Thread: Register to Stay

Originally Posted by XR500

....And since he was put on leave on full pay only a couple of weeks after the new Commissioner was in the seat he's pocketed half a year's salary (say half of half a mil).

Hopefully the "very serious allegations" result in charges. Then he'll spend all his pension on lawyers...

"very serious allegations" of which they are unable to report on............

They have commented on what it may be, which sounds to be similar to what has brought down a couple of other managers in places like ACC. But really the "why" of it is kind of irrelevant in the scheme of things, if you haven't played nice and by the rules as a senior manager for a Govt dept you get back what you put in. Same as a private sector manager in that regard...

it's porn. The big question will be was it legal or illegal stuff. I wouldn't expect legal stuff to be ""very serious allegations".

all will be revealed

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

all will be revealed

Haha, that is, optimistic

Originally Posted by inglishill

Haha, that is, optimistic

All will be revealed. Ha Ha Ha.
Yep, that's what he was watching.

yeah little pun there

It's been updated to Objectionable Material. So it's pretty bad.

Part of the usual compliance requirements when you get a company device (especially Govt dept company) is that you don't use it for anything outside business purposes - one of the main ones is using it to access objectionable stuff and this is can be a very wide and open description.

Objectionable for some people is looking at videos of hunting and butchering, others ripping up country with 4x4.

So in reality it might not be that 'bad' per se but if it is classed as objectionable and meets the threshold for serious misconduct it's enough to sink a top tier management staffer's career as a requirement for those roles is 'fit and proper' and setting the example. Again in the case of a Govt dept it's also into public disclosure and public interest area which doubles the consequences.

The bigger question for me is WHY would you do that on a business device in the first place - that's showing a character issue in that you don't appear to respect the rules of the organisation (going back to the need to have confidence in you as a manager and the fact that you could lose the confidence of your superiors through absolutely no fault of your own). Surely you'd have your own damn device if you HAD to do that though?????

Originally Posted by vulcannz

It's been updated to Objectionable Material. So it's pretty bad.

Maybe he was reading the Manifesto.......

Maybe he couldn't work out why the official narrative and the Manifesto were not congruent.

Maybe he started asking questions as to the actions of the police pre/post CHCH and everyone got uncomfortable.

Maybe that really was unicorn shit that bloke sold me at the pub that one time.......

How dumb do you have to be to watch porn on your work computer.
That's dumber than a dumb thing doing dumb stuff

Originally Posted by imaca

How dumb do you have to be to watch porn on your work computer.
That's dumber than a dumb thing doing dumb stuff

Has anyone reported that it was porn he was watching?

Originally Posted by No.3

So in reality it might not be that 'bad' per se but if it is classed as objectionable and meets the threshold for serious misconduct it's enough to sink a top tier management staffer's career as a requirement for those roles is 'fit and proper' and setting the example. Again in the case of a Govt dept it's also into public disclosure and public interest area which doubles the consequences.

No.

Objectionable Material is a specific term used for a type of material that would be banned by the censor, some examples would violent pornography, child abuse images, bestiality, snuff movies. (Definition is here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Digital-Chil...icted-Material )

Plain old porn would have been classified as "inappropriate material".

It is likely he will be charged if it truly is objectionable stuff.

Ok - Police would work to that. Some private sector outfits seem to be trying to use a much broader definition, effectively in a lot of cases I think they are trying to prevent exposure of their system to sites that run higher risks of malware attack and they are going as wide range as possible to cover the risks.

Hi 111 i need a police man. Sorry he cant come out hes busy rubbing one out in the office at the moment