203 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.