Screen Shot 2015-04-22 at 3.53.59 pm

Sabin sexual assault case – the shroud of political corruption and coverup moves to New Zealand’s High Court

John Key and Mike Sabin

From left, New Zealand Prime Minister John Key and his ex cop turned MP Mike Sabin

Latest Updates (5th April 2016): New Zealand Herald stunt fails, but the fascist state rolls on

By the looks of it the Mike Sabin sexual assault case took yet another turn two days ago when it was transferred from an undisclosed District Court to New Zealand’s High Court. The location of the new Court has also been concealed from the public. This sudden move occurred the day Sabin’s name suppression orders were due to expire. We have yet to find out the identity of the jurist responsible but given the case was on appeal then one could be forgiven for suspecting the order came from New Zealand’s court of appeal.

The entire world is now watching as New Zealand’s National party government attempts to bury its absolutely filthy laundry.

LF readers will most likely be aware of the latest allegations to engulf Kiwi Prime Minister John Key this morning, it’s therefore little wonder that John Key was of a mind to aid the police and ex cop Mike Sabin hide these serious allegations.

John Key: Pony-tail pulling ‘just horsing around’

Neither Fairfax or APNZ New Zealand ran stories advising of this latest development, which is of course not a good look for the country’s so-called “fourth estate”. One radio station ran a very small piece, albeit extremely well hidden from public view:



Whilst the article obviously does not name the accused it is however clearly the New Zealand National party’s Mike Sabin. Unless there are two “prominent New Zealander’s” up on exactly the same charges there is little doubt. The manner in which this case is being concealed is also completely indicative, reeking of the same National party coverup that John Key and his highly paid ex-journo political spin-doctors have run since late last year.

Fellow Australian journo Derryn Hinch pretty much spelt it out in four small paragraphs:

A Kiwi Conspiracy

…..The sitting member for Northland, Mike Sabin, was selected to recontest the seat in September even though there was an ongoing police investigation into his private life.

He now faces twelve charges of indecent assault involving two alleged victims. You now know this, but the electors in Northland didn’t back in September. And still don’t.

Mr. Sabin is an ex-policeman who got elected on law and order issues. In fact he was chairman of the Law and Order Select  Committee. Prime Minister Key let him continue to head that committee – and presumably question police officers – two days after Key was reportedly told of the police investigation.

‘prominent New Zealander’

Sabin appeared in court in February and had his name suppressed.  In news reports over there he is referred to euphemistically as a ‘prominent New Zealander’. The way the former All Black sex offender Graham Thorne is always protected………


In fact the New Zealand National party, their wonder boy PM John Key and his bent spin-doctors have become little more than an international laughing stock, the butt of quite a few bad taste jokes, “the Emperors new cloths”, but now that John Keys own “horsing around” and little girls “pony tail” fetish has been exposed the jokes can only get worse.

The criminal charges against Sabin are simple enough, although it would seem that the wheelers and dealers, including the New Zealand police, have had little luck in bullying the two plaintiffs into retracting the allegations and their statements – those allegations being that Mike Sabin variously touched their breasts, buttocks, groin and thighs. Of course the alleged indecencies will have likely been far more serious but that is being saved for the trial, if one is ever actually held.

The charges faced by the man, who elected trial by jury, can now be revealed.

He is facing 12 charges of indecent assault against two people including two representative charges.

The charges, which include allegations of touching the complainants on the breast, buttocks, groin and thigh, are punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment.

Make no mistake, what is occurring is extremely dangerous, its serious corruption, there is absolutely no other word for it. National party Prime Minister John Key withheld this information from the New Zealand public knowing full well that if he had not done so then the National party would have lost at least one seat in last Novembers general election, that being Sabin’s Northland electorate.

The stench of such allegations, indecent (sexual) assault, however may well have turned voters in electorates all over the country against the National party. Prime Minister John Key knew full well that child sexual abuse is extremely dangerous territory and its not just politically volatile – In New Zealand things can turn physical very quickly once the Banjo players have been identified.

