Does Christian Heritage reallyhave a problem?

Those of you who read David Farrar's blog will be aware that he posted part of a private email from Christian Heritage Party board member Mark Munroe, to undisclosed people "in the interests of public disclosure". David Farrar said the email "effectively minimised what Capill did."

The email was leaked to David Farrar by someone who could well have been Paul Litterick from the Fundy Post, or someone he knew. Litterick had previously obtained the email, which was posted to a private yahoogroups list. The email is below this blog post. I have posted it because it is already in the public arena. Most of you who read this blog read Kiwiblog also.

David Farrar is of the opinion that the original email breached suppression orders as it identified the individuals abused by Capill. That is not necessarily so if every member on the newsgroup was aware of the names of these people. However if Litterick and co are sending the email to their anti-fundy friends with identifying indications of these people, it is he that is breaching suppression.

In the interests of public disclosure, I can reveal that Graham Capills wife Judy wanted that email to be sent. It was sent because she didn’t like this article on the Locke Foundation website indicating that Capill deserved the death penalty.

The undisclosed recipients of the email were Madeline and Matthew Flannagan, former policy advisors to Christian Heritage. They are on the board of the Locke Foundation

On September 20, Munroe was listed on the CHP website as policy director and board member Then a few days later, after the email was circulating... his name was removed from the list of board members . but he is still the policy director.

I was advised that the board has recently accepted Munroe's resignation.

However, I do believe that people should be able to write a private email in a personal capacity without it being leaked and posted on a web site that gets 4000 hits a day. As I said I only posted the email as it is also in the public arena.

But you may expect something on the
Fundy Post on this linking it to Christian Heritage. Paul Litterick can't stand Christians. He's got more problems than Christian Heritage and his entertaining monthly hate speech newsletter is his outlet.

You`d wonder why he's digging up dirt on CHNZ when fewer than 3000 people voted for the party at the last election.
. ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Munroe" [mark.munroe@address deleted]
> To: Matt Flannagan
> Cc: Madeline Flannagan
> Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 10:17 PM
> Subject: Graham Capill
>
>> Hi Matt
>> Hope you and the family are going well.
>>
>> I noted the other day that you consider Graham Capill deserves the death
>> penalty. I am not sure how you came to this conclusion except by
>> misinformation. Graham's offences were against ( information deleted as it >>identifies those concerned) offending which stopped more than three years ago. The >> offences were not rape as understood from what I understand the Bible to mean, >>which is why Graham had such a concern about how to plea (as mentioned in the email
>> that was leaked to the media).

>> Rape of a married woman carried the death
>> penalty. Multiple convictions of any offence could merit the death
>> penalty.
>> But neither of these cases apply to Graham
>> As you know, I am a strong advocate for the death penalty, but only where
>> the Bible prescribes it. The "eye for an eye...." is a wonderful point
>> of justice - the penalty must balance the magnitude to the offence, not more
>> and not less.

>> Please note that these is still a media ban from publishing material that
>> would reveal the identify of the victims. ( but that didn’t stop Munroe from doing >>it)
>> I was speaking to Judy Capill tonight who is aware of your site and
>> concerned about it. I hope that now that you know more information that
>> you would remove the point about the death penalty applying to Graham.

>> Kind regards
>> Mark