McCready told not to “bother, vex or harass”

The latest Graeme McCready farce seems to have ended in court (yesterday) with McCready told not “bother, vex or harass” Amanda Bailey.

Ponytail pulling case ends in confusion

An attempt to get John Key under oath and talking about ponytail-pulling has failed with the private prosecutor being told to stop being a nuisance.

A new ruling today has seen Graham McCready’s application to the Human Rights Tribunal end in bumbling confusion with the litigator told not “bother, vex or harass” victim Amanda Bailey.

A finding from Tribunal chairman Rodger Haines QC today sharply told Mr McCready to leave Ms Bailey alone.

The ruling showed Mr McCready had no way of serving Ms Bailey with a summons and said it was because he was “not entitled to the information sought”.

“It is to be remembered Ms Bailey is not a party to these proceedings and that these proceedings have been brought without her knowledge or consent”.

McCready tried to make it all about him and force Bailey to play along.

Mr Haines said Mr McCready had not read with care previous rulings from the Tribunal related to the case he was trying to bring and it showed he was “wasting the Tribunal’s time with applications of no merit”.

He said the repeated applications to the Tribunal to get “information they are not entitled to” could strengthen any application by Ms Bailey or Mr Key to have the whole case dismissed.

Mr McCready said the tribunal had misunderstood confusion over the process and determined his actions were “frivolous and intended to harass the victim Amanda Bailey”.

He said he had no way to serve a summons on Ms Bailey to get her evidence into court.

“The Pony Tail Gate case is therefore at an end,” he said.

Good. It should never have started.

Any action if any should be entirely up to Bailey.

Previous Post
Leave a comment


  1. I find a couple of odd issues here:
    1) why would anyone do this without the consent or agreement of at least the supposed ‘complainant’ ?
    2) why is it that a majority of kiwis thought the actions of the ‘instigator’ were ranging somewhere between strange to perverted.. yet the whole issue was effectively brushed aside or even laughed off. Does this finally prove that senior members of parliament are actually ‘above the law’ ?

    How bizaare :/

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  16th June 2015

      No, it just proves your suppositions are wrong and that if you bothered to read the law you would find the incidents fell far short of the definitions of criminal harassment.

  2. kittycatkin

     /  16th June 2015

    I wonder how Zedd knows what the majority of kiwis feel, or does he mean Kiwis ? Of course senior members of Parliament are not above the law; only a very ignorant person would think that. Maybe he’s confusing it with diplomatic immunity.

    There is no way that this could be called sexual harassment in the workplace (as GM tried to make it out to be) or assault, even in the most technical sense of the word. Everyone else has lost interest long ago, and only Mr McGreasy seems to be frantically trying to keep it going.

    A case can be brought without the “victim’s” consent, but there’s no way to force the ‘victim’ to turn up, so the case would fall flat. I can’t remember what happened with Tau Henare and Murray McCully who didn’t want to take it any further, but the Lone Interferer stepped in and charged one of them with something or other,.

    We must hope that this is his annual case and that he doesn’t decide to look for another as this has flopped..

  3. kittycatkin

     /  16th June 2015

    I wish that someone would charge HIM with harassment-they’d certainly have a case, or so it seems. The biter bit. But I suppose that nobody will be bothered to do so.

  4. @kck

    just stating MY point of view & repeating things I see on TV news.. a poll showed the majority of respondents (including Nat. supporters) thought the ‘ponytail puller’ had stepped over the line, especially after the young lady reportedly told him to stop on numerous occassions over several months !

    IF it was I (or average kiwi bloke), we would have either been booted out & told to say out OR possibly even arrested for assault. BUT your ‘beloved leader’ can obviously ‘do no wrong’ ? Do you believe he can ‘walk on water too’ ? (ignorance is bliss)
    LOL :/

    • kittycatkin

       /  17th June 2015

      I was under the impression from what she said that she said nothing directly to him that indicated that she was annoyed. She claims to have called something after his minders.

      The quote from Alexander Pope is ‘Where ignorance is bliss/’Tis folly to be wise.’ This gives a very different meaning to it. Pope would never have thought that ignorance generally was a good thing.

      There would be very little chance that anyone tweaking a ponytail would be charged with assault, no matter who they were, Graham McCready was wasting everyone’s time, Even the ‘victim’ didn’t want to know. He’s the one doing the harassing.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  17th June 2015

      Actually courts require witnesses, not people with opinions picked up from TV news reports. And, amazingly for events reportedly occurring in the midst of a busy cafe, there has been a complete absence of grossly offended witnesses for the prosecution. Weird, eh?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s