Australian Broadcasting Corporation correspondent in New Zealand Peter Lewis wrote a story in 2007 that alleged that the average New Zealand copper was as thick as pig-shit. The article has masses of evidence in support such as a cop having to be taught the alphabet, and cops having to do exams up to seven times before passing. One wonders what exams were they referring too. In the case of most New Zealand cops it was probably a lie detector test.
Well some of that pig-shit made it to the very top with Peter “bad cop” Marshall being given the top job. Marshall attempting to defend the incontestably dishonest actions of Grant “lying wanker” Wormald has really painted a picture [likely by numbers].
The criminal act of perjury requires a witness to be dishonest. Dishonesty requires knowledge that what is said is misleading relating to the matter of importance before the Court. The deception cannot be trivial, but must have the ability to impact on the outcome. In this case, if Wormald had been honest he would have offered up the “truth”, but did not do so because it would have led to this outrage from honest law abiding New Zealander’s, but more importantly it would have led to evidence collected under such terms being likely inadmissible.
It would also add to the “growing concern” that the New Zealand Government has sought to “destroy” a resident of New Zealand at massive cost to New Zealander’s, because New Zealand’s Prime Minister John “CSLK” [no its not a branding of a New Mercedes but stands for “cant stop lying Key”] Key wants to deep throat the Yanks before swallowing.
We at Lauda Finem know what the next line of pig-shit will be from the likes of Greg “oink” O’Connor The dumb-shit will state that Wormald did not lie but preferred not to tell the truth when asked too by Dotcom’s lawyer. Hey Greg omission is actus reus of the crime of perjury you fuckwit. But section113 (fabricating evidence) covers all evidence that misleads a court, that is not covered by an act of perjury. But Wormald stated that he did not know of any other surveillance, when clearly he lied to protect the others that did know such as the Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister, and likely Peter “bad cop” Marshall.
What O’Connor does not understand is that in not answering honestly, when asked too, Wormald disclosed that he knew that the GCSB Officers involved had committed a crime, [unlawful interception] and anyone with knowledge of that crime, and who either assisted it be carried out [sections 66 (parties to offences), and 310 (Conspiracy to commit offence, New Zealand Crimes Act 1961], or who acted to prevent detection and prosecution of the offending [sections 116 (conspiring to defeat justice), and 117(e) (corrupting Juries and witnesses) New Zealand Crimes Act 1961] committed serious criminal offending.
Now importantly, why would this criminal offending exclude those that acted to “secret” the offending like the dishonorable Bill “cant speak or read it” English who executed a “gag” order to keep the offending secret.
Then there is the actions of the Prime Minister who will not order an inquiry; why is this not a further act in a conspiracy to defeat those that committed the offending, inclusive of high ranking Police Officers, being investigated and charged. But it cannot be the Police that investigate it, and can it be the judiciary who are appointed by the Government, look at the actions of retired High Court Judge Neazor.
Neazors report resembles Wikipedia content written by a person suffering from dementia. It does not address the behavior of Wormald in the stand, and who would have promoted Wormald’s actions to perjure himself. It is that behavior that Neazor should have honed in on, irrelevant of his position that it was somehow “an initial error”.
Of course all criminals have an excuse, but it is how they act after the “error” is detected that is important to disclosing the likely credibility of the explanation. Those involved in keeping Dotcom unaware of the “error” [which amounts to a criminal offence], showed that it was not an error at all, but was purposeful. The GCSB was the only agency that had the ability at such short notice, and who did not require a warrant, to intercept the communications sought. The actions in stripping Dotcom of all access to money and help was “part and parcel” of the complete plan. Those involved thought it was impossible for Dotcom to get bail, and to get access to funds that would be required to fight the “government” on a level playing field. But they were wrong, wrong, wrong.
We at Lauda Finem wonder how thick Mr Neazor is?. He could Google “GCSB corruption” and he would find evidence of wide spread criminal antics of the organization that he supposedly keeps a rheumy eye on. Neazor’s report is a con and he showed a complete contempt for a news reporter when the reporter was trying to get to the truth. Neazor must really be an arrogant fuck, and if he is then he has good company in the likes of Peter Marshall.
Just look at the evidence contained in the pages of Lauda Finem that discloses that the GCSB has been unlawfully tapping New Zealander’s communications for decades in order to falsely accuse innocent New Zealander’s. Why has there not been any fucking outrage? This is probably the very reason why Key and Marshall do not want an inquiry with wider terms of reference; imagine if the contents of our Aussie blog relating to the behavior of the GCSB, the Police, and the Crown Law, are accurate relating to possibly hundreds of New Zealander’s having fabricated evidence used in their trials.
But as always its us Aussies that take the time to make the obvious obvious to our less “robust” antipodeans across the Tasman. ABC reporter Peter Lewis who interviewed top cops about the incredibly low intelligence of the new recruits reported the following;
“A new report from the national police academy points to such a lack of intellectual rigour among new recruits that the force is now unflatteringly being referred to as New Zealand’s “thick blue line”.
Deputy Commissioner Rob Pope denies that the decision to relax entry standards a few years ago is now resulting in police that are not quite as sharp as they used to be.
Perhaps just as disturbing as the exam results are claims that there are graduates who are not qualified to drive a car at speed or carry a firearm and who cannot meet the physical fitness standards.”
“It’s not low average intelligence, it’s about ability to do the job,” he said.
“Policing is more than just an academic tick-pass, it’s competency across a whole range of on-the-job experiences.”
“It’s very important that as an organisation we have confidence that we have staff that are able to exhibit all competencies.”
Given that education has vastly improved over the last four decades, how fucking thick are the current top cops; well that has been answered already. But as has been shown cunning is the antithesis of competency, but it is all that the New Zealand Police force have at their disposal, and they can’t even use that competently.
But don’t worry to much about the future of the New Zealand Police force, it would be wasted concern, as it is only going to get much much worse, when you Kiwis don’t demand and obtain a full independent inquiry. A good idea would be to engage the Australian anti corruption authorities to have a look at the books, if they have not been destroyed by John Key.
Finally we ask our readers to take a look at section 98A of the New Zealand Crimes Act 1961 [participation in criminal group] as we believe that it fits the “bill” (so to speak) relating to how the National Party, the Police, and the Crown have acted against Dotcom, and many other innocent New Zealander’s.
- Dotcom: Detective Inspector Grant Wormald, perjury in any mans language (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
- Dotcom saga rebounds on Key Government (stuff.co.nz)
- Dotcom: the men in black, the boys from the GCSB (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
- Dotcom case: Earlier spying alleged (nzherald.co.nz)
- Police knew of Kim Dotcom’s residency status before raid (computerworld.co.nz)
- Greens ask police to investigate GCSB (nzherald.co.nz)
- Call for full inquiry into Dotcom spying blunder (radionz.co.nz)
- Officer’s evidence ‘inconsistent’ – Dotcom (radionz.co.nz)
- Former PM aghast Key left out of spy loop (nzherald.co.nz)
- Dotcom: Earlier spying? (nzherald.co.nz)