Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Tinakori,
Good for Rawshark. Based on what happened with The Hollow Men material and the material taken or leaked from Shandwick – the pr firm dealing with GM clients – in Nicky Hager’s other books, he or she is looking reasonably safe.
I take Hager at his word that this is the first time he's made use of hacked information, but you've highlighted the fact that most "unofficial" information will be "stolen" to some degree. It annoys me seeing one or two journalists whove made great use of leaks in the past seeming to forget that.
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
If the police chose not to investigate this high-profile case what precedent would that set?
Could you point me to the people in the thread who are saying the complaint shouldn't have been investigated? You keep saying this.
You implied this kind of police action against Hager was business as usual, but you couldn't name another incident involving a journalist. Could you just not admit that it's unusual and probably unprecedented?
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Tinakori,
That’s fine as long as the perpetrator is prepared to accept the consequences should they be caught. If they are not it quickly becomes the excuse of the tyrant through the ages – those laws don’t apply to me because of my motives and the threat posed by those whose rights I am violating. That isn’t healthy for any part of the political spectrum.
Rawshark was quite explicit in his sign-off that he knew and accepted the risk he had taken. He knew there was a maximum penalty of seven years.
-
If you'd like to help Nicky Hager with legal costs related to the search and action he has begun to retrieve his materials, there's a GiveALittle fund.
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Luke Williamson,
The other possibility about the police activity is that they are doing nothing about the other allegations and are doing this vindictively – it could swing either way.
Or ... that they do in fact plan to go hard on the other criminal complaints and have done this so they can be seen to show no favour.
-
Also: Slater's legal dispute with Matt Blomfield, whose stolen communications (literally, in this case, given that Blomfield has been deprived of possession of a hard drive) Slater has used in the most malicious way.
The judge really got it right here:
Slater appealed to the High Court and in a decision released today, Justice Raynor Asher said the definition of a journalist under the Evidence Act could include a blogger.
"The Whale Oil website was a news medium in that it was disseminating new and recent stories of public interest. While its style and focus can be criticised, it was breaking news to a significant section of the New Zealand public," Justice Asher said.
The judge said that Slater was a journalist and could invoke source protection under the Evidence Act.
However, the judge also granted orders sought by Blomfield that this section of the law not apply to Slater in this case.
There was a "public interest" in the disclosure of the identity of Slater's informants, Justice Asher said.
"There is a real public interest in those who claim that they are defamed being able to fully explore the circumstances of the defamation..." the judge said.
This was not a whistle blower case and it seemed the information was obtained illegally by sources, which diminished the importance of protecting them, the judge said.
"Moreover, any concern at the chilling effect of disclosure of sources is lessened when the subject matter of the material originally disclosed has the mark of a private feud, and features abusive and vindictive language."
In short, the judge said "Sure, you can be considered a journalist. But what you're doing right here? Not journalism." Good decision.
The full decision is here.
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
Are you now happy for the police to similarly descend in force on the homes and offices of, say, Matt Nippert and David Fisher and take whatever they fancy? Can you conceive of the chilling implications of this?
Happy? No. But as I say, I’m not sure they are or should be somehow inherently immune to it either. They should have recourse and an opportunity to defend the position and the privileged position of their information, but isn’t that ultimately a decision for a court anyway?
Come on.
Let’s look at two somewhat similar cases under the current government:
1. The SFO seeking to seize Matt Nippert’s notes on the South Canterbury Finance story. Even thought it was not constrained by the Evidence Act, the SFO didn’t come in, clear his desk and seize his devices. It negotiated with NBR and eventually reached an agreement that would protect Nippert’s sources.
2. The police serving search warrants on major media organisations during the 2011 election campaign, consequent to Key’s “teapot tapes” complaint. Again, the police didn’t just walk in and clean out the newsrooms. RNZ, TVNZ and the HoS were able to contest the warrants. They didn’t just have all kinds of stuff seized and get told to go to court to get it back.
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
The benefit of the doubt I’m giving they police is that they know better than we armchair critics how to manage there resources. I really don’t see anything here that screams of excess in their approach to the case.
Can you cite a single similar instance?
-
Just to let everyone know: Chelle has had her amputation, and while she's been dealing with pain and discomfort in recent days, the surgical side of things seems to have gone very well. Let's all hope her recovery is swift.
-
Labour speaks up:
Journalists have right to protect sources
Legal authorities must respect the right of journalist Nicky Hager to protect the source of his material for his Dirty Politics book under Section 68 of the Evidence Act, Acting Labour Leader David Parker says.
“It is crucial in an open democracy that journalists are not forced to reveal their sources so whistle-blowers feel able to come forward with information.
“While we respect the Police’s independence, we are concerned that an arm of the state appears to be being used against Mr Hager while nothing appears to be being done about the wrongdoing he exposed.
“A 10-hour search of their family home would be harrowing for anyone. Nicky Hager was doing what the fourth estate ought to do and Police need to take care to protect his rights, and to avoid the appearance of intimidating the media.
“At the time of the 2011 election media offices including TV3, TVNZ, the Herald on Sunday and Radio New Zealand were raided over the so-called tea-pot tapes. That resulted in a legally questionable ‘deemed guilty’ verdict by the Prime Minister in concert with the Police despite their being no actual prosecution and arguable defences. Other recent undermining of media freedom included the Serious Fraud Office demanding the NBR hand over documents about South Canterbury Finance.
“Nicky Hager’s book revealed serious wrongdoings including inappropriate conduct towards Government regulators the SFO and the Financial Markets Authority. It also showed misuse of power in the Prime Minister’s own office including the orchestrated use of SFO information for political purposes, and accessing of the Labour Party database. The allegations concerning Minister Judith Collins led to her resignation.
“As far as the public is currently aware, the wrongdoing exposed in Nicky Hager’s book is not being investigated with the same vigour as blogger Cameron Slater’s complaint about his emails being hacked.
“It is important that journalists’ rights are respected and that the Police are seen to be acting in a balanced way in respect of these politically charged issues,” David Parker says.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 391 392 393 394 395 … 2279 Older→ First