Brian Henry is compiling a large list of those who have defamed him. Reportedly the list is now said to have over 35 names on it.

He’s compiling the list because he says that he has been defamed, not just by Simon Bridges and Nick Smith, but also by a plethora of journalists, bloggers (and their commenters), other politicians, and so-called experts. That defamation has put a large commercial venture he has been working on for months in jeopardy, and he says that if the deal falls over then he will sue.

He has 30 million reasons to sue (as that is the value of the venture put in jeopardy) and he is a lawyer with a good reputation for winning who can sue for free.

I imagine he is currently hoovering up Twitter, Facebook and blog comments, as well as articles in media and on blogs. Bloggers may well be held responsible for the comments made by their audience.

It is our understanding that Brian Henry has communicated with journalists and told them they are wrong and that if they published their wrong information then he would sue them. Quite frankly I am amazed that they ignored his warning. Perhaps they have grown complacent as so few of the people that they defame or get the facts wrong about these days have the ability to fight back. It seems rather brazen and cavalier of them to publish anyway despite being told that they were wrong. Radio NZ cannot afford $30m and a suit like this, if it goes ahead, would have the ability to bankrupt them. Guyon Espiner may well have single-handedly destroyed public radio. This is an example of how NOT to do journalism 101.

Simon Bridges and Nick Smith are now in trouble and possibly even David Seymour although I assume if they limit their accusations and smears to the House they will be protected by parliamentary privilege.

The willingness for people to believe the “Media Party” when they don’t believe them on anything else suggests a suspension of rational thought simply because of a deep-seated loathing for Winston Peters. That loathing may well have enormous consequences, especially when key information is false and fake news. People who are not elected have private interests and scurrilous attacks like these can damage them: in this case, a $30 million business venture. Just because media say something does not make it true, and repeating what media falsely claim can be found in some cases to be defamatory as well.

Some people here on The BFD have been sailing very close to the wind but for the vigilance of our moderators. I warn you all now not to trifle with the moderators because the last thing we want to see is The BFD drawn into a lawsuit because of ill-considered and defamatory comments being made. If you want to talk tough and be full of bravado go do it on your own website and do not put this site in jeopardy. You have been warned: there will be zero tolerance of defamatory statements.