A Great White Shark



Friday, 13th March. Unlucky for some. The PM attempts, from directly in front of her, to reach around in search of her hair, as he walks by. She puts her hand out in front of her, and says “No! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!” wagging a finger at him. He reluctantly backs away. The PM says to the manager “She really doesn’t like me pulling her ponytail?” who responds “Well …no!” He then asks for her name and later, as he passes upon leaving, he speaks her name. “Just that one word”.

Thursday, 26 March. The PM is once again at the cafe. When it comes time for him to leave, he approaches her, raising his hands high, making scary, suspense sound effects, like the music from the movie Jaws and gesturing as if to reach behind her. Mrs Key tells him to “leave the poor girl alone”. She asks “is it self defence, with your security here, if I have to physically stop you from touching me?” The PM counters with a smile, “Defence against what?” As he motions to leave, she turns towards the computer, and he once again pulls her hair. She tells him “Please STOP or I will actually hit you soon!”.

Later, the PM tells Patrick Gower “I have to take responsibility for my own actions. I completely misread the situation, clearly otherwise it you know wouldn’t have happened. I just didn’t see it for what it was.”

Well, what was it?

According to Marilyn Waring on National Radio it was “unlawful behaviour under section 62 of the Human Rights Act. I’m tired of it being treated as anything but illegal. The Prime Minister is a sexual harasser and he has engaged in illegal activity. The law doesn’t depend on anyone’s political affiliation. Illegal activity is illegal activity. This is illegal.”

Under section 62, “it shall be unlawful for any person by the use of language (whether written or spoken) of a sexual nature, or of visual material of a sexual nature, or by physical behaviour of a sexual nature, to subject any other person to behaviour that is unwelcome or offensive to that person (whether or not that is conveyed to the first-mentioned person); and is either repeated, or of such a significant nature, that it has a detrimental effect on that person.”

The undisputed facts describe behaviour that was unwelcome, offensive, repeated and detrimental. He touched her at work, repeatedly and against her will, embarrassing his wife who had to ask him to “Leave the poor girl alone”.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Was there spoken language or physical behaviour of a sexual nature?

“As he rounded the corner behind me he commented “that’s a very tantalising ponytail”. The dictionary defines ‘tantalising’ as “exciting the senses or desires of (someone). Eg “she still tantalised him”. Language of a sexual nature?

He made “scary, suspense sound effects, like the music from the movie Jaws.” We all know the reference. The iconic two-note main theme for Jaws, which composer John Williams said was meant to represent the shark as an “unstoppable force” of “mindless and instinctive attacks”. In his essay in Deep Focus Reviews, Brian Eggert writes “Take the persistent theory of the shark as a sexual predator and serial killer. In this, Spielberg places us in the shark’s perspective using underwater POV shots of bikini bodies and slender legs treading water. Not unlike the masked psychopath in the opening of John Carpenter’s Halloween (1979), the killer watches and follows its prey, and then attacks with prolonged jabs, as if to savor the moment. Likewise, in the first sequence of Jaws, a clear inspiration for Carpenter, our underwater killer does not devour the bohemian Chrissie (Susan Backlinie) in one quick chomp, but instead tortures her with agonizing bites to heighten her fear and its own enjoyment.” Key identifies himself: a Great White Shark, the “unstoppable” apex predator, closing in on his female prey. Behaviour of a sexual nature?

Gower asks “when you accept that you got it wrong, do you accept that you misused your power?” Key replies “No because I didn’t intend to do that.” Gower suggests that “the context really is about power. You’re the Prime Minister. She’s someone working in her job.” Key responds “Yes I understand that’s some people’s argument. There’s a counter argument… for that and I think yeah look by nature I’m a pretty casual person, and I do kid around and have a bit of fun, and I think one of the things that look you know that, look the majority of staff there have enjoyed is the fact that……the opposite, rather than the power sort of thing and me being a bit stuck up I’ve been mucking around and having a bit of fun, now you know ok look in the end I got that wrong and I have to accept that.”

