Roastbusters - Police apologise for prosecutorial misconduct and blatant corruption:

 

 

 TIMELINE OF ROAST BUSTERS CASE / OPERATION CLOVER
Timeline
• 2011: 15-year-old victim lays complaint with police about the group's alleged activities.
• 2011: Green Bay High School counsellor claims she went to senior management to raise concerns about alleged Roast Buster Beraiah Hales.
• November 21, 2013: 111,000-strong petition demanding stronger action over the scandal delivered to Parliament.
• April 2012: Green Bay High School receive allegations about Hales.
• May 2012: Hales leaves Green Bay High School.
• November 3, 2013: Videos emerge of a group of boys calling themselves the Roast Busters showing them laughing and bragging about having sex with drunk and underage girls. Detective Inspector Bruce Scott said even though police were aware of the group, there was nothing they could do until a girl was "brave enough" to make a formal complaint.
• November 5, 2013: Superintendent Bill Searle said none of the girls from the original inquiry wanted to make a formal complaint.
• November 6, 2013: A 15-year-old girl comes forward to say she laid a formal complaint with police in 2011 -- when she was 13. Police later confirm this is true.
• November 7, 2013: After calls for action, Police Minister Anne Tolley announces she has asked the Independent Police Conduct Authority to investigate.
• November 12, 2013: Police child sexual abuse specialist Detective Inspector Karyn Malthus appointed to head the newly named Operation Clover.
• November 16, 2013: Nationwide protests take place, with hundreds calling for an end to the country's 'rape culture'.
• November 17, 2013: A girl who says she made a complaint to police two years ago reveals she has made a second complaint after the Roast Busters scandal.
• November 21, 2013: A petition is presented to MPs outside Parliament with more than 110,000 signatures calling for more action for the alleged victims of the Roast Busters.
• December 12, 2013: Then Police Commissioner Peter Marshall grilled by a select committee in Wellington about the police response to the case.
• May 22, 2014: The Independent Police Authority releases its first report into the initial investigation, which focused on information provided by police to media, which said a "systemic breakdown in communication" by police led to inaccurate information being provided to the public, however, said "no individual could be criticised" for that.
• October 29, 2014: Police release the findings of Operation Clover and announce no prosecutions will be made.
• March 19, 2015: The Independent Police Authority releases a report criticising police handling of the initial investigation.

 

Lawyer for family of Alo Ngata says IPCA report makes disturbing reading:

Alo Ngata and his family

"I can't breathe".

Like Nicholas Harris and so many others, Alo Ngata was choked to death by 'law enforcement authorities'. While other 'law enforcement authorities', administrators of justice and governance, uphold it and excuse it.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) today released its report identifying multiple failures by the officers who restrained Ngata, who was on meth when arrested for assaulting an elderly man in Auckland's Freeman's Bay in 2018.

Resources are not being effectively allocated, and too many police are involved with a disproportionate number of police officers have been convicted of using and dealing methamphetamine, but it's the tip of a much bigger iceberg, and a much bigger problem. 
 
People like Alo Ngata are collateral damage in the 'war against drugs' - damaged by drugs and drink, mental illness or the stigma of being labelled with mental illness, alienated and marginalised by society, failure of the education system, and a racist system of governance.

A highly disproportionate number of our Mauri and Pasifika people are arrested, injured, shot, choked, killed or died of criminal negligence in custody. The investigative and disciplinary processes are inadequate and biased.

Officers said he was struggling and resisting as they carried him to the cell, but CCTV shows that he was motionless, and apparently unconscious.

Police launched their own investigation into the incident, which determined that legal causation for Ngata's death was not established and on that basis no one was criminally culpable.

Police spin doctor public relations expert Karen Malthus said the conduct of the employees involved in the incident was assessed and it was considered that there was no behaviour that required an employment investigation.

Karen Malthus, NZ Police spokesperson

"Police emphasise the fact the pathologist was unable to determine whether the use of a spit-hood in this case had any causal effect on Mr Ngata's death," Malthus said.

"The report also noted the pathologist's finding that removing the spit hood might not have changed the outcome."

The NZ police operational manuals state clearly in regard to OC spray, the use of the spit hoods, and many other operational rules that were ignored or breached.

Alo Ngata's death will be the subject of a Coroner's inquest, and will no doubt join the growing list questionable reports such as the one into the death of Stephen Dudley and many others alleged ruled  to have other contributing factors such as 'undiagnosed heart conditions', etc.

