Enough already!! Jeesh Holmesy, take your small, warty foot out of your big, crazy mouth.
I know Paul is mates with Tony. I know Paul is in shock over how the events of the past few weeks have panned out. And I know he’s a once-was-great presenter, so therefore thinks his opinions and renowned questioning techniques are more clever and relevant than they really are.
I also know that Paul has his own closeted demons, plus experience of frenetic media interest from his daughter Millie’s P exploits. For some reason the Editor of the NZ Herald thinks I need to know more! The NZ Herald keeps giving the relic apologist column inches, and this week he bleats on about how poor Tony’s tragedy is affecting poor Paul. Ego, much?
Paul appears to be so super paranoid about how his own shiz would hit the metaphorical media fan, he can’t see the assault forest for the outted as an assaulter trees.
Paul raises many questions in his article, so I have helpfully answered them for him. I know, I totally rock. Now we just have to get the old fool to put down the pipe and pay attention to something not about himself for a few moments.
The fall of Tony Veitch is a genuine modern tragedy.
Ok, this isn’t a question. But many of Holmes’ comments are so ridiculous, they have to be parsed.
The fall (and kicking after the fall, and then the leaving as she lay) of Kristin Dunne-Powell is a genuine tragedy, modern or otherwise. By giving Tony’s media roasting the label of ‘tragedy’, you are minimising “the evils and brutality of domestic violence”, exactly what you say you don’t do.
There isn’t anything ‘modern’ about this, telly presenting aint exactly a new thang. The public and media interest hasn’t been anything other than it would be for any frontline personality caught lying after committing a serious crime. I would’ve thought you would know this only too well, Paul.
I believe I know something of what happened that awful night two-and-a-half years ago but, of course, I was not there.
Would that be because someone told you some of what happened? Aloha. Could that person have been Tony by any chance? Sources Paul, state your sources.
But it has nevertheless been a frightful, hysterical couple of weeks with vile claim after vile claim, two major broadcasting companies in the middle of it all, and a man, for obvious reasons, unable to defend himself because to do so would immediately incriminate him. No one in this country is required to do that, surely.
This paragraph makes no sense. If by vile claims you mean the claims are vile because they are not true, then FFS, advise Veitch to admit what is true and tell what did happen. The fact that Tony defending himself would immediately incriminate him implies to me that some of the vile claims we have heard are frightfully true.
He may not be required to do it Paul, ‘fess all, but if the claims are far worse than the truth, he should’ve fessed up long long ago, if only for his own sake.
But this has been a carefully orchestrated plan to end a career and the life a man has built.
Interesting theory. By whom? And why? Over the past few weeks the cat and I have played Spot-the-Dobber, so sure were we that it was an inside job, a jealous TVNZer. We focussed on who stood to gain. Marty Devlin got thrown in the mix early, Pete Williams was another obvious, and poor ole zero notice Andrew Saville initally made the list, but his bambi-in-the-headlights delivery of the sports news over the first day or two made it clear that he had applied no forethought or prior planning. Bless.
Back to Paul, name names, who do you think orchestrated this careful plan? Oh, and how did they get Tony to play along and bash the Mrs?
I do not minimise the evils and brutality of domestic violence. Men who bash their families serially are contemptible brutes.
But one-offs are ok? And it isn’t just men who bash, women acting out in violence also deserve your contempt Paul. Unfortunately, you do minimise domestic violence. Both of your articles have totally minimised the violent aspect of this crime. In fact, both articles minimise the fact that domestic violence is a crime.
There are serious questions. What happened that night? What are the facts?
Jeesh Paul! Did you or did you not interview one of the people who was there that night last week? Could you not have asked him and not us? Here’s a bunch of other questions you should’ve asked of Veitch.
Why did it take the woman well over two years to complain to police? This is of fundamental importance.
Why exactly is this fundamentally important? You don’t elaborate on this. And why can’t you call her by her name or call her the victim, jeesh Paul, find a nice person to review your words, you cranky old bat.
Why did the whole sorry saga start in a newspaper?
The whole sorry saga didn’t start in a newspaper. The whole sorry saga started when Mr Veitch laid his hands (and allegedly, feet) on Ms Dunne-Powell. Unless you mean the sorrygate saga? If so, that started when Tony took advice from some ageing old hack to give an empty, excuse-ridden apology via the media.