Is the Prime Minister to be judged by his intentions? Or by what he actually said and did? Is he saying “Because I didn’t mean it, it doesn’t matter.”? Is that the way the law works?

Many words have been used to describe what he did including silly, stupid, school-boyish, weird, odd, egregious, bizarre, unbecoming, creepy and grotesque. But who amongst us has not already thought of the PM in those terms. The word that counts here, the inescapable, unavoidable, fatal-to-a-political-career word, is the word Marilyn Waring uttered on National Radio: unlawful. He might be our most casual Prime Minister but he remains the country’s chief lawmaker and, as such, is bound to abide by the law. Unlike Len Brown, the line he crossed is not moral but legal.

In the final analysis, there is no ‘counter-argument’ to consent. No means no. No amount of context, kidding or casual banter can ever transform “No! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!” to “Yes! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!” She said “No”. And still, he touched her. Two bottles of wine won’t cut it. He should have listened to the woman if not his wife and stopped. Too late now, Mr Key.


  1. I know Graham McCready has already filed a complaint with the police but has any one filed one with the Human Rights Commission?

  2. Well said Simon!

    “The undisputed facts…”

    This is the most significant detail of the story and the MSM seem dedicated on ignoring it. We have coin-operated automatons like Mike Hosking repeatedly calling it a “singular incident”. Another major failing of the MSM though, has to be the blanket refusal to present the views or responses from Amanda Bailey herself. Here is a woman who has bravely stated she did not accept the PM’s apology yet “he has apologised” is sprayed like napalm whenever the weeds of reality show their potential to take hold in the unkempt wasteland of our Fourth Estate.

    Maybe the MSM have tried to get further comment from Amanda Bailey, but they don’t mention any such actions. After the sting put into play by Rachel Glucina and the Hip Group owners, I for one can understand if Bailey is unwilling to speak to the MSM.

    (& I imagine The Press Council and the BSA are getting quite a few emails.)

    • Good points there FREEDOM.

      Msm has gone very quiet over this issue of late. Running scared perhaps for having set young Amanda up under false pretenses, by a journalist in breach of media code of ethics?

  3. There is also a dispute of the facts regarding how the apology was given and whether it was accepted – according to John Key it was accepted…according to the young lady it was not….why was the version of events by Key not queried….surely it shows he lied.
    Also, if I was to believe that JK’s mea culpa moment was sincere, why does he keep saying he was ‘horsing’ around with a ‘pony’ tail when he was clowning around – acting like a clown – or behaving like an idiot….does he think he was being clever or humorous?
    While I am on the subject….I don’t want the most casual PM for NZ…I want a serious, intelligent, inclusive PM who is able to tackle the major issues of this country. I, for one, don’t want the position of a PM of NZ – and by extension NZ- to be undermined, disrespected, and ridiculed world wide.

    • “[…]does he think he was being clever or humorous?”

      John Key *always* thinks he’s being clever and/or humorous. He’s never right.

  4. Well put commentary of the facts Simon. Thank you.

    I certainly hope Amanda has a strong, capable advocate on her side, giving her good practical advice on the matter.

    Is Amanda still working at the same cafe that she was continuously assaulted at? Does anyone know?

  5. Bob Jones another apologist for the right has written an article belittleing the waitress and dismissing it as just silly reactions.
    He says its notas though key threw her to the floor and had his wicked way with her. In Neanderthal times the male dragged thefemale by the”hair” to his lair for obvious reasons.

    Men pulling females hair is attention seeking and a sign of attraction,to persist when his attention wasn’t welcomed is bullying and has overtones of sexual assault. The right blame the left as usual ,its neither left nor is it right behaviour,nothing political about it.

    If Amanda was a NAT supporter what would be the excuse then ?
    There is no excuse JK has admitted he did it.

