Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I understand the Sunday News had a Dunne-Powell story based on a handy "leak" injuncted just recently, so perhaps they got that injunction lifted yesterday, as soon as the court case was over and intend to go with it tomorrow.
-
Posted a couple of hours ago on the TVNZ site:
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,' said one criminal lawyer, who did not want to be named.
It was unlikely the case would be recalled but he had no doubt Judge Doogue would be very upset she had been given doctored documents, he said.
"I would say the legal profession is very surprised a reference given in good faith was amended."
I'm not surprised Mr Grieve is proving difficult to reach at the moment.
-
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 tomorrow what the Sundays do with the handiwork of Veitch's PI.
But in the Herald's lead story, Team Veitch admits none of luminaries who provided character references were told what was going on -- and it seems some were actively lied to:
Former Olympic triathlon champion Hamish Carter told the Weekend Herald he had understood the reference he gave to Veitch was for a job interview and was connected to the broadcaster getting his passport released. He said Veitch asked him this week for a reference.
Veitch's lawyer, Stuart Grieve, QC, did not return phone calls. Veitch's spokeswoman, Glenda Hughes, yesterday telephoned all those who wrote support letters for Veitch.
None knew Veitch was going to plead guilty, but Ms Hughes said only Mr Currie and Dame Susan had raised concerns.
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.
She could not say who removed the paragraphs referring to the passport.
It'll be interesting to see whether any more comes of this.
But anyway, that "I had a good time and I found stuff" quote from Veitch in the Dom Post about employing a PI to snoop on Dunne-Powell is nasty .
-
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 father who solicited the references.
-
Alright, seems I can tell you part of it.
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 this in a context where Veitch and his lawyers are simultaneously issuing threats against media planning to tell the victim's story.
That sort of thing.
Meanwhile 3 News has reported that Olympic chef de mission Dave Currie was also told his character reference was in support of a passport application.
And the final paragraph from Susan Devoy's reference, referring specifically to a passport application, was deleted from the document presented to the court.
Far freakin' out.
I actually hope Grieve and Hughes are acting under instructions rather than providing the advice, because this seems very bad to me.
-
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.
-
Stop the presses
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 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 has well.I wondered. And I know I was being manipulated every way that the magic of television can do it -- that clip is a bravura job of editing -- but it was still amazingly effective.
-
From Mrs Skin's link page:
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"), or
- that the statement was "privileged" in some wayAnyway, don't freak out. I'm just trying to avoid specific allegations like those being sprayed around in the comments of (ahem) certain other blogs.
-
Okay, I need everyone to be careful about what they say and not make actionable claims about Veitch. This doesn't mean you can't have a very strong opinion, just not a defamatory one.
It appears these pricks are serious, and that a a heavy phone call has gone in to at least one media organisation today.
Frankly, I think they've lost the plot.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 … 2279 Older→ First