What's in store for Kenty and Counterspin now?

It's no secret that Kent's defence to the defamation charges he and Vic Purkess are facing is sinking in deep water. What is interesting to observe is the apparent associated panic that has set in, not only is Vic no longer a site administration but also recently Aunt Fanny is gone. It hasn't much been in focus to this point, but it's questionable where liability stops with the members of Counterspin and Justice for Robin Bain. Invariably, they have all been party to the defamatory attacks on Karam, it has been their 'work' for many years, in which they have 'shared' the commitment and costs, a combined effort by a group with clear intentions.

Of course there has been a united effort in attacking Karam by the hate-sites. Even in respect to the defence of those attacks members have pooled their resources and 'money.' It's has always been clear that it hasn't been just silly Kent attacking Karam and Bain, it's been the administrators, the members and the 'feeders' to the hate sites. So Vic and Aunt Fanny apparently attempt to 'divorce' themselves from the attack against Joe Karam as the defamation case nears. By no longer being administrators for the 2 hate-sites they apparently that it absolves them from blame for the dirty war they waged. Likewise, the vocal attackers, the contributors to the financial fund have also displayed liability when tested by what could be lost or gained by their activities. Yet I wonder why they think they can escape. The hate-sites have a common purpose, one shared by their members, financial contributors and 'feeders.' They are able to be observed over a long period as having a common cause.

I look forward to finding out what steps are available to Karam to satisfy any award the Court might make. This could involve an analysis of the Constitution of the two hate-sites, the administrators, advisors and in particular the 'contributors' to the 'fighting fund.' Some readers will recall an early proposition that donations to the 'fighting fund' could be seen as an investment. The administrators of the time presented that scenario, which in their minds, would result in good returns for those that fronted up with money. In other words a 'share holding' with the intention to profit. Everyone knows that shares can increase or decrease in value, yet if the 'investment' was an attempt to obscure civil  or criminal offences, the penalties for which cannot be paid, then that 'instrument' may well be scrutinised for potential vicarious liability. There is another avenue that is also a potential opportunity for recovering the debt, examination under oath of the administrators of the time over their comments, calls for money and so on - what was raised and where it came from. Of course there have also been public claims by a now ex-administrator (one who has 'resigned' in the last few days) to fund the litigation and by implication 'bank roll' the case and therefore the dividends if the case met with success. Furthermore, there are others on record, the Remuera housewife, who have also made public pledges to fund the entire case, pledges it seems which were encouragement for site-members that they were 'on track' with their hate-site 'business.'

One hardly needs to point out that the pledges, calls to invest and so on were an effort to maintain defamatory attacks on Karam and others. One clear perspective is that if 'investors' expected to gain, as 'worldy and informed' they must have also expected they might also lose - but it is to what extent now which may well be the question. Just like the hate-siters have willingly accepted anything said against David and Karam, they have 'accepted' (it's in their writings, captured to file) that the hate campaign with all it's elements of lying, threats and so on is their responsibility or 'good work.' I think soon we will see the hollowness or fortitude of the hate-siters, the value of their words, and the value of their commitments - somehow I don't think it's going to be a pretty site. I believe, as they have always done, that they will display shallow character, prove that their word and pledges mean nothing - just as their hate-campaign has ultimately meant nothing good as it now flounders on the rocks waiting to sink. Look closely, and you'll see a steady line of rats deserting a 'noble' cause, scurrying back underground from where they and their evil came.

In certain quarters the defamation trial is seen as the prospect of a third trial for David Bain. How bewildered those poor souls are. The reality is that Kent and Vic will face cross examination if they give evidence. It would be material to that evidence for it to be determined who their 'contact's and 'feeders' were in order to establish a clearer picture of the attacks against Karam and who may have also been behind them. The same will apply to any witnesses they may chose to call. And who knows Karam himself might call some of the sisters, there are a few names I could recommend who might be able to inform the Court if Parker or Purkiss ever discouraged them from their defamation and other illegal activities. We might find out the links to van beynan, Weir, the members of Sensible Sentencing Trust who involved themselves in the campaign and who were willing to break the law both with false complaints and threats. Not quite the 'third trial' but a beaut nevertheless.

I look forward to a news 'scoop' from van beynan regarding the fate of Parker and Purkiss, or perhaps Kent or Vic's willingness to come clean about the 'feeders' and 'supporters' once the water reaches their feet.