New Zealand PM's staff accused of secretly filming women resigns
A member of New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's staff has resigned after being accused of secretly taking photos and videos of women, and recording audio of sex workers.Michael Forbes, Luxon's deputy chief press secretary, offered his "sincerest apologies to the women I have harmed".The allegations came to light after a sex worker said she noticed that Forbes' phone had been recording audio while he was in the shower, local news website Stuff reported earlier this week.His phone was later found to contain more photos and videos of women as well as audio recordings of his sexual encounters.
There were images of women at the gym and in the supermarket, Stuff NZ reported, as well as four videos of women in their homes, with the footage apparently taken from a window.Luxon said Forbes' case came as an "absolute shock" and that he had "zero tolerance for any behaviour that makes women or anyone feel unsafe"."My sympathy is with the women who raised these allegations and who were made to feel unsafe due to the actions of this person," he said on Thursday, a day after Forbes resigned.Luxon, along with other political leaders, have signalled an openness to changing privacy laws to better protect targets of voyeurism.Police said they received a complaint from a Wellington brothel last July about photos found on a client's phone, but ultimately decided the case did not meet the threshold for prosecution.According to the Stuff report, Forbes' encounter with the sex worker in Wellington happened in July 2024. Forbes reportedly gave the sex worker his phone password after being confronted with the secret audio recording. The woman, together with other sex workers, then found multiple audio recordings of similar sessions, as well as photos and video in the device.At that time, Forbes was the press secretary to social development minister Louise Upston. He became the acting deputy press secretary to Luxon in February.Upston and Luxon said they had not known about the complaint against Forbes, who said in a statement he was "was in a downward spiral due to unresolved trauma and stress" at the time of the incident. He said he has since sought professional help, but acknowledged what he had "failed to do then was make a genuine attempt to apologise".Luxon on Thursday called for a review of "inter-agency processes" after police chief Richard Chambers said the authorities had known about an investigation into Forbes last July but did not flag it to ministers."We have to take this incident and understand what has happened here and how it happened, and what more can we do about it," Luxon said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
Political Thinking with Nick Robinson The Jacinda Ardern One
How does it feel to be held up as the 'anti-Trump' by progressives across the globe? Jacinda Ardern was prime minister of New Zealand for 6 years and is now committed to promoting empathy and kindness in world leadership. She joins Nick in the Political Thinking studio to reflect on her unexpected rise to power and being described as a 'global pinup for progressive values'. She also opens up about how growing up in a Mormon family prepared her for politics and reveals what she told Donald Trump in the aftermath of the murder of 51 people in a mosque in New Zealand in 2019. Producer: Daniel Kraemer
The Sun
5 hours ago
- The Sun
‘Crass' cops slammed for playing ‘snog, marry, kill' with mugshots of local call girls and felons
LAYING 'snog, marry, avoid' with colleagues at work could be sexual harassment, a tribunal has ruled. The 'crass' and 'inappropriate' game may breach the Equality Act, an Employment judge said. The risqué quiz involves naming three people and then asking a person to pick which one you would like to kiss, which one you would get married to and which one you would steer clear of altogether. In the BBC hit comedy Gavin and Stacey, Pam, Mick, Gavin and Smithy played a version of it featuring celebrities during a car ride from Essex to Wales. However, the tribunal found it may break workplace laws. The ruling came in the case of a police officer who sued Derbyshire Police after a female colleague involved him in the game — using mugshots of sex workers. The officer candidly admitted to the tribunal that she had 'jokingly' played the game with co-workers and included PC Shafarat Mohammed in their discussion. PC Mohammed claimed that during the discussion in May or June 2022 he was only shown images of black women and was asked what he liked about one of them. He said he was 'embarrassed' and 'offended' by the questioning and felt it was inappropriate. The tribunal judge said: 'We agree that the questions were inappropriate.' However, the tribunal found there was no racial or religious element to it as the sex workers were of varying ethnicities. PC Mohammed lost his case for racial and religious discrimination and harassment. Two top cops accused of mocking a colleague's Irish accent in 'grossly offensive' leaving video 1
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
US supreme court rules Doge can access personal records during legal challenge
The US supreme court on Friday permitted the so-called 'department of government efficiency' (Doge), a key player in Donald Trump's drive to slash the federal workforce, broad access to the personal information of millions of Americans in Social Security Administration data systems while a legal challenge plays out. At the request of the justice department, the justices put on hold Maryland-based US district judge Ellen Hollander's order that had largely blocked Doge's access to 'personally identifiable information' in data such as medical and financial records while litigation proceeds in a lower court. Hollander found that allowing Doge unfettered access likely would violate a federal privacy law. The court's brief, unsigned order did not provide a rationale for siding with Doge. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented. Doge swept through federal agencies as part of the Republican president's effort, spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, to eliminate federal jobs, downsize and reshape the US government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Musk formally ended his government work on 30 May. Two labor unions and an advocacy group sued to stop Doge from accessing sensitive data at the SSA, including social security numbers, bank account data, tax information, earnings history and immigration records. The agency is a major provider of government benefits, sending checks each month to more than 70 million recipients, including retirees and disabled Americans. In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that the SSA had been 'ransacked' and that Doge members had been installed without proper vetting or training and had demanded access to some of the agency's most sensitive data systems. Hollander in a 17 April ruling found that Doge had failed to explain why its stated mission required 'unprecedented, unfettered access to virtually SSA's entire data systems'. 'For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records,' Hollander wrote. 'This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation.' Hollander issued a preliminary injunction that prohibited Doge staffers and anyone working with them from accessing data containing personal information, with narrow exceptions. The judge's ruling did allow Doge affiliates to access data that had been stripped of private information as long as those seeking access had gone through the proper training and passed background checks. Hollander also ordered Doge affiliates to 'disgorge and delete' any personal information already in their possession. Based in Richmond, Virginia, the fourth US circuit court of appeals in a 9-6 vote declined on 30 April to pause Hollander's block on Doge's unlimited access to SSA records. Justice department lawyers in their supreme court filing characterized Hollander's order as judicial overreach. 'The district court is forcing the executive branch to stop employees charged with modernizing government information systems from accessing the data in those systems because, in the court's judgment, those employees do not 'need' such access,' they wrote. The six dissenting judges wrote that the case should have been treated the same as one in which a fourth circuit panel ruled 2-1 to allow Doge to access data at the US treasury and education departments and the office of personnel management. In a concurring opinion, seven judges who ruled against Doge wrote that the case involving social security data was 'substantially stronger' with 'vastly greater stakes', citing 'detailed and profoundly sensitive Social Security records', such as family court and school records of children, mental health treatment records and credit card information.
