Posts by Matthew Poole
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm not trying to be a prick, but am seriously wondering whether our juries are being slanted towards those who aren't overly aware of WTF is going on.
That's one hell of an assumption. I've been summonsed three times, served twice (didn't make it beyond the ballot the third time), and would take great offence at anyone suggesting that I'm "[not] overly aware of WTF is going on."
The first time I'd just been made redundant, so was out of work.
The second time I was part of a team so the workload could be shared. I also stopped into the office most days, kept my cellphone on during breaks, and also did some work from home during evenings.
The third time, I got summonsed for a Wednesday appearance. As did the MD of the 10-person company that employed me. Yes, what're the odds? She let me go, again because I was part of a team and could have my day-to-day workload shifted to others, and got excused herself because she was already letting 10% of the company workforce attend.It's actually pretty arrogant to assume that jurors are all unemployed or useless. The last trial on which I served had one retired, one unemployed, a student, and the rest of us were working one way or the other. At least one was fairly senior employee in their respective field. A group of us used to go off for lunch together, and always of the conversation revolved around current affairs.
-
But the other reason is that it hurts my ears - literally. It's not the music - it's the ear-splitting volume. Even small jazz gigs bother me.
I have a theory that almost all sound-mixing people have gone to so many concerts with too high a volume that they're partially deaf, and sharing it with the rest of us.
Agreed. The only way I can tolerate the Big Day Out is with earplugs, preferably acquired before I even arrive so that I can put them in as soon as I get through the gate. It really concerns me that so many of my young (18-20) friends happily spend the whole day there, finish with ringing ears, and aren't worried about the fact that, in some cases, they're already starting to display signs of deafness. Of course, that particular young lady keeps her car stereo at a high volume, too, which doubtless compounds the issue.
-
To pull out a different thread from the OP, am I the only one who still thinks it's a bit trippy to see Russell "Che" Guevara over there <--- in the pink?
-
Anyone with half a brain could see, looking at @damianchristie 's Twitter feed...
You've just cited the problem, Robyn. If you donated a couple of neurons to The Blubbering One, they could at least keep themselves company. If you donated only one it would be cruelty, as the poor thing would get lonely.
-
And on the topic of Susan Boyle's pseudo destruction of societal stereotypes, Mike Moreu has weighed in with this beauty.
-
Well, Sacha, I am a little uncertain as to the city-management capabilities of an insipid Aussie beer. However, I don't see it as inherently less-qualified or -capable than, say, John Banks or Paul Holmes.
-
Uh, Rich, what? We don't want any of these celebrity media wankers as High Deity of Megatropolis! I'd even take Banks over Holmes, FFS, and that's speaking as the founder of the "Just Say NO! to Banks For Super Mayor" group!
-
finding the right person for you is hard, I know, but you keep on trying and yes that's hard but people around you should be wanting the best for you and supporting and encouraging you to get proper help
And when you can find $300k to spend on your legal/PR team before you even get as far as appearing before a depositions hearing, you can certainly afford some quality therapy. Hell, if he'd put even a 10th of his defence/spin fund into getting counselling he might've been given the kick in the head required to get him over himself and into a place where he could own up, plead guilty, and thus obviate the need to throw so much more money to the leeches and sharks.
-
I have always understood the best defence against action for defamation to be having the money to pay for expensive lawyers. It is not an area of the Law which is predicated on fairness.
Coming in rather late, this point still bears repeating. For all the talk of defences to an action for defamation, you still have to go to court before you can earn vindication using said defences. That's a very expensive proposition, especially when the legal arsenal arrayed against you is a) talented (I guess it's a bit arguable, but they're definitely not mediocre whatever their other faults), b) well-funded, and c) very demonstrably happy to take on even major media outlets, with said outlets also possessed of very capable legal advisors and fairly deep pockets with which to fund a response.
As for the rest, if what Russell's intimated about a major smear campaign by Team Kveitch through the Sunday papers is accurate, it's just a shame that the judge can't overturn her original sentence and decide that, actually, there's zero remorse and he's really worthy of a spot of sub-standard housing (whatever Garrett and McThicker may have to say about prisons, you can be sure that Veitch wouldn't find being inside a step up from his ordinary lifestyle) at one of Auckland's premier incarceration facilities.
-
Maybe I'm being a little paranoid here but an example of this is already happening with the ministry not initiating negotiations with the NZEI for the a new Support Staff agreement even though there old one has expired.
Expired collective contracts aren't exactly news in the public sector. Career fire fighters are working on a contract that expired around the time that Labour took over (I think it was just after), and have had one (yes, singular) pay increase in about the last 17 years. NZEI have it good if their collective contract has only just expired.