Lawyer Marie Dyhrberg, who was acting for Ngata's family, said the report made for disturbing reading.

"I have also read the response of the police and I do have concerns about that response. It would appear that there is a failure to acknowledge the degree and the depth of the police failings during the course of Alo being in police custody," she said.

Ngata's death will also be the subject of a Coroner's inquest.

Formal complaint to Judicial Conduct Commissioner regarding possible conspiracy to pervert the course of justice:

The corruption within the Wairarapa Police starts at the top.

 

 

 

Wairarapa Police have quite a history of perverting the course of justice, and of colluding and conspiring with Court staff and some local lawyers in order to facilitate those activities more effectively.  The link between Police and Court staff has been a matter for public concern since Police prosecutor Garry Wilson and Court deputy Registrar Liz Harpleton cheated on their respective spouses and shacked up together.

Latest matters involving Court staff and Police apparently lying to a District Court Judge in order to secure a lenient sentence for a recidivist violent offender have resulted in a complaint to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, with another in the pipeline.

Here's the latest complaint, submitted this morning, regarding the apparent deliberate deception of Judge Barbara Morris by Police prosecutors and other Police officers and Court staff who were in the Courtroom at the time, who were all aware of the offender's recent criminal history, and in particular, his violent attack on a vulnerable and defenceless woman right in the Courthouse itself not six months prior to the crimes reported in the paper:

"URGENT - serious miscarriage of justice - Formal Complaint

To the Judicial Conduct Commissioner - judicialconduct@jcc.govt.nz:

This is a formal complaint regarding the conduct of District Court Judge Barbara Morris.  I was one of several people who requested a copy of, or at the very least, access to, the decision of Judge Barbara Morris which was reported by the local 'news' media at this link:  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=11373104&ref=rss

Initially the Court Registrar, Ms Lauri Blyth-Carter refused to pass the request on to Judge Morris for months, until we wrote to the Area Manager for Courts.  That correspondence is attached.

Public confidence in the Courts has been seriously undermined by the blatant contempt contained in this response and we insist that Judge Barbara Morris be called to account and forced to provide the decision and her reasons for the decision in order to protect the impartiality and integrity of the judicial system.

This request is URGENT because the recidivist violent offender has been released as a direct result of the Judge's negligence - or the deliberate deception of the Judge by Court staff - and has been perpetrating further violence since that release, and because of disturbing factors such as the fact that the offender cut off his home detention monitoring device, breaching the conditions of the sentence imposed by Judge Morris, and committed further offences as a direct result of her giving him home detention when he wasn't entitled to it.

There are at least two related complaints regarding these matters and these complaints will be submitted as soon as possible, in the meantime please initiate an investigation into the refusal to provide this decision without further delay because public safety has been put at risk as a direct result of releasing a recidivist violent offender who was also known by Police to be suspected by investigators of committing two arsons during the same period of time, both against the victim of the assault at the Court, and related to the victim of the other offences he was convicted of.

[name withheld]

_______________________________________

Some of the emails with the Court Manager are copied below in the interests of justice and transparency:

from:    [name withheld]
to:    Richard Williams <Richard.Williams@justice.govt.nz>
date:    1 July 2015 at 13:01
subject:    URGENT - Refusal of Court Registrar to pass on request to Judge for copy of decision

Dear Mr Williams

I wrote to the Court in January requesting a copy of the decision of Judge Barbara Morris which was reported in the Wairarapa Times Age on 12 December 2014 at this link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=11373104&ref=rss

The Registrar is refusing to pass this request on to Judge Barbara Morris.

I wrote to you in JANUARY complaining about the refusal of the Registrar to pass on this request!  I told you that the reason for the refusal was that the Court staff were witnessed lying to Judge Morris regarding the prior convictions of the offender, telling the Judge that he had no convictions for violence since 2011 when a number of Police and Court staff knew that was a lie and that Peacock had been convicted just a few months prior for assaulting a woman in the actual Masterton Courthouse!  Witnesses in the Court swear that Police and Peacock's lawyer deliberately lied to Judge Morris - telling her that he had no convictions for violent offences since 2011 while the Court staff all knew perfectly well that Peacock had punched a woman in the face and chased her inside the Courthouse with his fists raised and further assaulting her inside the Courthouse only a few months previously - which is evidenced by the report at this link:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=11240701

The Registrar has refused to pass on this request to Judge Morris - the Registrar claims that I haven't identified the file to her satisfaction - this is completely unacceptable!!!  This offender has been released - apparently because Police and lawyers lied to a Judge!

