Talk:Joe Tripodi

Wollongong corruption paragraph

I have made some significant changes to the paragraph on this issue as follows:

• Removed the word "implicated" in the lead - Some dictionary definitions of "implicated: - "involved, usually in an icriminating manner", "to connect intimately or incriminatingly", "cuplably involved". The use of this word in the context sugested Tripodi was directly involved in corruption in Wollongong, not in the appointment of a "mate" to a job. Per WP:BLP, caution needs to be taken in the wording of claims such as this in biographical articles.
• Forced to sack Scimone from a "plush job" - this does not appear to be true. the source provided [1] does not say Scimone was sacked from his "plush job", only stood down (that is, suspended), and by the agency not Tripodi. If a reference can be found saying Tripodi has sacked Scimone, by all means put it in. Otherwise this appears to original research.
• Speculation of resignation over "improper involvement" - some care needs to be taken about using quotes in a manner that implies that a statement is definitively true, rather than alleged. It was alleged that Tripodi acted improperly over the appointment, and this should be mentioned in the article. But by quoting these two words without indicating where the phrase is sourced or in what context it is made, it suggests that improper involvement is a fact not a claim. If the phrase is sourced (for example, to a media outlet), the the sentence could be reowrded as "The Daily Telegraph speculated that "improper involvement"{{source}} by Tripodi might force his resignation .."
• Undue weight - the most minor point and a standing problem with political biographies is that every negative is covered in extensive detail in reliable sources but nothing else is. This tends to create the impression that the negatives are is the sum of the politician's career. This may or may not be true in Tripodi's case, but care should be taken to give proper weight to any allegations in the context of the overall piece. The Wollongong saga is sufficiently prominent (at least at present) to justify a paragraph or two here, but not much more.

Just some thoughts. I support some detail of this issue in the article but not to the point where it conflicts with the BLP warning at the top of this page. Any contrary views are welcome as always. Euryalus (talk) 03:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest it would perhaps be worthy nevertheless of including the fact that he was close personal friends with the person who was appointed, and perhaps even that departmental staff were aware of sereious sexual harassment allegations against him prior to the appointment? I agree that we need to ensure that undue weight shouldn't be placed upon this, although the way it currently leads I htink gives a slightly overly-rosy picture of what took place. Alternativly, maybe it would be worth pursuing a seperate entry for the scandal as was done with Orange Grove? Auspoliticsbuff (talk) 05:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree the friendship needs including otherwise the point of the allegation is unclear. I've added this to the paragraph. I'm not sure what you mean re Orange Grove, which does not have its own section. But if you think the "Minister" subheading is too long by all means break it up. I also don't intend that this sound rosy - it is not a rosy story. If there's alternative wording that doesn't go to the other extreme, put it forward and let's discuss.

Down the track the Wollongong issue deserves an article on par with Orange Grove affair. Euryalus (talk) 05:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Tonette Kelly

Tonette Kelly is the long serving senior legal officer of NSW Maritime currently under investigation by the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) . Tonette Kelly is also being prosecuted by the New South Wales Police for unauthorised access to a colleagues emails. During the recent public hearings of the ICAC, allegations as diverse as forgery, fraud and tax evasion were levelled at Ms Kelly. The principal allegation concerned Ms Kelly's conduct of a private legal practice using government resources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullst (talk • contribs) 11:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

where is the request access its rudy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.236.107.165 (talk) 22:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hamidur Rahman Issue

Hamidur Rahman was a year 8 schoolboy who died from apparent school neglect. A whistleblower appropriately brought the issue to the attention of Tripodi and was subsequently illegally blacklisted from work and smeared in public media. The story has not received widespread attention yet, but it is probably good to place some appropriate explanatory links in talk so as to improve the article when the story breaks. DDB (talk) 23:32, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Given your comments that the whistleblower was "smeared in public media", would you please provide evidence via links from reputable media sources? A link to a personal blog, whilst clearly gives some background to the unfortunate situation, doesn't provide any link to Tripodi. Thanks Jherschel (talk) 09:32, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I have made the issue public domain and have clean hands over the issue. Within that blog site are links to the questions asked in the NSW Legislative Council and the responses. Also the matter has been raised as part of the last federal election campaign when I ran for the seat of Blaxland. The first link I have provided is to the published coroner's report into the boy's death. I have clean hands over the issue as I have taken the matter before the (Fairfield) police as well as relevant bodies (Ombudsman's office, ICAC, and the members themselves). You will find I have also raised the issue with the media. Appropriately. DDB (talk) 12:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC) The policy launch as well as vote cards and campaign posters with local press reports. DDB (talk) 12:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

From review of the information that you have provided, I can't see any direct link to Joe Tripodi. If you wish to include details of Tripodi's direct involvement with Hamidur Rahman, please provide well sourced and independent facts on the action that he did, or did not, take that resulted in this unfortunate circumstance arising. The link to the Hansard did not provide any evidence of Tripodi being involved. Each of ICAC, the NSW Police, and the NSW Ombudsman are required to determine if the matter warrants further investigation or laying criminal charges. What was the outcome with each agency? As a former political candidate, you may be a little too close to the matter to provide a neutral point of view. Jherschel (talk)

It is undisputed public domain the conversation took place. But despite your apparent attempt to sideline or cross examine me as a responsible editor this is not an article posting, but an informative posting for talk allowing an understanding of current events and providing a background for what is anticipated. Yers I am too close to the issue, hence I am not posting this in the article. But it is public domain, and informs about the issue at hand. As for the specifics of dealings with the ICAC, or Ombudsman's office, as you may be aware, they are subject to privilege, but I am able to refer to them and it may be inferred that for whatever reason no action has been taken, but I am allowed to publicly broach the issue and have done so. DDB (talk) 06:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC) I just remembered. The senate questions were related to articles sent to Della Bosca via Tripodi. In the parliamentary reply the Department of Education, on behalf of the then minister, claim they received the issue through an undated letter .. that was a reference to Tripodi's office, as was the reply concerning a public official. Are you asking me to upload a picture of a letter from Tripodi's office marked "With compliments" and signed by Tripodi? DDB (talk) 06:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC) here is the picture referenceDDB (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

That would be orginal material, which is not something Wikipedia can use. Please review WP:OR. - 114.76.239.105 (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

That would be, were I to attempt to place it in the article. But it can be in discussion in anticipation of it breaking into mainstream review. DDB (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

2012 ICAC inquiry

Joe has been named as the person to install 3 premiers while fellow ALP member Obeid allegedly profited by over $100 million. Seems significant. http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/obeid-and-tripodi-ruled-the-roost-icac-hears-20121113-299oa.html DDB (talk) 11:32, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Unlike Obeid, Macdonald, and Roozendaal, Tripodi has not been named by the Independent Commission Against Corruption as a person of interest. Neither has Tripodi been asked to appear before the Commission to give evidence in camera or at a hearing. Rees, Iemma and Sartor have been called to give evidence before the Commission as witnesses, commenting on the alleged close relationship between Obeid and Macdonald. It is the Herald that is making reference to Tripodi. Rangasyd (talk) 12:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Angela D'Amore

His sister in law is a notable person also part of a corruption inquiry. Her presence in his life is notable and should not be deleted from the front page. This is an encyclopaedia which records relevant information of even such a personal nature of public figures. DDB (talk)

• Corruption or not is irrelevant. She is notable and relevant to his biography. A single mention doesn't violate WP:UNDUE and I've undone the latest attempt to remove it. Stalwart111 12:12, 5 April 2014 (UTC)