ACCforum: The sheriffs of Nottingham - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The sheriffs of Nottingham

#1 User is offline   NoShit 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 261
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 28 May 2014 - 06:05 PM

It seems, according to the NZ Parliament, that Dermot Nottingham is still a convicted criminal. Such a family. Full of such alarming traits.

But. Let us not despair. The Nightingale sings in Berkley Square.

In round but square tones. Eh, Tony?

Regards to your idiot butler.
1

#2 User is offline   jaffa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1792
  • Joined: 14-August 11
  • LocationWellington City

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:39 PM

Please give us the link to the NZ Parliament info, that Dermot Nottingham is still a convicted criminal?

View PostNoShit, on 28 May 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

It seems, according to the NZ Parliament, that Dermot Nottingham is still a convicted criminal. Such a family. Full of such alarming traits.

But. Let us not despair. The Nightingale sings in Berkley Square.

In round but square tones. Eh, Tony?

Regards to your idiot butler.

1

#3 User is offline   NoShit 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 261
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 29 May 2014 - 02:46 PM

"Please give us the link to the NZ Parliament info, that Dermot Nottingham is still a convicted criminal?"


Nottingham confessed in public. It's plastered all over this site.

To wit:

Quote

Note Mark Nottingham is also known as Antony Nottingham.

THE DOMINION, 12 MAY 2001, Edition 2, Page 12.

Investigator's criminal past revealed

By: KITCHIN Phil

DERMOT NOTTINGHAM, the self-styled investigator who plastered the name of the policeman who killed Steven Wallace on the Internet, is a convicted thief and a brawler.

Mr Nottingham, who was dumped as an investigator by the Wallace family soon after he began his inquiries into the police shooting of Steven Wallace in Waitara on April 30 last year, also has a conviction for discharging a firearm in public.

Mr Nottingham said he had nothing to hide and was prepared to discuss his history with The Dominion, but he had an exclusive agreement to speak to another newspaper and he would not speak till after that paper was published.

He said if The Dominion was prepared to print his conviction list, "why don't you print the name of a man who shot a guy in the back . . . is it because you are gutless?"


He's even made money out of his, apparently armed, raids on innocent people.
0

#4 User is offline   Campy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1386
  • Joined: 15-May 10
  • LocationAuckland Regional super city

Posted 29 May 2014 - 03:22 PM

View PostNoShit, on 29 May 2014 - 02:46 PM, said:

"Please give us the link to the NZ Parliament info, that Dermot Nottingham is still a convicted criminal?"


Nottingham confessed in public. It's plastered all over this site.

To wit:



He's even made money out of his, apparently armed, raids on innocent people.


Ewwww.... He truly is nasty!

I'll look out for a URL link to some NZ Parliament info. I know its not what was asked but speaking of NZ Parliament, there was something on Hansard.

OWEN JENNINGS (ACT NZ): Let me read to this House from the document that was quoted by the Labour Party, because unfortunately what was quoted is only part of what the Serious Fraud Office stated. ``This office is very conscious of the fact that there is not a comprehensive database available to conclusively identify the quantum of odometer tampering, notwithstanding the data that we have now matched, which is, incidently, supportive of a large-scale problem. It would be unreliable to extrapolate these figures across all imports.'' In other words, the Serious Fraud Office did say there was a problem, but it did not know how big the problem was. It is not correct for the Labour Party to quote that office in support of Labour's position.

Let me say why I spoke out against Harry Duynhoven lodging documents on the table of this House. The reason I did so was this. I have in my possession evidence that would suggest that the so-called conclusive evidence being put forward by some persons includes names of reputable, honest, hard-working dealers in Auckland and elsewhere in New Zealand. The privilege of this House should not be used to malign people, either by association or directly. I wrote to Mr Duynhoven yesterday. I said I had such information. I questioned whether he was proposing to take the action he did, and cautioned him against it.

Most of the evidence comes from one Nottingham and his brother, who have been active in this business for some time. Most of the evidence that I have seen, and most of the evidence that I know Mr Duynhoven has, has come from those sources, has been aided and abetted by those two brothers. If that is the evidence being put before the House, I say it is absolutely questionable. Indeed, if it is the only evidence those members have, I have to say it is shonky.

Evidence is being brought to this House from somebody who in 1978 was apprehended for theft, for unlawful interference, for burglary. In 1980 he was arrested for wilful damage. In 1983 he was arrested for fighting in a public place. In 1985 he was arrested for refusing to accompany an officer, using insulting language, and assaulting a traffic officer. He has been arrested for common assault and the discharge of a firearm in a public place. The list goes on and on. If the evidence comes from that person, then I have to say it is pretty questionable. If that is the material being put before this House as conclusive evidence, I have to say those members ought to think again. The Labour Party ought to think twice.

There is odometer fraud---there is absolutely no question about that---but we had better ask ourselves why it is being peddled out there. Mr Dermot Nottingham is proposing to be part of a company set up to be in charge of all cars introduced into New Zealand, so that he can have a financial stake. He wants to be the only person who introduces those cars. He wants to have a cut. Members of the Labour Party are putting forward evidence from that gentleman. They are proposing that it is substantial and that this House ought to reflect on it. I have to say: ``Think again.''

A report from the company that proposes to do odometer checks states: ``This report is for exclusive information and use, and no responsibility is accepted to any third party for the whole or any part of its contents. Neither the whole or any part of this report may be published in any way without prior written approval.'' What sort of evidence is that? The guy will not even stand by what he is saying. He will not even categorically say that he will allow other people to use his evidence. Such is the evidence being put before this House.

I suggest that there is a real problem out there. If all of these cars have been tampered with, where are the consumers? Where are the 250,000 people who bought a car knowing it was a Japanese import? Where is the wave of anxiety? Where is the roar from the hills of consumers wanting something done about it? This is a ruse by the Labour Party. It is a ruse to get round Mr Kirton. Labour members want him to cross the floor and sit on that side of the House. That is the only reason they are peddling their wares in this House today. That sort of evidence ought to be denied the right to come on to the floor of this House.




0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users