whites treefrog drama hmmmmm

[alanmin4304]

If it makes you feel any better, I had a visit, but over buying plants on trademe from plantman. They showed me their right of entry and they don't need a search warrent, although the police would have--never saw Mr Plod.

[Insect Direct]

You know, after the raid, i had a solicitor review maf acts and laws.

When interviewed by MAF, you actually dont have the right to remain silent.

thats interesting i thought that was pretty much a human right..

[Navarre]

How come i didnt get a visit? feeling a bit left out shure they would love to come see me 5m salty crocks! :lol:

LOL

I am sure they woudl see them right nextto teh Hyacynith macaws and the jacksons casue they are right down the path from my pigmy Blueys and lace monitors not far from the Blue iggies

Like I said

seen the lists

Was looking forward to a frilled as well

good thing about govet departments is that with the stroke of a red pen they change minds like whores drawers.

just look at how Pharmac works

[acanthurus]

After reading this thread with some interest over the past few months a though it was time to make a comment and to put some of those pointing fingers straight. I have to say its been a little sad to see how many of you have jumped on the band wagon with accusations based on no actual knowledge of the events. Even more disappointing are those who are willing to be dishonest to make themselves seem more important or squeaky clean.

I also think its a little wrong that admin has allowed this thread to go on as it has with direct accusations. As they have left these up for some time I hope they will leave my comments up as a direct reply to those accusations and therefore hopefully save Haisley's name from being tarnished any further.

I have been lucky enough to have read the judges statement, as well as much of the "evidence" in this case, including witness statements (yes Henward, this includes yours).

I would like to make a point that this case was not a win for MAF as THEIR press release pretended to be, but was actually a major loss for them. Im sure many peoples jobs are on the line for this one and maybe they were hoping a few false statements would distract from this. Lets just say the judges findings were scathing of MAF to say the least and I only wish Haisley could put them up on here so you could all have a read.

Just a couple of points the judge made:

1) Haisley had NO knowledge of any information that the frogs may be smuggled, and that MAF had shown no evidence that they were ever smuggled to start with.

2) He believed Haisley to be selling them openly and legally at the time, and that he had no doubts that Haisley did not know that it may be wrong to do so. He point out that Haisley was not being criptic with his dealings (they were advertised on trademe).

3) He points out that one of the accusations states that Haisley was knowingly selling an "unwanted oragnism". He notes that the frogs were only declared an unwanted oragnism by MAF 3 months after Haisley was found to have them.

4) He notes that another of the accusations states that Haisley as an expert in the field should have known that the frogs were not meant to be here. The judge points out that it took MAF a month and many many experts to work this out themselves ( a side point here is that one of the expert maked a statement that he did not think the frogs had been in NZ since the 70's. The same expert is found in a later statement to say that he had kept a group of these frogs into the 80's and that he had personally seen them in peoples collections in the 90's).

5) Haisley had stated where the frogs came from and that it was MAF who had not been able to track the source from here.

6) Haisley had not sold any of the frogs, more importantly none were sold after MAF put a hold on their sale.

Event though he believed the case to be rubbish, a not guilty finding could only be delivered by a jury.

In the end he gave Haisley 2 choices

1) Plead guilty and get discharged without conviction, move on and pay a share of MAFs costs.

2) Chose to fight the case in front of a jury at a later date - please note that this would have envolved legal costs of many tens of thousands of dollars.

You all know which option Haisley chose, and Im sure given the choices most of you would have made the same one.

Cheers.

[Varanophile]

Anyone who pretends to be interested in someone else's animals and comes to their house, pretending to be their friend, leaves their house and then phones MAF needs to have their motives explored. I have never represented a situation for something it is not.

I admitted to hormone treating frogs once upon a time (I admit that hormone treating was a silly thing to do). The whites tree frog ruling says it all. The judge believed that if I thought they were illegal I would not have advertised them on TM. I pleaded guilty on the basis of a discharge without conviction to prevent further costs.

I may yet appeal this decison and go for compensation. As much as i dislike the way MAF handled this....they could have just as easily jumped on any number of animals I have sold..leopards, beardeds, box torts...the thing I dislike the most is people like Henward. The ammount of help I gave Henward over the last few years is substantial. Anyone who says they are interersted in anything 'unusual' and then calls MAF and embelishs things to make themselves seem important is not someone I want to associate with. I have the documents to prove this too. If you have anything weird, or anything rare, you would be wise to steer clear of Henward.

If there are no rules to govern this hobby, no 'list' that says what is legal and what is not, there is bound to be a grey area. I want to keep as many critters as I can without doing anything illegal. People like Henward, and all of you that jumped on the band wagon are in the hobby for your egos, not for the hobby in its pure sense. I am glad I know who you are. Henward stick to the other forum or making pizzas. Moderators please edit as you see fit, but please let this message remain, you have let the other messages discussing my character remain, so I think it only fair. Anyone can obtain the documents concerning the whites tree frogs under the 'official information act'...if you trust Henward, MAF, and some other people, I suggest you read these documents carefully.

Have a good weekend peoples.

a Licensing system, similar to models around the world works. Definately.

it has to be a Self funded and revenue neutral endeavour for the govt.

For example:

a person wants a lizard. He pays for quarantine - pays for inspection, rego fees, and monthly inspection - if it disappears he must report.

Inspections happen like clock work - wtih out fail, Funded by the Hobbyist. I would pay for this...thsi would work.

But - its just not something maf prioritises.

I sit on both sides of the fence.

I love exotics - Everyone here knows that.

But .... if they did say that whats in the country stays that way anything new will go....

then you will see a massive surge in smuggling for those few months to increase the types in this country.

That would bring in problems in it self.

