Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned,
Nor hell a fury like a woman scornedWilliam Congreve, The Mourning Bride. 1697
Rochelle Rees has a press release up at Scoop with more fascinating details about Rob Gilchrist and his correspondence with his handlers in the police Special Investigations Group:
. . . in the emails sent by Rob Gilchrist to the police counter-terrorism units, was an email sent on 30/07/2005, containing naked photographs of a female and then teenage activist . . .
Well why didn’t you say so in the first place? Bill Ralston had a column up the other day condemning the tepid media response to this story; something tells me that our nation’s high-minded news editors are going to be a LOT more interested from here on in:
Also discovered on Rob Gilchrist’s computer were naked photos of a then 16 year old activist, which look to have been taken while she was sleeping . . . Rob Gilchrist also had photographs on his computer he had taken of the previously mentioned 16 year old girl, and another 16 year old female activist, taken seperately, with them posing with his guns. This included shots of one of the said girls posing with one of Rob’s guns pointed to her head, and in her mouth.
I have to admit I’m surprised none of these revelations were in the SST today – the media strategy here seems a bit scattershot, maybe they’re just releasing stuff as they trawl through Gilchrist’s hard drive?
This must be awfully stressful for the staff in the police comms unit. Presumably Mr Gilchrist is also somewhat apprehensive as to which horribly embarrassing details of his private life Ms Rees intends to reveal to the nation next.
Here are some words that you might light to cut and paste approriately into your reporatage of Ms Ress’ press release:
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
it is
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
claimed
If I have given you too many words, then you can save them up and use them on your reportage of the next and all subsequent releases on this fascinating but sordid little piece of theatre
Comment by Dave Mann — December 21, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
I have no particular reason to doubt the allegations. I don’t think the police have even disputed them. If they were able to cast doubts on elements of the story then that would be different.
Comment by danylmc — December 22, 2008 @ 7:37 am
Guns? Guns? what guns? The Urewera folks had campsites and other suspicious materials and this turkey has guns? An activist with guns and he’s the one working for the our defenders of the peace, this is all getting a wee bit, well, wacky – it is claimed by me.
Comment by SeaJay — December 22, 2008 @ 8:02 am
That was why they were released after the substantive issues. The underlying problem is in the police, not their agent.
You’d also have to wonder exactly what in the hell the photos were for (apart from the obvious) in the future. In particular are they in the file of the person photographed, and if so why?
Comment by lprent — December 22, 2008 @ 8:06 pm