Glen

In most cases I can see that it's a good idea (just because he's robbed before doesn't mean he did it this time) but when it comes down to rape accusations so many?

Good luck on the ads, there's good money to?

In those cases, surely a jury must hear about prior convictions? Doesn't it address the most important aspect of such a complaint – the character of those involved?

At which point the defence is going to argue, not unreasonably, that a proper defence will require the ability to scrutinise the?

Either he knew what was going on and was involved (very bad) or he knew but wasn't involved but didn't say anything (also bad). Or he didn't know (and yet was 'close friends' with these guys) which makes him a lousy copper, or he?

You should place the top leader board ad below your site header as it looks kinda weird being the first thing you see. To me it needs framing in your site not drifting above it like a geocities ad or something.

That's one of those calls you make. It was?

Craig Y

What that really amounts to is saying that bad character is valid evidence of guilt.

(What about someone who produces evidence of great character? They'd say "I'm innocent – 'cos I'm a great?

Shit, that's cynical. Then again, I'm not one to talk because after his extraordinary post-verdict outburst, I'm not entirely convinced he really wants his job back as opposed to laying the ground for a generous 'fuck off' package. (Because that's never happened in the history of industrial relations, has?

Wishart's sailing close to his own flatulence on this one. Schollum and Shipton are pond scum rapists, but Rickards might have grounds for defamation if his lawyer catches sight of his latest ramblings on The Barking Mad Room blog...

I'd be surprised. There are obvious risks for Rickards in going?

You'd have to think that being a long-serving senior officer...plus (as I understand it) the Government's 2-for-1 top-up of the Police Employment Rehabilitation Fund...

We're probably talking a fair whack of dosh here. Aren't we?

Masterpiece of understatement...

James Griffin:
I'm not sure whether he'd qualify to be paid out under the Police Employment Rehabilitation Fund – I think you only get the top up if you were employed before 1992 (when the PERF was closed off) and can prove you're leaving for?

As for the dirty coppers, their failure to be convicted doesn't mean they're off scot free. Reputationally, they are ruined. Which doesn't bother me at all. There should be consequences for?

And ofcourse the Police should have vigourously investigateed these allegations . Particularly since some of their own were involved . This to me is such a no brainer.

Too right. If we think there is a miscarriage of justice here, if there is a systemic failure, that system is police?

Agency creative is still an issue for me, but perhaps we can be a positive influence there.

I don't like the AA skyscraper ad with the yellow carr whooshing across from side to side. It's distracting when I'm trying to read the main blog post, which is the #1 reason?

How many people do you know who have opted out of jury service? Sometimes for valid reasons, sometimes ... not.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the wisdom of Public Address was transferred from computer screen to the jury room?

Sorry,?

??Mrs Shipton replied: "Absolutely, absolutely. I have stood by my husband every step of the way and that will continue.
"What I can say is that the verdicts speak for themselves – I told?

One way to improve trials/verdicts is ... to take part.

I don't disagree however having more, and possibly more capable, juries won't change the operation of the rules of evidence and criminal proceedure (3410's comment above about the delay in the complaint makes matters even more complex).

i'd very interested to see if these two had any involvement in the "investigation".

might be writing myself a wee OIA request.

He has been acquitted, twice now. That gives strong impetus to his claim to be reinstated. I agree with Craig R that probably someone?

Too right. If we think there is a miscarriage of justice here, if there is a systemic failure, that system is police management, and the failures go back to the 80s. If these cases had been tried 10 years ago or earlier we might have seen different verdicts.

As I?

Just as long as it's not the one that pops up from the side and plays video.... urgh, puts me RIGHT off the advertiser, and the site.

Won't happen here while I draw breath.

I understand that police officers have no code of conduct or code of ethics.

From my experience of police officers, I'd tend to agree, but I guess that's not what you meant.

I believe it is the case that NZ Police officers have an obligation not to "bring the NZ?

It's about human nature, and group dynamics. Not the law.

Ever been a kid at school, stuck?

I've never been on a jury, but my partner recently was – a serious trial for kidnapping, robbery and assault. The jurors took it very seriously. (Interestingly, after they convicted, they were told that the defendant had previous convictions for similar offences).

In?

As for the dirty coppers, their failure to be convicted doesn't mean they're off scott free. Reputationally, they are ruined. Which doesn't bother me at all.

ben, i would hate to see anyones career ruined,or worse just because of a couple of vindictive false claims. i don't believe that is?

But I do wish the process was discussed more in the media. For better or worse, it's how verdicts are reached, and it is a key part of the system.

That's a terrible slur on juries, Simon.

I did a week on a district court jury, we all took it very seriously, but it was still a really disconcerting, confusing experience. I know that the point is that we're not supposed to be swayed by any outside influences, but during?

I'm not a lawyer, but I do not see why, at least in?

One woman spent a lot of time carping on about why didn't the police do this, or that, or why don't we have x evidence, rather than focussing on the (really really stupidly obvious) evidence that was supplied.

Ditto – one woman on the same jury as me – an?

I would prefer any evening-up to be protecting the complainant, not stripping more from the defendant.

I read today?

Eww... but seriously, Span:

Maybe, maybe not – but I truly hope the Police make sure he's gone one way or the other. I'm no employment lawyer, or a mind reader,?

Anyone that does not?

My thoughts now are with every poor bastard who?s been on the receiving end of a prosecution based on evidence provided by these clearly disreputable men.

Mr Rickards as I understand it was an undercover drug squad officer?? In that case there could be many of these 'poor?

I think we should stick all the "experts" in the one room, tell them they can never leave until they ALL agree, and make it into a Reality TV show. Rated R18. That will tell us all we need to know how verdicts happen. It's not pretty.

?

With all due respect to your experience of current police culture, I would have to say that it is absolute bollocks to tar all with the same brush on that basis.

While there was clearly a bloody awful element within the Rotorua/Tauranga police force from the 80's,?

television has finally reached the bottom of the big-ideas-bucket!

That will be when the Kiwi version is made hosted by Jason Gunn & Michael Barrymore, and starring Loos & Ridgey.

I'm not judging them?

And consider Dad4justice, that the police seem hell bent on nailing these guys. More to come no doubt.

Glad to hear you're staying away from MediaOne (the pop-up video player), and even more luck with trying to resist agency creative...having dealt with the?

Society does need good cops .

As I commented last night rape has a high incidence of recidivism, the link above discusses this.
Just as for a serial killer or paedophile the modus operandi is frequently very similar as it serves to satiate a particular kink (for want of a better word). The consistencies in?

In situations where the defendant is charged with [offending that] is strikingly similar to [something that] the offender has been convicted [of], the prosecution can apply to the court to be?

And perhaps throw in a bit of conspiracy for good measure.

I served last year on the jury for a drug trial where these approaches were used: the defendants pleaded guilty once the multiple instances were lined up.?

One thing no seems to be considering here is the wisdom of lodging these charges in the first place

This is why there used to be a Statute of Limitations on this kind of case. After the passage of 10 or more years the risk of a totally unsafe?

In all the furore about this case, we all tend to forget that a jury of 12 of our fellow citizens (and it almost certain they unofficially knew of Shipton's and Schollum's prior convictions)

I doubt that.

"The distinctive characteristics of the behaviour of which these witnesses depose is that it involves joint sexual activity by two serving police officers featuring the use?

Let's put it this way. I knew, and so did?

Let's put it this way. I knew, and so did everyone else I know...so what were you chances of selecting a 12 member jury in which NO-ONE knew?

Doubt it.

Think for a moment about the circles you move in. How up to date on current affairs are you and?

Much of the debate surrounding the case has been around whether the Jury would have made a different decisions had?

Tom, would you like to look in the eyes of?

[T]he man who originally investigated the allegations is charged with attempting to obstruct or defeat the course of justice.

Former detective inspector John Dewar, who denies the charges, led the Rotorua CIB and handled Ms Nicholas' accusation that she was pack raped?

Tom, would you like to look in the eyes of someone who's just made a complaint that they'd been the victim of a sex crime and say, "well, you know there's a very low conviction rate for this kind of offence

A rather emotional card to play in the?

Well,sorry, I'm not convinced by Tom's argument that perhaps not bringing these charges at all would somehow be 'better' for the victim. Here's a shocking revelation: I think there are a plenty of victims of violent crime – including rape – who never report it precisely because they?

Rape cases are always difficult to prosecute, full stop; with so called 'historical' cases, the difficulties increase exponentially.

Which is my sole point really. I believe it was a mistake to remove the Statute of Limitations and to lower the burden of proof to convict on uncorroborated testimony alone.?

peter Cox wrote:
Maybe someone just doesn't want Clint Rickards to be police commissioner in the future, can't say I'd disagree at this point.

that was Reece.

My apologies for the misattribution.

Philip, you're peaching to the Amen corner on that one. :) I guess?

After reading his column today, I can only conclude that he has been practising with Rodney Hide and was repeatedly dropped on his head.

Some observations;
The rape trial was in the DC. The?

One thing no seems to be considering here is the wisdom of lodging these charges in the first place, given not just the difficulty of securing a conviction but also the impact on the victim of a not guilty verdict.

I would suspect, if anything, that likelihood of following a?

That wasn't the depressing bit. That would be the stupid people who kept repeatedly claiming the defendant hadn't proved he was innocent.

It has to be said: good god.

As Zsa Zsa Gabor once complained about a jury: 'It was not my class of people. There was not?

You conveniently forgot to mention the damning evidence presented by the defence about the accusers. In the Nicholas case, the accuser had made numerous allegations of rape against many men.?

I think the majority of jurors in the Louise Nicholas case were women. Isn't it significant that Nicholas was judged by her peers who found her testimony/credibility to be wanting?

What's $5 million between friends?

Wow, I hope I'm misinterpreting what you said, ross f, because I'm curious as to what exactly the numerical value you'd put on justice – in the judicial sense. And did Louise Nicholas's peers find her credibility wanting, or rather the actual evidence just not?

If ross' standard is that only a criminal conviction is meaningful, then let him wait for perjury and false complaint convictions before attacking Nicholas.

"I would've told the cops to take a hike."

If?

Well, I must admit that I'm using the Peter Ellis case as a guide. Remember the debate swirling in 1999 after the Court of Appeal said that a commission?

The complainant made allegations that she couldn't substantiate.

> If ross' standard is that only a criminal conviction is meaningful, then let him wait for perjury and false complaint convictions before?

I suspect that the jury's decision to acquit the accused was relatively easy. There was no external corroborating evidence.

Yes. And both complainants were flawed, and the prosectution couldn't show guilt beyond reasonable doubt. That's how it works.

On the other hand, there was better evidence in Mt Maunganui case,?

But the cousin from Australia didn't do that. She simply had a different recollection of events.

Those events including the phone call from Sharon Shipton coaching her on what to say (ie: to lie) in the past couple of weeks. I'd wager her memory of that was still quite fresh.?

Are you saying that the police bribed a witness? That's what I think you're saying.

Now, who's got some nerve? The guy you're referring to was originally found guilty of sexual violation, but that conviction was overturned. How did you miss?

An allegation that you, Russell, have accepted as fact. You might recall that the cousin couldn't remember how long the holiday was. However, despite not being?

I'm saying that if the police can provide jail-house informants with cell-phones and also somehow reduce the charges that such informants may face, anything's possible. But bribery? No, I used "inducement" and?

http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/3926839a10.html

Oh goodness, seems that is what they did, and that's why Dewar is now going to trial.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=000D0D73-FC83-15E7-891583027AF1010E

Ah, you're not saying it, merely insinuating it.

