Simon vs Sarah

The Spinoff reports:

Differing accounts of what was said in an inquiry into the alleged conduct of a now former Labour staffer have been issued today to media via lawyers. 
In spite of PM Jacinda Ardern’s exhortation that ‘it would be preferable if this case were not in the public domain’, that is where it is currently being litigated.
Statements to media were sent today by lawyers acting for the chair of the Labour investigating committee, Simon Mitchell, and subsequently by a lawyer acting for the complainant known as Sarah.

Labour people are ropable at Mitchell for reigniting this issue in the media. Just as things were calming down, he basically comes out implying the complainant is a liar.

When you read the two statements from Simon and Sarah they are incompatible. One journalist suggested that maybe anti-virus software stripped the attachments out.

A key aspect though is:

The complainant is not the only person who made allegations of a sexual nature during the internal investigation.

It isn’t just about Sarah’s allegations. There are other complaints.

The fact there is such confusion is mainly Labour’s fault. If they had run a decent process, the complainants would have received their transcripts and or a summary of their meetings prior to the complaint being decided. They would then have been able to correct the record at an early stage. What is happened here is exactly why you always make sure people agree with the factual record, before then reaching determinations.