During the course of the 2010s, I came across two con artists. One thing that united them was they were men. But they could not have been more different: one was rather elaborate and was the subject of a Panorama documentary; the other was a rank amateur and, at least in the situation we were in, never fooled us.
I wonât name them as Iâve no wish to add to their notoriety, but hereâs the real kicker: both had the means to do well legitimately if they each followed through honestly.
The first one was clever enough to rope in people from very different parts, essentially setting up a publishing operation. But it was a swindle, and people were left in debt and jobless.
However, if it had been legit, it would have actually done quite well, and if the con artistâs aim was money, then he would have made some, over a long period, which would have sustained him and his lifestyle.
The second was not clever but came to a business partner of mine with a proposal to become a shareholder. We heard him out, he proposed an amount, and we drafted a cast-iron contract that could see him get a return on his investment, and protect the original principal. The money never came, of course, and we werenât going to alter the share register without it. He might have hoped that we would.
Again, he would have got something from it. Maybe not as good a return as property but better than the bank.
The first is now serving time at Her Majestyâs pleasure after things caught up with him and he was extradited to where he had executed an earlier con; the second, after having had his face in the Sunday StarâTimes, was last heard from in Australia where he conned his own relatives. He’s wanted by the police here.
I donât know where the gratification is here. And rationally, leaving honesty and morals aside (as they do), wouldnât it be better making money regularly than swindling for a quick fix that nets you less? Is it down to laziness, making them less desirous to follow through?
On the first case, I did have the occasion to speak to one lawyer pursuing him. I asked him about my case, since my financial loss was relatively small compared to the others taken in (namely a FedEx bill that a friend of mine helped me get a decent discount on because of her job). Whereâs the con? I was told that it might not have been apparent as the con artistâs MO was to draw different strands, sometimes having them result in something, and sometimes not.
Whatever the technique, it failed him anyway.
And what a waste of all that energy to create something that not only looked legit (as in the TV series Hustle) but could have functioned legitimately with so many good people involved.
That did make the 2010s rather better than the 2000s when the shady characters included a pĂŠdophile (who, to my knowledge, is also doing time), a sociopath, a forger, and a US fashion label that conned a big shipmentâs payment out of us. I doubt Iâd be famous enough to warrant a biography but they would make interesting stories!
Posts tagged ‘police’
Why con?
07.12.2020Tags: 2010s, 2020, Aotearoa, Auckland, Australia, Bahrain, BBC, business, deception, Fairfax Press, fraud, Jersey, law, New Zealand, newspaper, police, publishing, TÄmaki Makaurau, TV
Posted in business, New Zealand, publishing | No Comments »
Going beyond a blacked-out image: thoughts on Black Lives Matter
04.06.2020
Usually I find it easier to express myself in written form. For once, Black Lives Matter and the protests in the US prompted me to record another podcast entry. Iâm not sure where the flat as and the mid-Atlantic vowels come from when I listened to this againâmaybe I was channelling some of the passion I was seeing in the US, and I had watched the news prior to recording this.
My Anchor summary is: ‘Personal thoughts in solidarity with my black friends in the US. Yes, I posted a blackout image on my Instagram but it didnât seem to be enough. This is my small contribution, inspired by a Facebook post written by my white American friend Eddie Uken where he reflects on his perspective and privilege.’ Eddie’s Facebook post, which is public, is here.
Tags: 2020, Aotearoa, black American, Black Lives Matter, China, Chinese Communist Party, culture, family, New Zealand, podcast, police, politics, prejudice, privilege, racism, Taishan, USA, Wellington, Whanganui-a-Tara
Posted in China, culture, Hong Kong, New Zealand, politics, USA, Wellington | No Comments »
Frack away, IGas Energy: the Metropolitan Police has your back
06.02.2014The spirit of Gene Hunt is alive and well in the Greater Manchester Police, in the form of Sgt David Kehoe.
Arresting someone over drink driving when he has neither drunk nor driven reminds me of The Professionals episode, ‘In the Public Interest’, about a corrupt police force in an unnamed English city outside London.
The only thing is: that was fiction. This was fact.