Even registration and self funded revenue neutral or even profit for the govt would mean that they spend money initally to set up, and there is the return on investment factor they have to think of.

if you think about it, really, how much money would they make.

In NZ, how many people would actually pay for this? i bet you can count it - as it is that little.

its not worth it.

The end of the day, we have our natives.... i dont particularly like them, but each to their own - if you want other things.....perhaps move to canada where you can pretty much have any animal you can want! fish, reptiles, the lot. You can buy an arowana from singapore.... and no quarantine straight off the plane take it home in canada. Reptiles too.

NZ is NZ, what makes this place good is what also makes it annoying and sometimes bad.....(my proverbial BS for the day:)

In this article, Haisley has failed to disclose the source. If you know the source is legal.... then why not disclose it? Its obviously illegal.

Do you know how many people got roped in to this?

I can tell you - MANY.

I personally - and am not kidding as i have the search warrant at home.

was raided by maf, underwear drawers searched, everything searched - just because he emailed him and phone him about the frogs.

What did he say to me?

"MAF visits there all the time and seem the frogs and said it was ok" LITERALLY

this is what was said.

I can speak of this as the case is finished in the courts - and as we can see publicised now.

Then MAF raids my house, looking for these frogs....

I agreed with him that iw ould buy 2 for $500 dollars thinking it was all legal and fine wtih MAF as i was led to believe.

then one day i get 2 uniforms and 3 maf enforcers climing on my gate like some movie - which i msut admit, was kinda cool! but anyway.....

Smuggled or not - they were not meant to be here right? Thats the key.

Haisley was discharged without conviction - even though he pleaded guilty. As NZs court system allows, if someone pleads guilty - and puts a case why they shoudl not have a conviction as serious as smuggling wildlife - then they get away only with a 10k slap on the wrist...

I was interogated by MAF - I was also going to be a witness in court. In the process, Haisley has spokena nd bad mouthed me with all the leopard gecko breeders in this country (i bought mine off him too) that they should not deal with me at all.

This is unfair.

What am i supposed to do when maf and cops knock at your door.

I told the truth of what he said to me directly. I didnt lie - but haisley expected me to cover for him? FOR WHAT? !?! WHY?? when i was just a buyer of supposedly legal animals.

He even called me to harass me and i had to get MAF lawyers to inform him that it is obstructing justice what he is doing.

There are 2 leopard gecko keepers in this forum that used to regularly talk to me - and now they dont even answer basic PMs.....

lesson is - if you are gonna sell an animal that is borderline ILLEGAL or SMUGGLED

1) dont do it on trademe

2) Dont lie to people that its legal

because by law - people who are told its legal cannot get in trouble, only you can get in trouble by misleading them. There is of course a common sense factor such as drugs and things like that, everyone knows thats illegal.

You know, after the raid, i had a solicitor review maf acts and laws.

When interviewed by MAF, you actually dont have the right to remain silent.

MAF in essense have more power to extract info than cops in some cases!

I guess when your countries economy is predominantly Agri - thats what happens:)

wow that felt good to get that off my chest!

[Varanophile]

Henward said

"What did he say to me?

"MAF visits there all the time and seem the frogs and said it was ok" LITERALLY

this is what was said.

I can speak of this as the case is finished in the courts - and as we can see publicised now"

After the original visit by the MAF investigator I was told that the sale would probably be ok, but I was told not to sell any until the investigation was complete. This is what I told Henward. He would have paid on the spot, but I did not sell. Henward was calling MAF and volunteering false info to make himself seem important.

[acanthurus]

I can fully understand why Haisley was so annoyed when he first read Henwards statement.

I have read it myself and must say I find it a little bizzare. Basically Henward was playing both sides of the fence and pretending to be everyones pal.

His statement does not read as he has written on these threads though I must say.

Henward states that he had befriended Haisley in the hope that he could obtain some unusual reptiles to add to his collection. In his statement he admits that he was desparate to get hold of some frogs and that he basically harrased Haisley to get them. He also states that he often calls MAF to inform them on what is going around in NZ in other peoples collections. He then goes on to say that he had offered Haisley a large some of money to buy some frogs. After MAF got involved Haisley then stopped the sale, at which point Henward offered more money for the animals. Haisley again refused stating that he could not sell them as per MAFs instructions. Henward then calls MAF about the frogs, at which point they bring him in to make a statement.

The funny thing is that Henwards statement actually fully supports Haisley's account of events (even if he had not meant it to). As to why MAF included the statement as evidence I can only guess, as really only 3 conclusions can be made from it...

1) Haisley had followed MAFs instructions and not sold any frogs, contradicting one of MAFs accusations in court.

2) That despite being offered considerable amounts of money by Henward, Haisley had never supplied Henward with anything unusual, and for that matter ever given him a reason to think he had any usual or illegal animals.

3) That Henward was looking to pay large amounts of money for animals, with little consideration to the legal aspects.

Anyway, you dont need to take my word for it. As Haisley said, this information is freely available to anyone who wants it, and please use this opportunity to make up your own minds...

[acanthurus]

Sorry guys just 1 more point...

To quote Henward

"Do you know how many people got roped in to this?

I can tell you - MANY.

I personally - and am not kidding as i have the search warrant at home.

was raided by maf, underwear drawers searched, everything searched - just because he emailed him and phone him about the frogs."

Henward you I and many others on this forum know that you have been actively seeking animals without much regard to their origins. My point is you have been trying to get "roped" into something for some time and come up short. Much of what transpired in this case came about because of you getting involved with no actual knowledge of the facts, and then making things up (maybe to seem more important?). In the end only you know why... and only you are to blame for your house being searched.

Cheers.

Thread locked, both sides have had their say but it would be against the rules and serve no purpose to allow a slanging match so it has been locked.