“Either Dermot Nottingham is Lauda Finem…or he is so intimately related to it…”

“Either Dermot Nottingham is Lauda Finem (in other words, the leading mind of that blog) or he is so intimately related to it that it is proper to conclude that he provided information and draft articles to that blog site knowing and intending that they would be published.”

“He makes the concession…that he has never denied that he has supplied information to the website…”

Following a jury trial in the District Court in Auckland in April and May 2018  Dermot Nottingham was convicted of two breaches of non-publication orders, and five charges of criminal harassment. He was sentenced to a term of a maximum one year home detention. See NZH Blogger dodges prison over court suppression breaches, harassment campaigns

The offending largely involved a website laudafinem.com that has a notorious reputation for posting many breaches of suppression as well as numerous attacks on many people, including judges, lawyers, police officers, pooliticians, journalists, business people (and businesses), and individuals – including me and two individuals who participated here.

I think that there is public interest in Nottingham’s connection with laudafinem.com be made known, as many people have been subjected to attacks and defamation.

Open justice is an important part of our country.

From a court document that is a public document (not yet available online):

[13] The detective sergeant’s efforts to establish links between Mr Nottingham and the Lauda Finem website led to an expansion of the investigation once he discovered a number of Lauda Finem articles which indicated several campaigns of harassment against individuals identified in those articles.

Conduct included:

  • Repetitively publishing articles on Lauda Finem containing fictitious, offensive and defamatory material.
  • Repetitively publishing articles on Lauda Finem about associates and family members containing fictitious, offensive and defamatory material about those persons.
  • Obtaining private photographs of the complainants and family and publishing those on Lauda Finem.
  • Photographing or causing to be photographed for publication on Lauda Finem.
  • Recording communications for publication on Lauda Finem m conjunction with offensive and defamatory material.

[18] It was clear to me that, for some of the complainants, life over an extended period of time had been made very uncomfortable and distressing, in some cases affecting the daily lives of some complainants whose reputations in their community had been so badly maligned as to cause them to withdraw within themselves.

[22] Now, I make some findings of fact. Consistent with the verdicts of the jury I have concluded that between 2010 and 2015 Dermot Nottingham published or had published numerous articles on the blog site laudafinem.com. Either Dermot Nottingham is Lauda Finem (in other words, the leading mind of that blog) or he is so intimately related to it that it is proper to conclude that he provided information and draft articles to that blog site knowing and intending that they would be published.

[23] During that five year period the defendant undertook numerous campaigns of harassment against a number of individuals, the most egregious and persistent of which were represented by the five complainants in the trial. I concluded that his conduct by publishing said articles, through other intimidating and harassing conduct – including threatening, watching, photographing, following – was either carried out directly by Dermot Nottingham or at his direction and that he knew his conduct was likely to cause the individuals to fear for their safety or the safety of family members.

[24] It was plain to me from the evidence that a number of these courses of conduct started with Mr Nottingham crossing the path of the individual complainant, either in his own capacity or on behalf of another individual, acting as their advocate. Initially, it is possible in some instances that Mr Nottingham reasonably believed he had legitimate concerns or complaints. However, rather than pursuing those complaints by lawful and reasonable means, he adopted a combative approach, I have to say reminiscent of his approach generally to the authorities and even to this Court, where he sought to achieve his goals or obtain justice by resorting to personal attack. Mr Nottingham seems to believe that, when it comes to informal media through blog sites and social media, “anything goes”.

[25] It is important to recognise and note at this stage that mainstream media are subject to codes of conduct which avoid the type of abusive and threatening articles being published in mainstream media, but bloggers and other persons who carry out their personal attacks through the medium of the Internet seem to feel that they are not bound by similar moral codes of conduct. Mr Nottingham seeks to justify and make
lawful his conduct towards others by reference to the conduct of other bloggers who habitually take an aggressive and attacking approach in purporting to uncover corruption and injustice. Further, Dermot Nottingham seeks to argue that the prosecution of him discloses bias and unfairness on the part of the police, the Crown and the Court, because others are doing similar things and getting away with it.

[26] I proceed on the basis that two wrongs do not make a right. Individuals can never escape the consequences of their unlawful conduct simply by pointing to someone else who is similarly acting unlawfully. It must also be said in the context of the evidence in this case that the degree of attack, abuse, harassment and its relentless nature appears to be far worse in Dermot Nottingham’s case than in the examples he relies upon to claim unfair and biased treatment.

