Porn-exposing lawyer also a steward and adjudicator with Racing Integrity Board

[hesi]

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

What was the indiscretion?

Who did he cover up to?

The indiscretion which was having porn on his computer that staff could see, but he has gone to great lengths to hide this to the RIB, by not raising it and continuing to try and get permanent name suppression.

Now that is fine when it comes to many avenues of employment, but TOTALLY unacceptable for someone working judging others integrity.

So not the indiscretion but that he tried to hide it, he never came clean

Now apologies to anyone with a sensitive demeanour, but there are 3 somewhat clever but inappropriate puns in the post above lol

[curious]

2 minutes ago, hesi said:

The indiscretion which was having porn on his computer that staff could see, but he has gone to great lengths to hide this to the RIB, by not raising it and continuing to try and get permanent name suppression.

Now that is fine when it comes to many avenues of employment, but TOTALLY unacceptable for someone working judging others integrity.

So not the indiscretion but that he tried to hide it, he never came clean

Now apologies to anyone with a sensitive demeanour, but there are 3 somewhat clever but inappropriate puns in the post above lol

I mostly agree but I don't think it is fine in any avenue of employment at all.

[hesi]

Just now, curious said:

I mostly agree but I don't think it is fine in any avenue of employment at all.

Managing a brothel?

[hesi]

4 hours ago, Newmarket said:

Who cares, its only porn. I bet Chief has even stroked the lizard at some time over the years….

Never heard it called a lizard before, maybe a chameleon lol

[curious]

5 minutes ago, hesi said:

Managing a brothel?

Fair point. I probably should have said that I don't think involuntary exposure such as this is fine in any avenue of employment.

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, hesi said:

The indiscretion which was having porn on his computer that staff could see, but he has gone to great lengths to hide this to the RIB, by not raising it and continuing to try and get permanent name suppression.

Wrong on all counts.  You are as bad as @curious reading what you want to read as opposed to distilling the facts.

2 hours ago, hesi said:

So not the indiscretion but that he tried to hide it, he never came clean

You make the assumption he tried to hide it.  What if he wasn't asked?  

In any case what was he hiding?  That he watched porn on his office computer?

2 hours ago, hesi said:

Now apologies to anyone with a sensitive demeanour, but there are 3 somewhat clever but inappropriate puns in the post above lol

If you are talking about your post then not "clever" more salacious innuendo unbecoming of someone of intellect.

Given both you and @curious haven't yet identified the core issue with the case I can say that neither of you would meet your expectations of an RIB Stipe.  Now what does that highlight?

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, curious said:

Fair point. I probably should have said that I don't think involuntary exposure such as this is fine in any avenue of employment.

You obvuously have no understamding of employment law.  

[Gammalite]

20 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

You obvuously have no understamding of employment law.  

what . There wouldn't be a paid job going where an employee could view pornography on work equipment. 

would be grounds for (summary) instant dismissal as is a case of serious misconduct. (yes the brothels get away with it I spose )  

Of course a 'dismissal procedure' must be followed to avoid any 'Unfair Dismissal ' claims by some gold seeking lawyer , just as in other serious misconduct issues under employment Law such as Theft, physical violence, Gross negligence or serious insubordination. they are not worthy of keeping on staff at any business .

unfortunately in this day and age the legal system  is full of claims of serious Sexual harassment. It seems to come in all shapes and forms these days that lead to all sorts of issues.

Staff seeing someone with pictures on a screen of a sexual nature,  is not only Very poor taste, terribly poor ethically, but also a type of harassment to those that know it's going on, and would effect productivity and co-operation in the workplace.  It is incredibly easy to prove from the hard drive.  Dismiss them instantly. 

[curious]

6 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

 Given both you and @curious haven't yet identified the core issue with the case I can say that neither of you would meet your expectations of an RIB Stipe.  Now what does that highlight?

Perhaps you would enlighten us then, as to what the core issue is that we are missing. From your headpost to this thread, I assumed you thought it was a history of exposing others (employees) to porn and then being employed as a stipe and adjudicator by the RIB? 

Edited 9 hours ago by curious

[curious]

6 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

You obvuously have no understamding of employment law.  

My opinion that you quoted didn't necessarily have anything to do with employment law. You seem to have drifted from supporting licensees with drug positives to now supporting those with a record of sexual abuse being employed in racing integrity. Not that it would be the first incidence of that.

Edited 9 hours ago by curious

[Freda]

9 hours ago, curious said:

Fair point. I probably should have said that I don't think involuntary exposure such as this is fine in any avenue of employment.

Involuntary being the operative word, I'm assuming. 

I was going to point out that viewing porn would be unnecessary in the brothel scenario...but I suppose that a new employee might be given some pointers.....and this is getting ridiculous.

Just get rid of the piece of shit.

[mikeynz]

Rather interesting, Pornhub is the 5th most visited website for January in NZ way more visits than Stuff and The Herald, so based on those figures how many publicly condemning someone accessing it when most likely they are doing same is hypocritical, so regarding the so called RIB, how many others are tuning in.

It's more about where you are accessing/watching, more than 90% of visits to the pornhub site is accessed  on smartphones, but accessing it on a work computer, that's where the issues, you would have to be a bit shortsighted to access a work computer, there is time and place for everything but passing judgement on some because they access porn, how many pass judgement on others when they are no different.

Now I see said lawyer is barred from refereeing rugby this year, is this a rugby union ruling, all of these issues are a bi  product of the infiltration the internet has on every access of our lives, it's endemic, it's a different world, it ain't better but the genie is out of the bottle now.

[Chief Stipe]

6 hours ago, curious said:

Perhaps you would enlighten us then, as to what the core issue is that we are missing. From your headpost to this thread, I assumed you thought it was a history of exposing others (employees) to porn and then being employed as a stipe and adjudicator by the RIB? 

The head post isn't my post.  In answer to your question  - no.  I'm surprised you haven't picked up the nuance - well not surprised as you seem to get a bee in your bonnet and gnaw at the bone of trashing racing.

[Chief Stipe]

6 hours ago, curious said:

You seem to have drifted from supporting licensees with drug positives to now supporting those with a record of sexual abuse being employed in racing integrity. Not that it would be the first incidence of that.

Alleged drug positives.  Sorry I'm not privy to the full rum medicated discussions at the Racecourse Hotel.

As for employing those with a record of sexual abuse?  It can't be this person who is the subject of this Topic as they haven't committed any sexual abuse let alone been convicted of it.

I note that the RIB employee referred to in this Topic is now free to practice law with his suspension having been completed.  The penalty was very low in severity which is commensurate with the indiscretion.  

But no let the sanctimonious preach holier than thou...

I see the journalist has scored yet another headline with the person in quesion being suspended from rugby referring.  I guess there was a real risk that he would look at his laptop during an injury break.  No wonder the All Blacks are stuffed!  

[Chief Stipe]

5 hours ago, Freda said:

Involuntary being the operative word, I'm assuming. 

I was going to point out that viewing porn would be unnecessary in the brothel scenario...but I suppose that a new employee might be given some pointers.....and this is getting ridiculous.

Just get rid of the piece of shit.

Sorry why is this guy a "piece of shit"?  The Law Society don't consider his crime to be as serious as you infer.  He was watching porn on his computer in his office of the company he was the sole proprietor of.  His staff caught sight of snippets for six years and then complained to the Law Society.  Obviously when they had finally decided to leave.  He copped the punishment and has served the penalty.

[hesi]

To be honest CS, racing administration has bought on a lot of the opprobrium it gets through the mismanagement of the projects it takes on.  Delay in addressing Hastings, problems with the Awapuni track, the development at Alexandra Park that went belly up, even Ellerslie's new track in the early stages, and other issues to do with the allocation of spending and programming

You could be well excused for coming to the conclusion that the people in charge are not very competent.

I don't know the reasons why these things go wrong, social media is not reliable in giving you an accurate picture

Anyway back to Mr Botherway.  It's not like the running of racing in NZ has a whole heap of runs on the board, so they need to stop digging holes for themselves.  Issuing this guy a trainers license for example may have not been to the liking of some, but he was offered a job as an adjudicator on integrity, which as I have said before is not appropriate because his own integrity is in question

Racing admin needs to stop shooting itself in the foot if it wants to be respected by the industry it administers.  You can't keep defending a regime that does not help itself, and that is what you are doing

[Muzza]

15 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Sorry why is this guy a "piece of shit"?  The Law Society don't consider his crime to be as serious as you infer.  He was watching porn on his computer in his office of the company he was the sole proprietor of.  His staff caught sight of snippets for six years and then complained to the Law Society.  Obviously when they had finally decided to leave.  He copped the punishment and has served the penalty.

Are you the President of Porn-Watchers United? 

[Chief Stipe]

5 minutes ago, Muzza said:

Are you the President of Porn-Watchers United? 

