Hard News: Phoning a Friend
69 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Andrew: you may be confusing me with someone else as I don't remember doing this.
Ooh sorry, I assumed you'd be the same Geoff Lealand who was editor of the Wgtn Film Soc's magazine in the 80s & who was a media studies lecturer at, I think, Massey for a while. Maybe it's my memory at fault :)
-
There is something peculiar in the state of Denmark over at APN with this "want to see wages drop" business.
At first glance it looks like John Key has had a word with Martin Simons, head of APN, and, it seems, another member of our wannebe oligarchy. And it seems that in response, like a gallant Sir Walter Raleigh, word has come from on high to the journalist minions to lay a cape over the puddle of bad publicity to ensure the anointed one’s serene journey to victory at the polls remains unruffled.
I am not sure if I am mixing metaphors or keeping it tightly Elizabethan, but hey.
-
The Wealthy Observer:
re: Soccer, it was one of the things I left the UK to get away from.
Plus soccer viewing is by no means as universal an interest as people make out. In my office of 20 people, we had one person who followed the game enough to own a season ticket, maybe two others who watched it on telly and the rest were up for watching big finals and that was all.
Heh, sounds like soccer-football was about as popular in your office as rugby-football is in mine here in Auckland. But shhhh, don't tell the largely sycophantic union fans in the NZ media.
-
If they're 'charged' with contempt, then the S-G is effectively admitting that it is impossible for Te Qaeda members to get a fair trial, and that all the firearms charges should be permanently stayed.
I think I can see why he wants to avoid conceding that point.
You're the lawyer Graeme, and I'm not, but I would have thought that A doesn't necessarily lead to B. Breaching the order is simply that - publishing the material. It could mean that the legal process is harmed, but it might not - it's presumably for the judge to decide.
Wouldn't it be possible to pursue the paper for contempt on the basis that any publication is contempt of the order, and then separately argue, that this particular suppression breach was not sufficient to remove the fair trial?
So can I, but can see the S-G is eventually going to have get a spine implant and assert that suppression orders exist for damn good reasons and hacks (and the Police officers who love leaking to them) are going to have to do a bit better than squeaking 'public interest'.
I thought we'd all concluded that the published material came from the defense side, not the police side. Or was the one published on the internet different from the one the Dom used?
-
anyone who has been to a Football match in the UK (or any other european country for that matter) will understand that spectator sport in this country can seem a bit passionless at times. If you’ve ever been to Anfield to watch the mighty Reds and heard ‘You’ll Never Walk’ alone belted out by the Kop you’ll know exactly what I mean.
I understand that going to a soccer/football match over there is probably a great experience, as long as you avoid any soccer hooligan violence. Great passion, singing, history etc. Similarly I wouldn't pay to go see the All Blacks play a test here in NZ, but I'd love to see them play Wales at Cardiff just to be amongst 100K Welsh in full song.
But soccer? Brief moments of excitement followed by long moments of people passing a ball around the midfield. If they're going to make the sport only exciting when the ball is near the goal, they should move the goals closer together.
-
I thought we'd all concluded that the published material came from the defense side, not the police side. Or was the one published on the internet different from the one the Dom used?
The internet one was definitely from the defence side, it's unclear who provided the Dom Post's copy. But they did get some earlier leaks from the defence camp.
-
I did read somewhere of a proposal to make soccer goals wider as the size of them was set in the c19th, when goalies were smaller. Now. with hulking big blokes, the idea is to make them do more work in defence.
Andrew--I was involved with the Wgtn Film Soc (but not as an editor) and did go to Massey (but to do a Diploma of Horticulture)--but that was another life, another time. -
Geoff - my mangled memory. Right guy, wrong details.
-
Maybe this is why Hillary looks quite confident and assured after her victories the other night, inspite of the delegate math.
With the Resko trial just getting started, there is plenty of time for this stuff to come out before the Dem convention in Denver.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/obamas_iraqi_oil_for_food_conn.html
The media do appear to have changed their attitude toward Obama over the last week or 10 days and appear more willing to ask Obama some sticky questions, which is something they haven't done much at all until now.
Now as to whether this Resko stuff is true or not, that has never been of the slightest concern to the Clintons.
This really could get quite nasty before it is all over, which reduces the chance of a joint ticket.
-
So can I, but can see the S-G is eventually going to have get a spine implant and assert that suppression orders exist for damn good reasons and hacks (and the Police officers who love leaking to them) are going to have to do a bit better than squeaking 'public interest'.