[28] …The Crown submits that the key purpose of sentencing in this case should be to hold the offender accountable for the harm done to the victims, to denounce his conduct and to deter him and others from offending in a similar manner. I accept that those purposes apply in this case.

[29] The Crown further proposes that there are a number of aggravating features to the criminal harassment charges, namely the extent of the harm. The allegations against the complainants included that that they were alcoholics, used drugs, were promiscuous or were corrupt professionals and public officials. The Crown characterised the language used by Mr Nottingham as malicious, misogynistic and entirely abhorrent. Without the need for me to repeat any of those specific offensive allegations, I concur with the summary of Mr Nottingham’s conduct. I also accept that those aggravating features are present.

[31] The third aggravating feature as proposed by the Crown is that the offender, Dermot Nottingham, clearly researched his targets extensively and published intimate and personal details, including making reference to friends and family, photographs of homes and cars and their licence plates. The level of research and preparation for a number of these articles demonstrates, the Crown says, a high degree of premeditation.

[32] Finally, the Crown submits that another aggravating feature, being the number and seriousness of the offences, is present, relating not only to the number of complainants, but also the persistence and time over which that harassment was carried out or continued. I accept that all three of those aggravating features are present in this case and to a high degree.

[38] I turn now to Mr Nottingham’s position, or his submissions on sentencing. In his written submissions, Dermot Nottingham, as I have previously indicated, relies on the proposition that the Lauda Finem website treated the complainant no differently to anyone else it reports on; for instance, like Mr Slater does on his website. He makes the concession at paragraph 32 of his submissions that he has never denied that he has supplied information to the website, although he maintains his denial that he is the leading mind of that website or has any significant control over its operators

[40] On the subject of cumulative sentences, Mr Nottingham simply states that is not appropriate. Further, he submits that imprisonment is not appropriate and he seeks to focus on the behaviours of the complainants, presumably to suggest that his conduct towards them was, at some level, justifiable.

[42] Not only does such a statement reinforce the contempt with which
Mr Nottingham holds the decisions of the Court and the non-publication orders, but establishes beyond doubt that Mr Nottingham harbours no sense of remorse in relation to any of this offending.

[52]  Mr Nottingham does not qualify for any consideration of reduction of sentence for guilty pleas, or indeed for remorse. He has doggedly defended the allegations and required the complainants to give evidence. Although this does not add to the sentence I impose, it highlights why Mr Nottingham is not entitled to any discount for remorse or acceptance.

[53] In his written submissions, Mr Nottingham makes it plain that he disagrees with the findings of the jury and challenges many of the rulings of the Court. As is characteristic of his approach to legal proceedings, I anticipate that Mr Nottingham will pursue all avenues of review and appeal and is unlikely ever to accept that what he did was not only unlawful, but reprehensible.

[59] Mr Nottingham, the message to you and to others by way of deterrence is that “anything goes” is wrong. The right to free speech or freedom of expression is not a paramount right. It must be balanced against the competing rights of others in the community to be free from harassment, to be protected from harm by others who malign, abuse, threaten and undermine their peace and safety. Your activities were not harmless. Nor were they justified by your sense of injustice or unfairness. They were destructive of good order and good human relations. They were misconceived and wholly disproportionate to the harm or injustice that you believed you and others had suffered.

Given his extensive record Nottingham is likely to appeal everything he can. The Crown may also appeal the sentence – they sought a substantial prison sentence.

There are also some important lessons for bloggers in the judge’s comments.

“He makes the concession…that he has never denied that he has supplied information to the website…”

I dispute that, but that’s for another story.

I will note however that on the Lauda Finem website it was often denied that ‘Team LF’ included people in New Zealand, even though it was obvious they used a large amount of New Zealand sourced material, their posts were almost exclusively New Zealand subjects, and their campaigns had things in common with campaigns on other websites.

Nottingham has not been acting alone in all of this (the court suggested a prominent role), but associates are for another story.

The laudafinem.com website started up in July 2010, and was shut down by a New Zealand court order in late 2016. Another site was set up but ceased activity in March 2017.