So, IGas Energy plc, you may frack away. The British Government and the Met have your back.
Dr Steven Peers was the cameraman and citizen journalist who was arrested. CPS did not have sufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution. I wonder why.
He is now planning to bring a civil claim against the GMP for ‘wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and assault,’ according to the Manchester Evening News, which appears to be the only mainstream media outlet I could find that covered this incident.
Another report claimed that the GMP never received a complaint from Dr Peers, though how are we supposed to believe any statement from this force? The video has gone viral, and globalâand if Operation Weeting and the inquiry into police standards were insufficient to give the Met a bad name, then this surely will.
What next? Legislation to make protests against oil companies illegal?
No, that would be daft. It would totally be against the ideas of free speech, human rights and international law. No democracy would be that stupid.
Tags: 2014, civil liberties, corporate abuse, corporations, corruption, energy exploration, England, environment, free press, free speech, human rights, international law, journalism, law, mainstream media, Manchester, media, New Zealand, police, press freedoms, UK, Web 2·0, YouTube
Posted in business, globalization, media, New Zealand, politics, UK | No Comments »
Storm in a teacup on tape
23.11.2011The ‘tea tape’ that’s been on the news for the last week or so seems like, if you’ll pardon the analogy, a storm in a teacup.
PM John Key and Epsom candidate John Banks invited the media to record them chatting, then dismissed them. One cameraman, Bradley Ambrose, left a recorder on the table. From what I can gather, he did so accidentally. I believe him, and this country, the last I looked, believed in a presumption of innocence. Except when it comes to the internet.
Unfortunately, the PM didn’t see it that way, and because, by his admission, the police have so much time to investigate matters these days, claimed that the recording was illegal. Four media outlets were searched by police over the matter, and over interviews with Mr Ambrose.
The PM has his right to advance his opinion and I will defend any citizen’s right to do so. However, I’m not that convinced that both Messrs Key and Banks could expect that their conversation took place in private.
The submission in court yesterdayâthe time-worn one of the reasonable person’s expectation that they would be overheardâwould have got a nod from me, though Winkelmann J. has declined to rule on the matter.
Both men are public figures, and while we Kiwis are generally very good at giving people the space they need to chat, it’s reasonable to assume portions of the conversation, though not the whole thing, would be overheard by a bystander, with or without a tape recorder.
I ran for a much smaller office than the PM and for the duration of the campaignâand even a year before it beganâI watched myself over what I talked about in public places. I still do. And I didn’t even win.
When you put yourself out there, sadly, you sacrifice a little of your privacy. The two Johns have put themselves out there for a lot longer, and with a much greater profile, than I ever had.
During the campaign, one of my advisers warned me that if I were to chat to any opponent, I must do so in private, because you simply never knew who could hear you. That’s for a local body election. You’d reasonably expect the stakes to be higher for a General Election.
I am reminded of one private conversation from a public figure that took place in Wellington, which was shared with me by a member of the public. He revealed that that public figure was a potty mouth, complaining about a family member. He was, consequently, shocked to notice that such a discussion would take place in a café setting.
To me, that’s the typical sort of thing you’d reasonably notice of a recognizable public figure.
It is only reasonable that we would have been interested in what they had to chat about. If we were there, not as a member of the media, the odd key phrase would have caught our attention. If we walked by, we might have been accidentally picked up a bit ourselves.
The issue, for me, is whether a recording made of the conversation in its entirety is privateâbut I think back to the Wellington incident where the member of the public overheard the whole thing.
If it were anyone who had never run for office, then the reasonable expectation is that the conversation was private. But we are talking about two men who have plenty of experienceâand who should know that private conversations take place in private forums. You don’t invite the media along, and once things get sensitive, follow the same rule as with uncomfortable public displays of affection: get a room.
Tags: Aotearoa, Auckland, common law, General Election, Jack Yan, John Key, law, mayoralty, media, New Zealand, police, politics, presumption of innocence, privacy, TÄmaki Makaurau, Whanganui-a-Tara
Posted in media, New Zealand, politics, TV, Wellington | No Comments »