Heather Kennett published fictional story as fact sign now

ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA - Before I am attacked for defending Heather Kennett let me say I do NOT support what Heather Kennett has done to sexually abuse kids, etc - there is absolutely NO child sex case where it is not the adult's fault and the child's fault. All I am doing is, as a friend of Kennett's, providing the "other side" of the story, and why Heather Kennett did what she did to land her in the police/legal trouble. This is similar to what psychiatrists do explaining why murderers kill people, and why our world is - I am NOT saying what she did was right, only explaining why she does what she does. The list of claims against Heather Kennett is long and by a number of people who have been victimised by her, so please wait whilst I take my time:

1) First of all, remember the kid who was sexually abused was NOT under 18. He was 20.
In Australia, child sex only relates to people under 18. It isn't America, and the age limit classification for a child is not 21 - it's 18. You may not agree with the law, but that's the case. Yes for a 50 year old to exploit a 20 year old is disgusting, and it's right Heather Kennett is getting shat for it, but what she has done is not "legally" wrong - it may be unethical, immoral, but it's NOT illegal. (Yes, the other things she has done may be illegal, but not the sexual abuse of the 20-year-old)

2) Rick Powers deserved to be stalked by the papparazzi.
Heather Kennett did the community a favour by stalking Rick Powers and printing a photo of that ugly fat slob who is manipulating Burnside. Nobody is going to feel sorry for Rick Powers. What we do feel sorry is Rick's use of lawyers and splashing his money around to get rid of any negative information about him. Also remember, journalists are meant to stalk - that's their jobs, so it's NEVER illegal. Yes, Kennett's stalking of the 20-year-old was unethical/immoral as I said above, but even that isn't illegal. But once she is exposed on Channel 7's Today Tonight or Channel 9's A Current Affair she'll never do it again, but a 20-year-old is hot and sexy so maybe Kennett gets a sexual thrill out of it, so why not?

3) Journalists are NOT there to report the truth unlike you are led to believe.
Heather Kennett did nothing by reporting a fictional story a kid wrote to discredit him. "He's 20, says he's the MD of an LA-based firm that provides medical and engineering science advice to businesses". Well as apart of the novel the kid wrote, he DID say those words, he DID say "as the MD of the LA-based firm etc...". It's not relevant the story is fictional, only that Heather Kennett can sell newspaper as a result of what she said. You could say what Heather Kennett said was smart. She twisted the kid's words to gain what she wanted. Sure, it is narccisistic to victimise a 20-year-old, but who is to judge? She made herself hell famous as a result, doing what she needed to do. Again, yes it was unethical and immoral, but reporting fiction as fact is legal loophole that is permitted and it's NOT illegal.

4) Receiving monetary or sex bribes aka paycheck journalism isn't illegal.
Heather Kennett did nothing wrong for accepting monetary/sex bribes/paycheck journalism from Ron Green. Sure it is questionable why receive a bribe from a 70-year-old obese MBA dropout who failed to become a councillor (dude thought he could become mayor of Burnside just years earlier), but that's Kennett's choice. Heather Kennett knows the wage of a journalist is nothing, so she decided to make some money on the side. What's wrong with that? It's not illegal. It's deceptive and manipulative to her readers, and those of the Eastern Courier Messenger, but it shouldn't be too surprising, given Kennett is already in her 50's and only made it far enough in journalism to be apart of a local newspaper - not even The Advertiser. Also, the thrill of doing something unlawful/illegal could be just enough to make Kennett feel alive.

5) There's no law preventing on you for saying someone is too young to teach, or too young to be elected to public office.
Remember this is Heather Kennett's opinion. She could even say it's her opinion Ron Green would make a bad councillor/mayor for having a small weiner. It's her own opinion. Sure, with kids getting into parliament aged 20 these days (e.g. Roy Wyatt for the Liberal Party), and kids smarter than ever, it's questionable whether Kennett's go at the kid for his age is ethical/moral, but she only crossed social boundaries, NOT legal boundaries. What Kennett did was not illegal, just unethical/immoral at best. I don't think the kid's age has anything to do with his incompetence to teach or be elected to public office, so I will say sorry on behalf of Kennett for you, but remember it's just opinion - even if she may have offended half the world.

6) There's no law saying someone is incompetent to hold public office because they're still in school.
The same logic applies for (5) applies to (6). Sure, the inferences Kennett drew were unethical/immoral, and questionable as to whether it's community's standards, but she just gave her opinion. It may be an extreme left comment, but that was her opinion, and she's free to give it under the law.

6) Reporting a vexatious allegation as "likely" to lead to an investigation is logically correct.
Heather Kennett was paid by a candidate to publicise a claim his political opponent had made. Kennett said, "it is likely XXX will be investigated by the State's Electoral Commission for a number of irregularities in his campaign". The issue is ECSA didn't actually investigate the candidate for these irregularities. The argument is that even IF the investigation was made, it may not conclusively find the candidate guilty anyway. The problem with saying "likely to be investigated" is that it leads to the conclusion the candidate WAS actually guilty as charged. Again, what Kennett did was NOT illegal, but at max immoral/unethical. Her statement is logically true, and if allegations are made (albeit that the critique name Ron Green wasn't provided) that such matters WOULD "likely" be investigated by ECSA. Kennett is NOT employed as a court officer to state the truth remember, she is a journalist who is there to make you buy more newspapers, and this is what she's done.

7) There is nothing wrong with coming to a person's house and asking them questions.
The purpose of investigative journalism is to be rude. If you don't stalk a person, by coming to their property, and use a telephone, email or mail instead, you might not get the truth. Yes Heather Kennett's behaviour is uncivil, but it's not illegal.
_______________________________

Election 2010: Student's tilt at Burnside seat - COUNCIL
9 NOV 10 @ 07:55AM BY HEATHER KENNETT
COUNTDOWN TO THE POLLS: A university student is vying for a seat on Burnside Council.

HES 20, says hes a managing director of a LA-based company offering medical and engineering science advice and a consultant lecturer , specialising in constitutional law - and now he wants to represent you on Burnside Council.

However Rose Park and Toorak Gardens Ward candidate XXX is likely to be investigated by the States Electoral Commission for a number of irregularities in his campaign material.

The UniSA students flyer featured the Burnside Council logo and included a generic University of SA postal address, as part of the authorisation required on all campaign material.

Burnside Council acting CEO Paul Deb said Mr XXX had not gained permission to use the council logo.

In line with the Electoral Commission protocol, we have forwarded this promotional material on to the Commission for review and action, Mr Deb said last week.

And an SA Electoral Commission spokeswoman said it was not appropriate for a student to list their university address, under the requirements of the Local Government (Elections) Act.

However, if the address is a workplace address it may be acceptable, she said.

If there is evidence to suggest that Mr XXX cannot be contacted at this address, the commissioner will consider the matter.

A UniSA spokeswoman confirmed Mr XXX was not employed by the university.

Mr XXX declined to be interviewed when approached at his house, but agreed to respond to questions via email.

Asked why he had suggested voters mark a number two next to his name - instead of the traditional one - he replied: The quota is (2) and it felt impolite to ask people to put a (1).

He cited the Copyright Act when asked if he had obtained authorisation to use the council logo.

Regarding his work as a consultant lecturer he said he provided schooling support to kids in high school, university, professionals (that was) similar to lecturing because thats essentially whats done, but its distinguished from the services the universities and colleges provide.

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in, otherwise register an account for free then sign the petition filling the fields below.
Email and the password will be your account data, you will be able to sign other petitions after logging in.

Privacy in the search engines? You can use a nickname:

Attention, the email address you supply must be valid in order to validate the signature, otherwise it will be deleted.

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Shoutbox

Who signed this petition saw these petitions too:

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in

Comment

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Goal
0 / 50

Latest Signatures

No one has signed this petition yet

Information

Glenda RowlandBy:
AnimalsIn:
Petition target:
Aust gov

Tags

No tags

Share

Invite friends from your address book

Embed Codes

direct link

link for html

link for forum without title

link for forum with title

Widgets