On 21.9.05 The Christchurch Press issued this statement.
Colin Espiner’s campaign trail blog from September 6 referred to a demonstration during Prime Minister Helen Clark’s visit to Otago University.
The blog entry referred to the demonstration as an Act Party publicity stunt and mentioned that Espiner had been hit on the head by a placard. We wish to make it clearthat Madeleine Flannagan, who was present, had nothing to do with Espiner being hit and was not a threat to the Prime Minister.
We regret it if any such inference was drawn. Ms Flannagan has no connection with the Act Party and has never had any connection with it. She is a former Christian Heritage candidate and is communications director for the Locke Foundation.
The incident referred to, occurred in the lead up to the 2005 election and embroiled Madeleine, Labour Cabinet Minister Pete Hodgson and Press journalist Colin Espiner in quite a controversy.
Madeleine Flannagan took a lot of flak on the Blogosphere and elsewhere over this incident. She was accused of being violent and of being a liar.
I am pleased to report that former ACT MP Stephen Franks and his team at Chapman Tripp took up Madeleine’s case with the Press.
Now New Zeal can confirm that The Press, while not admitting liability for defamation, or disclosing the amount has paid Madeleine a cheque.
Congratulations Madeleine. While I never doubted Madeleine’s version of events, this payment may help clear her name with those who criticised her at the time.
I just hope the cheque is pretty substantial Mads and is enough to give you, Matt and the kids greater security, plus some well deserved luxuries.
Congratulations also to Stephen Franks and Chapman Tripp for helping Madeleine out.
5 thoughts on “Christchurch Press Gives Madeleine Flannagan a Cheque in Confidential Settlement”
Don’t have lot of respect for anonymous character assassins.
I think Mads is good value. opinions differ-some people don’t even like me-can you believe that?
Stephen Franks is a smart lawyer. I suspect he did Mad’s case pro bono. Can’t imagine he would have done that unless it was sound.
M.F is one really unpleasant person. Of course they did not admit liability and Mads (literally) like many extremist activists can threaten lawsuits (which she does frequently) and sometimes people pay something to end it. It could have $1 for all we know. I’m sure the Mouthy Mad is spreading the word. Not very confidential it appears. Thankfully it was reported she had nothing to do with ACT the party doesn’t need nutters like her.
Anonymous is as ignorant as he is in error and he is hardly in a position to judge others for the company they keep.
He is just jealous that your friend was proved to be telling the truth when the smoke lifted unlike his friend.
Clearly you read no better than you reason anon.
Show me one thing I have ever written remotely defending Apartheid.
I am unashamedly ant ANC/SACP, so what? Does being anti Nazi make me pro communist, or anti AIDS make me pro cancer.
As for Madeleine. I’m proud to call her a friend. Her and Matt have been stalwarts in the VSM movement for years and have “paid their dues”. We certainly don’t agree on all issues, but we do have much common ground.
I’m libertarian enough to be friendly to and co-operate with those who are the side of freedom, even though we may have some differences over tactics or philosophy.
Methinks you are being overly judgemental and “sectish”.
More interesting friends of yours Trev – first apologists for apartheid (see post on SACP), now mad dog Chirstian fundamentalists (Madeleine Flannagan) whose chieff claim to fame was opposing Otago University Student’s Association support for the Civil Union Bill.
Judging by the company you keep, one could be forgiven for questioning your committment to libertarian values.