Not at all.  But then I don't know any adult who hasn't seen some.

LOL actually it brings to mind some instances in my working career I had to deal with as IT Manager.  One case was where the company I worked for was about to have their systems integrated into the Global Parent.  I received via DHL several boxes of policy, procedure and systems manuals (an American Company).  Being ever the inquisitive student I started working through them - the systems were fascinating as was the phone list of every executive in the company worldwide.  I rang a couple of Vice Presidents at the Global Information Systems Headquarters in an effort to get some traction on our NZ integration.  Worked a treat as they were genuinely interested in NZ as a country and were often amused when I told them that I looked out of my office in the Head Office at paddocks of sheep!

Anyway while getting through these folders I came across the Global policy on internet use.  In NZ we had very few policies in place and the internet was still quite novel and only the management had access to it.  I was the only one who had access to the logs of who was viewing what.  Anyway the Global policies were very strict and the consequences quite high so I thought I better do a check.  LOL lo and behold two senior managers were exploring quite a few things they shouldn't have been.  My boss was number 2 in the company and was looking at some stuff that was well let's say to the right of soft.

I thought I better have a discreet chat with him.  Basically I met with him and talked about the policies (no one had read much of these folders - yes all Senior Managers had got a shipment of folders - some were common to all but many were specialist to their roles.  I was the only one who had the IT related ones.  So I had a meeting, explained the policies and what they meant, then explained the detailed logs that were kept on internet access including all the links to all the websites visited.  I sensed a subtle realisation dawning upon my boss.  I then said would it be prudent before the integration that I filtered and flushed some of these logs for the purposes of simplying the integration.  Yes he said that would be a good idea.  I also suggested he might wish to raise the topic at the next executive meeting or would he rather I sent out a memo.  He chose the former.

LOL I received a formal written warning that year - I averaged about one a year normally for going ahead and doing things that wasn't approved - I worked on the principle of fix it now and ask for forgiveness later.  The next annual salary and bonus review was an interesting one and needless to say I argued well my case for an increase. 

[Chief Stipe]

39 minutes ago, hesi said:

To be honest CS, racing administration has bought on a lot of the opprobrium it gets through the mismanagement of the projects it takes on.  Delay in addressing Hastings, problems with the Awapuni track, the development at Alexandra Park that went belly up, even Ellerslie's new track in the early stages, and other issues to do with the allocation of spending and programming

Which gets back to my "gun shy" suggestion.  The problems you refer to have been building for decades - hard to fix things quickly when the crisis point is reached.

41 minutes ago, hesi said:

Anyway back to Mr Botherway.  It's not like the running of racing in NZ has a whole heap of runs on the board, so they need to stop digging holes for themselves.  Issuing this guy a trainers license for example may have not been to the liking of some, but he was offered a job as an adjudicator on integrity, which as I have said before is not appropriate because his own integrity is in question.

Yes I see the visuals but the RIB probably wouldn't have known as the Law Society are pretty rock solid at keeping someones privacy.  Even so I have doubts about the RIB employment vetting policies.  We all know about the ex-Police staff that have been employed and their records!

As for Botherway he is now entitled to practice as a Lawyer.  Let's face it the price he is paying for a minor indiscretion (in the overall scheme of things it IS MINOR) and the vitriol he is getting is way over what he deserves.  Calling him a piece of shit @Freda goes beyond the pale.  I have some compassion for the situation he is in because I have had personal experience not because I actually did anything wrong but because of a false accusation that bought out all the same type of vitriol and hypocrisy.  Thankfully social media wasn't a big thing then and I had some staunch close friends that stood by me and managed the media hawks.

Later in life I met people who were destroyed because of minor indiscretions or sometimes just unfounded allegations.   If not destroyed completely broken.  Yes mostly men  Yes there are certain things that in my mind you can't come fully back from nor should you be allowed to.  

56 minutes ago, hesi said:

Racing admin needs to stop shooting itself in the foot if it wants to be respected by the industry it administers.  You can't keep defending a regime that does not help itself, and that is what you are doing

I'm not defending the RIB - I doubt they knew.  If I'm defending anyone it is Botherway or at least showing some compassion.  Does the indiscretion match the crap he is getting?  Hell who would want to hold any licensed position in the racing industry or rather who are the individuals that haven't done something that the sanctimonious moral vultures wouldn't tear you apart for if they knew?  Why the hell does racing have to hold some moral high ground?  It isn't like that in Australia.  Some of their license holders have made major indiscretions and haven't faced the vitriol that they would in NZ.  We hang people out to dry based on a rumour talked about in a bar!

