Evidence conflict in Peters case clear cut in Glenn's favour

"They say the conflict of evidence is there as it has been all the way through."

Helen Clark, 17 Sep 2008

In reference to the Winston Peters/Owen Glenn case,  Prime Minister Helen Clark has trouble with a "conflict of evidence", so wont sack the hapless crooked politician.

The only problem with that is that there is some conflict of evidence but overwhelmingly the evidence of Owen Glenn and Owen Glenn only is able to be backed up with fact.

Winston Peters and his Perjured Lawyer Brian Henry have provided no proof of their accounts and in most key areas of evidence they not only conflict with Owen Glenn but they conflict with each other.

Helen Clark has also lied over her and her parties involvement in the saga.

Clark's soft stance on Peters is not only a desperate and grasping attempt at retaining power but it calls into question what Winston Peters must know about Clark and the way herLabour Party operates.

I'm sure Peters knows secrets she cant afford to be revealed publicly.

Peters is due to give further evidence in another Priveleges hearing today.

c Political Animal 2008