Tuesday 24 August 2010

Year of the Dirty Tiger

I know many of my readers will be devastated, especially Syd Walker and 'I am the Stig', to learn that Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren have divorced.

We wish them, and their money, all the best in holy separation.


Thaddeus said...

ROFL "Close Down Cairns Blog". This wouldn't be Blakey himself would it? Have a thought mate to just who has received the worst bloody treatment in this city in living memory. Have a bloody good look at that tall, slim woman with the whiteish hair who still walks around Cairns smiling, being gracious and calm despite the bucket loads poured on her by Mackenzie, King and even cairnsblog. You don't have a "hate" site on facebook, do you? Bloody amazing what a woman is expected to put up with here in Cairns, as compared to what a man can cope with.

MaryO said...

Dear Mr Close Down Cairns Blog,

Your view is certainly not shared by me - and I imagine many others. Who would rather fight to support Mike against all kinds of threats, than stand by and watch CairnsBlog go down.

a spectator said...

Again the Blake band of mental midgets show the zenith of their educational and intellectual prowess! Do not bow to this moron or his mindless toadies, you have support and you have the solid evidence behind you to show that this is simply another litigious, baseless act of attempted bullying by Blake and his family to mask the real truth: that this man is a raving sociopath who should not hold pubic office. This will backfire on Blake... in order to get to the truth he must disclose all and be able to be cross-examined - even a corporate hack barrister from the big city knows that and you will have your day to examine Blake's affairs, his mental health, his motives, his e-mails, texts and everything you need to mount a solid defense.
What an idiot, so vulnerable and so arrogant but that's the way it is in the land of sociopaths, everyone is right and you are coated with Teflon. I will watch from afar with interest

Oliver Redlynch said...

Mike is obviously not at liberty to publish details of any action. Cairns Blog has its (influential) supporters, so Blakey had better watch out since he has bitten off more than he can chew.

Smithfield Sam said...

Say spectator,
What you say is accurate. However it all costs. It's far more likely that the blog will ultimately be shut down, because MM will unlikely be able to spend the $$ required to fight. At some point the offer will be made "shut it down, don't do it again", and you can walk away. That's how the proletariat cope with the new media. In the US most states have "SLAPP" statutes (look it up on Wikipedia) that protect the little guy. No such luck here.

a spectator said...

Yes Sam , but can Blake really stand the disclosure that will be required from this? - believe me, and I know first hand, there is much, very much to be disclosed here and it will inevitably come out as part of the process. This is just the beginning and Blake is a deluded fool for setting the wheels in motion. He may restrict the blog but at his expense. A free kick to Mike and the Blake botherers.

Council Watcher said...

What sort of a sook is Cr Blake? Polititions should expect bad publicity from their public and investigative journalism and take it on the chin. Our Val has coped with much negativity and always fronts the world smiling and looking immaculate.
If you can't take the heat Blakey, get out of the kitchen.
More power to the Blog.

CBD Warrior said...

Politicians should be able to take criticism fairly delivered. This hasn't been the case here. I would guess a court may find slanderous comments have been made, and clearly the pattern shows animus. If the court proceedings don't kill Michael Moore, the settlement will.

MaryO said...

Presumably this is a defamation action. In which case, there may be a few defences worthy of further examination. E.g. justification, contextural truth, honest belief and qualified privilege. And a bounty of free legal advice too for someone like MM.

Thaddeus said...

"...clearly the pattern shows animus...." Well, goodness golly gee whizz CBD Warrior. And what has the campaign against Val revealed huh? Val has copped more shit, more bile, more spew than anyone I know of. Take a look at some of the comments on the site, "Val Schier is a Crap Mayor". Yet, you don't see Val "depressed" and lying under the bed bawling.

MaryO said...

Incidentally, some law reform options that have been proposed to short circuit these kind of silly actions include:
• Introducing state anti-SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) legislation. The ACT was the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce such legislation, The Protection of Public Participation Act 2008 (ACT).
Anti-SLAPP legislation could provide:
• A statutory tort of Improper Interference with the Right to Public Participation.
• Court declarations as to public participation. Such a declaration would carry substantial moral and political weight. 
• Early strike-out of cases that impinge on the right to public participation.
• Courts orders about payment of a security for costs or a summary dismissal of an action where a case is brought for an improper purpose.

Relevantly here, with respect to the Defamation Act 2005, constrain defamation actions by removing the rights of politicians to sue for defamation for comment made about their conduct in office or their fitness for office (unless they could prove malice). And by simplifying the horribly complex defences where even experienced defamation lawyers cannot correctly predict whether a statement will be deemed defamatory.

In short, the current Australian legal framework is framed around the purpose of the plaintiff in bringing a case - via the torts of improper purpose (malicious prosecution or abuse of process. That is, where litigation is commenced with the intention to dissuade or punish political opponents. In the alternative, the legal framework should be framed around a positive right to public participation and free speech.

For more information, see: Gunning For Change: The Need for Public Participation Law Reform, (2006) at: http://users.senet.com.au/~gregogle/images/Gunning_for_Change_web.pdf 

:Kevin-John: Morgan. said...

Hey there Mike, I'm really sorry to hear about your troubles at CairnsBlog, and although I know not what it's about as yet, but from what I have witnessed, you seem to have truly copped the trappings of a True Blogger. Congratulations!
I'm already famous around the world as BlueyBlogger due to many true statements I have made.
But I have a larger bone to pick with the likes of Cr Blake, Noel Briggs and that other pusbag Kevin Byrne, and possibly Val.
Mike, I tell you now, If anyone has come against you or your Blog, using paper, bring it to me pal, and within five minutes I will show you what NO other lawyer in Cairns will dare show you, then I will show you how to disqualify their ridiculous paperwork, then you can begin to prosecute those who dared to get in the way!
Hey, I may as well put this 10 years training in Universal Legal Technology to good use eh? Oh, I almost forgot the eleven years of
training in repairing the damage done with the use of legalese and bureaucratese.
Very shortly the public will get to witness this taking place, and people like Blakey and their fellow cronies will be where they should be.....broke, out of a job, and NOT too public nor popular anymore.

Ed in Edmonton said...

Thaddeus, from what I understand you won't be seeing Val lying ON a bed balling, either.

Queenie said...

I find this absolutely fascinating that Mike's entry was about Wood-Nordgren, & it immediately erupted into an election discussion/free-for-all. Or did I not get the joke? Probably so.

what's happening said...

Hey Queenie,

The first comment alluded to Mike's impending bankruptcy. Hence, it seems that an action may be in the offing against Mike.

A few of the commentators here seem to know something about it - and the rest don't - or are guessing due to past events.

Councillor Blake has attempted to sue Mike in the past, and it seems that he may have made another attempt.

And if it is a threatened defamation action, then MM needs to take care not to say anything himself until he gets some decent legal advice - or may get into deeper pooh.

Hope this helps clarify somewhat.

Thaddeus said...

Ed in Edmonton...who gives a shit what Val does in her private life?
She is calm and dignified in public and has never stooped to the level of her critics. There isn't any doubt the "boys' club" of Cairns tried to drive her out of office, but she stood her ground and withstood the barrage of assaults against her. How d'you reckon Blakey, Bonneau, Gregory and Pyne would have coped with all the shit she has?? Reckon Byrne would have? Entsch? Don't make me laugh.
You know bloody well they would have all fallen down in a heap of pissed pants, snot and snivel and gone running off to their Mummies.