[Muzza]

7 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I'm not defending the RIB - I doubt they knew.  If I'm defending anyone it is Botherway or at least showing some compassion.  Does the indiscretion match the crap he is getting?  Hell who would want to hold any licensed position in the racing industry or rather who are the individuals that haven't done something that the sanctimonious moral vultures wouldn't tear you apart for if they knew?  Why the hell does racing have to hold some moral high ground?  It isn't like that in Australia.  Some of their license holders have made major indiscretions and haven't faced the vitriol that they would in NZ.  We hang people out to dry based on a rumour talked about in a bar!

Listen Chiefy. This guy with his position and supposed intelligence doesn't deserve compassion. He knew exactly what he was doing and is as Freda described him is a "piece of shit"

Castration springs to mind as a remedy.

[hesi]

7 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Which gets back to my "gun shy" suggestion.  The problems you refer to have been building for decades - hard to fix things quickly when the crisis point is reached.

Yes I see the visuals but the RIB probably wouldn't have known as the Law Society are pretty rock solid at keeping someones privacy.  Even so I have doubts about the RIB employment vetting policies.  We all know about the ex-Police staff that have been employed and their records!

As for Botherway he is now entitled to practice as a Lawyer.  Let's face it the price he is paying for a minor indiscretion (in the overall scheme of things it IS MINOR) and the vitriol he is getting is way over what he deserves.  Calling him a piece of shit @Freda goes beyond the pale.  I have some compassion for the situation he is in because I have had personal experience not because I actually did anything wrong but because of a false accusation that bought out all the same type of vitriol and hypocrisy.  Thankfully social media wasn't a big thing then and I had some staunch close friends that stood by me and managed the media hawks.

Later in life I met people who were destroyed because of minor indiscretions or sometimes just unfounded allegations.   If not destroyed completely broken.  Yes mostly men  Yes there are certain things that in my mind you can't come fully back from nor should you be allowed to.  

I'm not defending the RIB - I doubt they knew.  If I'm defending anyone it is Botherway or at least showing some compassion.  Does the indiscretion match the crap he is getting?  Hell who would want to hold any licensed position in the racing industry or rather who are the individuals that haven't done something that the sanctimonious moral vultures wouldn't tear you apart for if they knew?  Why the hell does racing have to hold some moral high ground?  It isn't like that in Australia.  Some of their license holders have made major indiscretions and haven't faced the vitriol that they would in NZ.  We hang people out to dry based on a rumour talked about in a bar!

RIB need to front foot this and terminate his employment and admit they were not in possession of all the data to make a correct decision on his employment.

Botherway knew dam well he would not get the job if he disclosed this 'incident'.

He has been deceptive and that disqualifies him from a role concerning other people's integrity.  As I said before the porn is not the issue, as distasteful as it might be to some, who probably watch porn anyway

[Chief Stipe]

7 minutes ago, hesi said:

Botherway knew dam well he would not get the job if he disclosed this 'incident'.

He has been deceptive and that disqualifies him from a role concerning other people's integrity. 

We are assuming they didn't know.  I find it hard to believe, even though the Law Society would be one of the better agencies to maintain privacy, that someone in the RIB didn't know.  

BTW the main issue that undid him with the Law Society wasn't the misconduct itself which was minor but the fact that he didn't have the policy, processes and procedures in place to handle workplace misconduct as required by the Law Society.  This point seems to fly past most online commentators.  In my opinion that is the reason he probably shouldn't be employed at the RIB. 

I can't work out why the Office Manager(s) didn't have this covered after 7 years.  Everything was all good until the employer/employee relationship broke down then the complaint was made.  I've seen that happen in employement cases many many times.

[Chief Stipe]

20 minutes ago, Muzza said:

He knew exactly what he was doing and is as Freda described him is a "piece of shit"

Castration springs to mind as a remedy.

Really?  Since when did you join the convent?  Or is it something in that Racecourse Hotel rum?

[Freda]

As is often the case, the point has floated past you.

The porn matter is a by-the-by. If he wants to watch on his own computer and in his own time, that's his business. 

It is the context of the event(s) and the lack of integrity inherent in his behavior and the attempts to both dodge consequences and maintain employment in a situation where integrity is not just a like-to-have, it is imperative.

If he can't monitor his own, he has no right to sit in judgement on others.