Why did it take it so long to emerge? And why now? Why, when a confidentiality agreement was signed and money paid? Who did it come from? Did events in Tony Veitch’s life provoke them? His marriage? His career progress?
I’ll deal with all these questions as one as, like you Paul, life is too short. This bunch of hard hitters (that once again, you could’ve asked Veitch’s view on yourself last week) all seem to imply something, hmmn, what could it be? Oh, ahh ok, I see, you think the victim went to the paper cos Tony had his wedded bliss and Olympic dreams fulfilled.
Nice diversion from the assault. As you say Paul, there are plenty of vile claims circulating. It’s almost like some people want to talk about the money paid as if that then allows someone the right to bash. Whatevs, it’s illegal to pay cash to bash and the validity of any agreement made at a time when the mental state of both signatories was compromised, is totally questionable.
I do think it’s a great diversion tactic though, I’ve caught myself arguing with those who say Kristin should now pay back her blackmail cash. Nice distraction – made me look, you dirty chook. Now, stop it. This type of unsubstantiated claim is indeed vile along with any other untruths about the incident. Exactly why Tony should’ve manned up to make a formal statement to Police and let the truth prevail.
How was the Dominion Post so certain the incident had happened? And why did a Wellington paper break the story when the events, the people are so completely Auckland? I know from an insider at the Dominion Post that it did not come through a reporter. It came through management.
Do your job Paul! If you have an insider, ask them, and then you tell us. Jeesh. How long have you been doing this for? Your first question makes it sound like you are uncertain there really was an incident. And what does Wellington vs Auckland have to do with it? News is news.
And what was Tony Veitch supposed to respond to this past fortnight? Shadows?
Oo, you’re like a petulant teen, or a paranoid P freak. Tony wasn’t supposed to respond to anything. He has known for over 2 years that this moment would come, Tony tried to keep it under cover with the hush money, but he said himself he knew eventually details of the incident would come out.
Veitch has had more than enough time to come up with something for this day, maybe that’s why his hollow apology was all the more disappointing. Jeesh, aren’t folk in the arts and media ‘sposed to be creative? Of course, there would’ve been nothing to respond to if he had done the right thing in the first place.
They weren’t shadows Tony was seeing, oh no, dem thar are skeletons; dry bones doing the dem bones, dem bones dance all the way out of the closet.
Newspapers were full of wild allegations from unnamed sources. What sources?
Exactly. Bring it on. Who and what are the sources? There should be more research and less speculation. Agreed. But that goes for you too Holmesy. Name your Dominion Post snitch and the sneaky Manager too. Let’s round up all the sources, even hollandaise.
It is a terrible prospect for Veitch and his former partner. I imagine the process that lies ahead and the thought of how it may end. But at least now it is formalised, at least it is now within the system. Now the investigation will become rational.
Credit where due. You finally remembered that the victim may be suffering during Veitch’s tragedy and you upgraded her from “the woman” to “former partner”. Um, yeah, kapai Paul. Thankfully, we agree on one thing, at least now this is all formalised, a rational investigation can occur.
I have to say that as the tsunami that has engulfed Tony Veitch began to recede it was so pleasant to look up and keep an eye on the events in Sydney this week, with the visit of the Pope. We saw a huge celebration of love and faith and hope by tens of thousands of young people, so much laughter and warmth and gaiety. There was sun and blue sky. What people predicted would be a nightmare week of lockdown and overzealous policing turned into one of joy and tolerance and affection for a warm-hearted old man of intelligence and faith and a kind heart. It made such a contrast to the cruelty and destruction we were watching over here.
Oh Holmesy, you had to go and spoil it, just when I was giving out gold stars. Please, please tell me you are not comparing the warm-hearted intelligence, faith and kind heart of the Pope to a fallen Kiwi sports broadcaster. Please do not do that.
Unless you name the folk you accuse of cruelty and destruction, you can’t blame the mainstream media for reporting news without naming sources.
His battle is lost.
Aloha Paul Holmes. Your battle with dementia is lost. Leave Tony alone, you’re doing him no favours.