Breach of suppression orders does not equal contempt. Suppression orders do exist for a good reason, but the S-G is not responsible for investigating or pursuing breaches of suppression orders. The S-G is responsible for pursuing contempt cases. The police are responsible for pursuing breaches of suppression orders.
You're the lawyer Graeme, and I'm not, but I would have thought that A doesn't necessarily lead to B. Breaching the order is simply that - publishing the material. It could mean that the legal process is harmed, but it might not - it's presumably for the judge to decide.
Wouldn't it be possible to pursue the paper for contempt on the basis that any publication is contempt of the order, and then separately argue, that this particular suppression breach was not sufficient to remove the fair trial?
Contempt? No.
Contempt of court in this sort of case requires an interference with justice - a real risk to a fair trial. If there's no risk, there's no contempt - just a breach of a suppression order (which is substanitally less serious).
-
Oh sorry, my bad language. I guess I mean breach of supression order rather than contempt.
-
This really could get quite nasty before it is all over, which reduces the chance of a joint ticket.
Too right. Which shows how brazen Hillary is. She's clearly implying 'Vote for me and I might just make Obama VP' to win the hearts of those who want everyone to just hold hands and sing Kumbaya. She won't say it outright because then she'll have to explain why she didn't (if she wins the nomination).
As I've said before - there's no way Obama is willing to take a seat 'at the back of the bus'.
-
SurveyUSA, the acknowledged winner of the 08 polling season, has come out with an electoral college vote poll of polls.
Both Democrat candidates beat McCain. Obama beats him by a little bit more.
-
I don't quite understand how you could have "the acknowledged winner of the 08 polling season" by the first week of March 08. Wouldn't awarding that title have to wait until after the main event, the election in November 08, 8 months away?
However, there was an acknowledged winner of the 04 and 06 polling seasons and that was Rasmussen. Currently he has the Dems winning the electoral college 284 to 229, with 25 a toss up, a similar result to Survey USA..
Michael Baronne had a very interesting article the other day about how the red / blue electoral college map that we have been used to for the last 10 years or so may well change significantly as some voters for whom religion is important swap places with some moderates and independents. He wrote it prior to last Tuesday so he tends to focus on Obama v McCain, but his points are still valid.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/throw_out_the_maps_in_2008.html
In many ways you can't blame Hillary for keeping at it, after all the Clintons are the ultimate survivors. If Michigan and Florida revote, as is seeming increasingly likely, she will most likely close the gap a bit more to a point where she can plausibly say "the elected delegates are more or less a tie and I won the big states, and key states like Florida and Ohio (no matter how the electoral college changes, these 2 states will still be critical)".
That is a reasonable argument. Especially if Obama is impacted by the Resko trial. And it won’t take much for the Resko trial to impact Obama as the whole premise of his campaign is "a new kind of politics". If voters see that he is in fact just another grubby politician, he will be damaged significantly.
You have to question Obama's judgment running the kind of campaign he has, knowing that the Resko trial was coming and that he and Resko go back 17 years. He could have taken a different tack and still been very successful.
-
"PS This is an awful admission but I haven't quite mastered the reply process for this blog. Any advice?"
Hi Geoff - to make the above into quotes just copy and paste the line under 'Quote' to the left of the 'Post a reply' window. delete the word 'text' and copy in the paragraph you are referring to.
PS This is an awful admission but I haven't quite mastered the reply process for this blog. Any advice?
Russell - is there anywhere a short tutorial can be posted where we can read how to do the technical things to our offerings. I know I get so caught up in the mechanics of it sometimes I lose track of what I am trying to say.
-
I thought we'd all concluded that the published material came from the defense side, not the police side. Or was the one published on the internet different from the one the Dom used?
Graeme: Distinction noted. Kyle: Buggered if I know, but IMO anyone who thinks the Police don't routinely leak and brief to tame hacks is being a little naive, and I just had to chortle at the shock and outrage from Police and the reliably egregious Greg O'Connor at the notion that the defence might have been engaged in some pre-emptive counterspin of their own.
In the end, I am rather fond of the concept that we prosecute alleged criminals in courts of law rather than trial by media. And with all due disrespect to the Dom Post, I've seen little evidence that the security of trial should depend on its collective good judgement.
-
Quote:
Hi Geoff - to make the above into quotes just copy and paste the line under 'Quote' to the left of the 'Post a reply' window. delete the word 'text' and copy in the paragraph you are referring to.
Many thanks, Bob. Will see if this works.
-
Well, almost ..!
-
I guess the other trick is to practise with the preview function and try to learn that way. Although I have noticed sometimes the most glaring errors seem to slip under that radar and only reveal themselves once the post is public. :-)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.