Teapot tape before High Court judge

Print

Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:00a.m.

Freelane cameraman Brad Ambrose

Freelane cameraman Brad Ambrose

By Angela Beswick

A court hearing over whether the contents of the ‘teapot tape’ are private is underway at the High Court in Auckland.

Freelance cameraman Brad Ambrose filed proceedings last week, seeking a declaration on whether a conversation he recorded between Prime Minister John Key and ACT’s Epsom candidate John Banks was private, after a staged media event at a café on November 11.

Chief High Court Judge Justice Helen Winkemann was this morning shown 45 minutes of uncut TV3 footage from the event. Lawyer for Mr Ambrose, Davey Salmon, pointed out once media were ushered from the table reporters remained inside the café, close to Mr Banks and Mr Key. This suggested not only could reporters hear the conversation, but directional microphones on cameras could pick it up. Reporters were not asked to turn off microphones.

The black bag containing Mr Ambrose’s recorder was evident on the table throughout the footage.

Mr Key has refused to say what he discussed, arguing that the conversation was private and has likened the recording to the tactics used by former UK tabloid newspaper the News of the World.

Solicitor General David Collins is representing the Crown, Mr Key has lawyer Andrew Caisley representing him, Mr Salmon is representing Mr Ambrose and representatives for MediaWorks (TV3) are also present.

Mr Salmon says the legal action on Mr Ambrose's part is not about profit-taking or publicity, but about his reputation and legal rights.

Police have delayed executing search warrants on four media organisations until after the court makes a declaration.

But Victoria University media law lecturer Steven Price says the court has a choice over whether to make a declaration - and may choose not to, because of the police investigation.

"What they usually do in cases where there's disputed facts or whether there's some other process for determining what the law should be, such as a criminal prosecution, they're usually reluctant to give a declaration, they'll say `look, let the law take its course'," Mr Price told Radio New Zealand.

"If a declaration's granted ... it probably means the criminal investigation won't go ahead, the search warrants won't go ahead and media can go ahead and publish."

Lawyers representing Mr Ambrose say he is considering a separate defamation action, over allegations made about his credibility.

3 News / NZN

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

22 Nov 2011 10:57p.m.

olivier wrote:

I'm just posting to add to the number of people finding Mr Key ridiculous of his stance over this obviously very public discussion. You can't invite tens of journalists (to get good publicity) and then claim it was private. Com'on! And really has the police nothing better to do than spending such effort on such little thing?

22 Nov 2011 02:51p.m.

Stephen wrote:

If you accept that Ambrose made the recording by mistake was it right for him to give it to TV3 and the Herald on Sunday? About as right as finding a wallet and keeping the cash.

22 Nov 2011 02:17p.m.

hilary wrote:

this is the tv3 poll online result for labour to lead nz.Question 3
Thank You for Participating

Which party has the best policies for revitalising the New Zealand economy?


National (7165) 41%

Labour (8047) 47%

Act (850) 5%

Green (1018) 6%

Other (223) 1%

22 Nov 2011 02:07p.m.

Sia Siafa wrote:

It's sh*t for the camera man who recorded the so-called 'private' teapot conversation between Banks & Key. For the politicians to turn around and say the covno was private; dude, go f yourself, you're worse than a Kardashian and trying to maintain anonymity while a hoard of cameras are flashing and recording around you...

22 Nov 2011 02:07p.m.

RobertM wrote:

It's all rather extraordinary, the tea pot tape seems to have stressed the PM who looked stressed and tired in last nights debate with Goff, who looked good for the first time. It's a bit like the Nixon watergate tapes, or the LBJ or JFK tapes. Why all the drama and legal heavy hand if there's not something politicaly damaging.

22 Nov 2011 02:00p.m.

Harold wrote:

@cherie no. If your at a meeting in a cafe and you want it to be reported in the media to enhance your profile and you have invited reporters along for the ride with cameras and microphones and you haven't suggested to the reporters to turn off their microphones. Then yes it should be made public.

22 Nov 2011 01:49p.m.

crystal wrote:

@cherie: YES! If anyone is a public figure, and is getting paid by the taxpayer to make public and honest decisions, and is at his paid job, in a public place, and has invited the media to attend that public place to advertise his image, and his decisions effect people of NZ directly….then hell yes. On the other hand, no one is interested to hear your personal gossip about best mate’s droopy husband and tampon brands! Get a life, and do not repeat this silly question here again.

22 Nov 2011 01:45p.m.

anne wrote:

Point of interest also that the PM complained about the southland times having a headline about the israeli spies,at the time of the earthquake,his complaint got turned down because of huge public interest,so our PM is out there saying what he wants printed and bringing lawyers etc if its not favourable to him.Dictatorship,definatley,we have it in nz,right now.

22 Nov 2011 01:42p.m.

anne wrote:

So does key require nz to have a dictatorship style of reporting what politicians say or do we live in a democracy and expect to know what our politicians intend for us.
There should be a definate line here between
priviledge and private,meaning what the pm says with regard to politics then he is in a level of priviledge and it becomes one of public interest.If media are denied then that is against our democracy and will continue to be a slippery slope.

22 Nov 2011 01:32p.m.

cherie wrote:

So you guys are saying if you go and have a meeting in a cafe people should be allowed to tape you conversation without you knowing and then give it to the media?