NZ Herald Complaint | The Jackal

29 Sept 2011

NZ Herald Complaint

Yesterday the NZ Herald reported:
Two surveillance cameras were set up and showed a group of people "milling about" the area. Some were running down a path towards where the burnt-out oven was later found.

Many people moving in different directions were shown in the video film, and one person - not the person alleged to be Ms Morse - could be seen making the throwing motion with an object in his hand.
Stop the bus... somebody threw something. What really pisses me off about all this is that the cops are continually speculating on things without much evidence and some of the evidence they do have was illegally obtained. The entire case is farcical!

It's a travesty of justice that our Police force at the behest of the government are persecuting people who by most accounts are law abiding citizens.

Then we get biased articles from the increasingly right-wing NZ Herald that are so blatantly full of crap that I wonder if Edward Gay and Andrew Koubaridis have a vested interest in seeing the case go against the accused?

Anyway the Herald article has received a formal complaint to the online editor:
Dear Jeremy Rees,

I write to lay a formal complaint concerning an article entitled Revealed: What cops filmed in Ureweras, which was published on the 28 September 2011 on the New Zealand Herald website.

1. The article is inaccurate as it states the Uruwera 18 group threw Molotov cocktail fire bombs. The report then contradicts this statement by saying that the object was believed to be a Molotov cocktail fire bomb and that the video surveillance does not show Valerie Morse throwing the object or that there was a fire made from that object. The article is therefore speculating and is not factual.

2. The article is unfair as it incorrectly reports information that is not factual and therefore besmirches the people named in the article. The article reports the beliefs held by the Police about the remains of a fire being a testing area for Molotov cocktail fire bombs as fact, which preempts the upcoming court trial. The article is therefore in contempt of court.

3. The article is inaccurate as it states that the Uruwera 18 group fired semi-automatic weapons. The article then contradicts itself by saying only two pistols were seized, neither of these worked and Valerie Morse was photographed holding a pistol. The article does not report any evidence of the Uruwera 18 group using semi-automatic weapons.

4. The article is inaccurate when it states that Valerie Morse concealed her face. The video did not accurately show Valerie Morse's face, she was apparently identified by the clothes she wore. The article uses subterfuge to mislead the reader into believing something that is not factual.

5. The article is unbalanced as it only reports one side of events.

6. The article does not accurately state that it is an opinion. There is no way to tell that the article is based on opinion. The article is incorrectly labeled.

Please remove or edit the article so that it is factually correct, adheres to the law and does not defame the accused prior to a trial. I look forward to your reply.
Anything that David Farrar uses to discredit a peace activist is worth complaining about.