Legal Beagle: Paula's Peril; or The (un)certain Scenario
99 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
Graeme Edgeler, in reply to
Poverty IS having no money.
Pennilessness is the state of having no money.
-
Islander, in reply to
Pennilessness is the state of having no money.
These days, it's having no dollar = poverty
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
and I don't have a clue, either...
Pennilessness is the state of having no money.
These days, it’s having no dollar = povertyDollar? Us? = Dolorous and Doleful
But this is clue dough!
and as we all know
senselessness = e! -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Dear heaven - if only he had had the graphics!
He probably did, until DeepRed pinched his PowerPoint presentation. Very convincing, and rather less disturbing than the unfortunate pig burning in hell just a few posts down from the beloved doggie over at the City Scenes thread.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Pork, wha!?
the unfortunate pig burning in hell
What! That's not a tanning clinic?
(Shoulda gone to speck savours...) -
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Not only that but there is something not quite right about a round number, exactly 20 votes found lying around somewhere all with Bennett’s name on them? or exactly 20 votes discounted for Sepuloni . Fishy eh?
You’re taking the piss, right? But hey, if you want to accuse District Court Judge John Adams of outright judicial corruption, you might actually want to wait until he releases his judgement next week. Just for the shits and giggles.
If I were Sepuloni I’d totally go for a petition.
It’s not entirely up to her, to be frank. I’m trespassing on my host’s territory here, but I believe you got to come to an electoral petition with specific grounds for complaint. And with the enormous amounts of time, energy and money involved I don’t think anyone pulls that trigger casually.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
What! That’s not a tanning clinic?
It’s the leaving the head on that gets me, because the dentition is superficially similar. Like, ‘Dear God, is that what I think it is?’
’Yeah, that’s Schultz, he was all over the news last week, shot dead in the line of duty. We got him cheap from the police.”Would I make the same mistake in a tanning clinic, even with my eyeglasses on? Fortunately I’ll never know.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
And with the enormous amounts of time, energy and money involved I don’t think anyone pulls that trigger casually.
No, but it is rather important this time around, especially considering the chance of Graeme's "Paula's Peril" scenario. If that eventuated, then the whole National party could end up cursing her for going for the judicial recount when she was going to get in on the list anyway, and possibly cursing themselves for not reading Legal Beagle. Was it really a risk worth taking, just to kick Sepuloni out? And Sepuloni, facing electoral oblivion, has time on her hands.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
"Some say this is everything from the ravings of someone on the brink of death to poetry to secrets of the mob world. You be the judge."
I’ll go for poetry. Schultz is rather more forthcoming than a gentleman who appeared before the NSW Royal Commission into police corruption back in the 90s. While he admitted to having underworld connections he declined to name names as he feared reprisals. After prolonged questioning as to exactly who he was afraid of he allowed as to how he had a particular fear of someone known to him only as Wally the Wombat.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Sure it wasn't Spiny Norman?
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Sure it wasn’t Spiny Norman?
Chook'd know.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Ah, but there's been so many of them it's hard to keep up. As Ian might say: coming home to roost, they are.
-
exactly 20 votes found lying around somewhere all with Bennett’s name on them? or exactly 20 votes discounted for Sepuloni.
...you might actually want to wait until he releases his judgement next week
and
I believe you got to come to an electoral petition with specific grounds for complaint.
Agreeing with much of what Craig said, particularly re grounds being needed for a petition.
But IMHO, a net change of 20 votes on a recount (apparently now official) is a massive shift. Having scrutineered and counted various elections, the number of votes where the intent is doubtful is miniscule.
The Waitakere vote was just over 30,000. Say 1 in 100 is arguable - and the scrutinteers will know which votes are involved - that is about 300. The returning officer, the judge, and everyone else will know Hunua and other case law.
For a net change of 20 out of 300 or so, it seems the judge saw things in a much different manner to the returning officer.
As as aside, I saved from electionresults.govt.nz the data of votes cast at each polling place based on preliminary results. Be interesting to see, in Waitakere and elsewhere, what if any variations there are when compared to the final count.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
It’s not entirely up to her, to be frank. I’m trespassing on my host’s territory here, but I believe you got to come to an electoral petition with specific grounds for complaint. And with the enormous amounts of time, energy and money involved I don’t think anyone pulls that trigger casually.
Quite. They'll wait for the judge's decision, explaining the reasons for rejected votes, and then look very carefully at that before spending what could be $100,000.
As a matter of pure political strategy, I would think they'll come up with the money somehow if there seems a realistic possibility of enacting the Edgeler Scenario.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
As as aside, I saved from electionresults.govt.nz the data of votes cast at each polling place based on preliminary results. Be interesting to see, in Waitakere and elsewhere, what if any variations there are when compared to the final count.
Do feel very welcome to report any observations here.
-
Phil Lyth, in reply to
Do feel very welcome to report any observations here.
Big ups to Robert Peden for having the cojones to post the polling place data based on preliminary count. Another development in scrutiny of the process.
-
Phil Lyth, in reply to
the number of votes where the intent is doubtful
Before I am Edglered, I should make it clear that changes can happen for other reasons: eg in the recount, a decision can be made whether a special vote is allowed or not due to the signature of a witness on the declaration. And Graeme will no doubt add to the possibilities...
-
If, under the fulfilment of the Paula's Peril scenario, the lowest-ranked National list MP were to resign, am I correct in believing that Paula would be entitled to fill the vacancy? She would be, after all, the highest-ranked candidate on the list that was published who is not elected. Or does being elected as an electorate MP drop her from the list permanently? I can’t quite figure out the law on this one.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
If that eventuated, then the whole National party could end up cursing her for going for the judicial recount when she was going to get in on the list anyway, and possibly cursing themselves for not reading Legal Beagle.
No - just no. I know there are a lot of people with a not entirely healthy or rational investment in Bennett getting Portillo-ed, but the judicial recount in Waitakere was every bit as rational as Labour's in Christchurch Central. Sometimes you come up trumps, others it's snake-eyes all the way. Live with it.
-
Phil Lyth, in reply to
She would be, after all, the highest-ranked candidate on the list that was published who is not elected. Or does being elected as an electorate MP drop her from the list permanently? I can’t quite figure out the law on this one.
Exactly the point I remember Graeme alluding to, and the point that would be argued. This one could end up at the Supreme Court but for one thing. S137(2) says:
The Electoral Commission must determine which of the unelected candidates whose name was included in the same party list as the member whose seat has been declared vacant stood highest in the order of preference. ( my emphasis )
The possibility has never been considered by Parliament before. After all, when Simon Upton toddled off to Paris in 2001, there was no question as to whether Don McKinnon (by then Commonwealth Secretary-General) should be asked. He had been elected as a list MP in 1999 and later resigned. S137(2) didn't apply to him.
But before it got to that point, I have no doubt that John Key would use urgency to change s137(2) to refer to the highest person on the list not currently in Parliament. Then if the decision on a petition goes the wrong way, he opens up a vacancy by finding a nice job for Cam Calder.
Anyone for Niue?
-
Phil Lyth, in reply to
apparently now official
Announced sometime yesterday. Sadly Judicial Decisions Online seems to no longer provide what it should. The judge has released a decision which I would be interested to see.
-
For the anoraks among us, the changes between the election night result and the recount in Waitakere, with 3,000+ specials included:
BENNETT, Paula NAT 1,155
BRADFORD, Sue MANA 56
LYE, Jeff ALCP 59
MOUNTAIN, Danny CNSP 59
OSBORNE, Peter LIB 7
SEPULONI, Carmel LAB 1,495
TOLLESTRUP, Steve GP 273
Candidate Informals 28
TOTAL 3,132And the party vote changes:
National Party 1,233
Mana 56
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 34
Conservative Party 60
Libertarianz 6
Labour Party 1,613
Green Party 512
ACT New Zealand 24
Alliance 2
Democrats for Social Credit 1
Māori Party 31
New Zealand First Party 200
United Future 20
Party Informals 15
TOTAL 3,807 -
Finally, can anyone (hello scrutineers) provide a copy from the website of the pre-recount Waitakere & Chch Central totals? I.e. as released by the Electoral Commission as 'final' including special votes, which could be compared to the judicial recount.
-
Phil Lyth, in reply to
As you were: Google Cache (now saved) is your friend.
Compared to the returning officer's 'final' count, the judge gave Paula 8 more votes, and Carmel 12 fewer. 9 more for the Green candidate and negligible changes for other candidates and for party votes. 8 fewer informal candidate votes. 2 more votes allowed (presumably specials.)
Importantly, all changes are net.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.