If the request had been passed on to Judge Morris as requested at the time the request was made we have no doubt whatsoever that the Judge would have ordered the Registrar to identify the file and we INSIST that you order the Registrar to pass on all my emails to the Court regarding this matter IMMEDIATELY!

Furthermore I have heard absolutely NOTHING from Louis Pedro - to whom other correspondence was requested including requests for access to my Court files - this is absolutely unacceptable and I intend to initiate action against the Court unless these matters are dealt with IMMEDIATELY!!!

[name withheld]

_______________________________________

from:    Williams, Richard <Richard.Williams@justice.govt.nz>
to:    [name withheld]
date:    1 July 2015 at 17:09
subject:    RE: URGENT - Refusal of Court Registrar to pass on request to Judge for copy of decision

Dear [name withheld], thanks you for your email.

I am advised that your request was referred to the Judge who has decided not to act or respond to it. As this is a judicial decision it is not appropriate for me to comment further.

[ . . . ]

regards

_______________________________________

 

We await the response of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner with interest.

Police informer Shannon Parker tries to shut down the opposition - again:

Our facebook page was shut down 30 days ago after this notification and subsequent 'blocking' by fascbook administration staff (if you're new to the internet - click on the text highlighted in bold and it will open a link to the relevant evidence):

The NZ Police Watch page has been under attack since its inception, and our tech specialists have now identified the source of several malicious attacks on our systems as none other than Ms Shannon Parker - self confessed Police rootbag and former debt collector, who was infatuated with a local Police sergeant who she was sleeping with. They had a nice little racket going on - Parker talked gullible local youths into committing crimes and bribed them to do so, Haughey charged them and ensured they were convicted and fined, and Parker went around 'enforcing' the penalties and 'collecting' the fines.  Until Haughey and his mates got sick of her.

Ms Parker contacted us when she was charged with bribing a group of youths to trash the home of her boyfriend, Police Sgt Bede Haughey, after he dumped her.  It took all of about five minutes to work out that her story just didn't add up.

She boasted to us of having group sex with serving Police officers while they were on duty, using Police uniforms, truncheons, handcuffs, etc, as sex aids, often in the actual Police station.  She told us she'd been charged with stealing a Police uniform, but she told us that the uniform, handcuffs etc, was acquired during the group sex sessions at the Police station by her willing cop mates.

She bleated that Sgt Haughey had cheated on her and set her up.  The first part was undoubtedly true - but we were skeptical about the set up bit from the word go, and our suspicions were confirmed when Parker was convicted - not once, but twice, for her crimes.

The first thing Parker did on being released from prison was set up a facebook page claiming to address Police misconduct, as an outlet for her spiteful vendetta of revenge against Haughey and his mates.  We were alerted to this early on by people who were concerned about the "advice" she was dishing out, privacy concerns, etc.  These concerns escalated when we started to see evidence of the incompetent standard of 'work' Parker was delivering - we were provided with material she had written and encouraged people to submit to the Courts that was frankly laughable, not to mention largely illiterate, irrelevant, rambling nonsense that put people in a worse legal position instead of 'helping' them.  Here's just ONE example of Parker's incompetent attempts to 'help' people, at this link.

Our organisation gets results and we've got the evidence to prove it.  Parker is a sly manipulative fake.

Parker is a self focused sociopath - as the Judge pointed out - an egotistic narcissist - like other deluded half wits.  She and her recruiters seem to spend all day trawling social media for suckers they can fleece - like Parker's mate Grace Haden.  They insist of being in charge of things rather than contribute to group collaborations, they have their own political agenda and backstab anyone who gets in the way, they use others to do the work but ensure that they take the credit for it - Ariana Paretutanganui Tamati is another good example, Grace Haden another.  They copy and plagiarise other people's work and ideas while dishing out their inept and incompetent "legal advice", scamming s much money out of gullible and vulnerable victims of injustice and corruption as they possibly can.  One look at the 'terms and conditions' of interaction expressed on their websites confirms this. 

Like the Pied Piper, these idiots lead the more gullible members of the community, particularly those of the left side of the political spectrum, straight up the garden path, and then they laugh all the way to the bank - they are richly rewarded by their handlers.  Anyone who entrusts their personal information to Parker or listens to her advice is taking a very big risk indeed.  Like most undercover agents, Parker is given a certain amount of fake credibility, but more people are seeing through the smoke and mirrors every day, and making the connections.

