Probably giggling with excitement, and understanding he was being blocked from his hate-rants both in NZ and Australia he found somewhere else on the internet. A book review blog, and book 'review' opportunity that wasn't to be missed. He took some friends with him, including everyone's old favourite Christine Williams, an Auckland school teacher, hate-siter and frothy mouthed stalker.
Emboldened by the opportunity to spit the dummy that he had needed to keep sucking on during the radio 'interview' he was back to what he does best, deceit and misadventure. I have to admit it must have been hard for Kent to appear credible for 2 hours what with his mate Purkiss wanting to hang himself and show host vinnie eastwood howling eagerly at a poster of the moon on his wall. Kent must have just wanted to let it hang out, or what little he has to hang out, there on Mighty Ape was the opportunity.
In the following you'll see that Kent is the third 'reviewer' is Kent. The same guy acting with some reserve on the radio, and thinking he was getting away with it, letting it all out in an environment where he thought he wouldn't be known. His ally Christine also used her own name, the other 4 are unknown at this stage. But a dumbo or two remain among the balance. Don linked the 'reviews' to the Trade Me site, where he operates under an account that can be traced. The person calling himself 'Aileen' did the same. Of course the publishers, distributors and sellers of the books have a financial interest at stake here. 4 identified people have conspired with 2 other unidentified to this point to financially hazard the commercial expectation of the book. That is not to forget, that many sites have blocked these people for attacking reviewers of the book who were positive in their reviews, including that of a leading legal academic who opinion was that the book moves the debate for those oppose the Jury's finding 'to prove' that Robin didn't suicide.
But back to Christine, Kent and little Don's efforts. Caught with their pant's down? Yes completely, and who by? Themselves. Kent would have been beside himself to have another opportunity to 'have a go' at Karam, a sneak attack asare all his attacks against families and children are. Christine Williams would have needed no encouragement because she has published her fantasy of watching people being hung while shining a torch on them. The link to TM must have seemed an inspired choice because the sisters had a thread running there started and used by people who hadn't read the book, a 'manufactured' chance to rubbish it. But footprints or fingerprints were carried and deposited nicely showing the commercial attack to parties with an interest in benefiting from their investment in publishing this book.
But what of the public. Are the public not entitled to read a book that has been said by Mike Hosking to be the only book needed to be read to understand the Bain murder/suicide and the innocence of David. Or seek more information that what was shown on the successful 60 minute show last Sunday? Kent in his petulant way has talked about freedom of speech but we see his group has done everything they can to stop David speaking in Australia next month.Meanwhile Kent believes he is being 'excluded' by the press, seemingly unaware that most of nz are aware that he faces 100s of defamation charges and operates hate-sites.
However, what can his real fear be in people learning about the Bain case. Does he fear it exposes him and his fellow hate-siters. Is he afraid that his lies have been made evident. Is he afraid that the public would reach the conclusion of the legal academic, or it simply his hate for Karam getting the better of him once again. Whatever it might be, it does confirm that he has no credibility, is dishonest and why his hate-sites has 'inner sanctums' or places of worship for only the enlightened. One sick puppy.
If you read this Kent you will know why the Justice Department shut the door on your 'submissions' and phony petition and you will know why all of your hate-siters have well and truly lost their credibility.
8 out of 10 people found this review helpful:
9 out of 12 people found this review helpful:
8 out of 11 people found this review helpful:
6 out of 8 people found this review helpful:
7 out of 10 people found this review helpful:
4 out of 7 people found this review helpful:
2 out of 8 people found this review helpful:
1 out of 8 people found this review helpful: