‘Assets’ reveal Lauda Finem-[Deleted as per court order]-Slater links

On assets and teams and Lauda Finem, [Deleted as per court order] and Cameron Slater.

Lauda Finem play with words to try to deny that they are a front for a handful of (nasty) people based in New Zealand.

We will say it once more, for the last time! Lauda Finem is a foreign based blog, it is not and never has been based in New Zealand or any of it’s territories.

Everything LF publishes we do so quite legally, no different to any other foreign news source. Moreover LF is NOT a party to any legal proceeding in New Zealand whatsoever, nor is any member of team LF, again all members live outside New Zealand, always have, always will. Nor will we be the subject of defamation proceedings in the future as absolutely everything published on LF is the TRUTH, as distasteful as that may be to those who have featured on LF

In typical irony they claim “absolutely everything published on LF is the TRUTH” immediately after telling a big porky.

They may claim that ‘team LF’ is just Antony Nottingham (ok, they don’t admit that but also don’t deny it) and their  New Zealand based operators are not members but ‘assets’.

Here’s an example of Lauda Finem referring to their ‘assets'”

Funnily enough when we had one of our assets point out Fishers mistake to Slater and tweeted it during the lunch break Slater got stuck into Fisher.

From BLOMFIELD v CAMERON SLATER – POT, KETTLE, BLACK – LABOUR RAG, THE STANDARD & LYNN PRENTICE, AT IT AGAIN

Here’s another example:

LF obtained the services of probably Australasia’s greatest investigative asset over the weekend for free…well somebody paid for his services, but it was not LF!!.

Just after that they refer to “New Zealand Justice Campaigner [Precautionary delete]” and anyone who has read through [Precautionary delete] and Lauda Finem – detail will recognise that’s probably not a coincidence.

And another: Whale Oil Blogger Cameron Slaters bad dream – climbs into bed with arch nemesis Matthew Blomfield  4 September 2014

In the recorded telephone conversation, between Blomfield and [Delete as per court order] (below)…

[Deleted as per court order]

[Deleted as per court order], one of Slaters many sources, a man who was prepared to go public and stand by Slater in court…[Deleted as per court order]and others who had turned LF assets has assisted in obtaining reams of evidential material which LF has yet to publish.

Lauda Finem openly admit  [Deleted as per court order], one of Cameron Slater’s ‘sources’, as an ‘LF asset’ who has “assisted in obtaining reams of evidential material which LF has yet to publish”.

In an earlier post: TVNZ, John Hudson, Matthew Blomfield and the Ruawai Property Scam – Part One 17 December 2013

In our last post on Blomfield we evidenced that he had likely either colluded with journalists or in the alternative mislead journalists. Having had a little time to review a fraction of the material we, like Slater, received recently…

This makes it fairly clear someone (in New Zealand) has been supplying both Slater and Lauda Finem with material.

Back to the previous post:

In doing so Blomfield had knowingly laid one of those false police complaints against Mr [Deleted as per court order], in fact it was the second in two years that [Deleted as per court order]had been subjected to, both of these complaints designed to intimidate [Deleted as per court order].

As is becoming evident, Lauda Finem et al claims of being harassed can mean the opposite. This is true in my experience, and last week’s Court of Appeal judgment revealed “Mr Blomfield’s application for a restraining order against Mr [Deleted as per court order]was successful in the Auckland District Court. In delivering judgment, Judge Dawson noted that the relationship between the two was “toxic”. The Judge proceeded to find that text messages sent to Mr Blomfield by Mr [Deleted as per court order]constituted harassment under the Harassment Act 1997. A restraining order was accordingly made against Mr [Deleted as per court order] and remains in force until 9 April 2016.”

LF managed to collect additional evidence of this fact, Blomfield’s true intention, by covertly recording a telephone call that Blomfield made to [Deleted as per court order]…

How would LF, who claim none of their ‘team’ have ever lived in New Zealand, covertly record that telephone call?

At the same time Slater was communicating with Blomfield he was also chatting with one of our mutual sources, fishing for additional information on none other than Warren Powell, an action that seemed very suspicious. The source immediately contacted an LF operative and explained what had been unfolding in Slaters Skype texts…

A ‘mutual source’ again. However Slater doesn’use the term ‘asset’, he talks about ‘team’. This email is in the Lauda Finem post:

SlaterEmailtoBlomfield

It seems clear from a number of posts at Lauda Finem that Antony Nottingham doesn’t like Slater. Slater is correct in saying the lauda Finem attacks against Slater’s wife were disgusting (like many LF posts). And he has also been the target of similar, like this in the same post as the emails:

So is Cameron Slater a candidate for filthy Maggot cunt of the year? In the absence of a plausible explanation from the fat-boy himself we here at LF certainly think so. Can Cameron Slater really be trusted to keep his sources safe? We here at LF think not.

But it is also clear from this that there is no honour amongst this lot, they are all vicious, even amongst themselves. The hapless Slater almost looks good in comparison to those who have been using and abusing him.

Back to Lauda Finem’s claim:

Moreover LF is NOT a party to any legal proceeding in New Zealand whatsoever, nor is any member of team LF, again all members live outside New Zealand, always have, always will.

Lie 1 – [Deleted as per court order] still lives in Auckland as far as I know.

Lie 2 – Lauda Finem stated “[Deleted as per court order], one of Slaters many sources, a man who was prepared to go public and stand by Slater in court”. And there is also evidence that [Deleted as per court order]is a party to other legal proceedings.

Lauda Finem and Cameron Slater may use different terms but it seems clear that an LF asset is the same thing as a Slater team member.

Regardless of their semantics one could wonder whether people like [Deleted as per court order] are assets or liabilities.

 

Leave a comment

96 Comments

  1. Kevin

     /  29th November 2015

    So can we agree that any links between LF and Slater have been business-only?

    Reply
    • I don’t know what all the links are but they are obviously varied. Keith Ng claims Slater has given photos to LF.

      But in the main it looks like Slater has been played. This post suggests [Deleted as per court order] has been the middle man, at times at least.

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th November 2015

        They’ve both got so many enemies they’ve run out of separate enemies so now they are each other’s enemies’ enemy and best of friends – no, make that they are each other’s only friends in a world that hates them.

        Reply
        • Jeeves

           /  30th November 2015

          Lol.
          When you’ve run out of ‘separate enemies’ you know you’ve finally arrived.

          Reply
    • Mike C

       /  29th November 2015

      @Kevin

      It is pretty obvious that Slater and [Deleted as per court order]and Nottingham are “Beast Friends” … also known as “Mutually Beneficial Parasitical Relationships” 🙂

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th November 2015

        Lol. Luckily I’d finished my coffee, Mike.

        Reply
        • kittycatkin

           /  29th November 2015

          Ditto. Please put a ‘Put drinks down’ warning on such things You will be liable if I wreck my keyboard by spraying tea or coffee all over it.

          Reply
    • Person W (name edited)

       /  29th November 2015

      I agree. This article has backfired on Pete. He has been claiming for the last week or so that he had [false accusation], but the emails between Slater and Blomfield prove that this is not the case. Pete should [false accusation/insinuation]. On the issue of the hard drive, its been speculated in the media about the theft, and Pete has swallowed this and then spat it out on his blog. Again the email proves that the hard drive was never stolen, as has been claimed by Blomfield and Pete.

      [ I haven’t claimed anything about the hard drive like that. There is no proof it was never stolen. It’s fairly obvious that personal data was illgally obtained and passed on.]

      Pete you have to read stuff fully before embarrassing yourself on the internet.

      Your statements against Slater have been [false claim]

      You seem emboldened by the fact that nobodies had a go at you, but complicated proceedings take time to get up and running.

      It may not be next week, or the week, after that but i think that you may be [vexatious speculation]

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th November 2015

        Enter Cockroach C, notably with poor spelling, grammar and literacy compared with the first two but entrusted with the same mission. Will he also wind up flattened in the waste basket? Who sends these grubby little chaps out on their suicide missions?

        Reply
      • I have never claimed that Slater owns LF. I’ve said a number of times that ownership of irrelevant.

        Reply
      • Mike C

         /  29th November 2015

        @”UsurePG”?

        If you manage to get George in front of a Judge before Xmas 2015 … then I might have some respect for your most recent made-up username.

        And while you’re about it … stick me in front of a Judge as well.

        I am in a totally different part of New Zealand to George … and I am not the only commenter here in YourNZ who is geographically separate from Pete George 🙂

        Reply
        • Person W (name edited)

           /  29th November 2015

          Pete has already stated that he has been served by Earle McKinney, [I have not alleged that – PG]. Others in the forum have stated quite clearly that others have legal issues over [edited]. Those others being named in this forum etc. Pete has stated to other people on this blog that he will tell them all about [deleted]. It just seems that there could be more niggle on the way thats all.

          Reply
        • Person W (name edited)

           /  29th November 2015

          You seem to be [false claim]and he [fales accusation], whilst he [false accusation]. its pretty easy to see that you and pete are [deleted – PG]

          Reply
          • kittycatkin

             /  29th November 2015

            .

            If Pete was deleting these names for legal reasons, he would have to be an idiot to let someone else name them-the law wouldn’t take into account that his best friend was doing it (if one assumes that Mike C is this, which is unlikely)

            ‘Oh, I didn’t think that it was defamation when my best friend did it,’ Yes, he’d get away with that-I don’t think.

            Reply
  2. Loki

     /  29th November 2015

    The single most important aspect of this is how the mouth breathing slob tried to slime out from under the Blomfield legal dramas by giving up Warren Powell.
    So all that bollocks about being declared a journo was for nothing.
    Nice to see his weasel move has failed.
    Public Lion and a private mouse.

    Reply
    • Despite that and despite obviously annoying one of ‘Team LF’ considerably some of the inter-asset associations continued.

      Reply
      • Loki

         /  29th November 2015

        They were very scathing of the mouth breather for a long time but have a common foe in Blomfield and with the brains trust cutting him off he has had to team up with these nasty haters.
        A match made in Heaven really.
        There is only one person still talking to him from before and he only does it due to a debilitating sense of politeness.
        No help is being rendered.
        No info shared.
        No fucks given.
        Which obviously is reflected in the lack of content.
        Unless you count the crappy cut and pastes and cat posts.
        The Whaleoil panic room would be a fun place right now 🙂

        Reply
    • Person W (name edited)

       /  29th November 2015

      And who are you Loki? At least Cam uses his real name unlike you – does this make you a private snake, and a public worm

      Reply
      • I presume you are not using your real name?

        Reply
        • Person W (name edited)

           /  29th November 2015

          You Loki Pete?

          Reply
          • ‘UnsurePG’ is Person W and have been warned about changing pseudonyms and have been asked to verify your identity before commenting here again.

            Failure to comply means you are not welcome here and may face identification.

            Reply
            • I am concerned that Person W is making these statements. I wonder if his parents know that he is making these immature and ill-sonsidered statements? Best you get back to your studies young lady.

        • jaspa

           /  29th November 2015

          ‘UsurePG’ has a very similar style to ‘ubeverycarefulcook’, don’t you think?

          Reply
          • Yes, it’s quite obvious isn’t it. It’s Person W and will be updated accordingly.

            Reply
          • Person W (name edited)

             /  29th November 2015

            Why did that cause such a stir Jaspa. You pete as well

            [Not a stir, just holding you to account. You have been asked not to comment here again without verifying your identity. You keep ignoring that request. You make false accusations and you seem to be trying to deliberately compromising this site.

            Your comments will be deleted from now on unless you comply. PG]

            Reply
            • jaspa

               /  29th November 2015

              That was not a stir. A mild observation. You haven’t seen me stir yet. 🙂

            • kittycatkin

               /  29th November 2015

              Oh no ! Person W has worked that we are ALL Pete. Curses, foiled again.

            • Pete, please delete her, she shows distressing adolscent traits and muting her is for her own good.

            • kittycatkin

               /  29th November 2015

              i’m sorry, I promise to be good from now on. Don’t have me deleted.

  3. Urban Redneck

     /  29th November 2015

    I get the feeling Blomfield has made it his life mission to fuck Slater up as badly as he can, and he’ll only stop the day either one of them is in a wooden box.

    Reply
    • Hel

       /  29th November 2015

      How much did Powell pay Slater to attack Blomfield and then be called a lying toe rag?
      How much is all this costing the taxpayer given Slater’s obvious view of the Judiciary competence being foolish?
      And can someone find out what Blomfield just won in costs off Slater? Is it enough to bankrupt him outright? The “Whalearmy” will be getting another begging post soon so the Slater family can have a nice Xmas in the meantime as Spanish Bride keeps bragging, the family has rental property!

      Reply
      • Kevin

         /  29th November 2015

        Do you know what the phrase “leading question” means?

        BTW there are a number of potentially defamatory statements in your post. Just saying.

        Reply
        • MaureenW

           /  29th November 2015

          What are the potentially defamatory statements Kevin? I can’t see anything in that post I would term “potentially defamatory”.

          Reply
        • Loki

           /  29th November 2015

          Nothing defamatory in what Hel wrote.
          Hel could have written a lot more..
          I hope Blomfield tracks down where the fidelity life settlement went. Hiding money after the defamation action began.. Tut tut. Black mfield may win some out of Auckland rental properties if he wins.
          And who am I??
          Not important other than the fact it is creating a frenzy of screaming in the mouth breathers panic room..
          Call me a collator..
          We are all sharing stories Cameron, all the different lies you told to each member of the brains trust.
          And.
          You would all be astonished if you how little he got for the Block mfield project.
          A humiliatingly small amount.

          Reply
      • jaspa

         /  29th November 2015

        Well now, isn’t that funny. I copied a testimonial to Legal Beagles by Juana on to here recently, “I have just settled on an investment property for my family trust. I have purchased property a number of times in the past and Legal Beagle were fantastic.” (Legal Beagle have been operating since 2012). I just checked up on that page and it has been deleted!

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  29th November 2015

          @Jaspa

          Paid for Post ???

          Reply
          • jaspa

             /  29th November 2015

            Could well be. Who would know with them?

            She did have a home & income in Howick advertised for sale on sella until recently

            Reply
            • Mike C

               /  29th November 2015

              @Jaspa

              Perhaps Slater&Co are selling some properties on behalf of someone?

              As an aside … who sells stuff on “Sella” anymore? 🙂

            • jaspa

               /  29th November 2015

              I don’t know – has anyone ever sold things on sella? Isn’t it just a site for cheapskates who don’t want to pay Trademe fees?

              Anyway, obviously she at least has the self awareness to realise that boasting about properties she is buying isn’t fitting in too well with the begging bowl scenario.

            • kittycatkin

               /  29th November 2015

              I am surprised that Sella is still going . When I looked on it, their selection was very limited, and I was looking for something quite ordinary. They also did that thing where they bring up all sorts of irrelevant things to disguise their lack of stock.

    • I don’t see it like that. On his own he has defended himself from some very nasty attacks from some people who are loosely associated. I would expect he would be happy for it all to end, but while under attack one of the best defences is to attack back. And they aren’t taking that very well.

      Reply
      • Kevin

         /  29th November 2015

        That’s assuming what Slater said about Blomfield isn’t true. From my opinion Blomfield has been trying to crush Slater by vexatiously using court proceedings, including an application to make Slater bankrupt for non payment of court fees – court fees that according to SB have already been put in “trust” and aren’t due until the defamation case has been decided.

        Reply
        • DaveG

           /  30th November 2015

          Correct Kevin, and Bloomfield does not deserve to win, one must only ask why so many people are against Bloomfield, what went wrong, and why so many want to extract Karma. Its an unfair battle now, with Slater gagged from publishing anything or correcting anything Bloomfield does around town.

          Too many are blinded by their dislike of Slater to simply ask the above, and I remain uncomfortable about the sudden emergance of Ben R, its too convenient. Others have eluded to a level of concern, i see that too now.

          Reply
          • “one must only ask why so many people are against Bloomfield”

            One must ask how many people are against Blomfield? A small handful that I’ve seen. Who mostly repeat the same lies and misinformation. The Coourt of Appeal was fairly damning.

            “Too many are blinded by their dislike of Slater”

            And a few more people seem be blinded by their support of Slater and perhaps of [Deleted as per court order]and the Nottinghams. They are vindictive, dangerous liars who have deliberately harmed many people..

            Reply
    • Mike C

       /  29th November 2015

      @UrbanRedneck

      Slater was the first one out of the two of them to take a seat at the “Fuck-Fest Table” … so you can’t blame Blomfield for wanting to finish the “Party”. LOL 🙂

      Reply
    • Person W (name edited)

       /  29th November 2015

      I think that its only a matter of time before [vexatious]. I have read stuff on LF and Slaters site and there are strong cases against him [I disagree]. Sometimes it just takes a long time to put a big case together.

      Reply
      • I’ve never claimed Slater owns LF. I’ve said a number of times that ownership is irrelevant.

        Reply
        • Person W (name edited)

           /  29th November 2015

          Ownership is very relevant Peter Donald George. Very relevant because the allegation of ownership stems from control and input. You have [false claim]. You have amassed a significant amount of worthless material, that would not be admissible in Court, to [false allegation]. This is as bad, and likely worse that any allegation made by Slater against Blomfield, and you seem to be the [false claim]. [unsubstantiated speculation], then how stupid are you going to look Pete. You have stepped out of the shadows into the light where you complain about being targeted. But you are a [false accusation], and if you are wrong on that score and LF and Slater are correct, all of your readership will leave you as you not only backed the wrong horse, but you attacked those trying to bring Blomfield to account. Of course people that are exposed alleged victimisation [yes, they do, son’t they]. Nothing new there mate. [False insinuation] it may help.

          Reply
          • You’re making incorrect accusations. Are you making things up deliberately or has someone given you false information to repeat here?

            Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  29th November 2015

            Well, Cockroach C. Let’s call you Cuddles. Just to be clear, would PG be wrong if he agreed with all the nasty things LF has said about poor old Cam? Or should it be LF in the dock?

            Reply
            • Person W (name edited)

               /  29th November 2015

              My point is that Pete has [false claim]. Its a bit embarrassing. It seems to me like he has a personal agenda to do with LF.

              [I’ll leave this comment because it was posted before I completed my last comment saying further comments from Person W will be deleted until they comply. And that includes stopping making false accusations, like in this comment. PG]

            • Tedious irrational sexist comment. Time to say goodbye!

          • MaureenW

             /  29th November 2015

            @ UnsurePG
            Talk about fantasy, suggest you are trying to plant false information here. The question I’d ask, is why are you bothering?

            Reply
      • They have been accusing Blomfield of things for years and I’m not aware of him being charged for anything. And I don’t trust any unsubstantiated claim made by LF. And I think Slater has been used and didn’t know better, and has been left on the firing line – or under a bus.

        Reply
        • Person W (name edited)

           /  29th November 2015

          Have you read the articles on [they are not accurate or substantiated]

          Pete, I am just saying that you seem to be on a toxic attack, that will see you very embarrassed. What have you against Cameron Slater, and [Edited per court order], other than trying to save [false claim] And this obsession with Lauda Finem and [false claim] on your blog, that you will be found accountable for. Just interested in knowing what has screwed with your balance.

          Reply
      • artcroft

         /  29th November 2015

        Nonsense – You and Slater are long on promises and short on delivery. Slater was adamant that the Sabin affair would see Key out of office. Didn’t happen. Likewise assestions about Blomfield’s future are going to be equally WRONG.

        Reply
  4. Missy

     /  29th November 2015

    Assets? Really?

    I find the language they use interesting though, it is like they are trying to be something they are not, and the more I see of what they have written the more it looks like some scriptwriter for one of those unreal American dramas.

    I did like this bit though:

    “…[Deleted as per court order]and others who had turned LF assets has assisted in obtaining reams of evidential material which LF has yet to publish.”

    ‘…turned LF assets…’ who uses phrases like assets and turned in the real world? that is like some phrase that you will see in a second rate US spy drama.

    The try-hard use of language combined with their poor spelling and grammar doesn’t do much for their credibility.

    Reply
    • MaureenW

       /  29th November 2015

      @ Missy – the language and faux legalese is truly bizarre. Something like The Bourne Legacy meets Perry Mason.

      Reply
    • Salacious P Crumb

       /  29th November 2015

      The well, they do put the ‘ass’ into assets, do they not.

      Reply
  5. It’s the whole “I don’t hate you I just tried to destroy your life, can we be friends now?” schtick that amazes me. Why do people(Slater/LF) aspire to live like this?

    Reply
  6. unitedtribes2

     /  29th November 2015

    “We will say it once more, for the last time! Lauda Finem is a foreign based blog, ” Not really something a real foreign based person would say.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  29th November 2015

      True. It sparks an image of the Beagle Boys frantically fanning smoke towards the camera.

      Reply
      • Person W (name edited)

         /  29th November 2015

        Are the beagle boys PG and Blomfield?

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  29th November 2015

          I think you well know the answer to that, my little cockroach. And it is a lot closer to home for you.

          Reply
          • Person W (name edited)

             /  29th November 2015

            Cockroaches will be there past your end Alan (is it Wilkinson)

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th November 2015

              But not all those I have squashed, Cuddles.

            • kittycatkin

               /  29th November 2015

              Yes; it’s not impossible that someone who’s IN a foreign country would use that word, but it seems odd. Isn’t it more likely that one would say ‘European’ or ‘Asian’ if one wanted it known that it was not NZ, but didn’t want to be specific ? If I wanted to do that sort of thing from here, I might well say that I’m in the Pacific. I wouldn’t say foreign; a foreign country is somewhere that I am not.

            • kittycatkin

               /  29th November 2015

              Yes, Person W, Alan’s name is Wilkinson. Well deducted, Mr Holmes.I don’t know how you guessed it, though-I am very impressed.

  7. kittycatkin

     /  29th November 2015

    Dear me. The Beagle Boys and their associates haven’t enough to do with their time, I’d say.

    Reply
    • Robby

       /  29th November 2015

      It’s the weekend Kitty, court is closed & they don’t have any friends 😉

      Reply
    • jaspa

       /  29th November 2015

      How does a “justice campaigner” actually make a living?

      Reply
    • brucehnz

       /  29th November 2015

      Justice campaigner is just another term for a shit stirrer as it applies to Nottingham.
      He gave himself the title after grassing up some of his mates in the motor trade for speedo tampering.
      Anyone can give themselves a title these days it seems, no qualifications required.
      You can win a cooking programme on the tele, and call yourself a “Master Chef”.

      Reply
  8. I feel like I’m in a madhouse. It’s all so “where’s the lithium?” and “fetch that straitjacket”. Never seen anything so bereft of sense of perspective or reality.

    Is this the way it is? Blomfield is commercially and very possibly ethically compromised. People he was in business with sought vengeance when deals went belly up ad they lost lots of money. These people had a blogger run a series of hit pieces on him. This resulted in court action by Blomfield. Court decisions and directives supported him. Despite this, and using the guise of being a foreign website these “affected” parties continued to press an escalating narrative that is evermore abusive, bullying and threatening.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  29th November 2015

      I’m not sure that it is escalating, traveller. I think “they” started pretty much as they have continued. Learning is probably not their strong suit. Also “they” may be more than a single group, changing from time to time?

      Reply
      • ‘They’ is a small number of people with some common interests (fucking over people for example) but a lot of conflicts between them as well.

        Reply
    • Blomfield was commercially compromised. There’s no evidence of that now. The only ethical compromising I’ve seen is via attacks on him by a small number of ex business partners and a few others who have become involved.

      The rest of what you say seems accurate.

      Reply
      • DaveG

         /  30th November 2015

        Pete, you are obviously influenced by Blomfield, and his impression on you. I have listened to the arguments, read the reports on his businesses and the ones he has been involved in, for many many years and i have briefly met him. I am lucky to have a high awareness or “radar” of people, and after briefly meeting Blomfield, every alarm was going off, and that was well before Slater wrote the first article on him.

        I have not met Slater or any of the assumed LF crew, but also read what they write regularly, my belief is they have it pretty right in that regard. (FYI I dont agree with everyhting LF writes, the piece on MikeC’s real name and family was not needed, but will quickly be forgotten as time passes) As I commented a while ago, why are so many people against Blomfield, Why – can anyone realistically answer that as it is overlooked. I’m sure its not that he burnt the pizza’s once too often,

        When there is smoke, people look at the smoke, point and “assume”. its more productive looking under the fire, working out why, what is fuelling it, where did the spark come from that caused it, not a reaction, but the root causes. This is what i suggest is asked and looked at – Why are so many against him, really and honestly. Im not providing clues, or ideas, just asking. I’m not here to attack you Pete, and I have nothing to gain or lose from the situation. Good luck! PS: I commented some time ago, will repeat it, perhaps its time to ask Otis?

        Reply
        • Pete, you are obviously influenced by Blomfield, and his impression on you.

          You are obviously making that up based on what? I’m influenced mainly by what I read in court judgments and papers and restraining orders. That they tend to support Blomfield and damn Slater and [Deleted as per court order]does impact on my view on things.

          I have not met Slater or any of the assumed LF crew, but also read what they write regularly, my belief is they have it pretty right in that regard.

          Have you read the Court of Appeal judgement? That was an embarrasment for Slater and [Deleted as per court order].
          Fave you read http://www.thepaepae.com/wp-uploads/2014/09/CIV-2013-404-005218.pdf ?

          Slater and [Deleted as per court order] get things wrong, badly, in court. That doesn’t give me any confidence in anything they say about this out of court.

          s I commented a while ago, why are so many people against Blomfield, Why – can anyone realistically answer that as it is overlooked.

          I ask you why so few peeople are ‘against Blomfield’? Can you substantiate “so many people”? Or are you perpetuating a lie?

          I have no idea who ‘Otis’ is.

          Reply
        • (FYI I dont agree with everyhting LF writes, the piece on MikeC’s real name and family was not needed, but will quickly be forgotten as time passes

          “Was not needed”? That is very faint condemnation, in fact it’s not condemnation, it’s little more than saying “too bad, not sad”.

          And “will quickly be forgotten as time passes” is fairly disgraceful to be frank. I know for a fact that the effect of Lauda Finem hit jobs can impact severely on victims for years. And they still have not seen justice done.

          DaveG, I’m quite apalled by your comments here that seem to be effectively in support of Lauda Finem’s actions, or at least uncaring about the impact.

          If they did you over in a post, exposing your family and lying about you, would you quickly forget it as time passes? No one but Antony Nottingham and perhaps his brothers are safe from being fucked over by Lauda Finem. Slatyer has been done over by them. Juana Atkins has been done over by them, I doubt she forgot about it quickly. So why would you think it wouldn’t happen to you?

          Reply
          • DaveG

             /  30th November 2015

            Pete. See my comments in the post you devoted to it, and to repeat Good Luck and adios.

            Reply
          • Liam

             /  30th November 2015

            How [Unacceptable – PG] can you be?

            Just wait until you wade into the dark web. Don’t forget your water wings!

            Reply
  9. SteveRemmington

     /  29th November 2015

    Person A through to Z

    With all these threats of litigation, threats of defamation proceedings, amateur legalese posts, doxing blog posters etc

    If you’ve got it then use it, file proceedings! If not then STFU.

    Fucking light-weights!

    Reply
    • Yes Steve I agree completely. This blog is a cut above the scurrilous garbage served up by the extremist Left and Right garbage being served up elsewhere. We should focus on the pursuit of Truth, and ignore gossip. speculation, offensive language and personal attacks, courtesy and good manners should be a hallmark of this blog and obscenity should be grounds for censorship. As my Dad taught me, those who need to use obscenities show their lack of education and an ability to express themselves concisely.

      Reply
      • Mike C

         /  29th November 2015

        @BJ

        If that’s the case … then how come we only see you in here hardly ever?

        Actually … pretty much never 🙂

        Reply
        • Rob

           /  29th November 2015

          Probably because some can say what they mean to say in one post, unlike yourself who posts 20 times and says nothing.

          Reply
      • Jeeves

         /  30th November 2015

        And let’s add ‘condescension’ to your list.

        Reply
  10. kittycatkin

     /  29th November 2015

    I think that we demonstrated yesterday that laughter has the same effect as sunlight on some people.

    Reply
  1. Blomfield lies | Your NZ
  2. Disgraceful dismissal of disgraceful behaviour | Your NZ

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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