Saturday, 1 November 2008


The Timeline in the Dom Post is well worth a read and we are pretty sure there is more to come early next week as well. Other journalists are tracking down old contacts to see whast they can find as well. One of the questions we now want answered is what the hell is the SFO going to do about it? Surely now they must investigate.And whats all this we keep hearing about section 103 ??? What does it mean for Winston?
And more to the point this has serious implications for Clark. - The last vestiges of her integrity rest on what she will now do with Winston in light of the latest allegations.


Colin said...

Sorry - am I slow? Whilst I am appalled at Winston's ethical stance, and dismayed that Helen has not sacked him for his corrupt practices - what has he done legally wrong? Why would SFO want with him, just as the Police will say he has nothing to answer?

mawm said...

Crimes Act 1961
S.102 Corruption and bribery of Minister of the Crown

(1) Every Minister of the Crown or member of the Executive Council is liable
to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who corruptly or
obtains, or agrees or offers to accept or attempts to obtain, any bribe for
himself or any other person in respect of any act done or omitted, or to be
done or omitted, by him in his capacity as a Minister or member of the
Executive Council.