Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Raymond A Francis,
You say rather ingeniously that Hager was just ” a witness” but he was more than that as he clearly profited from a crime
Could we please get over the idea that Hager’s motive was personal enrichment? His journalism is many things – lucrative isn’t one of them. And as others have pointed out, the word "witness" isn't mine -- it's the police's.
It can be said ( certainly from the Left ) ” that it was for the public good” but let us let the Courts make that decision
Hager’s legal position here is pretty solid, as you’d realise if you’d bothered to read the Nicole Moreham analysis that I linked to.
And while we are doing that lets see what real motivation was behind all this
Like what?
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
Ultimately we don’t know what resources within the police are being spent on what. It’s taken them months to even get to Hager who is very clearly a key point of the investigation so it’s not unreasonable to assume it’s not a super high priority.
Six weeks, actually, with an election intervening.
And you need to stop pretending this is standard conduct. It isn’t. It’s an unwarranted fishing expedition involving the seizure of a wide range of material.
The typically cautious Ursula Cheer said:
University of Canterbury media law professor Ursula Cheer said Hager had legal grounds to oppose the warrant or the way it was carried out.
“I think some of his objections could be justified,” she said. “I am surprised it took 10 hours and it sounds odd that it needed to be done when he wasn’t there."
And:
Law professor Ursula Cheer told Newstalk ZB’s Rachel Smalley warrants can be challenged on the basis they’re too broad.
“That they’re more like a fishing expedition and indeed you can challenge a search for not being carried out in a reasonable way as well so that is possible.”
Ursula Cheer says police are entitled to carry out searches against media, as long as they don’t prevent news from getting out.
They’ve almost certainly taken a large quantity of unrelated material, along with Hager’s tools of trade and family possessions, and are now saying it’s up to Hager to take costly legal action to get it back. It’s outrageous.
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?
-
Hard News: Doing over the witness, in reply to Keir Leslie,
I think it’s pretty legit to say that the cops should investigate the possible interference of a senior minister in a major criminal investigation before they raid the homes of any journalists.
There may be a partial excuse there, in that the minister is currently the subject of an official inquiry. But the terms of reference of that inquiry -- bizarrely -- exclude Odgers, Slater and Graham, so there would seem to be less of an impediment there. And let's re-emphasise this: there is evidence of extremely serious criminal actions there.
-
Speaker: Why we should not dismiss…, in reply to HORansome,
Aye. I think it’s true that when we generally disparage theories about conspiracies, it does make it easier for some people to successfully conspire.
The most notable recent example has been the way John Key has consistently referred to Nicky Hager: as variously, "a conspiracy theorist", "a left wing conspiracy theorist" and even "a screaming left wing conspiracy theorist".
The line was being deployed preemptively, before Dirty Politics was even published. And it was quite effective. The number of people who can't perceive a difference between Hager and Ian Wishart is quite remarkable.
In the terms of your argument, of course, Hager is a conspiracy theorist.
-
Hard News: Home advantage, in reply to Grant McDougall,
I’m not so sure. There may’ve been, but the Messam one was certainly the most blatant and reckless.
Hmmm ... I looked it again and it's Messam's upper arm that strikes Burger's head. If he'd made contact at chest height I'm not sure anyone would have noticed it.
-
Hard News: Home advantage, in reply to Rob Stowell,
Entirely down to the director what gets seen. But it’s not out of line to replay something the ref has missed. Still quite possible a kiwi director would have replayed Reid’s turnover first, though.
Yes. I'm not complaining so much as observing the new reality.
-
Hard News: Home advantage, in reply to Alan Perrott,
also, could someone please sort out A Smith’s (it’s getting like the Wales Jones’) box kick?
Never his strength. I thought he had a poor game in general, actually. There were times when he needed to step up and get the ball from the breakdown, and didn't.
-
Hard News: Home advantage, in reply to John Morrison,
Russell, I’m glad you brought this up because it really troubled me how an incident that happened a few seconds before the awarded scrum
It was more than a few seconds – more like a minute, and 30 metres away.
But I hated it when international cricket had a period of not showing replays on th4 big screens while they were adjudicated by the video official.
-
First live performance of 'Yellow Flicker Beat', at Berkeley Greek Theatre.
Quite the frenzy in the crowd.
-
Hard News: Friday Music: Festival of Non-Dudeyness, in reply to Sacha,
and Tali
seen this recent collaboration?
I love Tali's rap on 'Providence'. It's so bustling.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 392 393 394 395 396 … 2279 Older→ First