Could this really be the end of Cameron Slater?

34
2

Working-for-Whale-Oil-600x339
The magnitude of criminal offending alleged in the hacking scandal enveloping Cameron Slater could well spell the end of Whaleoil.

Beyond the defamation case against Cameron, the current Police investigation (which seems to be crawling along) has the potential to bring charges of a serious enough nature that could see Cameron serve prison time.

The case will hang on, whether Cameron paid Ben, what the $9100 was paid for, and whether it is Cameron who sent the text messages. The encryption program they use in those discussions makes it very difficult to claim that they weren’t sent from a designated phone.

What suggests that Cameron is in deep trouble is the fact that he has not mentioned to it once on his own blog. He tweeted his response in a  format difficult to google online…

CGxx97wUcAAYzmo

…I suppose when he has been asking his readers for contributions, news that he may have been paying a hacker $9100 won’t go down well with his supporters.

If Cam goes down, will it be in a blaze of glory or will he whimper out?

All eyes are now on the Police investigation.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

34 COMMENTS

  1. I’ll put money on the ‘blaze of glory’ option. Something will eventually get him, and when it does, it won’t be a quiet exit.

  2. Please explain the difference between these allegations and what Hagar actually did and why you didn’t make a big song and dance about him. And don’t say “public interest”.

      • @ Kevin re “the difference” between Hager and Slater ( apart from many obvious moral ones)

        ….Hager was handed material on a plate
        …unlike Slater he didnt solicit a hacker
        ….Hager didnt break the law
        ….nor did Hager pay to hack a website to get confidential information…as Slater has done

        • so you speak for the public now?

          are you saying that you really dont understand the difference between exposing corruption and engaging in corrupt behaviour?

          are you really saying you just dont get why hagar has commited no crime?

          cmon kev – the public wants to know whether you even undertsand the issue – because your opening line points to you being woefully uninformed about A) the two different cases and B) what public interest means vis a vis journalism

      • mmmmm not sure about that. If it is in the public interest to publish information stolen from WhaleOil, then surely it is also in the public interest to publish information stolen from The Standard. Any other position is rampant hypocrisy.

        • no – Slater was caught hacking into the Labour Party server with Ede, Slater was fed a falsified SIS smear to attack Phil Goff, public servants were crucified and Slater was planning a hit job on the head of the SFO – The Standard bloggers are not even in the same league of scumbaggery that Slater is.

        • Dave, seriously? I think you need to read up on the difference between self-interest (hacking in a political party’s server) and public interest (reporting on the break in of a party’s server).

          I know you’re a supporter of National/ACT, and that obliges you to ‘spin’ these things in a rather crass way, but making statements like that simply undermines your credibility rather than enhancing any possible valid p.o.v you might hold.

        • im staggered that theres still this group of people who cant spot the glaring differences in the two cases and keep insisting they are the same

          three chairs for ignorance!

        • Dangerous Dave, the term of public interest is deemed when people in positions of power, in other words people that are able to effect change on behalf of the public, particularly if it is to the detriment of the public, are behaving illegally and inappropriately, abusing their position of power that they have been entrusted with, for private or political gain. That is like comparing the exposure of scandals such as Watergate, with the exposure of a saucy telephone conversation between you and your wife who you haven’t seen for a few days. The first scenario is public interest because it effects us all. The second scenario is private and is the business of you and your wife only, it effects nobody else. Blogging is an expression of opinion and although in the public domain, has no vote on the policies that are implemented in parliament. I cannot see any good reason for a person with strong, opposing political views, to hold private and identifying information of those that do not agree with him. I find that very sinister.

    • hager wrote the truth and has worldwide reputation for it. Whaleoil is the opposite.One acts in the public interest,other acts in self interest.

    • Kev.
      1. Please explain how Slater got hold of my details and donation record from the Labour party website then threatened to list it on the sewer, then the hypocrisy of him making a police complaint and accusing Hager of being a thief when the same thing happened to him.

      2. There appears to be evidence Slater paid for The standard to be hacked, is there proof that Hagar paid someone to do it?

      3. Slater is an obnoxious prick who threatens everyone who disagrees with him, Hagar is philisophical about debate.

      4. Slater is a hypocrite and a liar ie: he told Lisa owen on The Nation yesterday that he dosen’t break the law, yet he unremorsefully released the name of a defendant who name suppression.

      5. Slater is an uncouth blogger who relies on smear/scare tactics to threaten people. He paints himself as a maytr when caught out labeling everyone as liars. Hager is an investergitive journalist of the highest calibre who threatens no-one.

      6. Slater is a prick.

      Thats enough reasons for me?

    • C’mon Kevin I’m sure you can come up with a least a couple more all by yourself. I’ll give you a hint.

      One out of Hager and Slater appears to have broken the law. Which one is it?

      Still can’t get it?

      What about this: One of the two appears to have paid someone to hack information on their behalf. Which is it?

      Sorry, I couldn’t resist 🙂

    • It’s not hard. Hager published a book containing information given to him by a third party. Slater is accused of paying someone to break the law. What is even more interesting is who is paying Slater. Seems like quite a big difference to me.

    • Kevin – yes, public interest. I know that National/ACT supporters don’t hold to the view that public interest is of paramount importance in a democracy (unless it’s a Labour govt being outed by Nicky Hager, as in “Seeds of Distrust” in 2002) – but nevertheless, it is important.

      I guess once New Zealand becomes a one party state with National/ACT in permanent power, we’ll no longer have to worry about niceties like “public interest”.

      Hey, North Korea has got it sussed. You’d be perfectly happy there. No “public interest” at all.

  3. If Cameron Slater goes down, I doubt it will be quietly, given his unstable mental condition.

    He knows too much and has plenty of ammunition to take NatzKey down with him, spreading the excrement to kingdom come I’m picking!

    NatzKey should be afraid. Very afraid, if Slater turns feral!

  4. Let’s hope that when he goes, he actually goes out on a high note and takes a heap of other scumbags with him.

  5. Could this really be the end of Cameron Slater? Gosh I hope so. On the upside even the apathetic right-wingers are irritated and bored of his crap.

Comments are closed.