Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters is siding with the Labour Party investigator who denied being told about sexual assault complaints against a former party member, during a recent hearing and in emails.
Simon Mitchell, one of three members of Labour's investigating panel that looked into seven formal complaints, denied he was told about any sexual assaults during a hearing.
This is despite the woman who complained to Labour, and addressed the panel, insisting Mitchell's statement on the matter was not correct and that she had made the alleged sexual assault against her, by a now ex-Labour staffer, known to the panel.
Speaking to media before question time today, Peters again told media: "I happen to know some facts that you don't know".
He would not, however, go into any further detail.
He said: "When I hear a man like Mr [Simon] Mitchell say 'I never actually saw that complaint' – that's what he said – I believe him. I think some people are owed an apology."
After question time today, he told media he "knows when someone is credible and when someone would not put their whole legal reputation on the line by saying an untruth – that's why I believe him".
Just hours prior to Peters' comments, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told media she didn't "want to get into this ongoing contesting of facts between the complainant and the Labour Party".
A statement from the complainant's lawyer said the complainant has records of three emails sent by her to Simon Mitchell between March 9 2019 and May 21 2019 in which Mitchell was made aware of there being allegations of sexual assault.
Those emails, the statement said, have been sent to Labour Party lawyers Kensington Swan.
The complainant also maintains that she went into detail about the sexual assault during the March 9 interview and that Mitchell was "present and engaged".
But Peters this afternoon said "good and innocent" people had been "maligned on the basis of evidence that is not chronologically accurate".
Speaking to Newstalk ZB yesterday, Peters said there had been a lack of presumption of innocence in the alleged sexual assault saga.
"All that went flying out the window in what was a disgraceful orgy of speculation and innuendo."
Asked if it was appropriate to call the saga an orgy of speculation, he said yes, because "I happen to know some facts that you don't know".