Sorry We need to read the link in the herald.  Barry Soper wrote it. It has detailed the text from this named lady.  The text quoted is rather disgusting.

Should she have said this? No. Get someone angry enough and that is unfortunately what sometimes follows. Politicians are human too.

Whether this truly triggered Ross, I don't think we'll ever know. He is an extremely angry man that has some significant issues to deal with.

I don't even like the National party (certainly not this iteration) but it's really bit of a stretch to describe this as a political issue/necessarily demonstrative of the alleged sender's overall character. Yes, on its face (if the MP did send the message), that message may be an offence under the Harmful Digital Communications Act.

But unless one has been living under a rock, this is the kind of insults that disaffected lovers (both of whom would have been lying to their own respective spouses) routinely sling at one another. Should it happen? No. Does it happen? You bet -- I've viewed hundreds of Family Court files whilst lawyering and people sling stuff that's not by a huge degree better at one another in court documents. Let the police take care of it -- my own view is that a prosecution wouldn't be in the public interest in this instance. It's your classic (former) lovers' quarrel. The only people I feel sorry for are those two's spouses and children.

dejadeadnz:

 

But unless one has been living under a rock, this is the kind of insults that disaffected lovers (both of whom would have been lying to their own respective spouses) routinely sling at one another. 

 

TIL today - I've been living under a rock.

FWIW - here's a screenshot of the text message (NSFW):

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DtcOiphU4AApec1.jpg

This may not be a legal issue to some but surely its a moral issue. Do we want these sort of people trying to run our country. Would you allow your children to send or even read this. If a child sent this over social media all hell would break loose. is it not Cyber bullying.  I would be asking for the resignation of anyone who carried out such actions if they worked for me.

"Sorts of people"

Most people going into Politics local or Govt usually put themselves forward as being pillars of society.  Clearly this is not the case with both these two. Its interesting to read their speeches when elected to Parliament (sorry cant find the links ) but having read them, and they put forward that they were honest and trustworthy etc.  This is clearly not the case. Listening to the news tonight people in her electorate are clearly disappointed.

I guess I am old fashioned but if a person used language such as has been used by this MP and her leader people like me would have no respect whatsoever.  To me use the use of such language shows lack of intelligence and maturity. ( This I am sure will be debated by many who will disagree with me) I also feel for their family members especially their children. I don't care what side of the political spectrum people believe in,but standards must be adhered to. We do not need these "sorts of people" running our country

gulfa:

 

I guess I am old fashioned but if a person used language such as has been used by this MP and her leader people like me would have no respect whatsoever.  To me use the use of such language shows lack of intelligence and maturity. ( This I am sure will be debated by many who will disagree with me) I also feel for their family members especially their children. I don't care what side of the political spectrum people believe in,but standards must be adhered to. We do not need these "sorts of people" running our country

 

The problem with your approach -- and it shocks me that only one person has called you out on this -- is the implicit nonsense that JLR is somehow a "victim" based only on the superficial information available via one abusive text message allegedly sent by Dowie. Context here is important.

Once again, I have no qualms around claiming to have no skin in this debate except calling it as I see it -- I called out Simon Bridges on here as a scumbag given Bridges' own recorded attempts at mollifying JLR for reasons of political expediency whilst knowing of allegations against him despite JLR's own deplorable behaviour and this record is searchable. And JLR's behaviour is deplorable. This is a guy who went and publically referenced his affair with a person then described as a married MP in his little political warfare with Bridges, where thus far despite his sensational claims, a lot of the allegations just aren't being made out by JLR's own leaked recordings. And JLR would surely have known that through taking the choice to reference the affair with Dowie, her identity would be leaked sooner or later.

Against that background and given what people have told you about this kind of behaviour being not exactly atypical, to extensively and repeatedly soapbox about it (but only from an angle of targeting Dowie) reeks to me of a kind of double standard.

I am out. This debate is beyond pathetic.

There is no way that I support JLR and his part. I challenge all Members of any political group to earn their keep by being honest and truthful even though I may disagree with their politics

The other thing that I take issue with is the sexist/gender stereotype-laden coverage that Dowie has received in the media and also in the soapboxing by one on here. Every article on the Herald website about Dowie today was accompanied by a large headshot portrait of Dowie (who appears by conventional social "norms" to be reasonably attractive and so forth) against the background of her allegedly sending a nasty message about JLR's physical appearance, amongst other things.

And I also love the selective moral outrage of gulfa. Let's have a look at the most recent post in this thread:

 

 

Most people going into Politics local or Govt usually put themselves forward as being pillars of society.  Clearly this is not the case with both these two. Its interesting to read their speeches when elected to Parliament (sorry cant find the links ) but having read them, and they put forward that they were honest and trustworthy etc.  This is clearly not the case. Listening to the news tonight people in her electorate are clearly disappointed.

Until the last line this paragraph is pretty balanced. But somehow Dowie is automatically wrong and others are entitled to be disappointed in her for allegedly sending a nasty text but gulfa is uninterested in how JLR shamelessly and needlessly revealed the identity of a person with whom he engaged in a consensual extramarital affair to the media, in order to further his own war with Simon Bridges. The latter has been confirmed by the Herald, which revealed that JLR named Dowie as the other affair participant in statements to the press.

The above fact doesn't seem to at all bother gulfa.

I guess I am old fashioned but if a person used language such as has been used by this MP and her leader people like me would have no respect whatsoever.  To me use the use of such language shows lack of intelligence and maturity. ( This I am sure will be debated by many who will disagree with me) I also feel for their family members especially their children. I don't care what side of the political spectrum people believe in,but standards must be adhered to. We do not need these "sorts of people" running our country.

Here comes all the nasty gender stereotypes. The "shouty" and nasty woman is, well, nasty. The guy's conduct isn't relevant (and I am a guy). After launching into Dowie's personal character, there are some sideway references to feeling sorry for both people's children and adhering to "standards", which given the weight of the paragraph being overwhelmingly about Dowie's words and conduct, must mean that it's mainly about how she behaved.

Look, I hate to sound like some critical linguistics professor but the double standards here are apparent as heck.

I have no problems with your comments I agree with you about double standards I assume you are referring to the people involved.

Err, no. The reference to double standards were specifically to your post and the media coverage generally. I think I will stop wasting my time now.

Some interesting commentary around this yesterday and this morning...the Herald saying her career is all but over (my opinion is Mr Ross's is probably well and truly done):

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12196422

and comparing what has happened to these two compared to what they said in their maiden speech - interesting how things change:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110173811/parliaments-starcrossed-lovers-who-crossed-each-other