Liz Gunn arrested at airport

[C_T_Russell]

Was very sad to see how she was manhandled for filming and welcoming the family she had helped find a home in NZ after being in essentially home detention for not having a Covid jab in Tokelau of all places. Like they were any risk of transmitting the virus in such an isolated place.
She was arrested due to politics, not for breaking any rules.

Other people were free to film that family, but not Liz Gunn.
Why? She was not filming for commercial reasons, so she was not in breach of any terms.
They should have just left her alone instead of making a story of it.

[king1]

She had a cameraman with her, and she is/was a TV presenter? just saying it's not commercial doesn't really cut it under those circumstances...

My money's on she was being cheap and didn't want to pay the filming charges... and that led to the minor anti establishment thing she seems to have going on...

Deserved everything she got in my opinion

[Lilith7]

She's stretching things a bit to claim it isn't commercial especially given her media background, & some who knew/worked with her are concerned about her.


https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/liz-gunn-a...ZDLQEOWPQ/

" In 2021, Gunn suggested that an earthquake that hit the central North Island was Mother Nature’s response to then Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s announcement about new vaccination targets, passports, and the traffic light system.

Earlier this week, Seven Sharp host Hilary Barry voiced her concern for Gunn, asking Kiwis to keep her in their “thoughts and prayers”.
Singer Lizzie Marvelly replied to Barry, agreeing with the popular TV host: “It feels very painful to watch. I worry for her. And also despair for the people she’s influencing and dragging down the rabbit hole with her.”

[C_T_Russell]

Is is still commercial if she is not making money from it?
She was just going to post it on social media.
I wonder if she had a film crew, or was she just filming it with her phone?
If it was just her with her phone, I doubt she would have had any action taken against her, unless the airport knew who she was and wanted her gone.

[king1]

Is is still commercial if she is not making money from it?
She was just going to post it on social media.
I wonder if she had a film crew, or was she just filming it with her phone?
If it was just her with her phone, I doubt she would have had any action taken against her, unless the airport knew who she was and wanted her gone.

she had a cameraman apparently.  The fact is, it is an airport with security restrictions and it is also private land and buildings - she must obtain consent and abide by the rules in place...  If she just pulled out her cell phone then i imagine it wouldn't be such a big deal, but she brought along a cameraman - that just screams commercial.  

Even if she was just uploading to social media doesn't preclude it from being commercial, nor does not making any money off it for that matter - it was clearly not for personal use, presumably intended to further an 'agenda'

[C_T_Russell]

Is is still commercial if she is not making money from it?
She was just going to post it on social media.
I wonder if she had a film crew, or was she just filming it with her phone?
If it was just her with her phone, I doubt she would have had any action taken against her, unless the airport knew who she was and wanted her gone.

she had a cameraman apparently.  The fact is, it is an airport with security restrictions and it is also private land and buildings - she must obtain consent and abide by the rules in place...  If she just pulled out her cell phone then i imagine it wouldn't be such a big deal, but she brought along a cameraman - that just screams commercial.  

Even if she was just uploading to social media doesn't preclude it from being commercial, nor does not making any money off it for that matter - it was clearly not for personal use, presumably intended to further an 'agenda'

A camera man With professional gear would attract attention most definitely
Ideally they should have just left her alone as she is just using it as ammo now for her cause, it just makes it look like everyone is out to get her.
It's really a distraction from the real story of the family from Tokelau. We haven't heard much about it in the media for obvious reasons.

[king1]

she had a cameraman apparently.  The fact is, it is an airport with security restrictions and it is also private land and buildings - she must obtain consent and abide by the rules in place...  If she just pulled out her cell phone then i imagine it wouldn't be such a big deal, but she brought along a cameraman - that just screams commercial.  

Even if she was just uploading to social media doesn't preclude it from being commercial, nor does not making any money off it for that matter - it was clearly not for personal use, presumably intended to further an 'agenda'

A camera man With professional gear would attract attention most definitely
Ideally they should have just left her alone as she is just using it as ammo now for her cause, it just makes it look like everyone is out to get her.
It's really a distraction from the real story of the family from Tokelau. We haven't heard much about it in the media for obvious reasons.

I disagree, she comes across as an entitled numpty who doesn't believe the rules apply to her - they just can't ignore that in a security area...  The only ammo she gains from it will be localised to the minority of conspiracy theorist circles she frequents so I don't think it will have wide reaching ramifications...