This post will be updated shortly with links to more of the Court decisions refered to above, and other of Parker's failed efforts to "help" others, because vulnerable people need to know who they are dealing with before they hand over authority to act, or sensitive information, to malicious idiots like Shannon Laing Parker..

Peter Pakau fallout contiues - even the crims don't want a bar of it:

When crooked cop Peter Pakau overheard a colleague talking about a black, 2006 Chrysler 300c that had been reported stolen and had turned up at an auto electrician's shop in West Auckland, he hatched a plan that is still causing his former bosses legal nightmares.

Police files that trace the whole sordid saga make for comical reading.

The Chrysler was originally owned by Oscar Chand, a drug runner who was described in court as the "mastermind" of a bungled attempt to smuggle $40,000 of pure methamphetamine from Auckland to New Plymouth in 2012.  He used his daughters, one of whom gave birth the same day she was arrested at gunpoint, as mules.

The Chrysler, said to be worth $30,000, was registered in the name of Chand's then-girlfriend, Danielle Cooke, who was using it.

In June 2012, Cooke reported the car had been stolen, and was being driven around by a Head Hunter gangster, the police files show.

Some time over the next three months, the Chrysler was recovered, but police weren't notified.

In September, it turned up at an auto electrician's for repair. The electrician checked and found it was reported stolen, and called police.

Pakau overheard the constable who took the call discussing the vehicle. According to the reports, he located the file and arranged for a criminal associate, Melissa Brown, to collect the Chrysler. They would sell it, and split the profit.

Pakau called the electrician, the files say, telling him he was a police officer, the car was now owned by Brown and he could release it to her.

Brown paid the $1100 repair bill, and took the car.

In March the following year, she sold it for $19,500.

Later that day, the buyer sold it to a car dealer for $20,500. The dealer later sold it to a private buyer in the South Island for $29,000 and it has since been sold again, to a Nelson woman.

In March 2013, Chand advised police what Pakau and Brown had done - but at that point the car wasn't re-recorded as stolen.

By this stage, police had begun surveillance on Pakau and 10 associates. Last November he was jailed for eight years for corruption, supplying methamphetamine, accepting bribes and stealing the car. Brown went down for five years, six months.

The saga might have ended there - but Cooke came forward and said: "I want my car back."

At first, police indicated that was the fair outcome. Although the original owners had a "dubious criminal history", wrote a detective senior sergeant in an email, "assuming they originally had legitimate title to the vehicle and it was stolen from them, then they still have title."

He recommended police get a warrant and seize the Chrysler. The current owner could seek recourse through the LMVD and the dealer could take civil action against the first purchaser.

A detective sergeant said she didn't know how Chand came into possession of the car, "although it is likely that it is a result of some sort of standover or drug deal".

The police legal section was asked for advice. A solicitor wrote that although it appeared Chand and Cooke had title, recovering the vehicle could cause "difficulties" for police because they hadn't "alerted the world" that the car was stolen when they became aware Pakau had taken it.

"Therefore anyone who purchased the vehicle may name police as a party to civil proceedings."

He was even worried that Pakau and Brown might take civil action, citing "officially induced error", when someone relies upon a direction or authority of a government official (that is, Pakau) which turns out to be unlawful.

It was decided to visit Chand in Rolleston prison, where he was serving time for his drug dealing, and see if he would be prepared to accept "reparation" instead of the Chrysler.

It might go down as the first time in history that a criminal turned down the offer of money from the police.

The constable who arrived in the Kowhai unit in August last year got a frosty reception.

He recorded the conversation in a memo.

Chand: "I don't want anything to do with that car. The cops up there ... are laughing about this. They're the reason the situation is like it is."

Constable: "But ... would you be happy with reparation?"

Chand: "I told you I don't want anything to do with that car. I don't need the aggravation. I don't want anything to do with the Henderson cops, they're gangsters, the lot of them."

Constable: "Well, one of them might've been but that doesn't mean they all are."

Chand: "Yes they are, the whole gang, they're corrupt. I'm having nothing to do with them. Now if you can get out of my way, I want to go back to my cell."

Since then, police have backtracked and are now refusing to take action unless Cooke can prove she is the owner. The Independent Police Conduct Authority has declined to intervene.

In an interview, police Inspector Edward Carr said police now had a signed statement from the man who paid for the car (Chand), "and despite having been registered to several different associates for short periods, he is considered to be the true owner".