NOTE: This case was subject to suppression (non-publication orders) – and the private prosecutions of myself and three others were also bound by this. I have been advised by the court that this suppression lapsed on the sentencing of Nottingham.

However the case involves other cases that are still subject to non-publication orders (suppressed), so details on them must not be published.

Due to on-going suppression orders comments here will be strictly moderated. Do not try to identify anyone who is not named in the quotes from the court document here in any way.

@Laudafinem splutters again

I don’t usually bother about what @Laudafinem is doing, they block me which suits because I’m not interested in what they are trying to do.

But someone alerted me to them having a dirty splutter at me last week so I checked,  and saw that they must follow things closely here. Someone had mentioned them in a comment in relation to the Stephen Dudley case, and they reacted.

LFtweet100percent

Very funny, but probably unintentional.

They did make some valid points about the Dudley case, but as is typical they went way over the top with baseless allegations and conspiracy theories, and couldn’t do anything about it.

The LF website may have been sometimes right but their reputation is mostly for being malicious, defamatory nut job conspiracy theorists and gutless anonymous cowards.

In another tweet the named four people, saying “one by one they’ve all fallen to LF’s sword – as will the others​ you’ve backed “.

LF are like waving a paper sword in the rain – they can’t front (or won’t) front up in a New Zealand jurisdiction because of the legal jeopardy their actions have put themselves into. All they can do is rant anonymously from somewhere on the other side of the world. I presume this is why they seem to have been 100% wrong about overturn the legal shut down of their website – they can’t front up without putting themselves at risk.

They also tweeted:

LFTellTheTruth

My ‘kiwi cabal’ is one of their conspiracy theories. They have accused me of working for and  the GCSB, the police, business people, bloggers, media and journalists when all i do is independently run a blog.

Truth and LF are only occasional acquaintances. And they react badly when I expose the truth about them – they tend to get more ludicrous with their claims and accusations.

I believe that @laudafinem may be operated by an Antony Nottingham from the Netherlands – I haven’t seen that denied by them.

They often contradict their own claims – they say they have no New Zealand connections, but have often bragged about informants and associations.

@MarcSpring still openly associates with them on Twitter, is still the registrant of laudafinem.co.nz, and posts and comments on their website often sounded very similar to his style – I got to know and recognise his MO when he commented here under various pseudonyms.

Spring’s aim was to shut this site down because he didn’t like being exposed, or because he is just malicious.

He had help from Dermot Nottingham and Cameron Slater was also involved, but I presume now that Slater is getting good legal advice he has distanced himself from these legal idiots. Spring filed a court against me and this site in 2015 but failed to follow basic procedures set down by the Harmful Digital Communications Act, used law that didn’t come into effect until a year later, and was thrown out as soon as this was advised to the Court.

See Court order discharged – that was one that LF got 100% wrong – in fact they have been closer to 100% wrong about a lot of things from what I’ve seen.

(Dermot) Nottingham also tried a private prosecution against me – see Notice: Private Prosecution – another 100% failure.

LF have tried to dig dirt on me but failed, hence they resorted to making things up. Which makes it likely a lot of other things they have claimed are made up. And they have dug themselves into a legal hole – if they ever find a way out of that there are likely to be quite a few lawyers ready to act.

So they are left ranting in a small dark corner where very few notice, and then splutter when exposed.

They failed to comprehend that ‘justice campaigners’ actually need to understand how justice works, and what is just. They may have had some good intentions sometimes, but they are just idiots, albeit malicious ones.

They are usually best ignored but sometimes I think it’s worth confronting their bull and their bullying.

They could take note their own message – “tell the truth or eventually someone will tell it for you” – but may not get it. They are more likely to just splutter again. Fools in futility.

Lauda Finem down

It looks like the Lauda Finem website has been taken down:

LFDown.jpg

Lauda Finem has confirmed:

Lauda Finem have been advised our domain name has been transferred to a New Zealand Barrister & thus jurisdiction.

This is great, about time serious action was taken against them.

They had indicated in a couple of posts they were subject to a High Court order, and stupidly appear to have breached that order before going down. Publicly attacking the judge is not the smartest of responses.

Despite their claims about being ‘justice campaigners’ and international whistle blowers and having no connection to New Zealand their posts were just about exclusively targeting New Zealand issues and New Zealand people (literally hundreds) and what they posted on happened to coincide with the interests of a small number of people in New Zealand.

