Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Simon - as usual, Wikipedia has the answer.
Swallodale is second, but Peter Duck - a story within the story so not really within the timeline - can be seen to take place before it.
-
I read S&A to my kids (it was really hard to find in the US), got through the next one but we didn't make it much further - it became hard going - the first one had all that mystery that kind of got lost later
Skip a few to Winter Holiday - always my favourite. And We Didn't Mean to Go to Sea has a great adventure in it.
-
One problem with conspiracy, is that whilst the plan doesn't have to be far advanced, the conspiracy has to be around a specific crime - conspiring to assassinate some politician isn't enough - you need a target. If you're planning to murder, it's down to Clark or Key and you're going to flip a coin on the day, there probably isn't a conspiracy.
-
I think the intent of Parliament when passing it, amongst other things, was to ... introduce a new offence of committing a terrorist act
The Terrorism Suppression Act didn't create a new offence of committing a terrorist act. That new offence will be created by the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Act currently before Parliament.
-
If TSA-related material could be introduced at bail hearings on the firearms charges, then does yesterday's development allow bail conditions to be re-examined?
Yes. Now that the maximum sentences those arrested face are terms of four years' imprisonment, the question of whether it is just to detain them while awaiting trial can be reassessed.
Interestingly, arguments can go both ways. Now that the offences are only against the Arms Act, it is likely that any trial will be sooner than one held under the TSA (there won't need to be as much preparation by the defence, and there will be fewer pre-trial arguments etc.).
Also, in assessing risk to the community, likelihood of absconding from bail etc. some of the material relating to the TSA may still be relevant.
-
Sorry Steve. I missed it.
Had the warrants been issued after the amendment to the TSA was passed would the result have been any different, if so how?
There would be no change.
-
would it still be possible to lay other charges? I'm thinking about conspiracy to commit a crime sort of thing.
Yes. They wouldn't be able to use evidence obtained under the interception warrants, however, and would have a tough time using evidence obtained with the search warrants. Surveillance - the video footage etc. could be used, as well as witness statements.
Of course, it's also still possible to get more evidence and charge them under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
I'm still holding out for treason, 'though.
I've sent him some whisky. It now seems it should have been more expensive whisky, but I've, um, opened all the expensive whisky ...
Fortunately, the only utility of that would be showing it off to people. It's my first bottle of whisky, it looks cool enough, and I doubt I have a palette advanced enough to tell the difference...
-
a glass of wine
Not whisky?
Now, we're told the terrorism-related evidence won't be made public, and we'll never now how close we came...
When someone is charged with an offence, their counsel will make an OIA/Privacy Act request for everything the cops have - they get it, and can then use it in the defence. There is nothing to stop the Uruwera 16 making those same requests in the absences of anti-terror charges, and no reason why the police could refuse to give it to them. Will they? And how do they feel about making it all public?
Maybe Scoop could do it for them, and get the individual's permission to the release of personal information...
-
Meanwhile, two parties (the Greens and Maori party?) have reportedly requested an urgent debate on the matter.
Well, they can't have one until Tuesday - the Standing Orders would not permit it. I suppose they can use the third reading of the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill. Winston certainly is.
-
double blinded exams
So neither the examiner nor the student would not what paper they were studying?