- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, June 02, 2006

6/6/6

Queen v Selwyn

The sedition trial starts Tuesday - the day after this country celebrates Her Majesty's birthday with a public holiday.

The Crown and myself have managed to come to an agreement on having a lot of their witnesses read instead of having to turn up and give evidence personally - thus saving them the hassle of participating in the circus and the jury gets to go home a couple of days early.

For the Crown to win they must prove I, as a participant in the publication process, had a "seditious intention" at the time. That is only something that I can answer.

Now the NZ Herald went and published one of these texts that the Crown alleges is seditious about a quarter of a million times the day after. But it is assumed that the publishers of the Herald had no seditious intention when they did that even though the text was the same. The Herald publishers must have thought it was reasonable that people were alerted to the content of the document and/or that the words fall short of a credible incitement.

I've already pleaded guilty to being a party to a conspiracy to cause intentional damage so this shit is all unnecessary additional persecution as far as I'm concerned.

Giving people ideas should not be a criminal offence.

Link

18 Comments:

At 2/6/06 7:11 pm, Blogger Zippy Gonzales said...

Good luck with the trial.

This whole sedition thing relies on proving your actions were in malice. One could argue the Tame Iti defence, that it was all just performance art.

 
At 2/6/06 10:21 pm, Blogger Idiot/Savant said...

New Zealand newspapers have repeatedly republished seditious statements and utterances while covering trials, and have never been prosecuted for it. Presumably its covered by the "good faith" defence.

That aside, you're right; merely giving people ideas should not be a crime.

 
At 5/6/06 11:40 am, Blogger peterquixote said...

tim,

does the allegation of 'seditious conspiracy' rely on a printed article, and if so are we allowed to see that article

why for gods sake did you plead guilty to intention to cause damage, what fucking damage,

i talked to some poof white liberal women down here, about whether the foreshore was in the treaty and they said it was, and technically you are correct

what should concerned people be doing to help you,

 
At 5/6/06 6:56 pm, Blogger Asher said...

Tim - Best of luck to you. Much respect for forcing this to trial rather than pleading.

 
At 5/6/06 7:08 pm, Anonymous John said...

What a shame that the Abolition of the Death Penalty Act 1989 removed the death penalty for the crime of treason :)

 
At 5/6/06 7:12 pm, Blogger Murray said...

In reality it's Clark Vs Democracy.

This is the most BS charge in our nations history.

 
At 5/6/06 7:20 pm, Blogger JamesP said...

What damage? Heh. Remember the axe through the window?

Giving people ideas should indeed be encouraged in a democracy. And if Tim had done only that he wouldn't be in trouble. Instead he called for civil disobedience (ie. illegal acts) and for that there should be some punishment. We live in a democracy and there are ways to change governments and the minds of governments without resorting to illegality. If we all felt justified in breaking the law whenever the government did something we didn't like the country would be in chaos.

On balance though I hope he gets off because it is a pretty tame example of sedition and the law is so broad as to discourage even reasoned criticism of the government.

 
At 5/6/06 10:28 pm, Blogger sagenz said...

good luck tim. this charge should never have been brought. especially when this govt is run by a liar fraud and thief.

 
At 5/6/06 10:52 pm, Blogger ZenTiger said...

If its any consolation, it could be worse. You could have cut down a tree with that axe...


Good luck Tim.

 
At 6/6/06 1:03 am, Blogger steve martin said...

Good luck Tim, I hope it all turns out for the best!

 
At 6/6/06 1:24 pm, Anonymous bomber said...

Good Luck my friend! You did the right thing, beat the monster at its own game!

 
At 6/6/06 7:48 pm, Blogger peterquixote said...

strength

 
At 6/6/06 8:25 pm, Blogger t selwyn said...

Thanks. I have to be seated next a security guard the whole time to make me look dangerous.

 
At 6/6/06 11:11 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

With respect Tim, ALL accused are accompanied in such as manner, so as to prevent conclusions being drawn about their potential for disruption.
It is standard op for the Judge to advise the jury to disregard the security for this reason.
Good Luck

 
At 7/6/06 10:28 am, Anonymous Cameron said...

Kia Kaha bro keep up the good fight!

 
At 7/6/06 10:46 am, Blogger anth said...

Good luck

 
At 7/6/06 2:29 pm, Blogger llew said...

"I have to be seated next a security guard the whole time "

Is that why you're not live-blogging the trial?

 
At 8/6/06 11:16 pm, Anonymous nick keesing said...

Good on ya Tim; if they were consistent, I'd be in jail for a host of offences. I suspect they haven't forgotten the police station episode! Civil disobedience is judicial activism, an important part of the whole process of making new laws. Go hard.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home