They frequently contradicted their own claims.

They blatantly breached suppression orders, they made numerous false accusations, some of them quite extreme, and they abused and smeared many people.

Despite targeting a number of judges, police officers and lawyers it seems to have taken the initiative and determination of one private citizen to deal to them.

They (LF) have claimed it is some sort of an attack on free speech but they were amongst the of the dirtiest abusers of free speech I have encountered. They have exercised none of the responsibilities that a responsible site would have.

This is unlikely to be the end of the matter. They have said they will try to set up an alternative site but that would appear to be in breach of the court order.

At this stage I don’t want anyone named here so please don’t.

Vendettas and death notices

Cameron Slater has claimed he has had death threats as a result of the news onslaught yesterday.

I hope Judge McIlraith is watching the comments, the death threats have started. He didn’t think this was such a problem.

 

original

While it could be perceived as a threat of violence it doesn’t go as far as being a death threat, but is nasty it is unfortunately not uncommon talk online.

Something that was apparent yesterday was Slater’s continued association with Lauda Finem.

Two days ago LF posted an attack on  Ben Rachinger and others, and blatantly included information subject to court ordered suppression, and some of that suppression is still in force. There are not many possible sources for the judgment they published in full (actually it was a first version of the judgment that was corrected).

Then remarkably early yesterday LF published a media statement from Slater that also breached suppression. That seems certain to have been sourced from Slater.

After several hours it was taken down, in itself remarkable as the previous day LF refused to amend a false claim they made about Bradley Ambrose. This suggests preferential treatment for Slater at LF.

Then this exchange appeared on Twitter:

LFSpringTwitter

Spring coughing over vendettas alongside tweets involving Slater and LF is more than a little ironic.

Talking of vendettas this comment appeared on LF about the same time as the Slater statement appeared (overnight Monday):

DeathNoticeRedacted

Redacted comments breach the law and make false claims.

I don’t think that was Slater, but that’s the sort of people and website he associates and utilises. And that’s a more serious implication of a death threat than what he complained about.

I condemn any threats, implied or otherwise, of violence or death, including against Slater.

I wonder if Slater would likewise openly condemn the threat aimed at me, and ask his friends to take down this threat like his statement was taken down.

Whale Oil bail out

Whale Oil is again asking for donations to bail Cameron Slater out of more legal costs.

This could be avoided by dealing with some basic legal responsibilities but Slater chooses to continue to dig himself into legal holes, then asks for help to pay his way out of the inevitable costs.

Cam needs your money

by Whaleoil Staff on February 21, 2016 at 9:00am

There, that’s blunt enough.

Can’t tell you why.

If you go to other blogs, you probably know why.  If you read some of the media, you may know why.

But we can’t tell you why on THIS blog.

Such are the strange machinations of the law.

Cam has been on the receiving end of a court decision – which we can not discuss, so don’t – and with fines and costs he’s once again looking at a $10k bill to clear.

We decided that this wasn’t your problem, and of course, normally one has to explain in detail why one is asking for help.

So we decided to just tough it out.

Somehow, we always manage.

That’s until last night when one of our commenters, unsolicited I might add, asked if Cam might need some money to pay off some surprise bills.

I more or less explained the same thing – that we can’t talk about it as talking about it simply would incur even more costs, so we decided to keep our heads down and eat some crow.  Swallow a rat.  And chase it with some bile.

But people insisted that this would be something they want to help out with, even though we can’t say what it is about, they either knew through OTHER MEDIA (yep!) or simply find the call for funds enough – no publicly stated reason needed.   Such is their valuable trust.

Anyway, at the request of Whaleoil supporters, please consider helping Cam Slater out, in a personal capacity. This has nothing to do with the blog.

If you want to know why, that’s the whole stupid point, we can’t tell you without risking more bills.

But if you know, or you trust us, and want to take the pressure off Cam, then this is the account that will gladly take your personal gift to him.

That probably relates to Blogger Cameron Slater fined for ‘reckless’ article amendments about businessman.

So what would personal gifts of money to Slater be supporting? According to this posted at The Daily Blog :

BlomfieldAdams1

BlomfieldAdams2

BlomfieldAdams3

Note: Bradbury spouts nonsense in his post but this appears to be provided material.

I don’t know how accurate these claims are but they don’t sound out the ordinary for some of the people involved, from my own experiences here and elsewhere, and from claims by others who have contacted me.

And consider this comment at Lauda Finem, a site that often seems to have a close interest in matters related Whale Oil:

That brings us to the subject of Matthew John Blomfield, a master of exactly this type of con-job. Blomfield and his exploits are of course well known to LF and Whale Oil’s regular readers.

Again from my own experience a lot of claims and accusations made by Lauda Finem are fabricated lies and bizarre conspiracies (I expect that in their next attack on me they will accuse me of faking the moon landings and being an alien).

Getting back to Blomfield’s job vacancy above, in our humble opinion he appears to have omitted a couple of pretty important qualities, traits that any assistant working with him would almost certainly need to possess in order to be successful in working for Blomfield. The first and most important would certainly be the ability to field phone calls from deep-throated heavy-breathing individuals that refuse to give a name or leave a message, and the occasional death threat, without getting too emotionally involved or distraught.

This could be the sort of thing that Blomfield refers to that stinks.

Slater isn’t getting much help with his troubles with comments like that.

LF sometimes say they have no association with Slater but their posts frequently contradict many of their claims.

Slater’s bail out fund raising seems to me to be much of his own making, exacerbated by his stubbornness and the poor advice he seems to receive.

DISCLOSURE: Lauda Finem have made many accusations about me in relation to conspiracies involving business people, bloggers, media, real estate agents, police, the court and chem trails (ok, I made the last one up but that’s how ridiculous things are).

‘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.

 

[Precautionary delete] and Lauda Finem

Lauda Finem is a website that has mainly New Zealand orientated content and is clearly targeting a New Zealand audience. It has a reputation for personal attacks, lying and defamation, with potentially hundreds of people amongst the targets.

Disclosure: I have been a target of Lauda Finem and have been subject to attacks in several posts that contain a number of blatantly false claims and I believe it sometimes amounts to defamation.

In my opinion they have a long record of making false accusations and making despicable attacks, and theer seems to be a lot  intimidatory and threatening behaviour. And they commonly accuse others of doing exactly what they themselves are doing.

This post plus a more detailed post shows to some degree how closely associated [Precautionary delete] has been with the Lauda Finem website. How close is up to you to judge, from Lauda Finem’s own words.

In August Lauda Finem claimed:

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.

I think that is at the very least very misleading. One could quibble over what “member of team LF” means exactly.  ‘Foreign based’ means nothing, this site could claim to be foreign based or hosted (like Lauda Finem is).

But it’s clear that Lauda Finem have had a close interest in New Zealand based issues and have paid close attention to people in New Zealand, and have paid comparatively little attention to anything or anyhone outside New Zealand.

And if as some believe that [Precautionary delete]’s brother Antony is the only significant ‘team LF’ member who resides overseas then the claim that all members of the ‘team’ have never lived in New Zealand is suspect.

I have asked @laudafinem directly if he/she is Antony Nottingham and they have avoided answering, more than once. I don’t recall seeing any specific denial that Antony Nottingham is the overseas ‘owner’.

Denials of New Zealand associations are usually couched in vague language designed to imply no New Zealand connection rather than categorically deny.

My posts will show that a significant part of many of Lauda Finem posts and much of their content is closely related to and involves [Precautionary delete] – who I believe lives in New Zealand.

He has probably featured in more Lauda Finem posts than anyone else. He has frequently been quoted and praised.

He features in something like 90 posts, and sometimes he is virtually the sole focus of the post. His name is repeated sometimes 20, 30, 40 times in a post.

If you read and believed much of Lauda Finem you could easily get the impression that [Precautionary delete] is the most wonderful  and truly great unsung hero in the world (using some of their own words). Nottingham could hardly praise himself any more than the frequent accolades he gets on Lauda Finem.

I have collated quite a bit of information that demonstrates the attention given to [Precautionary delete]by Lauda Finem. It builds a picture of what sort of association Lauda Finem and [Precautionary delete] have.

Lauda Finem have often made it clear that they are located outside New Zealand and [Precautionary delete] doesn’t own the site. That may be so but it leaves open many possibilities that could include co-operation, collusion, co-authorship, exchange of information etc. Some of those at least have taken place.

It  is long but I believe an important record – a record accumulated by what Lauda Finem themselves have collected, in their own words.

There’s a clear pattern of Lauda Finem investigations paralleling [Precautionary delete]’s investigations and court actions.

My take on this? [Precautionary delete]appears to me to have been a significant and possibly integral part of the content at Lauda Finem over the past five years.

Here are some brief examples.

Lauda Finem state they have received information from [Precautionary delete]that they then posted:

We also received, via email,  Justice and consumer rights campaigner [Precautionary delete]s comment, we have however not edited it, after all it is his story and his personal opinion of Milne and has undoubtedly been formed as a result of his own personal experiences of him, Fair Go, TVNZ and its so-called “staffers”

An Open letter suggests that communications have been both ways:

You will note that we have copied in Justice campaigner [Precautionary delete] as it seems to us that he to has been greatly affected by these sham websites and their so called members

Kind Regards

Sharon McBride

The Team @ Lauda Finem

And:

With that outcome in mind LF have emailed [Precautionary delete]and advised him of Blomfield’s email…

There’s a number of similar admissions.

Lauda Finem also claim to be providing safe storage of information of Nottingham’s:

LF has it on good authority that [Precautionary delete], as is his nature, had filmed Mayer on numerous occasions confessing to the criminal frauds, and also filmed Mayer’s sister-in-law offering up her involvement in his orgy of criminal forgery and fraud.

Apparently [Precautionary delete]secured a video statement from the sister-in-law following a visit to the SFO. None of these video’s have been supplied to the Serious fraud Office…as yet. (LF however have the complete set, here in the Netherlands for safe keeping)

This suggests that Nottingham has given “the complete set” of videos to “LF” in the Netherlands for safekeeping.

This also demonstrates typical contortions where they seem to be claiming some vague and distant association but then contradict it – “on good authority that [Precautionary delete]”, “apparently [Precautionary delete]” but then they state they are storing the complete set of [Precautionary delete]videos.

Some more extracts:

“Quite what it was that he’d hoped to achieve we’re unsure of as neither [Precautionary delete]or for that matter Lauda Finem take kindly to threats.”

…”and Butler chose to play games with [Precautionary delete]and the team here at Lauda Finem.”

“We like justice, as does justice campaigner [Precautionary delete]. In fact from what we’ve been able to establish Mr Nottingham likes, as we do, sifting through the chaft and finding facts that support justice…”

“We’ll be sure to pass on your bogus admission to Mr [Precautionary delete]…”

“From what documentation we have been given by the informant victim it would appear to us that [Precautionary delete] clinically assessed Nurse Athol as suffering from narcissistic disorder and as suffering from a psychosis that was being played by Nurse Athol’s masters at ACC.”

“Women are just as susceptible as men to wanting the trappings of power, or to be driven by jealously, and according to New Zealand Justice Campaigner [Precautionary delete]Ms Bowie-Broad is a ravenous plague rat when it comes to spreading her disease of lies, deceit, jealously, incompetence, and intellectual inadequacy.”

” [Precautionary delete]had also found out…”

“A breakthrough for LF came with David “what bomb” Butler rolling over naming names to Justice Campaigner [Precautionary delete]. [Precautionary delete], in his normal style, got significant admissions out of David Butler whilst, unbeknownst to Butler, filmed Butler.”

“Nottingham and LF didn’t disagree with Butlers position.

“On footage that LF holds [Precautionary delete]appears to tear up when Butler gives [Precautionary delete]two examples of his early life…:

“What concerns us is that the people that are being threatened have nothing to do with the ownership or operation of LAUDA FINEM…”

They keep referring to ownership of the website, but ownership is not the issue here, it is the degree of association and collusion between Lauda Finem and [Precautionary delete] that is of critical interest.

We accept your apology and would suggest that you also apologise to Mr [Precautionary delete] for having wrongly assumed his involvement with Lauda Finem. We have made it clear on a number of occasions who owns, runs and contributes to Lauda Finem, on one occasion publishing an email we received from Fairfax Media NZ. Indeed [Precautionary delete] would have the quite extraordinary ability to be omnipresent given that he lives in New Zealand and the team @ Lauda Finem are all in Australia.

That was several years ago when one member and probably the official owner of Lauda Finem was based in Australia – believed to be Antony Nottingham.

Lauda Finem now claim to operate out of the Netherlands and some claim that is where Antony Nottingham has moved. I know there is some Lauda Finem related activity from the Netherlands.

But it is obviously that Lauda Finem have close connections with New Zealand, and it seems with [Precautionary delete].

 

An LF admirer

I don’t bother with Kiwiblog’s General Debate much these days, it mostly seems to be the same old names and same old arguments. But I had a browse last night and find a couple of gems from ‘Reid’ from Tuesday. First a vote of support for Lauda Finem:

Good old LaudaFinem strikes yet again, shedding sunlight on a topical issue where our useless, idiot, pathetic, cowardly and very very stupid moronic media, utterly, yet again, fail to, in any and every single way possible. This time, explaining the background to the aussie deportations: the vital why, not the what, but the why. The critical and crucial element to the issue that, yet again, our vapid Fourth Estate not just glosses lightly over but completely fails even to mention, let alone explicate in detail. A task that this intrepid overseas website does again and again and again and again. It’s one of the best news sites in NZ.

They might not appreciate him saying “in New Zealand”.

And then in response to this…

I know you’ve mentioned Lauda Finem for a different reason, Reid, but do you have any idea why the people behind that blog are currently at war with Pete George? I’ve checked out Pete George’s blog and, well, let’s just say that he’s under siege.

…he launches into a same old style rant.

No I don’t. But at a guess the beige badger almost always gets the wrong end of the stick and that’s fine. For example with his rape culture meme. However what’s not fine is he then gets on his high horse just like his hero and mentor Dunne. So not only is he wrong but he’s also self-righteous.

That’s similar to how Lauda Finem do things, making things up and repeating  them (this is old repeats from Reid) – it’s called deliberate lying.

Which also, I suspect with LA, would be fine too. But where he then crosses the line is that in his roaring galloping self-righteous mentalism (which is in fact, logic and all things Holy actually totally incorrect every whichway you can imagine), he then picks a personal target which in his insanity personifies his outrage over “x” and in his weak, pathetic and most importantly dishonest disengenuous proceeds to do his level best to take down his target, using whatever means at his disposal.

Of course he’s such a moron it’s like being mauled by an arthritic church mouse with cancer on their deathbed about to die that same evening but even so, because of his idiocy combined with his insanity, the target is invariably innocent, and I think that’s why LA are doing what they’re doing.

Funny. And ironic.

Of course I don’t know, I’m guessing. I don’t know them, I have no association with them apart from admiring their contribution to the NZ media fabric which is considerable and if they read this, thank you.

Reid calls most people sheeple amd morons because they don’t agree with his claims the world is about to end, but admires LF. Says a lot.

But that’s my theory on it.

FWIW I was surprised to read those posts too. I thought PG is such a profound lightweight, why bother, who cares what he does. I wouldn’t have personally, given the weight of most of the issues they target.

BTW, I know you pointed me to an article the idiot once wrote about me. I’ve never read it and I never will, for the abovementioned reasons. Life is too short to waste time on thinking about thoughts emanating from a fool like him.

He wasted quite a few words not thinking about me.

He later comments:

Cows don’t try to jump open gates nasska.

That’s why.

Compared to sheeple cows can solve quantum physics and space travel and would get every single Nobel prize for both this and the next century, compared to the collective mind-power were it all combined, of sheeple.

So naturally I don’t want to honour actual sheeple by pretending they’re as brainy as a cow.

They might misunderstimate their total and actual stupidity in the scheme of things, and start thinking things such as: Shillary would actually make a really good POTUS, and such-like.

Then where would we be.

Plus I don’t give a fuck about equality and in my personal life I try to be as evil, cruel and unequal as I can possibly be without getting arrested, just cos I can.

Perhaps that’s why he admires Lauda Finem so much.

Rachinger public apology

Ben Rachinger has been pressed to at least apologise for sending pictures of a journalist that ended up being published by Lauda Finem.

He responded on this on Your NZ yesterday:

I’ve already acknowledged to JW as much as I can say. I don’t see that relitigating it in public for white knights helps her. She can raise the issue in public as she sees fit.

Insofar as Slater received the pictures and forwarded them to Lauda Finem?

That’s a whole basket of can’t comment. For obvious and very good reasons. A lot of people have been up to some very dodgy stuff. In some cases, criminal.

What I’m supposed to have done is unethical but not illegal. What Slater has allegedly done?

That’s definitely criminal 🙂

Thanks

This morning in what appear to be authentic tweets:

Unconditionally apologise to for sending pictures to who then sent them to . Worst thing I’ve ever done

I have no excuses for what is extremely shithouse and immoral behaviour. I can only make amends by writing and by taking Slater down.

Would like to say that my ex had no knowledge of any of pics. She’s her own person. We don’t speak anymore. Onwards to literary infamy! 🙂

Ben has said he is writing a book.

He can confirm if these tweets are from him but to me it looks authentic.

 

Whale Oil connections

A week ago a post appeared on Lauda Finem that revealed substantial personal and family information about a regular commenter here, ‘Mike C’.

This may have seemed “out of the blue” to some people but it obviously would have taken someone some time to trawl the Internet to source the material. It’s really quite creepy. The same sort of thing has happened to me.

It’s possible this despicable personal attack is the result of a long standing grudge. On a post here  to the Lauda Finem post Mike C commented:

However … [Deleted as per court order] stepped over the line by putting photos and information about my extended family members in the Lauda Finem post.

And for that … I will never forgive [Deleted as per court order] and the Brothers and Belt and Juana.

End of Story

It may or may not have been [Deleted as per court order] who actually did the post but he’s a part of this group – and he was the first to draw attention to the post by putting a link to it in a retaliatory comment. It seemed at the time that he threw a hissy at Mike C, hit the post button at Lauda Finem and then linked to it, but it may have been a ‘Team LF’ effort.

Last year Mike C was a regular commenter on Whale Oil, but apparently fell foul of Cameron Slater, Pete Belt and Juana Atkins (Slater’s wife). I don’t know details and most of this has probably been deleted off Whale Oil. Like many people Mike C was banned from Whale Oil, and then started commenting here at Your NZ.

Mike C has been a critic of Whale Oil and those involved there, and also of the Nottingham cabal. Both groups are closely related and have  records of choosing targets based on very little (sometimes they attack totally innocent people as @Laudafinem did in the weekend).

Some of contents of the Lauda Finem post certainly look to have been at least tipped off by a person or persons with far more than a blog observer’s knowledge.

Mike C also commented:

I never had any bone to pick with the Brothers Grimm and [Deleted as per court order] at Lauda Finem until they began attacking this Blog several months ago.

My mention of Juana Slater is valid … because she wrote my full birth name in here a couple of months ago.

Slaters Wife is part of this entire equation … I can assure you 🙂

It is correct that Juana (Atkins, who comments and authors as Spanish Bride) had already outed Mike C. It happened here:

Mike C

October 2, 2015  / 6:55 pm
Belt should be worried about what people can dig up and publish about him 🙂

spanishbride

 /  October 3, 2015  / 1:18 pm
[Edited – I initially held this comment aside until I had time to deal with it properly,Spanish Bride, what you did is dirty, as anyone who is familiar with how blogs operate would well know. You may do things dirty at Whale Oil, that’s your choice, but it’s not acceptable here.

What Cameron, and others, and now obviously you, seem to do is dish the dirt out in big dollops but if anyone challenges you on it you react badly and instead of addressing criticisms you resort to attacking those who criticise. If you can’t take criticism I suggest you give up blogging.PG]

It was a provocative comment from Mike C but it didn’t deserve that sort of response from Atkins.

I deleted the details but have a copy of what Atkins posted as evidence. That looks to have been done with calculated retaliatory and malicious intent.

It wouldn’t be hard to see Belt as being complicit in that hit.

And from October 3 to last week would give someone or some people enough time to trawl the ‘Net and dredge up extensive personal details of someone in preparation for a Lauda Finem hit job.

[Deleted as per court order]  is known to work closely with Slater on some things. Last week’s Court of Appeal judgment shows an obvious relationship between Slater and [Deleted as per court order]in the claimed defamation by Matthew Blomfield, and  I’ve seen some vile stuff in other court documents involving the two of them.

This adds weight to the view of quite a few people that Lauda Finem has been used by Slater and co as a means of dishing dirt that is too nasty (if that’s possible), too legally risky or too financially risky to post at Whale Oil.

They seem to be a very spiteful and vengeful bunch.