I'm not sure of the relevance of that link, Riddley. I would note that the link does not mention the PCA inquiry into the Nicholas case in 1995. The 1995 inquiry had nothing to do with Dewar – he wasn't involved?

Please! If you think the police would never resort to offering inducements, why don't you just say so?

Ross? You there Ross?

People can genuinely believe that they have been sexually abused without it being so.

Oh?

Anything's possible, including monkeys flying out my butt on their way to give you a conspiracy vaccination, but I don't have to waste my valuable?

Have these allegations been tested in Court, Russell? If not, why not?

I didn't insinuate she lied at all. In fact, I said that she testified that she couldn't remember about events more than 20 years ago. However,?

http://www.issues.org/18.4/loftus.htm

Have these allegations been tested in Court, Russell? If not, why not?

Read the story, Ross, for god's sake. All three statements were given as evidence in court, along with another one from a female participant in Shipton's sex games. I don't think there's any doubt it happened.

So perhaps?

Since a baton was a feature of the case, I would've expected that the offending baton would have been produced as an exhibit. Was it? Presumably such evidence is important?

> I don't think there's any doubt it happened.

There's?

Sunday Star Times
February 13 2005

Meanwhile, the?

Since a baton was a feature of the case, I would've expected that the offending baton would have been produced as an exhibit. Was it? Presumably such evidence is important?

I'd assume you were joking, but I rather fear you aren't.

There's one little problem with your comment. You weren't?

Isn't it significant that Nicholas was judged by her peers who found her testimony/credibility to be wanting?

Actually, ross, she wasn't on trial.

No, I don't believe only a criminal conviction is meaningful. But I suspect that in the last two cases of alleged rape, the jury may have declared innocence if they were able to. Isn't that a weakness in our system?

I read this exactly the other way, ross, and I'm?

Sorry, Russell, I thought you would be aware that I was referring to external?

I provided you with a link showing that police pay informants, and police have been known to help out prison informants by way of giving them goodies and reducing whatever charge they may be facing.

So you did. All I want is for you to state clearly the conclusion you?

That's absolutely correct. Which is why – despite her credibility problems – she is free, but if the accused had been convicted on the basis of her testimony, they could now be serving up to 14 years in prison.?

You've got nothing to be concerned about, but I would like to know – even if you don't – if any of the witnesses appearing on behalf of the accuser?

Sorry, Russell, I thought you would be aware that I was referring to external corroborating evidence. Clearly pyhsical or external corroboration is not important to you. And you have (deliberately?) ignored the fact that Mr Reynolds does not seem to be a very reliable witness.

Ross, I feel that I?

Have these allegations been tested in Court, Russell? If not, why not?

It turns out ... yes! But...

I thought you would be aware that I was referring to external corroborating evidence.

Ohhhh, of course! Russell you dingbat, anyone could have inferred that from Ross's initial statement.

Clearly pyhsical or?

OK, I admit that I, like 36 jurors who – over three trials – heard all the evidence and who decided that a baton apparently wasn't involved, am?

Apparently when they're appearing for the prosecution, they're very credible, but as soon as they appear for the defence, they're not. Hmmm.

OK, I admit that I, like 36 jurors who – over three trials – heard all the evidence and who decided that a baton apparently wasn't involved, am wrong.

Uh, they didn't decide that it wasn't used. They decided that it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt. So they might ALL?

But what caused this doubt? Remember this doubt was not among just one juror but ALL 36 jurors. However, Russell's opinion is that there is no doubt that a baton was used.?

But there are some here who apparently believe, in sex cases, guilty until proven innocent. The fact remains: you cannot prove a negative.

> In this case, I'm not sure that anybody comes off particularly well.

I?

Uh, they didn't decide that it wasn't used. They decided that it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt. So they might ALL believe that the baton was used, but were only 70% sure. Or they might ALL believe it wasn't used. You can't tell.

Actually, they decided in the Nicholas case?

but tell me rossy, if 'you cannot prove a negative',?

A3 poster, "...the we did her with a bottle"

has "0800 BAD COPS" and a little description of the fun stuff you can hear about on the chat line.

am thinking?

" Get some baton work stories"

It's just not a good look, but while helen makes political hay just remember that she oversaw his promotion several times while aware of the allegations against rickards so we'll just?

yes reece, i think the charming man from wairarapa definitely feels more comfortable on kiwiblog conspiracy nutter. the tone there is incredibly septic – seems like the 'Dykocracy' is conspiring to keep that nice man Mr Rickards out of power.

Hmmm, yes. The misogyny is certainly surfacing. It also gets?

If I knew what statement you were referring to, I might respond. Could you be more specific.

And Russell, you do yourself no favours by referring to me in the same?

"Oversaw his promotion several times" would be overstating the situation a great deal IMHO.

Correct. The one time she did get a say in his promotion she turned it down.

Attempts to blame this affair on Helen Clark are quite pitiful and smack of desperation in some quarters.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/3983574a1861.html

Richard Long himself weighing in on whether juries should hear all the evidence.

quote:
If the juries at the two recent sex trials had known that former policemen Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum were already in jail, for eight years, for a?

I wish the interviewer had commented back "Even if we committed the crime, we're innocent until proven guilty". But they?

you cannot be serious.

like corngate – the great scandal where in turned out the alledged corn never actually existed. like paintergate – where the PM signed the back of a painting to give to a charity auction. like speedgate -?

from Don above: 'The one time she did get a say in his promotion she turned it down. Attempts to blame this affair on Helen Clark are quite pitiful and smack of desperation in some quarters'

Ordinarily, I?

Sadly it seems there are trolls everywhere over this issue :-(

never fear!! my D20 and my elven sword of ungodly smiting will vanquish these trolls!

huurah!!!

The point I'm making is that as prime minister the buck stops with her.

Look, I'll go out on a limb for the pm of the day. If you credit her personally for every positive economic, social and sporting indicator/success of the last 7 years then maybe, just maybe you?

Tamihere NOT PROVEN (his deputy at Waiparera was)
Samuels PROVEN and MINISTERIAL WARRANT REMOVED
Benson pope NOT PROVEN (and plaintiff a tad sketchy at best)
Parker PARTIALLY PROVEN but REMOVED FROM OFFICE all the same
Clark PROVEN (what a terrible terrible crime, do you think she writes?

never fear!! my D20 and my elven sword of ungodly smiting will vanquish these trolls!

huurah!!!

I have a breastplate +2 vs social humiliation

...and with my natural +3 CHA bonus things are looking good.

hmmmm... but we're looking at an ogre with +6 CHA vs. halfing manipulation... better roll very high my friend

12.

Hmm... Just checking the relevant saving throw tables on my Dungeon Master screen, and cross referencing my CHA bonus, subtracting the ogre's value, it says here that...

'Ross is a dumb-ass'

Well, I guess you?

On reflection I guess we have different expectations of our elected officials. I want people who have strong ethics in combination with a decent moral code of conduct.

I doubt it very much. I suspect the difference is expecting criticism to be fair, balanced and not quite so one sided.

big marker writing on the policy hq too.

make me think, a few years back ird caught a lot of flak from rodney hide about allegedly driving some businessmen to suicide with demands they pay their taxes.

i?

I suspect they will have to implement changes at the training level too, sort of like when the legal profession made Legal?

These were?

cops using their uniform to access women is as common today as ever.

sexual harrassment of women, by cops, continues to this day. i've seen the police files on this in a previous occupation. they filled a room?

Thanks too for reporting on the news coverage, which I missed. Not surprising that the media has focused on a small amount?

In the end though, the most important thing was a very large group of people (for?

http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/72707/index.php

Excellent education though. Maybe protesting and?