“The person in the intimate images does not consent to their intimate images being posted on the website administered by you”. Who is that person? Lynda Tabuya. The images are of her.
Lynda Tabuya’s decision to break her silence to describe the evidence of a “romantic involvement” with Aseri Radrodro as “fake news” reflects the fact that she is fighting for her political life.
She is going to have to persuade the current PAP inquiry into the allegations against her that they have been fabricated or face the prospect of censure that could see her propelled to the backbenches and inflict severe, even terminal, damage on her political career.
It is an impossible task. Because the evidence clearly indicates that Lynda Tabuya is lying when she says there was “no romantic involvement” between her and Aseri Radrodro. Just as the pair lied to the Prime Minister last September and he, in turn, misled the nation.
The “brutal” sex she describes between the two in their leaked text messages may not be romantic in the traditional sense of roses and sweet nothings but some of the exchanges between the two are inarguably tender. And let’s just remind ourselves of the facts as we know them.
Not only were the explosive images and text messages that Lynda Tabuya sent to Aseri Radroro extracted from his mobile phone. She subsequently confessed to Aseri Radrodro’s wife, Sainiana -both verbally and in writing – that they had had an affair and begged for forgiveness.
If she says this is not true, she is lying. And In her comments to FBC News late yesterday (see previous posting), Lynda Tabuya told further porkies that Grubsheet is in a position to expose with hard evidence.
This is what she said:
QUOTE: The Australian Federal Police have assisted the Fiji police to instruct certain figures who have been on Facebook and have websites to take down. You know, content that they have displayed. And so I will be pursuing that continually in terms of the police investigation.”
FACT: The Australian Federal Police have not been involved in instructing “certain figures” – Grubsheet – to take down anything. It is a fabrication designed to create the impression that what we reported was factually wrong and is pitched directly at the PAP inquiry.
What happened was that Lynda Tabuya complained to the Australian Government’s E-Safety Commissioner – a statutory body set up to deal with complaints about image-based abuse on the Internet. Much of its effort is directed at “revenge porn” – people who publish intimate images of their ex-partners.
The E-Safety Commissioner wrote to me “in response to a report about intimate images shared without consent” on Grubsheet.
QUOTE: “We confirm the person in the intimate images located at the URLs detailed in the table on the following page does not consent to their intimate images being posted on the website administered by you, being http://www.grubsheet.com.au. “
“The person in the intimate images does not consent”. Who is that person? Lynda Tabuya. The images are of her.
The E Safety Commissioner instructed Grubsheet to remove a number of these “intimate images”, including one that depicted tattoos of turtles on Lynda Tabuya’s back.
At no point in the correspondence is there any suggestion that these images are fake. On the contrary, there is tacit acknowledgement that they are genuine.
“We confirm the person in the intimate images does not consent to their intimate images being posted on the website administered by you”
Clearly, publishing “fake” material and publishing material that is authentic but to which consent has not been given are two different things altogether. And this is something that needs to be clearly understood by the PAP Disciplinary Subcommittee.
I repeat: Grubsheet stands by the authenticity of the material we published in the same way that Victor Lal stands by the authenticity of the same material he published on Fijileaks..
Under Australian law, I had no choice but to comply with the E-safety Commissioner’s directive. Yet the record shows that I had already taken down most of the images BEFORE I was contacted by the E-Safety Commissioner because it had made some of my women readers uncomfortable.
For the record, below is edited correspondence from the E-Safety Commissioner (removing my address and the identity of the E-Safety case manager) and my response. There has been no further correspondence between us.
Readers can decide for themselves whether we have purveyed “fake” material or authentic material to which Lynda Tabuya objected because she hadn’t given us permission to use it. Yet a number of questions remain, among them:
- If this is “fake news”, why would Lynda Tabuya go to the Radrodro family home and tearfully confess to an affair with Aseri Radrodro and beg for forgiveness?”
- *If this is “fake news”, why didn’t Lynda Tabuya and Aseri Radrodro call a news conference to deny “any romantic involvement” when this story first broke rather than Lynda waiting to make a public statement only after the PAP inquiry has begun?
- If this is “fake news”, why does one of the leaked images show a portion of a carpet that is an identical match for the carpet in Room 233 of the Windsor Hotel?
- If this is “fake news” why hasn’t Lynda Tabuya answered the call to “show us the turtles” – the tattoos that are clearly visible in one of the leaked images?
And if this is “fake news”, why suggest that the Australian Federal Police had any part in getting Grubsheet to remove images when it was the E-Safety Commissioner to which Lynda Tabuya complained and on the basis not that they are fake but that she hadn’t given us her consent to use them?
Read on for the “smoking gun” document that proves the images are authentic and the latest from Victor Lal, who reprints this article in full.