    • When Bob Jones comes up either on TV or in the media, we all quickly tune it out and turn it off. Pompous Bob Jones is usually wrong and out of date and out of touch. He thinks he has the final word on everything and what a joke he really is. Retire old farts, we say and bring on those aware and intelligent humble folks to speak about issues in our NZ media.

  6. One wonders who might be next to experience some banter. And in what form this horseplay or banter might take!

  7. Excellently said…straight to the point.

    The original blog had glorious detail in it but you have captured the crux of the matter that JK’s mates have tried to cleverly cover up.

    The big lie is that when Key finally knew she objected he stopped assaulting her. Bullshit.

    Fact :After the outraged “No No No No No” straight to his face, he assaulted her again.

    Word to the apologists : having fun and a few laughs at someone’s expense while assaulting them is not a defence, its called “being an arsehole.”

  8. No evidence of an apology yet. No accepting the effect of his actions. Key has spent plenty of time talking about how nice he is. he’s actually modelling that abusive cycle of flowers for the bashed wife, but no real change.

  9. Oh god, in the immortal words of Frozen, let it go, let it go, let it go….

    There is only so much traction you can desperately generation out of this before you end up looking rather sad and desperate.

    And this post has achieved it.

    • John Key has a track record of disrespecting NZ women.

      Roastbusters. He said those boys needed to just “grow up”. They were gang raping girls FFS!

      The Malaysian diplomat accused and arrested for attempted rape. Key lets him leave the country.

      Cuts to womens refuge and rape crisis services.

      After women are requested to speak about their experiences of being raped by NZ police Key decides the NZ government will not offer them compensation.

      And now Key is found to be harassing a waitress. His behaviour was ILLEGAL.

      NZ women can see a pattern here. You may not think it’s important, but a great many people do.

        • Come on mate – we agreed on the tv thing – unless there are 2 Countryboys. Give it a week and I bet it will be gone.

          • @ Dan . Firstly, I’m not your mate.
            Secondly, are you that stupid that you don’t recognise sarcasm when you read it. You’re so far up yankee doodle psycho jonky-stiens arse that you can’t see his sociopathic dysfunction for his gold plated turds. Quislings like you would fucking swoon in shock at the thought of a quality, ad free, free to air public funded radio station in this , the third state of israel.
            Re yankee doodle psycho jonky-stien’s careless abuse of a working class wench ? There are two worrying aspects to that. Firstly, the little prick couldn’t realise that what he was doing to her was causing the woman discomfort and distress, or perhaps he did and was enjoying causing her discomfort and distress. Secondly; I pay for that fuck to sit in my government and get clean away with the above while simpletons like you desperately try to normalise his abnormal behaviour and for what I can only assume will be for some kind of remuneration.
            It’s my view, you both need your gold plated turds kicked out of you so as we can all share in the wealth .

            People like me spend an absurd amount of our time heading off traitorous little pricks like you and others. And because we’re driven by what we think is right and fair, not for money or status, we’re never going to let anything go. We’ll never give up and we can’t be bought off. This issue will not be gone in a week or so, I’ll personally make sure of that.
            Yankee doodle psycho jonky-stien MUST go . For the sake of our world standing, now in tatters thanks to your casual ‘Mate’ and for the sake of our sovereignty, security and prosperity.

            This is now a family thing. We’re all Kiwi brothers and sisters here and it’s up to us to protect each other and in so doing we must flush out the traitorous rats and protect ourselves from the hostile neighbours those same traitorous rats have sold us out to.
            A bit off-topic but I’m on a roll.

            Yankee doodle psycho jonky-stien should come home to a cold Hawaii and know that his NZ office will be empty.

            • “simpletons like you desperately try to normalise his abnormal behaviour”
              Thank you CB really great post
              the most truest words said IMO.
              Working in Rape crisis for quite a few years what I see happening surrounding negative comments about people who get abused in any way by people of or in power, will be more abused saying “No way am I going to report this,” alot already do say that.
              I don’t think any one should let this slide by and give that creep key a free pass on this.

              abuse = mistreated regularly or repeatedly

              • Not if I can help it.

                The PM is a role model. When he refuses to accept a ‘no’ from a female when she feels uncomfortable by his attention, then what message does that send to younger people?

                There are far bigger implications to this behaviour and letting it slip under the mat with all the other ‘innocent mistakes’ the PM is said to have made, would be a huge mistake. It is time this narcissistic man was put in his place and reminded just who pays his wages.

                • PM salary, wages pocket change compared to corporate jobs, deals and handshakes coming his way for progressing NWO plans for NZ. just like Shipley and Clarke before him.
                  We are mere play things in the mind of this twisted sicko.
                  IMOP pollititions are not role models. they are non productive parasites with out of control egos.
                  Im with ya not lettin this one go under the rug!
                  We do not forgive and we do not forget.

              • Well I for one don’t agree with the poll its a Nat con poll,a trick the right use when they are in trouble always.

              • 750 eligable voters who took part in the poll is not “most of the voting public”
                Half the poll was taken before the pony tail pulling story
                the other half after the PTP story

                jkey lost a % of his popularity in the 2nd half of the poll

                LPrent wrote an in depth story on this
                educate yourself for free

                If you do a poll now things IMO will have changed, surely people cannot be that closed minded to what a failure this PM has been

              • May aswell have been a poll by People magazine they are just as credible and relevant. the Hearald constantly calls us kiwis like its cutesy. Im a fuckn New Zealander Gd damn it! not some bird too fat to fly scratchin the dirt in the dark lookin for bugs.
                its a right wing proppagander gutter rag.

      • @ DAN – APRIL 28, 2015 AT 8:05 PM –

        Give it time, give it time.

        This issue is only just gathering momentum and has the potential to explode in a few very prominent faces, once it gains traction! Namely the arrogant, smirking faces of Key and his mob!

        I’d say there is at least another two years mileage left in it yet, possibly more!

    • @JULES 74 . So, you’d be ok with it if she was your daughter? Or your partner. You’d stand back and not care because no big deal right? Because the abuser was the prime mincer and he’s a great guy and just horsing around? For seven months. You wouldn’t care if a woman close to you came home crying in rage and despair after being assaulted in her work place by a rich little bully surrounded by the cops, all of whom you pay for?
      You would be in effect paying for cowards and bullies to assault your partner or daughter?

      ( A word on the police standing idly by. Perhaps they stood back and watched on as Yankee doodle psycho jonky-stien dug a hole from himself? )

      Yourself and @ Dan desperately want this to all blow over. I bet you fucking do.

      Not on our watch .

    • Jules74, if anyone touched my daughter or wife I wouldn’t be “letting go”. Not until I’d shown the prick the error of his ways with a kick up the pants. Let Key’s protection goons stop me, I can get at least one good kick up his backside before they jump me.

      Really, would you be so ok with this if someone touched your kid? You might “let it go”, but then I suspect you’re a JK kiss-butt so anything he does is ok with you.

  10. If anyone is on the fence and asking themselves whether these attacks were sexually motivated, ask yourself this, Would Key have done this to a guy? The answer is of course not.

  11. Excellent analysis and some really important points (e.g., the various descriptors of Key’s behaviour that in many ways are a distraction).

    I think people generally have a very odd understanding of ‘intent’. They think it’s inside someone’s head. Worse, they think the person has some incorrigible knowledge of its true state that no-one else can see.

    That’s just wrong and, legally, intent is never (can never be) decided by what’s in someone’s head (if anything) that corresponds to an ‘intent’. it’s decided on what intent the public actions demonstrate.

    That’s also how we come to know our own intent – through our own actions and reactions.

  12. Interesting in today’s Herald what several MP’s have stated…

    We have the Double Dipper from Dipton acting PM Bill English stating :

    ” Aaron Gilmore’s treatment of a waiter in Hamner Springs was different – and that it had been dealt with appropriately ”…

    He goes further and states about ‘ the PM’s disappointment of these events , – and the ‘ inappropriatness ‘ of his behavior ‘….

    It is stated as if there was no common assault being committed….that there was a consensual-ness about it -and juxtaposed with his (Key’s) supposedly ‘clean ‘ record and popularity with the NZ public.

    The parallels with Aaron Gilmore are spurious …at least with Aaron Gilmore there was no ‘ 7 months protracted period ‘ of actual physical assault. It was a one – off incident with Aaron Gilmore….

    A point being that in the case of John Key , the victim had asked the offender to desist. And he did not. And that , – after 7 months of constant harassment.

    Another point is that despite what anybody alleges about the assumed ‘ popularity ‘ that Key and his supporters would like to tout …it is still no real defence against a charge of assault.

    The law does not recognize ‘ popularity ‘ as any particular mitigating circumstance as grounds for defense against criminal prosecution.

    Not if the law ifs functioning as it should.

    You can be the most popular persona on a national level and still be charged with drink driving or speeding offences.

    The same goes with assault.

    And the same goes with admitting to an offence and then – worse, – trying to minimize the offence once caught out …..

    It is all very well showing contriteness in admittance to offending after being found to be the culprit….but the fact remains he indeed did commit those offences…and just because someone later shows remorse….may yield leniency…but the fact remains the law has been broken and the law must be seen to take it’s course.

    To do less would be to show contempt of and minimization of those laws.

    Particularly in light in that others of less social standing have been convicted for just those same things and now have a criminal record because of their offending.

    The question that also remains is this :

    If John Key …had not had the whistle blown on his assaulting this person…would it be any less a crime ( common assault ) because no one spoke up?

    A crime was still committed…

    The difference being that this time Key was caught out in a very public manner – and not just locally – but worldwide this time. Indeed our very status as a valid member with the UN – to be taken seriously – under this PM is at stake ….with the respects to the law applying to all in this country . Not just a selective few.

    Hardly a good example to put before the UN about effective Human Rights issues and good legal and humanitarian issues if our own PM is not seen to adhere by them himself.

    And he , like any other member of the public – or indeed a member of the Police – is liable to prosecution.

    It is important in this regard to not see the magistrate swayed by certain arguments of ‘ He’s a nice guy , he didn’t mean any harm ‘ ,to hear such deflections and justifications based on ‘ popularity ‘ , he’s apologized ‘ , and that other past MP’s behavioral dismissal was ‘ different ‘ therefore justifiable..

    This is a legal matter.

    And the strength of the upholding of the impartiality of the law in this country is as much on trial as is the successful pressing of assault charges on the offender in this case.

    There is to be no minimizing , deflection or granting of special privilege here.

    The law apply’s to all.

    • Gosh Wild Katipo you have said it all ,you should be PM,
      The only worry I have is that a judge hearing the case is a fan of John Key and wont be impartial.i sincerely hope this isn’t so,

  13. 7 MONTHS, this harassment went on for…I suggest this is shouted from the roof tops, just so the general public can see how long this woman had to put up with this shocking behaviour from ‘our Primeminister! Yes, our Primeminister! Come on, all those apologists for Key…really? Horsing around for 7 months!

  14. Now a Herald digipoll says the PM hasn’t lost his popularity with the public and its much the same as before ,700 people polled!!!
    The daily blog alone has had more people than this who are disgusted with the PM behaviour.
    The Herald always supports Key so we have no reason to believe much of what they say.

  15. Latest Herald Poll shows National on 51%, confirming most kiwis see this as a media driven beat up of no significance. The serious opposition (Green/Labour) should be focusing on the big issues of economic hardship, renewable energy not hair-pulling and horse play – a load of chicken bones and biscuit crumbs, not surprisingly about all the herald can do to sell theyre crappy used toilet paper.

Comments are closed.