 That man had advised he did not wish to make any claim on the vehicle. Carr indicated Cooke had only had the car in her name for 22 days.

"Police have invited the woman to substantiate her claim of ownership by providing proof of this. To date, this has not occurred."

Cooke, who's no longer with Chand, says she had possession of the Chrysler and was the registered owner when it was stolen, but she doesn't have a sales and purchase agreement or a receipt.

She believes it raises serious questions about police procedure relating to stolen vehicles and intends to begin legal proceedings against police next month.

Wairarapa Police have been operating a similar racket for years involving motor vehicles, and assisting corrupt local SPCA officials to steal horses in a similar racket.  They are currently refusing to investigate claims made by the owner of a Hillman Minx by simply refusing to interview the witnesses to the sale of the vehicle - because the seller was none other than corrupt EX Constable Gallagher's wife's brother - a recidivist offender who Police protect because not only is he related to Gallagher but Constable Peter Cunningham has been having it off with the seller's mother for years, as well as shacking up with his own son's wife's mother in recent years in continuation of the long standing incestuous manner in which the Wairarapa operates.  This website has been publishing those allegations for years and all Gallagher and Cunningham have done is instigate a number of unsuccessful criminal prosecutions - they don't dare challenge the veracity of the claims though, because the evidence is indisputable.

Police incompetence highlighted in death of vulnerable patient:

The family of Nicholas Tairoa Stephens continue to speak up about the litany of errors that led to the death of their beloved son and brother:


"When my son failed to return on 9th March from an ‘unescorted’ cigarette break from a ‘secure’ unit at Waikato Hospital’s Henry Bennett Centre the family was sick with worry, knowing his two recent attempts at suicide, and his recurrent talk of suicide made him an exceptionally high suicide risk while he was on his own. - See more at:

When my son failed to return on 9th March from an ‘unescorted’ cigarette break from a ‘secure’ unit at Waikato Hospital’s Henry Bennett Centre the family was sick with worry, knowing his two recent attempts at suicide, and his recurrent talk of suicide made him an exceptionally high suicide risk while he was on his own.

What we didn’t fully comprehend then, but know only too well now, was the depth and breadth of official incompetence, inaction, backside-covering and outright lying that would unfold over the three days until his body was found in the Waikato River, and the 10 weeks since.

My other son Tony has written eloquently in The Daily Blog about how the New Zealand mental health system failed Nicky, and fails too many other families.

We have also tried to initiate other inquiries via the Coroner’s office, the Health & Disability Commission, the District Inspectors of Mental Health – none of which have yet started.

And we are actively using social media (e.g. Facebook: Nicky ‘Autumn’ Stevens) to get Nicky’s story out, and help other families tell their stories, many of them horrifically similar to ours.

But what we haven’t yet told is the story of the almost complete dereliction of duty exhibited by the NZ Police following their receipt of the ‘Missing Person’s report from the Hospital shortly after Nicky disappeared.

After all, Police did not start a search for Nick until over two days after he went missing, despite telling the DHB one was under way immediately (at least according to the DHB).

Nicky’s body was found three days after he went missing, but only a kilometer down the fast-flowing River from the Hospital area.

And two witnesses have come forward claiming in a written statement to have seen Nicky on the day after he disappeared between the Hospital and where his body was found – near the Police station, actually. Not that Police have yet interviewed that couple, 7 weeks after we provided the statement to them.

No Police read the statement clearly placed in their missing person notes that he was a suicide risk, and had made recent attempts at his life.

The Police ‘Comms North’ call centre did not note down the Hospital nurse clearly pointing out the suicide risk three times in the initial call, including using the word “serious” to describe it.

Shades of Iraena Asher, the troubled young woman who went missing at Piha in 2004, with police responding to the report of her disappearance by sending a taxi (to the wrong address). Nicky didn’t even get a taxi! Iraena, who was also mentally ill, was presumed drowned, as her body was never found.

As a result of the lack of attention to the known details, mid-level cops pushed Nicky’s missing persons case well down the priority list, not even assigning it to any officer to look at for 42 hours after the missing person’s report came in.

When no police had contacted us for over a day after Nicky’s disappearance, we tried to call their Hamilton ‘operations room’, being cut off six times before getting a junior cop to take a message asking for whoever was in charge to call us – something that never happened.

In fact we have a written report from Hospital staff claiming that the person who would normally handle Nicky’s case was “out on training” that day.

