Govt urged to give up collecting spy base reparations

Email
Print

Mon, 08 Aug 2011 6:20a.m.

The three men have no money, says Mr Locke

The three men have no money, says Mr Locke

There are calls for the Government to drop civil action against the three activists who attacked and deflated the Waihopai Valley spybase dome in 2008.

The trio cut through electric fences to get into the enclosure.

They were found not guilty of burglary and wilful damage, but the Crown is now chasing around $1.2 million to cover the repair bill.

Green MP Keith Locke says it's a waste of time as the men don't have any money.

Mr Locke says the civil case is a case of the Crown being vindictive in defeat.

3 News / RadioLIVE

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

08 Aug 2011 07:46p.m.

Bryan wrote:

These guys may think they are political activists, but in my eye they are vandals of public property. Reparation is required. Their relative poverty or wealth is not relevant.

08 Aug 2011 05:49p.m.

Roxanne wrote:

Prosecute them to the full extent of their civil liability. They are costing the taxpayers 1.2 million dollars through their stupid thoughtless actions. They are responsible and should pay in every way possible as should all their supporters for this piece of stupidity. We try to bring up children with a sense of responsibility and then we have this mentality. I note they still expect their welfare cheques!

08 Aug 2011 04:54p.m.

jj wrote:

Alien You are a nationalist and have plenty of money by the sounds of you,why dont you do the decent thing and pay their fines for them? Or are you just utter crap the way you write,and the bones are hanging out of your backside.

08 Aug 2011 01:29p.m.

Mouthguard wrote:

Well done Sym, that about is par for the course with Alien. He'll strip away the facts until he can get his point across. Yes, they do owe the taxpayer. They can use their 'clear conscience' as collateral.

08 Aug 2011 01:14p.m.

jan wrote:

if they owe money to any government department they will have money taken away. if on a benefit WINZ are legally obliged to have it deducted, aslo when you work it automatically comes to the attention of IRD. same when you register your car move house the government knows where you are. I think these people probably have organised not to have money. if they did have money and where defending themselves, the cost for lawyers would of wiped out any savings and quite possibly they would of had to remortgage their homes. (not sure if they had legal aid or not). Maybe the americans should pay to persue them as it was to do with the spy sattelites. but after this financial meltdown they don't have any money to chase them either.

08 Aug 2011 11:51a.m.

Brett wrote:

Being poor and not having any assets shouldn't be an excuse for not paying for the damage they've done, YES it may have been done as part of a protest but it's still property that they had NO right to damage regardless of their political motivation.

The governments pursuit of compensation is no different to an insurance company who are seeking reparation from someone with no insurance to pay for the damage they've caused.

A neighbour of mine only recently cut down a tree which accidentally knocked some power lines down, the power company are taking him to court to pay for the damages.

I hope the government pursues this because if they don't it's the tax payer who ends up fitting the 1.2 million bill.

08 Aug 2011 10:43a.m.

Carlos wrote:

They should all go to jail if they cannot pay for this damage. They have put NZ in danger, and should be jailed at Gitmo bay, with all the other terrorists. ......shave the bastards first though !

08 Aug 2011 10:38a.m.

Terence wrote:

As the courts have found them not guilty, I don't like the governments chances of getting any money out of them, especially as they are all broke. Sound like throwing good money after bad, but of course that is what governments are good at as it our money they are throwing. I think it is more a case of some politicians having their pride dented.

08 Aug 2011 09:46a.m.

John wrote:

Having no money does not mean they should not be held responsible for the damage they caused. There is no rule or law that says that poor people are not responsible for their actions. This is also a signal to any other genius who thinks its OK to cause damage to state assets, there will be consequences in some way or another.

08 Aug 2011 08:29a.m.

Sym wrote:

Allan... The courts disagree with you. They found they did NOT commit a CRIME as you state. Two don't have houses to take and the third has it buried in a trust so good luck with your approach.