Deborah Coddington: 'Media victim' shows gall by blaming his accuser

Darren Hughes. Photo / Mark Mitchell

If there was any whiff of "trial by media" in the Darren Hughes debacle, as Phil Goff now alleges, it was over the way the leader of the Opposition handled it.

As has been repeatedly canvassed, Goff was stupid to think he could conceal the fact that a naked 18-year-old youth ran out of a house where Darren Hughes, chief Labour whip, and Annette King, deputy leader, both lived.

And this occurred after the youth, well-known in Labour circles, had been seen with Hughes at several Wellington bars. The Press Gallery was perfectly entitled to label this a sex scandal - they'd never buy kiss-offs like, oh, maybe the distraught teenager had been taking knitting lessons from King.

When National's Richard Worth was in the gun for allegedly sending lewd texts to a woman he later met in a hotel room, Goff didn't castigate the media for scrutinising Key and Worth. Why so prissy now?

Because Worth is history, but for Hughes it is different. Now the police have announced there will be no charges laid, Labour - and everyone else in Hughes' huge fan club, it seems - are welcoming him back to Parliament, perhaps as early as 2014.

I, too, was one of Hughes' supporters but my sympathy for him as the underdog let me down. Hughes' arrogance, his refusal to take responsibility for his poor judgment on the night in question and lack of mea culpa leaves serious questions about his suitability as an MP.

Consider what the police actually said. The complaint against the former list MP did not reach the "evidential threshold" required to bring charges.

And how did Hughes respond? With a statement saying "to be falsely accused of something I did not do, let alone a serious crime, has been one of the most challenging experiences in my life".

Police have confirmed this was not a false complaint but Hughes, having been accused of a crime, then turned around and publicly accused this former friend of a crime.

And he thinks he can return to Parliament as an honourable member?

Was this necessary? Why not just thank his supporters? Why not just shut up?

Furthermore, there was nothing in his statement apologising to his caucus colleagues for the considerable trouble he has caused them through his selfishness.

It is all very well to blame a "media frenzy" for having to resign but Hughes chose to take this student home with him after a night out drinking.

After being in Parliament since 2002 and promoted to the position of whip, he still lacks the warning bell in his head which says, "Don't go there".

When an MP's personal life hits the headlines, it is impossible to have policy taken seriously. Hughes undoubtedly must take responsibility for some of Labour's bad polling.

But his statement contained no recognition that he had caused any of Labour's woes.

Maybe he adheres to that Machiavellian mantra - never explain, never apologise.

Labour should demand more from Hughes than a few years' space before it puts him back on its list.

It is not good enough to be popular, funny and a good debater.

And Labour's spin doctors should pause.

While they paper over cracks in Hughes' carefully constructed image and shut down journalists' sources they could reflect that, in the end, truth has a nasty habit of outing itself.

I spent eight years, on and off, researching sex offences and tricky ones often come down to consent.

One party believed consent was given, the other believed it wasn't.

I can only surmise that the 18-year-old complainant felt bad enough about what happened that night to go straight to police.

Ironically, by not pressing charges the police have probably done him a favour, as a court case would have been very public.

I bet if Hughes, 33, or any other male MP his age took an 18-year-old girl home and she fled naked into the night to press sexual offence charges, he would never survive with his glamorous reputation intact.

Vestiges of homophobia live.

If Hughes was a real man - chivalrous, decent, media victim - he wouldn't have attacked the complainant once considered his friend.

He would have extended the hand of regret.