In desperation, after 30 hours of hearing nothing I wrote urgent, ‘top priority’ emails to the Police Minister, Police Commissioner and Waikato District Police Commander demanding some contact with us, and outlining the serious suicide risk. The next day the Minister’s office emailed back saying they wouldn’t do anything but had referred my email on to the Commissioner’s office.

Neither senior cop sent a message down the line to Hamilton police to get their backsides into gear, and to this day, neither have contacted the family.

The Police finally did start a search, 50 hours after Nicky went missing. His body was found by a member of the public, right across the River from where I was personally searching at the time.

We hoped, naively, that the pleasant cops who drove us to the morgue to view Nicky’s body after it was recovered from the River, and who let us listen to the missing persons phone call audio tape, would do the right thing, and recognise police inaction had thrown away any chance of finding Nicky before he drowned himself.

But after initially offering all the help we wanted, and even letting us listen to the audio of the missing persons call, Police have clammed up since we laid formal complaints of negligence against the DHB, insisting on a formal police investigation, and since we made a point, after hearing the audio, of telling them we thought they had not done their job properly.

Police have only just in the last week (9 weeks after Nicky’s body was found) started their investigation of the DHB negligence.

Police have refused to give the family a copy of the missing persons call audio tape, or the notes of that call that are on Nicky’s file.

Police have appointed a Hamilton police sergeant to investigate the failings of the Hamilton Police and, in some cases, his superiors – not that this investigation has even started, 11 weeks after Nicky disappeared.

The Police have gone to great pains to tell us on several occasions that if they have made mistakes they will “put their hands up”, and rectify their errors.

But the family finds that the Police words are not matched by their actions, and have now made a formal and detailed complaint to the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA), who we are told are this week holding a high-level meeting to decide how to handle it.

We are not holding our breath for a timely, independent and fearless investigation by the IPCA – that would be a bonus – but we are letting Police, health and Government officials know that we won’t be bullshitted to, and that we will leave no stone unturned looking for the truth about Nicky’s death."

Dave Macpherson – Father of Nicky Stevens

Evidence of prosecutorial misconduct:

After witnessing the victim of a crime being told that Police would not be taking a statement from them recently because apparently the complaint "didn't meet the standard required", We were surprised to receive a copy of a statement to Police which was released to me (by the Police) after I requested information regarding an unrelated matter.   I could not believe that a Police officer had considered this rambling monologue to be worthy of actually recording in evidence to be potentially used in Court.  Particularly after Police had rejected the complaint of a genuine victim of crime, the offender being none other than the husband of the complainant in the other matter.

After making further inquiries other information was received regarding this matter and it became apparent from the evidence that local Police are extremely selective to the point of blatant corruption regarding the enforcement of the law, that witnesses and 'complainants' are being encouraged to commit perjury by vindictive local Police officers, who are desperate to convict people they don't like, at any cost, regardless of the moral or legal implications.

This link to the phone call to emergency services which was made on 18 February 2014 by Melissa Peacock, recently married to Ronald Peacock, a member of the Nomad gang according to Police, with a long history of violent offences.  She complains of "tailgating" and "trying to run me off the road" and claims to have been travelling behind an ambulance at the time this occurred.

This is a link to the formal statement of the complainant in this matter.  Paragraphs 3-8 indicate a desire to "set the scene" for the allegation.  Being of an inquisitive nature, I wondered what action was taken as a result of statements being made to Police by two witnesses alleging they saw a man make threats to them.  Enquiries revealed that the alleged offender had never been charged with threatening to kill either complainant as a result of this incident referred to in the complainants statement to Police regarding the alleged event on 18 February 2014. 

The complainant begins by stating her full name and that she is speaking to Senior Constable Simpson about an incident that occurred that afternoon while she was driving her car. 

She states that this matter "involves Lee Harris."  Mr Harris is a local man who minds his own business and works hard, who is known to the complainant.

The apparent 'involvement' in this case appears to have been the agreed fact that the defendant happened to drive out of a side road into in a merging lane and the complainant over reacted to this.  The evidence is odd to say the least, and deserves wider scrutiny.  Repeated requests to Police for a copy of the Summary of Facts relating to this matter - or even just confirmation or denial regarding the EXISTENCE - or not - of a Summary of Facts.  It appears that there never WAS a Summary of Facts, despite section 12(a) of the Criminal Disclosures Act stating that a summary of the facts alleged against the defendant must be provided in the INITIAL disclosure!  Police continue to refuse to confirm or deny whether a summary of facts ever existed!