Retiring High Court Justice John McGrath

Retiring High Court Justice John McGrath

There’s another very disturbing factor in what has now morphed into another serious judicial fiasco and the pattern of corrupt political behavior around it – the role that the country’s judiciary appear to have performed in this case is seriously questionable; begging the question, is the New Zealand judiciary now at the beckon-call of the country’s seriously small political elite?

Just thirteen days ago retiring Supreme Court judge Sir John McGrath spoke of his concerns for the rule of Law in New Zealand. – That the National party government had been playing with the statutes to such an extent and in particular the governments proposed removal of democratic safeguards, that he held very real fears for the rule of law.

McGrath’s concerns never made a half serious newspaper column, nor did any of the country’s editors pick up on his warning. Instead the best that could be done was a flippant piece penned by Mr jocular himself, Jock Anderson, in his weekly column “Case Load” for the New Zealand Herald:

Dumping rule of law worries retiring judge

A statutory provision affirming New Zealand’s commitment to the rule of law will soon disappear from the statute book – and retiring Supreme Court judge Sir John McGrath (70) doesn’t like it.

In his recent retirement speech, Sir John – a former solicitor general – expressed concern at the removal of a provision on the rule of law from legislation governing the Supreme Court.

Sir John said though the Constitution Act 1986 provided for Parliament to be the supreme law-making power of the nation, there was no equivalent provision stating the role of the judicial branch “or indeed the underlying concept of the judicial function which is to uphold the rule of law”.

He said the gap was filled to some extent by the establishment of the Supreme Court in 2003. The establishing legislation stipulated that nothing in it “affects New Zealand’s continuing commitment to the rule of law and sovereignty of Parliament”.

But he said the statutory provision would be repealed if the Judicature Modernisation Bill, which recently had its second reading, is enacted in its present form.

“If that happens, in the new statute providing for senior courts, we will no longer have this meaningful statutory recognition of both the judicial and legislative roles,” Sir John said.


If the Sabin abuse case is anything to go by it would seem that at least one of those “rule of law” fears may have already started to manifest – the current New Zealand government believing itself to be above the law. McGrath’s full speech can be read here.

Categorised in: , , ,


  • Justin Davis says:

    A number of M.P.s have serious conviction for child abuse , yet somehow have been able to keep there jobs despite not illegally able to be a m.p. with serious criminal conviction. Who covering this up and why ? Sabin the tip of the iceberg.

  • What’s the latest on Sabin?

  • Are you guys going to do a expose on Justice Goddard, whose going to oversea the British child sex case of their elite.
    We cant petition the Queen here , when we have a compliant judiciary that covers up similar crimes here.
    Im on the Herald as the TheOwl, yous cant look at all my posts, I invented Brand Key,
    even the Herald columnists are using the term now.
    The irony of colonism cringe with the flag is a joke, n the PM wants a royal title
    and they wont dump the Queen as head of state.
    Why do they ignor 27 September 1907 as a national day?

  • alonay says:

    Wow interested letters put up fiduciarywingate

  • fiduciarywingate says:

    How muster is executed and covered up by the professionals in NZ. .

    Sonny Tawhiao

    Investigating Pathologist- The Death of Sonny Tawhiao
    16 June 2011
    John Viggiano
    Investigating Pathologist

    Re: The Death of Sonny Tawhiao

    Dear John

    Thank you for your time earlier this week discussing the Sonny Tawhiao case.
    There is much evidence that may not have been considered in 1999 that indicates that Sonny’s death was murder and not suicide.
    BackgroundI first met Sonny in August 1991 at the Matakana Island Marae. He was a likeable and intelligent man, the father of two little boys. He was Ngai Te Rangi iwi’s official representative for the Waitangi claim regarding Matakana Island.

