As has been shown below Mike Stockdale is a blatant and self-exposed liar. In the earlier post 'Mike Stockdale, a blatant liar?' he first of all alludes to a conversation with Milton Weir, giving details of the actual conversation. Then on another day, claims not to know him.
But in his true role as a hypocrite he almost daily announces David as a liar because of David's testimony being contradicted by his Aunt. This needs to be looked at a little further, David's aunt was also to become a beneficiary of the estate should David have been convicted. Much was made by the prosecution that David was lying about who the glasses belong to. David said they weren't his, at that time the Crown had clear evidence they weren't his but withheld it. So David was clearly telling the truth. His aunt's account is unsupported apart from a claim (not evidence) by Micheal Guest that David was going to 'admit' that he had been wearing the glasses that weekend. Mr Guest, we know, was David's lawyer at the time and he was later struck off for amongst other things lying to a client. So at best, Stockdale's claim is based on two different people giving conflicting accounts, evidence from one them David, claimed to have been lies by the Crown but which in fact was absolutely true. If David was telling the truth about whose glasses they were (and he was) then on the balance of things he was telling the truth about not wearing them - remembering that not one witness gave evidence of having seen him wear those glasses in the day's before the murders/suicide. 'Supporting' evidence that David had asked for the (his)glasses was later offered by a police officer who had held silent on the matter for 13 years. I find it absolutely nonsense that David would ask for glasses that were broken and therefore of no use to him that morning, more so because he is 'supposed' to have realised or known they were 'linked' to Stephen's room by a lens not yet found, and not found for many further days and only then in the most extremely odd of situations.
So Stockdale you are entitled to say that David's evidence conflicted with that of his aunt, or that indeed her account conflicted with his. You can't call him a liar. However, I can call you a liar, a stalker, a persecutor and a member and patron of hate-sites that are currently being sued in the Auckland High Court because that is true, and the truth of all of that has been provided by you. Thanks for that.
Old Mike is just begging to appear in Court. I bet the ol'fart would even turn up in a wig and a gown, and demand to sit in the front bench. He's certainly a 'legend in his own mind'.
ReplyDeleteFor goodness sake someone stop me. I can't help myself. This clowns replying to his own posts.
ReplyDeletesupersleuth wrote: Just thought...Another day,another lie.
Edited by supersleuth at 2:50 pm, Mon 20 Sep Quote supersleuth (0 ) 2:49 pm, Mon 20 Sep #27477
I see Kent is asking for help with his submission, no doubt he wants to get it in as quick as possible, before someone else puts together a submission pointing out some of the things the Counterspin group have been up to, and why they are not representative of 'right thinking members of society'.
ReplyDeleteContempt of Court, Harassment, Stalking, Defamation, Public Abuse, Derogatory Statements about Public Officials and Celebrities (including their children), Intimidation, Planning to Commit a Crime.... it goes on and on.
It's only commonsense, when you set yourself up as an organisation whose main objective is to influence Justice and Law, that you are able to demonstrate you are firstly, a law-abiding group of people.
It's a sad fact, people like Superdoof and the twisted sisters, who once boosted Kent's egos, by hanging off his every word, will now provide the evidence that will be the downfall of his entire campaign.
I think it also another sad fact for kent and the sisters that their exposure as a hate-site of nutters has already occured. The petition is used toilet paper, the petitioners are defendants and the group have taken their place in history as losers and persecutors. The early and telling exchanges have taken place and the hate-siters have found they have no stomach for the fight that they begin to realise is already lost. They are infiltrated, disarmed and subdued.
ReplyDeleteI would like to defend Kent to a certain point. We do have and should retain the right to dicuss any decision made by a Court.
ReplyDeleteAnd we should have the right to fight for change, if we feel the system is lacking in some manner.
Initially maybe Kent's intentions were admirable. But somewhere along the way he lost it.
One very big mistake was taking his fight to trademe, and allowing it to continue. Ask any trademe member, and there are hundreds of thousands of them, and they will tell you the message boards are full of nutters. The JFRB thread proves that. It is an historical account of just how nasty and vicious the fight has got. And it's there for all to see.
It has become the public face of Counterspin. And a very ugly face it is too.
The facebook page is hardly a shining example either. Here we have the same people from TM, making fun of DB and JK, dicussing person details of non-members and plotting the persecution of innocent persons, and anyone that dares to oppose them.
The odd discussion on actual evidence is usually spoilt when some stupid person throws in some theory that is so unrealistic, you can almost feel the others shudder, at it's very mention.
Kent's biggest mistake now is believing he can turn things around and teach his supporters a bit of self control, and somehow regain some respectability. He is wrong. He is being watched by more than just us 'TM Nutters' whose feet he allowed to be stood on. He can't refute the facts, and he can't take it all back.
As an child can tell you Kent, when you have a spinning top, you have to start it in a normal cycle, you can change it to a counterspin, once it's going, but the counterspin won't last long, because it soon runs out of momentum, and when it does, it stops, and falls over.
Most children learn very quickly, if you want your toys to be more enjoyable and last longer, then don't abuse them, and use them how they are meant to be used.
Fair point about what Kent's intentions might have been in the beginning. However, I can't concede him any ground on that because before he jumped in boots and all he should have had a comprehensive understanding of the case, and then even when he had achieved that (assuming he was too thick to see that David is innocent,) he shouldn't have, as you say, taken a intemperate approach. Trade Me, 'apparently' his and his supporters greatest tool for propoganda, has also been his downfall. Kent got carried away in his own importance, nothing has really changed except that he and a few others are left holding something they thought they would never be holding.
ReplyDelete