GUEST BLOG: Matthew Blomfield – High Court lifts suppression on strike out of Whale Oil defamation defence
This week, the High Court lifted a suppression order on its 26 October 2018 judgment in my case against Cameron Slater. In that judgment, the High Court essentially struck-out all of Slater’s various defences against my claim of defamation.
In 2012, Cameron Slater ran a long series of articles about me on his Whale Oil website. They were vicious. They portrayed me as violent, a criminal, a fraudster, a psychopath, and more. He said anything he could to try to destroy my reputation and to destroy me. There was no truth to any of it.
I believe he did all of this because he was paid to do so. I had had a falling out with a business partner who tried to get revenge by making false allegations against me. I recognised many of the allegations Slater published as being the same ones that my ex-business partner had made. Slater has always denied it, but I have seen correspondence confirming that my ex-business partner was sending him money. It also appears he gave Slater an overseas holiday. I found out that documents Slater was using to try to legitimise his allegations came from files I had left in the care of my exbusiness partner.
For almost seven years, I have been seeking to clear my name and to have Slater held responsible for spreading these vicious lies. For almost seven years, Slater has succeeded in delaying, and delaying, and delaying. He claimed that if given a chance he would show the Court that all the allegations he made were true. The Court gave him chance, after chance, after chance, but he was never able to even say what his case was.
Finally, in October last year, Cameron Slater ran out of chances. He had blown his last chance and the Court refused to let him have yet another one. The Court carefully considered the case that he said he wanted to bring and found that it failed to properly answer my claim in almost every way imaginable. The Court also looked at the documents Slater had and found that they did “not provide cogent support” for the allegations.
It’s magnificent to have this decision. I think this judgment is a major vindication of everything I have been fighting for, for almost seven years. It shows that there simply was no substance to what Slater said about me on his Whale Oil site.
Unfortunately, this is not the end. Slater has appealed this decision. He has used that appeal to still further delay the final judgment. Like he did in the High Court, he is now trying to delay the proceeding before the Court of Appeal.
I am determined to see this case through to its conclusion. I believe, in light of this judgment, it is now clear that there can only be one conclusion; Cameron Slater will be held accountable for his actions.
In 2011, Slater targeted me in my role as a primary school principal because I was very active in fighting against national standards. My suspicion (although I have no evidence) is that this was coordinated with then Minister of Education Anne Tolley’s office. While the vitriol was in no way comparable to that fired at you, it was still enough to end my career as a school principal and to contribute to a breakdown in my health. Your success in making him accountable gives me great joy.
Anne Tolley has a lot to answer for, with claims such as this, sadly I doubt she’ll ever be held accountable…
wont it be a hollow victory against slatter he will just declare bankruptcy with all cases piling up you ve really got to wonder if his stroke is just an act he is one individual who will never take personnel responsibility for his actions
@ Mike …”you ve really got to wonder if his stroke is just an act … ”
You could have a point there!
It’s interesting to note, the High Court judgement was in October 2018, approximately about the same time it is said Cameron Slater had his “stroke” if I remember correctly!
If Slater genuinely had a stroke, then I’m sorry for him. However on the other hand, realising what was coming from the case, if he’s pulling a swifty to get the sympathy vote, then he deserves nothing but contempt!
So did Slater have a stroke and which other politicians do he and Lusk work for? are they paid with tax payer money?
Yes, Slater did have a stroke. All of the hatred inside of him finally took its toll.
slatter is one toxic fellow who should be handled as high level nuclear waste
“National Standards” are a disgrace to NZ, as we were stupid enough to allow these ideological political tools to damage our education and the lives of many thousands of our kids.
The education system has not recovered from the load given to teachers by “National Standards”, the loss of direction in assessment towards teaching, the rising levels of student anxiety exacerbated by the unnecessary and continued constant stress imposed by this system of competition, leading to widespread increase in feelings of failure and underlying hopelessness.
Good on you for fighting this anti-education, anti youth govt edict foisted across NZ in spite of all international expert opinion against such folly.
Business NZ is very much behind “National Standards” just as they are against recognition of global warming. Kerr et all have a history of anti social influence on NZ and our kids futures.
Greed driven swine with no empathy or regards for our future generations.
Teachers who fought against “National Standards” need recognition for their altruism.
Well done Matthew – tremendous fortitude and guts and stress to follow through on this as you have.
Whether Slater continues with this sort of poison may depend on his backers, or whether God decides to call him and clasp him to her bosom, but I suggest that everyone who has been unfairly vilified will be feeling very proud of you right now.
Kia kaha
I’d really like to see Slater receive jail time… even if it’s suspended at least it’s on his record
Would that be his third strike?
People with a track record like Mr Slater’s have to be pursued till the end
as with crims called to account in old age, a stroke stricken Whale will likely be a pathetic sight, with him past his peak “damage years”, but, such cases should be pursued nonetheless–both because of the damage done to others who did not deserve it, and to discourage anyone else in future who might think it a “nice little earn” to try and destroy someone publicly
Aside from showing the apparent business model uncovered by Dirty Politics doesn’t pay; it’s also been useful for building up some case law on what’s journalism and illegal scumbaggery.
Mr Slater lost all credibility when he openly declared on national TV that he “did not break the law”.
Really?
He was found guilty (and subsequently sentenced) on 8 charges of breaching suppression orders and one of identifying a victim!
These crimes were facilitated through his website by use of a computer.
I want to know why, in the course of sentencing, he was not forced to close down his website, surrender his computer(s) and be subsequently banned from any device capable of accessing the internet for a period of years.
The website and computer(s) were tools used in the commission of crime(s).
I have never seen anything useful or substantive come from his corner. It is apparent that he is nothing more than an effluent agitator.
A lot of people I meet still don’t know that Slater’s slease blog site –
‘Whale Oil Beef Hooked’ is a pathetic attempt at humour- a childlike play on words meaning ‘WelI I’ll be fucked’.
Sounds like he certainly has been.
Sympathy is minimal.