The complainant continues to say that she has known the defendant for a long time, but that she and her husband have had "ongoing problems" with him for "5 - 6 weeks" - yes, since her husband assaulted an innocent woman who happened to be known to the defendant with a knife and a motor vehicle and threatened her, on the mistaken assumption that the victim was the defendant's [Lee Harris's] "missus".

Paragraph 11 is odd because it refers to "my friend Bridgette" rather than "my sister in law Bridgette Peacock", given the reference to Ronald Peacock in the initial paragraphs.  

The complainant's statement goes on to describe an 'event' which appears to be based on her perception of imminent danger rather than any ACTUAL danger.  Paragraph 16 describes how the complainant noticed a car pull out of a side road into a merging lane on the main highway - a perfectly normal occurence.

"I was on SH2 approaching Clareville heading towards Carterton and just as I went past the Chester Road intersection there was a car, all of a sudden, just there, right next to my drivers door."

"I got such a fright I pulled over into the road verge and stopped."

It would seem that the complainant was driving along in a daze, possibly under the influence of some substance, as the defendant alluded to during the cross examination of the complainant, and she suddenly noticed that there was a side road there and that she was driving alongside a merging lane, and there was a car in the merging lane, which happened to be the defendant's car.  This is alleged to have happened in rush hour traffic.  The prosecution goes on to spout a garbled account that is frankly in the realms of fantasy, and the evidence given adds a lot of weight to the defendant's references to the complainant's drug addictions perhaps, and indicate that this woman should not be driving on the road if she is going to panic for no reason, if her eyesight is seriously impaired which it obviously is and if she is going to drive in the erratic  manner described in her statements and evidence and while talking on the phone.  There was no ambulance.  And if there had been, and what she said was true, the ambulance driver, or any of the other motorists, would have certainly reported it.

In the interests of transparency and the fair administration of justice, here is a link to the Court documents regarding this matter.  If you have trouble viewing these documents leave a comment below with your email address and we will mail them to you directly.  Comments are moderated prior to publication and confidentiality guaranteed.

Compare this information with the letter sent to Police from a lawyer stating this:

14 February 2014
Inspector Brent Register

Masterton Police
cc Garry Wilson & Jodie Lawrence, Prosecuting Sergeants
cc Glen Jordan, Officer in Charge
VIA EMAIL

 Dear Inspector Register

PROSECUTION OF RONALD PEACOCK FOR SERIOUS OFFENCES AGAINST[NAME WITHHELD TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OF THE SERIOUS OFFENCES]

I act on instructions for [NAME WITHHELD TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OF THE SERIOUS OFFENCES], (my client), and I am writing to you in regard to the lack of Police response to very serious criminal activity by Ronald Peacock, (the defendant), against my client.

Background

As you are no doubt aware, my client is now essentially in hiding, (with Police assistance), in a Masterton motel, following the burning down of her home on Waitangi day this year.  The house one paddock over, was burned down a week or so before this, which in light of everything I have been instructed about this matter, can only be viewed as an error on the part of a very determined arsonist, who corrected his error a few days later.

However this matter is viewed, my client's life has clearly been placed in serious and immediate danger by a determined and aggressive criminal.

I do not lightly link the defendant's name to the arsons alluded to above, but rather I do so in light of very compelling evidence, which will be outlined below), following clear threats by him to the life of my client, coupled with an assault with a knife and a vehicle by the defendant against my client.  Further to this, the defendant has stalked and harassed my client on a number of occasions, with such behaviour demonstrating at the very least an intention to run an on-going campaign of fear and harassment against my client; with the clear possibility that he indeed intends to make good on his threat and murder [NAME WITHHELD TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OF THE SERIOUS OFFENCES].

My client is terrified of this man and in light of such clear criminal activity against her is very unhappy that this on-going threat remains against her, as this man is neither charged, nor in custody.

The compelling evidence which [NAME WITHHELD TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OF THE SERIOUS OFFENCES] would give against Ronald Peacock is as follows:

Following her contacting me on 12 February 2014, I took a statement from my client on 13 February 2014, the essence of which is condensed as follows, without losing any of the essential elements of her allegations, nor exaggerating or minimizing anything she said:

That on 9 January 2014 at about 10.00pm the defendant arrived outside the address of the complainant at [ADDRESS WITHHELD].  The defendant pulled up in an AU Ford Utility, with dark tinted windows.  He started talking to the victim through the passenger window, while parked in the street, slightly to the left toward the pavement on [ADDRESS WITHHELD].  The complainant could not hear him and came around to the driver's side.  On coming around to the driver's side, my client observed that the defendant appeared to be badly affected by drugs or alcohol or both. 

