General Debate 18 October 2013

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment110

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (110)

Login to comment or vote

RD

I think that in the USA, Joe Karam’s lawsuit would be recognized as a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or SLAPP. In my opinion the intent is to stifle any expression of opinions other than JK’s opinion on the innocence or otherwise of David Bain. As such I think it will not be well-regarded by the public at large. It is my opinion that New Zealanders don’t generally like being told that they may not express certain opinions.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2013 11:20am
goldnkiwi

Guess we shall just have to wait and see.

Personally I do not think he should have taken his site down unless or until he was directed to by the court.

“Clark’ Kent Parker might have been exposed to kryptonite but right should counter might, in my opinion.
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2013 11:31am
Dennis Horne

If you are driving along the road and a juggernaut crosses the centre line, what do you do? Keep on your track knowing you’re in the right, or swerve off the road? Tactics.

Kent Parker told the court, rightly or wrongly, he would take down Counterspin. Being a man of honour he did so without delay. I am pleased he did, better to swerve.

Parker is one man. Mr Karam is spending good money on a court case against one man in his pursuit of proof that on the balance of probability Bain is factually innocent.

Kent Parker is not the only one to agree to something ambiguous on the stand. During the second Bain trial, after a lot of questioning, Michael Reed QC finally got Dr Dempster to say that he couldn’t tell whether wounds to Robin Bain were very recent or 12 hours. It seems to me, but I may be wrong, that the defence concluded this means the wounds could be very recent and definitely less than 12 hours. This is not a valid conclusion, that information is not contained in the statement. The statement means, presented correctly, that if the wound is less than 12 hours, one cannot tell if it’s very recent or 12 hours. An analogy would be, if I hand you some fruit pulp and ask if it’s melon or pear, you say you can’t tell and I say so it’s not apple.

The Sandiford experiment of measuring socks soaked in blood leaving prints compared with the sock prints at the scene which were a partial set of faint and incomplete prints. Binnie J hung his wig on this problematic evidence and built his conclusion of innocence around it. The Sandiford experiment loading the rifle magazine, which left parallel smudged lines on the fingers, that bore no resemblance to the scene photos: the fine divergent lesions, old cuts or tears. Mr Reed QC called this slam-dunk proof of Bain’s innocence.

The fact is, there is no forensic evidence that ties Robin Bain to the rifle or the murders. He may or may not have been committing incest, he may or may not have been depressed, he may or may not have been the Loch Ness Monster, but he was not the killer.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2013 1:14am
Nostalgia-NZ

Blood on his hands and on the towel is forensic proof drrh brain. So is DNA inside the rifle and the marks on his thumb that Walsh couldn’t exclude as being gsr, and that’s only the beginning dreamer.

Kent Parker had years to take down his site, his ‘defence’ of truth went out the window on Friday, a day earlier he admitted perjury. Free speech is not about lying or being defamatory, stalking people and repeating mantras. ‘May’ have been committing incest is motive, not that one is needed. How’s the petition and political party getting on? Waiting for Vic to come back from Siberia?
0 3
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2013 8:33am
Kanz

@Dennis Horne

You still don’t get it do you, fool?

This case had nothing to do with the Bain case. It was whether or not Parker campaigned against and defamed Joe Karam.

Did you sit in on any of the hearing? If you did, how can you say Kent is a clever man? He is a fool who has been used by others thinking he would finally become the hero he has always seen himself as. Instead he has proved, to all who has taken an interest, that he is a deluded fuckwit, who has a bunch of nutters agreeing with him.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2013 9:17am
nemesio

Contrary to what Judith and others say defamation is very hard to prove and I believe Joe Karam will lose his case because all comments made were already in the public domain, so in that sense there is no defamation.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 24, 2013 12:10am
nemesio

One of the defences used by Kent Parker was:

Honest opinion (formerly called “fair comment”): You will not be liable if you prove that the statement in question was a statement of your genuine opinion on a matter of public interest.

Therefore Joe Karam would need to prove it was not Ken Parker’s genuine opinion and not a matter of public interest. It doesn’t seem he did anything but call family witnesses and try and win sympathy from the judge but the judge can only work within the framework of the law and I think honest opinion will win out here.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 24, 2013 12:18am
Manolo

The jihadists are upset with the Kenyan: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2472680/Saudi-Arabia-severs-diplomatic-ties-US-response-conflict-Syria.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 24, 2013 6:33am
Nookin

Nemesio

You contradict yourself. First you say that you are not liable if you prove honest opinion. Then you say that Karam will lose because he cannot prove it was not. Parker is advancing a positive defence. He has the burden of proof. Karam just has to show he was defamed.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 24, 2013 7:24am
Nookin

“Contrary to what Judith and others say defamation is very hard to prove …”

Tell that to the local authority rep in Invercargill who has just been clocked $40,000 for a whispered comment that was slightly more audible than he would have wished.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 24, 2013 7:30am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Coroner on Greg King

Where to for ACT »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Justice in Brazil
No Right Turn
The Presidential Bicameral Adjournment Clause Is Almost An American Equivalent to Prorogation
Utopia
"Seymour is only doing openly what M?ori nationalists and their Pakeha allies have been doing, quietly for the past 50 years."
Not PC
This Weeks Email To Prime Minister Luxon.
No Minister
Daily review 22/11/2024
The Standard
More young offenders will get boot camp, bus drivers will get some protection – and there’s relief for southern farmers
Point of Order
Sowell says
Hompaddock
New Zealand government urged to back ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders without equivocation
The Daily Blog
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz