Jump to content

Whos your money on?


Pratangs
 Share

Recommended Posts

i was workin at the district courts yesterday and know exactly who it is....

 

who is it??????????

 

Doubt he'll tell us, wouldn't be very professional would it?

I don't know Zeb or what he does tbh but that's my stab at it.

 

make a fake account? C'mon mang, we all wanna know!

 

 

well it aint bugsy or grind,thats for sure...your in the clear lads....

 

but anyway,dj attempts to get a suckjob from a young groupie aint exactly a new scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another local forum nearly got in a heap of trouble for spilling a name suppression case earlier this year, I'd suggest mods keep an eye on this thread....the dudes been granted name suppression, leave at that, discuss it via PM or around the BBQ instead but not on the boards.......IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another local forum nearly got in a heap of trouble for spilling a name suppression case earlier this year, I'd suggest mods keep an eye on this thread....the dudes been granted name suppression, leave at that, discuss it via PM or around the BBQ instead but not on the boards.......IMO

Indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A prominent New Zealand entertainer has been given permanent name suppression and been discharged without conviction after earlier plead guilty to committing an indecent act likely to offend on a 16-year-old girl.

 

The offence carried a maximum penalty of two years jail.

 

The man's lawyer Ron Mansfield last month said the man had performed at a concert in Wellington last year and was on his way to his hotel at 3.30am when three girls approached him on the street.

 

"They asked if they could kiss him," Mr Mansfield said.

 

He said two of the girls walked down an alleyway with the man and he made a series of "crude propositions".

 

They were then joined by a third young woman before the man forced her head towards his genitals.

 

"It caused offence to all three young women present. He misread the occasion that was occurring," Mr Mansfield said.

 

He said the man had been drinking and had no recollection of what happened the next day.

 

Mr Mansfield said his client was ashamed of what he had done and had offered to pay the 16 year-old $5000 in reparations.

 

 

He said the man had also offered to take part in a restorative justice programme with the victim, but she had turned this down.

 

"He has been trying to rationalise in his mind how this could have occurred, to ensure it does not ever happen again," Mr Mansfield said.

 

He said the man has also addressed his attitude to alcohol.

 

"He has let down his family, friends, the New Zealand public and his fans," Mr Mansfield said.

 

Mr Mansfield said his client should be discharged without conviction because a conviction would have an adverse affect on his chances to break into international markets.

 

He said it would also have a negative impact on musicians that he performs with.

 

Mr Mansfield produced letters from the executive director of the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA) New Zealand director Anthony Healey and Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ) CEO Campbell Smith.

 

Both men said naming the man could destroy his chances of succeeding overseas and could have a negative affect on New Zealand music overseas.

 

Mr Mansfield described the man as a "leading New Zealand talent".

 

"The New Zealand music industry has high expectations for him achieving a high level of international success," Mr Mansfield said.

 

He said the media was only interested in the case because of the musician's fame and the punishment of him being named would far outweigh any sentence the court was likely to hand down.

 

William Akel represented the New Zealand Herald, Fairfax, TVNZ and TV3.

 

He argued that the naming of the man would not affect his career if he is discharged without conviction.

 

Mr Akel argued that if there was a "total shut down of the court", it would appear that the man was being treated differently because of his prominence.

 

"Is there in fact some special consideration being given because this is a prominent person?"

 

Mr Akel said it would be far better for the court to name the man so that young fans could learn a lesson from the proceedings.

 

The police took a neutral stance on the suppression of the man's name.

 

- NZ HERALD STAFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was working at court again today and all the news crews were waiting for "whoever" it is....but while they were waiting out front a bit of a gang brawl broke out in the middle of the street....it was kinda skitz but being outside court a 100 cops were on the scene in seconds.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
  • Create New...