My client observed that the defendant was frothing at the mouth and saying in very strange and exaggerated way:  "What do you want"  The defendant went on to say:  "Give a message to [NAME OF MUTUAL ACQUAINTANCE, WITHHELD TO PROTECT PRIVACY OF OTHER VICTIM OF OFFENDER] from me, (referring to a friend of my client).  The victim responded, (noting the condition of the defendant), by saying "Do your own messages, he's just down the driveway". 

The defendant responded with again saying in an exaggerated voice: "Give a message to [NAME OF MUTUAL ACQUAINTANCE WITHHELD]."  My client then said:  "I'm sick of you _____ _____ trying to use me as a messenger.  Go down the driveway and tell him yourself". 

While sitting in the driver's seat the defendant produced a large black knife with a black handle.  My client, who is a chef, recognized this as a chef's knife.
The defendant then got out of his utility vehicle with the knife and he said to my client: "I'm going to kill you bitch."  My client responded: "No you're _____ not."
My client backed off.  The defendant got out of the vehicle and lunged at my client with the knife several times.  My client kicked the door of his car so that the door of his car went back toward him and formed a barrier between them. 

The defendant then came around from the door of his car and lunged toward my client with his knife. 

Throughout this attack the defendant was just several feet away from my client.
My client then ran to her car, which was just parked a few feet away, outside the driveway of [ADDRESS WITHHELD], Carterton.  My client found that her car was locked and jumped into the deep gutter of [ADDRESS WITHHELD], screaming for help. 

The defendant drove at my client in his vehicle, attempting to hit her.  He would have succeeded, except for the fact that the gutter in [ADDRESS WITHHELD], (in which my client was standing), is unusually deep and his vehicle would have become completely stuck had he driven into the gutter. 

The defendant did a U turn and turned back toward my client who had picked up a rock to deter him.  My client threw the rock at the window of the defendant's vehicle.  The defendant drove past the gutter and into the side of my client's vehicle, clipping the driver's side mirror, (damage done to such mirror is captured in a photograph).  Paint from the defendant's vehicle is clearly visible on my client's vehicle.
That this was a terrifying incident for my client. 

However, since this time, the defendant has "stalked" my client on a number of occasions:  Following her to school with her son, following her to a service station and following her to Greytown.  On these occasions he has parked his car, or followed my client, in order that my client  would be aware that he is nearby and has the ability to harm her and her family at a time of his choosing. 

That the defendant is relentless in his stalking of my client and that he has attempted to make good his threats to kill my client by in all probability, burning down her home, or arranging for someone to do this on his behalf.

That the defendant will not cease the above type of behaviour until in custody, particularly so as his behaviour is drug induced.

That my client has been forced to go into hiding, with the knowledge and support of the Police, which is totally unfair.  This would not be necessary if the defendant was in custody.

That in the circumstances outlined above, the defendant ought to at the very least be charged with:

    (i)    Threatening to kill; and
    (ii)   Assault with a weapon x 2, both with a knife and a car; and
    (iii)  Criminal harassment

My client seriously fears for her life and accordingly I need an assurance from Police that the defendant will be charged with the offences outlined, or similar offences, on an urgent basis.  Failing this, I have very clear instructions to initiate a private prosecution and to oppose bail forthwith.

Accordingly please advise me on an urgent basis if the Police intend to charge the defendant with offences as outlined above.

The circumstances are so dire for my client, (who is in hiding with your support and knowledge), and she is so badly stressed by everything that has occurred; that I can only give you until 19 February 2014 to advise me that you will take action against the defendant.  Failing this I will immediately commence a private prosecution on her behalf.

Yours faithfully,

[Name of lawyer withheld for reasons of personal safety]

Here is the response to that letter.  Readers will notice that this response has nothing to do with the matters raised in the letter, it refers to a completely different incident at a completely different place and time - click on the image to view, or comment below in confidence with an email address and we will mail you a copy of all evidence referred to on this website - Police are now obstructing the private prosecution and totally ignoring the concerns of this lawyer, and we have recently received a considerable amount of evidence that this is not an isolated incident, and there is considerable evidence of a pattern of this corrupt behaviour by local Police, indicating that the problem is much bigger than we thought: