Island Life by David Slack

Read Post

Island Life: The resignation of Captain Worth

355 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 15 Newer→ Last

  • David Slack,

    The hostage was eventually released once the criminals began riffling through his record collection.

    I'll come out with my Yes LPs above my head.

    Devonport • Since Nov 2006 • 599 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Target practice. :)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    no action would be taken against John Campbell for breaching a cordon around the scene of the seige in Devonport

    Anyone know what offence the cops could have taken action for. I can't find one in the Crimes, Police or Summary Offences Acts?

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie,

    Target practice. :)

    Oh dear. Maybe this one, referred to by Rick Wakeman as Going for the Bum.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4593 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Russell:

    I got a rather nice e-mail from an acquaintance who works for Phil Goff saying that I most definitely misheard, and am pleased to accept his word. (Which proves, I guess, that when you're driving through heavy rain you should be focused on the road not trying to filter out static on a radio interview.)

    End of the matter, and for once I've very glad to be proved wrong.

    You're a mile off, Craig. Which was my point.

    Next time, David, you want to try making it directly.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Going for the Bum

    Arseing for it..

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    Craig

    Key talking to the woman complainant would have followed through on his own promise to do so. It would have showed empathy after calling his own Minister out and asking for his resignation or I'ld have sacked him for..., now what did he call his Minister out for? Key never said why he was going to sack Worth if he didn't resign, but this complaint was with the police and of a sexual nature, as I believe Key stated.

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1158 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    David Slack - "...Call in the Police whoop whoop whoo" Chorus from Goldie looking chain.

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1158 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    no action would be taken against John Campbell for breaching a cordon around the scene of the seige in Devonport


    Anyone know what offence the cops could have taken action for. I can't find one in the Crimes, Police or Summary Offences Acts?

    I believe obstruction is the normal charge when one disobeys the lawful instructions of a police officer. There is a defence, from Police v Mackley, where one reasonably and honestly believes that the officer has no standing to give the instruction. Mackley was out filming with St John, with all the necessary paperwork, and was arrested after refusing to stop filming a crash scene. The Police lost, as the judge held that Mackley was entirely reasonable in his belief that the officer had no standing to order an attached photographer to stop taking photographs.
    I don't see, however, that the Mackley defence could be utilised by a reporter who breaches a cordon just because it'll get them better footage. They know the cordon's there for a reason, and that they have no potential claim of right to be within.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Key never said why he was going to sack Worth if he didn't resign

    Danyl has a theory:

    I kind of get the feeling that Worth threw a temper tantrum when Key eventually confronted him and that he’s been sacked for that as much as anything else

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    I believe obstruction is the normal charge when one disobeys the lawful instructions of a police officer.

    But is that applicable if you weren't personally instructed, but just snuck through somebodies back yard?

    Also, what is a "lawful instruction"? Do the police have a right to exclude the public from an area?

    (I'm not arguing that it isn't sensible for them to try and do so, but am interested in when they can cordon off an area - to stop people protesting, for instance?)

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Latest:

    Key now says he did hear "a rumour" about Worth's conduct towards women a while ago, but he'd raised it worth Worth, who denied it.

    And then when Goff came to him with some fairly specific claims, he raised it with Worth, who denied it.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Well that's ok then.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Brent Edwards with that story from RNZ (streaming, 3m39).

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Key now says he did hear "a rumour" about Worth's conduct towards women a while ago,

    So how many now?

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    But is that applicable if you weren't personally instructed, but just snuck through somebodies back yard?

    Also, what is a "lawful instruction"? Do the police have a right to exclude the public from an area?

    The closest the police get to "a right to exclude" is s35 of the Policing Act, providing for the temporary closure of roads where

    (a) public disorder exists or is imminent at or near that place; or
    (b) danger to a member of the public exists or may reasonably be expected at or near that place; or

    However, there's also a statutory duty at s9 of the Act of "maintaining public safety". It's commonly accepted that controlling access to a dangerous area is commensurate with the fulfilment of that duty. I can't see a judge wearing the excuse that "Oh, I ignored the tape because there wasn't a cop there to tell me that I shouldn't cross the line," either, especially when the breach was carried out with the intent of facilitating coverage of a known-dangerous situation.
    Plus, it's an offence to be on private property without lawful excuse. Trying to find a technicality that would let you inside the cordon around a siege situation isn't going to meet the bar for "lawful excuse".

    I rather like the Fire Service's way of dealing with people who won't stay clear of hazardous substances incidents. "If you come any closer, you'll need a very cold shower. No, you can't take your clothes off, they need to be bagged for destruction. Yes, that includes everything in your pockets." It's a very effective threat. Shame the police don't have anything that's similarly vile, because a small fine and a couple of hours in a holding cell just isn't that scary compared to having everything you're wearing and holding taken away for destruction.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    Danyl may have a theory, I'm seeing a pattern.

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1158 posts Report Reply

  • Lyndon Hood,

    Further to cute extra syllables, at his post-cabinet presser yesterday Key may actually not have said 'textes'.

    But he was saying the messages were reportedly 'lewid'.

    Or maybe he meant leeward. But asking someone to prove their texts were sent from the downwind side of the phone would, I think, be unfair.

    audio video

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1115 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    'lewid'

    Momentary crossed wires in brain between lewd and lurid, perhaps?

    These things can happen to anyone in extremis. I remember one of our teachers in (perhaps) Year 12 completely losing her rag at misbehaving students in assembly, and berating the miscreants in question as a "bunch of grunts".

    Well, she would have said that, but angry vocal cords somehow mangled "grunts" into "gunts". Sound it out and you can imagine how this might have been misunderstood from a distance in a crowded echoey hall. Took a couple of weeks to sort out the misunderstanding...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1611 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    And then when Goff came to him with some fairly specific claims, he raised it with Worth, who denied it.

    It put it to Worth that he was the one who farted. He denied it.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    BTW, do you think someone should be suggesting some deep breathing through the nose over at The Standard? For all the sniffing at DPF, I really think its a matter of when, not if, some idiot commentator lands them both on the thick end of a indefensible defamation action. I can't honestly say I'll have any sympathy when the day comes either.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    As opposed perhaps to our oleaginous friend who outed the complainant?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Sacha:

    I intend to be pretty careful what allegations I throw around on that front -- and not be cute about it either. Not seeing a lot of moral high ground to go around, but I'm sure I'll be told what a prick Tory hack I am in very short order.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Don Christie,

    s I throw around on that front -- and not be cute about it either. Not seeing a lot of moral high ground to go around,

    Ah, so you are running with the "it's Labours fault" line as well.

    We all know Slater's a cock but if there are National party folks who think that using him as a channel for their dirt (whatever happened to Wishart?) they must be mad.

    John Key sacked a minister for, presumably, good reasons. It is that minister's fault, not Labour's, not Key's - he did the right thing at the time. Right now the right thing would be to call off the attack dogs. The have managed to turn a tawdry little affair into a political shit storm.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1645 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    I believe the Standard have moved their webhosting offshore to prevent libel actions shutting them down. As Nicky Hagar's experience indicates, this is a prudent move in the cash strapped blogsphere.

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2217 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 15 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.