    In 1992 I took a confidential proposal to Far Financial Ltd (FAR) seeking finance to allow me to purchase Matakana Island. I was also required by the Resource Management Act to consult with Ngai Te Rangi iwi. FAR and the iwi leadership utilised significant elements of my business plan for their own benefit. FAR purchased the island and later on sold it to a company owned by the iwi leadership – Te Kotukutuku Corporation Ltd (TKC) .

    In 1993 I commenced proceedings in the High Court (Arklow vs MacLean) claiming breach of fiduciary duty and obtained a caveat blocking FAR from selling Matakana Island.
    In 1994 FAR surprisingly succeeded in having the caveat lifted after entering into an agreement to sell Matakana Island’s 10,000 acres to TKC. TKC’s ownership was subject to the outcome of my proceedings against FAR. TKC on sold half the land to American investors Blakeley Pacific. TKC’s net gain from the transactions was 5,000 acres plus $5m.

    It appears FAR’s strategy in selling the island to TKC was to introduce complicating Waitangi related factors into the court proceedings and strengthen FAR’s position. If this was their strategy, then it was ultimately successful.

    In 1997 I decisively won the Arklow vs MacLean case meaning the 1994 sale to TKC would be reversed. FAR and TKC sought a rehearing and I also won that case.

    In 1998 FAR and TKC appealed those decisions. The defendants’ opening line in the Court of Appeal was:
    Maybe the bank made some judgment mistakes but the important issue here is that the sacred land is now in the hands of the tangata whenua.

    The Appeals Court reversed the High Court decision giving ownership of Matakana Island to TKC.
    TKC misled the Appeals Court into believing that TKC were acting on behalf of Ngai Te Rangi iwi and were settling a Waitangi grievance. In fact the TKC Directors, who were also Ngai Te Rangi iwi elders had put themselves into a conflict of interest and purchased Matakana Island for their own benefit.

    This explains why the Ngai Te Rangi leaders / TKC Directors kept the details of their Appeals Court victory secret from the Ngai Te Rangi iwi. TKC also kept these details from Sonny who, as previously mentioned, had been the official Waitangi claimant on behalf of the Ngai Te Rangi iwi leadership regarding Matakana Island.

    The shareholders of TKC were not the iwi, but rather the leading members of the iwi, including Don Shaw (iwi resourse management manager), Howard Palmer (chairman of Ngai Te Rangi iwi), Graeme Ingham (iwi accountant), John Neill (trust chairman), Enoka Ngatai (chairman Tauranga Moana Iwi trust board).

    Sonny’s final months
    In early 1999 Sonny contacted me seeking the information from me that the TKC Shareholders had been withholding. I gave him files that contradicted what little the TKC Directors had told the iwi. In particular the iwi had been told that Blakeley Pacific had only purchased the forestry rights when in fact they had also purchased half (5,000 acres) of the land.

    Sonny then confronted the TKC shareholders at the Matakana Island Marae with the files I had provided him.

    This memorable event was witnessed by many of the iwi.
    The fact that he had those documents was mentioned in a witness statement given to police shortly after Sonny’s death and were described as documents he was not meant to have.

    On the morning of Sonny’s death Mr Shaw arranged to meet Sonny.

    Mr Shaw was known to have threatened Sonny.

    Contrary to a Police summary, ferry tickets show that Mr Shaw was on the island at the time of Sonny’s death.

    Privy Council
    In October 1999 the Privy Council confirmed the Appeal Court ruling giving ownership of Matakana Island to TKC.

    The Police narrative of Sonny’s death
    The narrative offered by the Police claims that Sonny:
    1. was depressed over certain failed business ventures,
    2. drove his car to the Matakana Island location where his body was found,
    3. for some unknown reason he took the petrol can out of his boot, placed his jumper and boots next to the right hand rear wheel, doused them with petrol and set fire to them and then threw his lighter onto the fire,
    4. he then poured petrol under the boot, up the left side and the interior of the car and then put the petrol can back in the boot of the car,
    5. climbed into the rear seat and set himself on fire.
    Problems with the Police Narrative
    1. Sonny had no interest in business matters.
    2. The lighter had been destroyed before Sonny supposedly got into the car. Sonny therefore would have had no means of starting the internal car fire.
    3. There is no reason for Sonny to have deliberately and separately burnt his boots, jumper and lighter.

    Alternate Narrative
    A more plausible narrative that is supportable by evidence is as follows;
    1. Sonny was deeply concerned about the iwi elders / TKC shareholders profiting at the expense of the Ngai Te Rangi iwi.
    2. Sonny publicly confronted the iwi elders / TKC shareholders.
    3. Sonny’s challenges jeopardised the millions of dollars that the iwi elders / TKC shareholders stood to gain[1].
    4. Mr Shaw met with Sonny on the day of Sonny’s death.
    5. Mr Shaw threatened Sonny on the day of his death.
    6. Mr Shaw was ex-military Special Forces and had access to a stun-gun.
    7. Mr Shaw and / or the other TKC shareholders incapacitated Sonny.
    8. Sonny was incinerated in his car.
    9. Sonny’s boots, jumper and lighter were separately incinerated to destroy evidence.
    I would therefore appreciate it if you could shed light on the following relevant pathology questions.
    1. You have excluded the possibility that Sonny’s death was caused by blunt instrument or stabbing due to the high levels of carbon monoxide in his blood. Is it possible that Sonny could have been unconscious when his car was set alight?
    2. If so, is it possible that a stun gun could have been used to make Sonny unconscious?
    3. Or is it possible that a physical blow could have made Sonny unconscious?
    4. Or is it possible that some martial art or military special forces technique could have been used to make Sonny unconscious?
    5. The body was found in an upright position. Is that unusual for death by incineration where the person was alive and conscious at the time of the incineration?
    6. How have pathological investigative methods for this type of death changed from July 1999 to 2011?

    Yours faithfully

    Chris Wingate

    [1] In 2007 Mr Shaw sold his 12.5% shares in TKC for $7m.

  • fiduciarywingate says:

    Perhaps someone now needs to go ask Government lawyer Bob Stevens how he reacted to deputy chairman of the justice and electoral committees comment to use the power of parliament to expose judicial corruption. His anger included the words “he should fucking well know better than be saying that sort of thing because that will get his kids killed” – so a few months later –

    • The truth will come out, Amy Adams list is a hoot, it can be used in reference to playing the new media poster game Irve termed Voldemortitis, ‘he who cannot be named, but everyone knows who[what] your talking about…

  • fiduciarywingate says:

    Silence from this letter to the SFO.

    Serious Fraud Office

    Dear Sara

    I have been talking with the clerks office at parliament about a select committee inquiry. They have given me a template which surprised me in that it offers to overturn the Privy Council Decision.
    I have drafted a list of questions that need investigating by the inquiry, however meantime if you can identify any areas contained in that list that outline criminal behaviour then perhaps we need to address them by me providing you the evidence. I attach that list in a word document.

    On a separate matter but on a simular vein of conflicts and perverting the course of justice, the Lombard prosecution as we know ended in a flop despite clear evidence of guilt that the directors misled shareholders. Deborah Coddington wrote to me telling me her husband who was prosecuting that case was under pressure from outside influences. In NZ, if you are prosecuting a case against a group of defendants on criminal charges and you are approached to “go soft/ back down”, is that approach illegal – is that attempting to pervert the course of justice? Is this a matter the SFO would look at?

    On the subject of perverting the course of justice you may have seen political donations in the Herald recently. Their investigations has turned up Carrus Corporation paying Tauranga MP Simon Bridges $20,000 to help with his election. Simon Bridges has refused to discuss, investigate anything in relation to my Matakana Island complaints. Carrus are trying to develop Matakana. It’s a clear conflict of interest and again I ask you if this is a criminal matter.

    Yours sincerely

    Christopher Wingate

  • fiduciarywingate says:

    Anyone doubting corruption needs to read all of this.
    Justice and Electoral Select Committee
    New Zealand House of Representatives


    “That the House of Representatives inquire into, with a view to overturning, the Privy Council’s decision in Arklow Investments Limited v MacLean [2000] 2 NZLR 1, and provide suitable remedies to the plaintiff.”
    Mr Wingate was the main plaintiff in Arklow v Maclean. He has applied to the New Zealand House of Representatives Justice and Electoral Select Committee to investigate a miscarriage of justice.
    In order for that to be determined these questions will need to be addressed:
    1. Did the Court of Appeal and Privy Council get any facts wrong?
    2. Did the Court of Appeal and Privy Council get any law wrong?
    If that answer is yes, then it needs to be determined how that materially affected the outcome.
    3. Did the Court of Appeal and Privy Council engineer false judgements in order to ensure the Matakana Island land remained with Maori defendants?
    4. Has the judiciary been operating a special “Assist Maori” policy?
    5. Was the Crown blinded by the Maori claim the Matakana Island land was sacred without doing any serious inquiries?
    6. Did the Minister of Land and Minister of Finance knowingly assist the Maori defendants at Arklow’s expense?
    7. Did the defendants use the millions of dollars they had defrauded at Arklow/Wingate’s expense then use that to pay for lawyers to defend their fraud?
    8. Did Justice Henry predetermine his Privy Council decision prior to trial?
    9. Was the author of the Privy Council judgement Justice Henry in a business relationship with Alan Galbraith QC defence counsel for the defendants?
    10. Did the defendants know in advance of the Court Appeal decision they had won from an inside source?
    11. Did the Maori defendants use threats and violence to obtain their contracts from ITT Rayonier, Ernslaw One and Far Financial in 1993?
    12. Did the Maori defendants interfere with Mr Wingate’s relationship with timber buyer Kanematsu Japan by threatening them with “Maori problems”?
    13. In 1994 in lifting Mr Wingate’s caveats protecting his interests in Matakana Island did Justice Greig pervert the course of justice?
    14. Did David Baragwanath QC mislead the High Court at the 1994 Justice Greig hearing?
    15. Did Arklow/Wingate’s barrister Gary Judd fail to protect Arklow’s legal rights at the 1994 Justice Greig hearing?
    16. Was Mr Wingate’s barrister Gary Judd QC in a business relationship with David Baragwanath QC? (Mr Baragwanath acted for the Maori defendants 1993-1994.)
    17. Did any of the defendants perjure their evidence?
    18. Did other TKC Corporation witnesses perjure their evidence and pervert the course of justice?
    19. Did Ernslaw One lawyer and company secretary Jack Porus perjure his evidence?
    20. Did ITT CEO Charles Margiotta perjure his evidence?
    21. Did Don Shaw perjure his evidence?
    22. Did Far Financial directors perjure their evidence including backdating diary entries?
    23. Did Far Financial steal confidential information from Arklow Investments?
    24. Did Far Financial owe Arklow a fiduciary duty?
    25. Was Far Financial broke when Arklow approached it to borrow money therefore saw the Arklow business plans as opportunity to get rich by stealing the Arklow deal?
    26. Did the defendants misuse the discovery process by concealing documents?
    27. Did the defendant’s lawyers pervert the course of justice by claiming damaging documents had legal privilege?
    28. Did barrister John Eichelbaum have a business partnership with Far Financial?
    29. Did John Eichelbaum mislead the Court of Appeal in 1998 with false submissions?
    30. Did lawyer Jock Fanselow attempt to pervert the course of justice by holding in trust Far Financial directors personal assets?
    31. Did the Resource Management Act section requiring Arklow to consult with local iwi as directed by the Tauranga / Western Bay of Plenty mayors expose Arklow to extortion and vulnerability?
    32. Did the Tauranga police fail to adequately investigate Waitangi manager (WAI 215) Sonny Tawhiao’s death?
    33. After the Privy Council win did Far Financial set up Lombard Finance with Michael Reeves and appoints former Attorney General Sir Douglas Graham and Minister of Justice Bill Jeffries to the board of directors?
    34. Was Far Financial business partner and legal counsel John Eichelbaum partners with former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice and Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer and what was his relationship with the judges of the Court of Appeal?
    35. Did Sonny Tawhiao’s complaints about iwi leadership corruption offer a problem to iwi leadership who were also the personal shareholders of Te Kotukutuku Corporation?
    36. Did the Brendan Mulholland the Commissioner of Crown Lands misuse his office to defeat Arklow’s rights?
    37. Did the tribal leadership of Ngai Te Rangi breach their fiduciary duty by directing tribal assets into their own personal names? (Theft by a person in special relationship)
    38. Did the Maori group submit to Court the Matakana Island land was going to be jointly owned on a 50/50 basis with a charitable entity known as Matakana Island Trust and was it not correct that the trustees then transferred that benefit into their own names?
    39. Did the tribal leadership of Ngai Te Rangi, namely its Chairman Howard Palmer, accountant Graeme Ingham, Tauranga Moana Trust Board Chairman Enoka Ngatai, iwi Resource Management Act manager Don Shaw, Matakana Island Trust Chairman John Neill provide the High Court affidavits claiming the Matakana Island was sacred and subject to a Waitangi claim but perverted the course of justice by failing to tell the court they were personally shareholders set to gain real estate worth more than $100m should the court assist them gain ownership at Arklow’s expense?
    40. Despite the claims which the Crown supported that the Matakana island land was sacred, did the Maori group involved, namely Te Kotukutuku Corporation sell that land to developers in 2007 resulting in none of the $100m plus going to Ngai Te Rangi iwi or charity Matakana Island Trust, but instead going into the pockets of the Maori leadership, their accountant and lawyers who misled the court?
    41. Did New Zealand police create a “criminal conviction recording” after Arklow Wingate’s High Court win on the national online database against Christopher Wingate that was completely false?
    42. Was a senior tax officer who issued a false tax payable demand for $1.4m against Christopher Wingate, a former lawyer for defendants Far Financial?
    43. Did Arklow’s confidential valuations by forestry consultant Cawstons for the Kanematsu /Arklow deal which was provided in confidence to stockbroker Neil Craig in August 1992 get used by Neil Craig in putting a bid to the receivers on 30 September 1992? When that bid failed did Neil Craig then provide those valuations to Te Kotukutuku and forestry consultant Paul Robinson 4 December 1992? Did iwi accountant Graeme Ingham and iwi RMA manager Don Shaw then use that information to threaten Kanematsu on 7 December 1992?
    44. Did Far Financial clearly state in a letter dated 1 September 1992 to CML/Joseph Banks that Far Financial was purchasing for themselves the Matakana Island land, selling off the 1-16 year forest and the 17 to 34 year forest therefore were actively copying the Arklow deal? Then did the Court of Appeal majority claim that at no time did Far Financial copy the Arklow deal?
    45. Did police use a search warrant to uplift confidential files from Mr Wingate’s residence and then invited the defendant’s lawyer Ray Annan to take copies of those files which he did on that very day?
    46. Was Justice Baragwanath’s daughter Natalie present at a meeting held by a businessman whose grandfather was involved with the Maori defendants Te Kotukutuku in March 2000 in which Wingate was offered $18,000 a month in exchange for remaining silent and to stop any complaints about the Matakana court process?
    47. When those payments stopped in August 2000 immediately after Wingate filed a complaint to the United Nation’s Commission on Human Rights, did the defendants within 48hrs then file for costs against Wingate in the High Court?
    48. Was the Court of Appeal wrong when they stated: “At no stage was Arklow vulnerable to the action of Far Financial” Despite the fact Far Financial were broke and now had the confidential business blueprint plans of Arklow that if implemented had the potential to earn a minimum of $3m right through to the Arklow aim of securing the 10,000 acres of land which according to reports by George E.Lipp Inc, concept analysts and financial consultants of Singapore together with international architects Klages Carter Vail and Partners of California and NZ engineers Duffill Watts and King – calculated Arklow’s turnover of $17.82 billion, with development costs of $6.40 billion, operating costs of $7.99 billion to produce a net cash flow of $3.43 billion.

    • New Zealand is the least corrupt country in the world.
      The goal post isnt very high, whats that saying for the world,
      democracy & freedom is a mythical fantasy.

  • Chris Wingate says:

    The corruption is standard but of course they don’t see it that way. They simply see it as their duty to maintain public confidence.
    I saw black and white facts exposing murder, fraud, perverting the course of justice, perjury, judicial point blank corruption, organised media silence in my 10 years of prosecuting the Matakana Island litigation. Nothing surprises me.

  • hornet says:

    There is an Epidemic across Western Politics – a sick perverted epidemic that MUST be exposed and stopped. That epidemic is the Psychopathic Sexual Deviant or Child Abuser who has been corrupted, manipulated, controlled, extorted and entrapped through secret ritual and then used to take up positions of control over the people – planted in every senior political position across Govt, Justice, Police, Councils – to LIE with impunity on command – to manipulate good people – to micro manage change for the WORSE. – is a classic example of a massive coverup – not to mention so many other coverups occurring right now across the world – there is so much evidence now of concerns with Sitting MPS in the UK parliament not being investigated, files lost and police silenced, too many high profile people having connections to convicted pedophiles …..exactly the same as as we have here in NZ……SECRECY – SUPPRESSION – DECEPTION.

    NZ firsts bill to expose Child Pedophiles and remove Name suppression and secrecy – and this request is refused by Govt – WHY??? Secrecy is Corruption and Deception.

    Now we know why the NZ family court is shrouded in secrecy – why so many fathers have been deliberately deprived of time with their own children. Single parent kids become socially detached without the input and protection from a father – and are easy prey later in life to abusers.

    And then right here at home we have more secrecy of a Prominent NZ person before the courts on SEXUAL CHARGES – we all know who, and also at this minute we have another Prominent NZer touching kids in personal areas – and then using the media to make it socially acceptable to future generations – by normalising the event.

    Recall my comments on DARVO – DENY the allegation , ATTACK the Accuser , then REVERSE the VICTIM – OFFENDER – ROLE – this is classic Psychopathic sexual deviant behaviour – its unique to them and them alone – and surprise surprise when they cannot blame someone else – they feign MEMORY loss………sorry I cant go to court i’ve got Alzeimers… can we please suppress this entire event…..

    Where are the real “MEN” in NZ – because its NOW time to stand up and take a very strong stance on this disgrace – this is unacceptable on so many levels.

  • Sadly NZ government is a sovereign tyranny, its only bound to a degree by public opinion.
    The Tories harp on about how wonderful the system is and that the Queen creates a stable democracy here,
    but its a complete fiction because NZers have no access to petition her, the Governor General is just a party flag waver & glove puppet.

    Brand Key fast tracking of the flag change suggest he wont last the year, if his knighthood isnt imminent on June 6, then it will be in the new year.
    If Congress vote down the TPPA, hopefully after they realize corporations won need to bribe them,
    so apart from the flag change its an easy bet that Key wont stick around. Its a pretty expensive knighthood for the country.
    Its already been reported in a Herald column that National will break with convention and give him it while he is still PM.

    Things will heat with China with Key’s refusal to sign the extradition treaty request made by President Xi, =exports held up,
    its going to be a fun six months.

  • rosenolannz says:

    The Earthquake Minister is already side stepping High Court ruling in anticipation of Judicature Modernisation Bill reform.

  • dennis says:

    Do I have your permission to wear a tshirt with with “” on it?
    I love the truth.
    Thx & Kind Regards ….Dennis.

  • mary_a says:

    National seems to be a refuge for the depraved!

  • RealNewsNZ says:

    Keep up the great work. 🙂
    John Key’s interest in young girls being trivialised in NZ media

  • be interersting to see how long it takes the Newstalk NZ website to remove the comment naming Sabin

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: