Who could trust Jami-Lee Ross now?

Could any woman trust Jami-Lee Ross to be faithful and honest in a relationship?

Could any woman trust Jami-Lee Ross to not reveal private communications if a relationship turned sour?

Could any MP or politician or party official or party member or voter or colleague trust Jami-Lee Ross to be faithful and honest  as an MP?

Could any MP or politician or party official or party member or voter or colleague trust trust Jami-Lee Ross to not reveal private communications if a relationship turned sour?

Could anyone trust Jami-Lee Ross not to secretly record communications for the purpose of using against you in the future?

Trust is probably more scarce than votes would be if Ross stood for re-election.

The only ones who appear to be standing by Ross are those who seem to think he can be used for their political purposes. Such as Winston Peters and NZ First.

Cameron Slater was full on using Ross before that abruptly ended when he had his stroke, Simon Lusk was also involved – he is known to have worked with both Slater and Ross in the past. And is on record as getting a thrill out of trashing people’s careers and or lives.

I think that whoever is involved in the current operation to return Ross to parliament and keep him in his electorate there is very little that can be trusted about them.

And – isn’t a bit coincidental that at the same time as Ross is accusing someone of inciting him to suicide, Whale Oil has been doing exactly the same thing in relation to Slater?

Leave a comment

75 Comments

  1. Mother

     /  26th January 2019

    “The only ones who appear to be standing by Ross are those who seem to think he can be used for their political purposes. Such as Winston peters and NZ First.”

    Nope. I’m not in politics and I know nobody closely in politics.

    PG, question Mr Ross’ trustworthiness as an MP yes – but don’t question his integrity as a family man. That is hitting too low. Give them a chance.

    There are many people in Parliament who are untrustworthy. It seems that being untrustworthy is how they climb the ladder. Mr Ross is a symptom, not a cause.

    If being untrustworthy is how they got there, what does that say about the voters? If you want to hit low on Mr Ross why not call out all of us? We are a democracy.

    Reply
    • “but don’t question his integrity as a family man”

      I strongly question his integrity as a family man. In my mind someone who has an affair for more than two years and also appear to have had relationships with other women, has no integrity as a family man. He has clearly put his own agendas and interests ahead of his wife and children. Totally untrustworthy.

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        Yes, but you don’t call out the adulterous women. Why is it so one sided?

        Reply
        • Duker

           /  26th January 2019

          Its clear from the text that this post is pushing the national partys point of view and its not attempting to be fair.

          Reply
          • I have no idea what the National Party’s point if view is on this.

            Can you provide any evidence of what the National Party’s view is? And any evidence of me knowing what it is?

            Or are you just making this up? It’s ironic that you accuse me of dirty politics here.

            Reply
        • “Yes, but you don’t call out the adulterous women. Why is it so one sided?’

          Because this post is about Ross. I have done a different post focusing on Dowie, where I have done quite a bit of calling out of her behaviour.

          I don’t think she is trustworthy relationship-wise either.

          But as far as I know she hasn’t secretly recorded her leader, or revealed private communications to the media, or dumped big time on the party that provided her with a pathway into Parliament via safe seat.

          Ross has proven to be untrustworthy both in personal relationships and with political relationships.

          I’m not going to ever have anything to do with either personally, but the political trust is of interest because it is public business.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  26th January 2019

            Peter Dunne made a career out of providing secret info to the media- even got caught out once- and that involved a much younger woman journalist. Look where he is now

            Reply
            • That assertion is unsubstantiated, and has no relevance to this post. You seem to be flailing around a bit here, but you’re getting further off topic.

              Do you think Ross can be trusted in politics? If so who do you think would trust him, or which party?

        • High Flying Duck

           /  26th January 2019

          JLR couldn’t even be faithful to the person he was having an affair with.
          He has proven to be untrustworthy with private communications, relationships and the truth. There is no redeeming feature to him at this time. He is even using his mental health as a hammer to attack others with.
          As for Dowie, it seems clear no one has jumped to her defense, her marriage ended, her support staff abandoned her and her political career is in tatters. Did you want her tarred and feathered as well?

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  26th January 2019

            ‘Did you want her tarred and feathered as well?’…you are ..kinky…

            Her resignation…will do.

            Reply
          • Joe Bloggs

             /  26th January 2019

            as I recall Dowie txted Ross saying that he “deserved to die”.

            That’s not a million miles away from §306 of the Crimes Act – threatening to kill or do grievous bodily harm.

            To be sure, the charge wouldn’t stand up in court as the Crown would have to prove two elements: firstly, that a threat of death has been made in relation to a person, and secondly, that the threatener intends the threat to be taken seriously. And the txt message doesn’t substantively satisfy either element.

            But as for casting herself as a victim that’s patently far-fetched and self-serving.

            A charge brought under §306 of the Crimes Act is punishable with imprisonment for up to 7 years. Tarring and feathering at least a portion of Dowie’s anatomy would not be entirely a bad thing.

            Reply
          • Mother

             /  27th January 2019

            Compared with Ms Dowie’s hissy fit to the media, apparently because the affair resulted in dashed hopes for herself, Mr Ross was the most honorable and faithful!

            Tarred and feathered? Why would any of us wish that on any one?

            Reply
    • I don’t think he has any integrity, at all, let alone as a family man, that disappeared long ago.
      Multiple affairs don’t suggest integrity.

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        I’m thinking of his wife and children. Give them a chance! Why are we so quick to harshly criticise when what is needed most of all is compassion?

        There’s only one person who has any right to question his integrity as a family man and that is his wife.

        Stop making the kind of calls that even the most experienced and intelligent counsellor would dare to touch.

        Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        You can not know his integrity. It is his credibility in the moment that is in question.

        Reply
    • Blazer

       /  26th January 2019

      to judge a mans integrity you only need to look at his…toes.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  26th January 2019

        Eh?

        Reply
      • Corky

         /  26th January 2019

        Post a picture of your toes.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  26th January 2019

          😮

          Pervert ! 😡

          😀

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  26th January 2019

            If the women he had affairs with had told him to naff off, there’d be no story.

            Reply
            • Duker

               /  26th January 2019

              Sounds like they were throwing themselves at him ?
              Women do like a man in suit with a high status job and expense account

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              I don’t know about that, but would guess that the atmosphere would be highly charged.

              What could he have done if they’d said ‘Thank you, but no thank you ?’

              I must say that a man in a good suit looks good. But unless he raped them, they have nothing to complain about. He was married and everyone knew it. It takes two to have an affair, and the odds are good that it will end in tears. If you know that his chances of leaving his wife are zero, keep away.

            • Mother

               /  27th January 2019

              If only NZ had been spared this horrid story! However, I think there must be a reason it’s being told.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  27th January 2019

              I wonder if someone who’s been abandoned feels the need to prove that they are attractive….and to break if off before the other person does.

          • MaureenW

             /  26th January 2019

            Doesn’t matter who did what first, or whether one party was more persistent than the other. They both participated – they’re equally accountable to their families, their electorates and their party.
            A pair of tossers who should be tossed out. Move on.

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              Any woman who sleeps with a man who has a wife and family can’t whine when he ends the affair. As these were all consenting adults, and all the women knew that he was married and that he was highly unlikely to leave the wife and children for them, they should shut up and move on.

            • alloytoo

               /  26th January 2019

              If you’re sleeping with a married person, that person* is by definition a cheating swine/bitch.

              * The only exception is those people who are legally separated awaiting a divorce.

  2. Loki

     /  26th January 2019

    He is unemployable.
    At 33 he has destroyed himself and is now lashing out trying to take others with him.
    He has surrounded himself with scumbags and is done.
    He will do anything he can to hang on until the next election because he knows he will NEVER get paid as much as he does now.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  26th January 2019

      ”He is unemployable.”

      And that’s at the hub of his mental issues in my opinion. The thought of going from a well paid pampered puppy to a council worker on the end of a shovel is just too much to contemplate. Especially now that he realises all the wrong decisions he made..and how he may have been manipulated by others.

      Honestly, if I was in his situation, I to would be feeling decidedly unwell, especially after reading my bank statement showing my last big government pay..followed the next week with my first Job Seekers benefit entitlements.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  26th January 2019

        doesn’t he qualify for the Parliamentary golden parachute after 9 years?

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  26th January 2019

          No, I don’t think so. He falls just short ? Someone may be able to enlighten us.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  26th January 2019

            he won a by election before the 2011 election, so that would mean it would be 3 terms if he lasts till the next election.
            But I think the pension payout now is just related to what they paid in ( with generous subsidies) and not the old 9 years timeline.
            Its probable its his own private super scheme as thats the sort of thing the nats go in for , usually to leverage property investments.

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  26th January 2019

              Thanks for the enlightenment. However, we didn’t need a party political.

        • There is no such thing for anyone who became an MP this century.

          Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      Harsh. Too harsh. Perhaps money is important to him. Perhaps not.

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        Often we don’t know our true motives until further down the track. Yet some presume to know a man’s motives in the here and now.

        What were the motives of the women caught up in his wrong choices?

        Reply
  3. Duker

     /  26th January 2019

    Who is writing this stuff ?
    “And – isn’t a bit coincidental that at the same time as Ross is accusing someone of inciting him to suicide”

    …. accusing ‘someone’ we are way past ‘someone’ its Sarah Dowie

    Yet yesterdays posts said Ross HASNT made a police complaint on this matter.
    “The fact of the police investigation was revealed by Ross during a television interview. It was apparently sparked by a call to the Crimestoppers hotline. Ross said he did not lay the complaint.”

    At the moment this post is reading like its written by someone in the national party as part of their dirty politics style pushback against Ross- while keeping their hand in it hidden

    Reply
    • Ross said he is working with the police on the complaint, so has supported the complaint while distancing himself from the making of the complaint (but I don’t think complicity can be ruled out).

      Obviously the ‘someone’ is Dowie – that hardly needed pointing out, an that isn’t relevant to the point I was making.

      So you are really accusing me of posting something written by someone in the National party but am hiding my hand or their hand in it?

      Is the post at The Standard written dirty politics style pushback against Ross? What about all the other social media and media articles critical of Ross?

      You’re jumping the shark a bit.

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  26th January 2019

        It certainly ‘reads like something the national party would like published’

        Cooperating with the police- is that too a character flaw

        Im betting that Dowie will refuse to speak to police .

        Reply
        • So you have nothing on what the National Party might publish nor any connection with that me. You’re making up accusations.

          Any person under investigation has a right to not cooperate with the police. That is a fundamental part of our law.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  26th January 2019

            No if they want to stay in national party caucus… they are a law and order party are they not , not a place for sheltering people who were involved in a crime with a serious sentence.
            I remember even John Banks made a police statement when he was being investigated by police.
            ACT expelled Donna Huata once she refused to cooperate with police.

            Dowie has no place in parliament if she wants to climb on the high horse of legal protections for criminals

            Reply
            • Duker

               /  26th January 2019

              Heres a former KPMG partner, former President Wellington Racing Club accused of misappropriating funds
              As he wouldnt cooperate with NZ Institute of Chartered Accountants investigation , he has been SUSPENDED, while they investigate further.
              https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/110156954/racing-figure-suspected-of-misappropriating-funds-over-a-number-of-years
              Could a judge stay on the bench if they exercised their right to silence in an investigation . of course not.

              Parliamentarians are our supreme lawmakers, so they are held to a very high standard. Not cooperating with police means its bye bye.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              In the context, I’d say that it could well be trying to push someone into committing suicide, especially as it’s highly unlikely that this happened in isolation.

              Hell hath no Fury like a woman scorned.

              I’ll say.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              Heav’n has no Rage like Love to Hatred turn’d/Nor Hell a Fury like a Woman scorn’d.

              Congreve.

              I always forget the first line. It’s as true now as it was 300+ years ago.

      • Duker

         /  26th January 2019

        Your format for post was marketly different to the type you over welhimgly use.
        Hosting uses national party talking points in his blurbs, can’t be a coincidence

        Reply
        • Duker

           /  26th January 2019

          Wouldn’t be a surprise next week when Hosting starts to make much the same JLR points as you have used.
          Of course he won’t be verbatim, but cover the same ground.
          I’ll be keeping an eye out for them.

          Reply
          • Wouldn’t be surprised if I do something about you repeatedly making baseless insinuations. You’ve chosen a very poor fight to make your move.

            People all through media and across blogs, from Whale Oil to Kiwiblog to The Standard are saying similar things about Ross. That’s a massive conspiracy you’re suggesting, unless you’re only targeting me – if so it’s as ridiculous as it is stupid.

            Reply
            • Conspiratoor

               /  27th January 2019

              “You’ve chosen a very poor fight to make your move

              Kinda the way I’ve been thinking as well…

        • How much more of a dick of yourself are you going to make?

          And now you’re making baseless accusations about I presume Mike Hosking? Some conspiracy theory.

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  27th January 2019

            Sadly, when public figures behave so badly as to cause a distraction from the real business of government, individuals are inclined to react personally by becoming more fearful, stressed, suspicious….

            Trust is so important. I trust PG simply because he returned to me my freedom of speech at a time when my anxiety could have put him off. Initially some people reacted with fear toward my testimony, to the extent of perceiving conspiracy. Even after several weeks there remains one person who attacks me instead of respecting my viewpoint.

            I think Duker’s perceptions are valid. I also think PG, as I know him as YourNZ’ host, has responded in kind. I trust both men.

            I think that PG could try to be more open minded about the issues around the Ross and co saga but I doubt very much he is sneakily ‘siding with National.’

            I wish I could be in the position of standing up for my fellow women. Instead, I side with Mr Ross because he is the bravest emotionally. Everyone has their own emotional burden, along with political bias, to bring to any issue. I generally find PG very non partisan. I think he has a servant heart, is honest and shares a great blog.

            Reply
      • Duker

         /  27th January 2019

        “Is the post at The Standard written dirty politics style pushback against Ross?

        Ive just read their Sara Dowie story again. Hardly mention Ross, as hes only a minor part of the Dowie story , certainly not a whole detail on his ‘future’ – which to you is 10 x woe.

        Reply
  4. Duker

     /  26th January 2019

    “Could anyone trust Jami-Lee Ross not to secretly record communications for the purpose of using against you in the future?”

    hello ….wasnt this the nub of the Todd Barclay events, of course he was in addition recording others conversations that he wasnt a party too -thats a crime in the crimes act

    The posts on Yournz dismissed at that as no evidence ( The police had plenty of evidence , it just wasnt in public interest they said)
    https://yournz.org/2017/10/30/no-charges-after-todd-barclay-re-investigation/

    But no condemnation about Todd Barclays ‘future’ after he was revealed as a secret recorder.
    “But some people and the media seem intent on driving this as much as they can”.
    https://yournz.org/2017/06/27/threats-of-private-prosecution/

    Whats changed ?

    Reply
    • You said “The police had plenty of evidence , it just wasnt in public interest they said”

      Stuff via your link: “Police have now closed the case as they have insufficient evidence”

      And you are cherry picking (inaccurately) from a couple of the many posts I did on Barclay. This is from one:

      “There is no excuse for the other main person involved, Glenys Dickson, being recorded (possibly illegally), and the lack of honesty and forthrightness from both Barclay and English will understandably have annoyed some people.”

      https://yournz.org/2017/06/23/more-on-the-barclay-saga/

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  26th January 2019

        The stuff link is wrong .
        I realise you are a busy guy with links to various things but news reports cant be ‘incomplete’
        http://www.police.govt.nz/news/release/outcome-re-investigation-todd-barclay-allegations

        “After a thorough review of all information available to us, including legal advice both internal and from Crown Law, plus consideration of the Solicitor General’s prosecution guidelines, Police has determined that there is no change to the outcome of the original investigation.”

        Solitictor generals guidelines dont cover ‘lack of evidence’

        So how did Stuff come up with phrase ?
        “In that first investigation no search warrants were sought or executed as there was insufficient evidence to seek such warrants

        The Solicitor general Guidelines arent a manual and are more aspirational – his words.
        but the interesting part about evidence is

        Only evidence which is or reliably will be available, and
        legally admissible, can be taken into account in reaching
        a decision to prosecute.
        Prosecutors should seek to anticipate even without pretrial
        matters being raised whether it is likely that
        evidence will be admitted or excluded by the Court. For
        example, is it foreseeable that the evidence will be
        excluded because of the way it was obtained? If so,
        prosecutors must consider whether there is sufficient
        other evidence for a reasonable prospect of conviction.

        When you read them all especially this
        “Public interest considerations against prosecution
        5.9.1 Where the Court is likely to impose a very small or nominal penalty;
        5.9.2 Where the loss or harm can be described as minor and was the result of a
        single incident, particularly if it was caused by an error of judgement or a
        genuine mistake;
        5.9.3 Where the offence is not on any test of a serious nature, and is unlikely to be
        repeated;

        of course they still prosecute people in these circumstances all the time
        http://www.crownlaw.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Prosecution-Guidelines/ProsecutionGuidelines2013.pdf

        Reply
        • You’re the one who linked to a Stuff report and claimed something contrary to what it said.

          “I realise you are a busy guy with links to various things”

          I don’t have links to various things. What I do here is completely independent of anyone or any organisation or group. The only ‘links’ I have are with people who participate here, and elsewhere openly under my name in social media.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  26th January 2019

            Police didn’t say directly ‘closed the case because of lack of evidence’
            It was SG guidelines, which covers many things

            Reply
    • Blazer

       /  26th January 2019

      Whats changed ?

      the Govt….the bar is set much higher for this one.

      Reply
  5. PartisanZ

     /  26th January 2019

    “Who could trust Jamie-Lee Ross now?”

    That was the idea, wasn’t it?

    Reply
    • PartisanZ

       /  26th January 2019

      No electoral law reform … No investigation into Chinese influence …

      Reply
  6. Gezza

     /  26th January 2019

    Reply
  7. Mother

     /  26th January 2019

    A Stuff piece by Graham Adams –

    “They clearly underestimated him and, like much of the media, appear baffled by someone who doesn’t play by their rules. In fact, his difficult background may be the best way of understanding his kamikaze response to Bridges and Bennett deciding to muscle him out.”

    He doesn’t play by ‘their rules’. I like that.

    ‘Their rules’ stink. We need more people like Mr Ross in government. I didn’t say we need adulterers and manipulators like Mr Ross. I said we need more people like him.

    If SB, PB and Ms Dowie do not step down soon, then Mr Ross has certainly earned his right to stay.

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      In fact, in my effervescent hopeful kind of way, I think it would be great if Mr Ross was successful as an Independent for a while.

      Meanwhile SB, PB and Ms Dowie could be resigned to history. Then National could invite Mr Ross back (and all of them free from manipulative political nutcrackers.)

      Dreams are free I know, but I see no reason why it could not be this way.

      Has anyone pondered how hard it is for a man to stand his ground when he is so bad morally, under the leadership of people who are just as bad? From that point of view, it gives Mr Ross immediate credibility.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  26th January 2019

        Dreams are free I know, but I see no reason why it could not be this way.
        The biggest difficulty with why it could be this way is that there would be very few people who would ever trust Ross again. Not a dog’s show of being possible.

        Reply
  8. alloytoo

     /  26th January 2019

    Ross is unemployable to any sane sensible person.

    Reply
    • duperez

       /  26th January 2019

      Maybe he’ll get a job in the tobacco industry or is that what you do before becoming an MP rather than after?

      Reply

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