The following are a few suggestions that should be helpful to males to avoid being victimised, defamed and arrested when entering KCDC premises if they have ever been critical of KCDC lies, extravagance, corruption or ineptitude:
- Do not smile at female staff as this might be construed as flirtatious.
- Do not grimace in their presence for any reason, as this might be construed as threatening.
- Do not walk slowly as this might be regarded as stalking.
- Do not walk quickly as this might be thought aggressive.
- Do not carry a walking stick or zimmer frame, as these might be regarded as weapons.
- Do not enter the building if you have a facial scar, as this will be regarded as “creepy”.
- Do not say “hello”, “have a nice day”, “how are you today?”, or any other ordinary pleasantries, as these might be regarded as “pick-up lines”.
- Say nothing complimentary, as this will be regarded as sexual harassment.
- Do not walk past a female staffer any closer than 2 metres as this might be regarded as attempted sexual assault.
- We hope your experience with KCDC is safe, friendly and pleasant. Have a nice day.
Issued as a public service by K.R. Bolton
Some balance would be a good idea.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/104239954/alison-mau-elected-officials-need-to-remember-respect-is-earned
In addition to which the supposed “set-up” has not had the benefit of any evidence and it is almost ludicrous to suggest that more than 1 elected member and more than 1 senior staff member colluded against Councillor David Scott for reasons that are far from convincing.
I have experienced such collusion, or what might better be termed convergence towards a common aim that involved outlandish lies, and caused me much stress, to say the least. So have many others in Kapiti who have come up against a council agenda. Dr Scott has challenged many council agendas. There are Councillors and staff who regard lying as an acceptable political tactic.
When did Dr Scott receive ‘balance’ from media reporting or anywhere else? There is rather at the moment a huge imbalance of defamatory claims against him.
My wife and I heard all three days of ‘evidence’. We were sitting in the front row of the court public gallery. As there were few of the public present, perhaps you could tell us where you were sitting and we might recall having seen you.
If you were there, you would have heard that Dr Scott allegedly grabbed the complainant by the hips, pushed himself forward and her backward to the extent that his legs were supposedly up against hers, and ground away for ‘at least five seconds’, while Guru for his part testified that Dr Scott kept his hands down at all times while he passed by, and the complainant remained still. So what version is it, if any? Nobody claims to have witnessed the complaint’s allegation. Not Guru, or the two other witnesses, whose testimony amounted to zilch, while Cllr. Michael Scott mostly talked about what is presumably his area of expertise – food.
We heard Dr Scott being called a liar or exaggerating his medical conditions; that is to say conditions that preclude the likelihood (to say the least) of his attempting such actions, even should his character predispose him to do so (which is itself outlandish). However, a few minutes research easily confirms that all the claims he made in this regard are accurate. The testimony we heard in regard to Dr Scott’s claims not being credible can be readily shown to be bilge on each point. Unfortunately, Antunovich, excellent although he was in demolishing the prosecution case, did not challenge what were probably crucial contentions.
Sir, if you are ever before a court, I recommend you do not choose trial by jury, as you are reliant on twelve people being capable of critical analysis. In this instance they chose to ignore the lengthy explanations given to them by both judge and lawyer in regard to the high threshold of evidence that must be established before a guilty verdict should be considered. Why they did so cannot be ascertained by anyone other than those present in the jury room.
I did not address the fairness or otherwise of the trial. I do however stand by my opinion that there is no evidence that there was a deliberate plot hatched by several elected members and senior staff. Indeed I find it incredible that anybody would believe that. There is much talk of how good David Scott is and has been but I still ask what evidence is there to suggest there was a conspiracy?
One of the unfortunate legacies of the Dougherty era is the widespread impression that the council is nothing but a scurrilous bunch of functionaries engaged in self-serving deceitfulness at Ratepayers’ expense. In fact there are some good people there and the council does do some good things along with the bad. As regards “balance” we believe that we, along with Kapiti Independent and KC News, provide the balance to the likes of the Kapiti News free newspaper which only reports the good and ignores the bad — the two reasons for which are they don’t want to lose any council advertising money, and the editor’s wife works at the council.
Mr King,
You state that you find it incredible that there would be a deliberate ‘plot’ hatched by senior staff. You plainly do not know the council.
Several years ago, their was a deliberate plot to say that I chased Janet Holborow through the chambers with my walking stick, so that I could be set up to be trespassed from council. Cllrs. Michael Scott, Holborow, and Gaylor claimed I chased Holborow from the corridor back into the chamber with my stick aloft. Multiple public witnesses present (i.e. the whole lot) in the immediate vicinity, plus Cllr. Elliott, standing right there, said nonsense, and the CCTV footage definitively proved these Councillors to be liars. Joel Maxwell was sitting at the reporters’ table but saw or heard nothing. Cllrs. Welsh, Bell, and Amundsen (complete with what she called an ‘affadavit’ (sic)) backed them up, as did several anonymous staff.
When I brought misconduct complaints against them they of course voted among themselves to decline each, other than Cllrs. David Scott, Guru and Elliott. David and Guru refused to participate in what was regarded by them as a travesty against me ‘, Cllr. Cardiff took annual leave, having stated to me that he did not see anything untoward, and Cllr Elliott voted in favour of each of my complaints – the only one to do so. My complaints were voted down on the false basis contrived by Michael Scott that the matters happened during lunch break and were not covered by standing orders; although council had not adjourned for lunch at all.
So do’t tell me there are not those in council who will not converge with a story and lie to get their own pathetic way. The matter was over the issue of the dog Beau. Pat Dougherty added a new spin – that I stood in the chamber, raised my walking stick aloft with both hands and ‘yelled at the top of my voice for at least five seconds’. He, at the furthest reach of the Council chamber, was alone in seeing this very dramatic event.
At the time Michael Scott was supposedly witnessing this event, he was talking with David Scott in the room across from the chamber, and David Scott wrote a statement that Michael S. could not have heard or seen anything. I took a complaint against Michael S. to the Law Society. He is a liar. Naturally, the Law Society did not care. He and David have crossed before in council, so he was happily at court testifying against David presumably as an expert witness on food.
Jackie Elliott was in the last mayoralty a thorn like David Scott and Guru. She was constantly bullied and reduced to tears. It is one of the reasons why the ‘white ribbon ‘ (self-declare) status was taken from council – it’s bullying. To get her off the one position she had, arts committee, staff ensured that she could not arrange meetings, then she was removed from the position by Ross Church – — for not arranging meetings . When she was berated by Ross Church for trying to hold staff accountable, she walked out of the chambers in tears. I once had frequent communication with Cllr. Elliott – she commented that she would arrive home from council each time fearful to see what threats would be in the mail from KCDC. Another ploy was to spread a rumour about then Regional Councillor Nigel Wilson and herself. Nice stuff. Now she has a nice job with Council , and is on the inner.
It might be recalled that Guru went to the High Court to challenge the way Elliott, David Scott, himself and Cardiff were denied entry to the inner core meetings of the time. His complaint was upheld by the High Court. It might also be recalled why Guru was about 15 years ago dismissed from his position as a journalist with Kapiti Observer. Nuff said…
Waikanae Watch has detailed certain of these matters.
So I do’t need telling about Councillors and senior staff unless you have had dealings with them. Until I raised my voice in regard to the way the dog Beau was railroaded to his death, I naively had no suspicion as to how things operated here, and apparently still do, and did not give a tuppenny damn about their two-bit politics. I do not see why myself, David Scott , Dale Evans, the Osborne’s or anyone else , however , should be expected to put up with a pack of crap from narcissistic miscreants, with the added outrage of being paid to do so with the help of my rates. Indeed, late today I received a scabrous legal threat again showing the types of people involved. . Please excuse me if i seem a tad peeved.
Mr Bolton.
I cannot of course argue with what you have written since I know only what I have read in the press or here.
What I can report is that I know 3 of the elected members and several of the staff reasonably well and some of those are the ones that you have said are guilty of poor behaviour. Only one of the ones that I have had dealings with has ever led me to doubt his ethics. That one told me about the rumour concerning Councillor Elliott, stating it as a fact; that one also betrayed a confidence.He is not one of the ones that you have complained about but he is one that you have supported and indeed lauded. There is always another side to every story. I have no wish to cause dissension here and only commented because of my personal knowledge and a still held belief that a conspiracy is extremely unlikely. I do however thank you for explaining your position; if what you say is true, and I have no reason to disbelieve it, then I can well understand that you feel peeved.
This is wonderful Kerry. Just be careful out there all you men
I was talking today to my son & other men 45yrs to 68yrs old about the “Me Too” “Men Haters” movement in our society. Not one of them could believe that saying “Hullo”, “your hair looks nice today”, “you are wearing a nice dress” or “brushing past a woman in a crowded room” could be construed as sexual harassment leading to a court case!! I warned these men “NEVER to compliment a woman again especially at work as it is highly dangerous for men in society today”. The world has become a very sad place in such a short time 😢😡
David Scott is very friendly by nature and likes to discuss things with people he recognises as intelligent. That’s how we’ve got to know him over the last 3 years, and he has impressed us as honest, hardworking, sincere and caring — he’s not there for egoistical reasons like some of the councilors are.
Has the age of endeavoring to make people feel good come to an end? It certainly has at the KCDC because of this episode. The way David Scott was treated by Dougherty, Guru and Power and their accomplice was nasty, big time. They have a lot to answer for.
Thanks Geoffrey. Look at the way the police treated him when he was dragged off to the cells, because she said he had said hello to her (as if he would). That was truly awful. David has done so much for people. he is naturally very friendly.