To the Minister of Police , Minister of transport , Minister of Courts and Minister of Justice Official information act requests
Urgent request for review of the *555 system and review of the ability to use the process of the court for corrupt purposes .
I am a Former Police Prosecuting Sergeant , now a Private Investigator.
In January I was returning to Auckland when I experienced an incident of road rage.
As I had the faster car I managed to get myself out of the situation and placed a vehicle between the other vehicle and myself
What I was un aware of was that the driver of the offending vehicle chose to involve the police to extract revenge on me for escaping his torment.
When I was pulled over by Constable Connors of the Thames traffic unit I was told that there had been two *555 calls about my driving. I stated that that would have been impossible, then I remembered the white van and told him that if there had been a call it would have been from that vehicle and I told him why.
The constable claimed that there had been two calls, I replied that they would have both come from the same van and that they were malicious.
He said he would get back to me and several days later phoned to say he had taken statements from both drivers and I was going to be issued with an infringement for passing dangerously and I was lucky I was not to be charged with dangerous driving. He added that he had discussed this with his supervisor .
When the ticket came I filed an official information act request to obtain the statements, the recording and relevant documentation.
The documents were supplied outside the time frame of the OIA -the constable claiming he had been on leave. Surprisingly the statement from the *555 caller had only just been obtained and was dated 6 weeks after the alleged offence, this was the only statement on file .
I noted that there was no evidence for the offence with which I had been charged. I brought this to the attention of the senior sergeant traffic unit and asked for a review, especially as the time of the alleged offence was two minutes after I had been stopped by the officer.
There was strong determination by police to go ahead with the charge . I elected to enter a plea of not guilty.
I am grateful to Senior sergeant Rex Knight for ensuring that I did not have to drive to Thames twice one to enter the Not guilty plea and another for the hearing. Instead I proceeded straight to the hearing.
I was disappointed that no one could take the time to review the file . I fortunately received the voice recording four days before the hearing and I was able to play that in court and use it in my defence.
It would have been more economical for me to have paid the $150 fine and I am sure many would have done so as a defence is time consuming and those who do not have the experience would have to engage a lawyer at in excess $250 per hour . I have no doubt that many pay up because it is the easy and economic option. There by serving he police with positive statistics and clearances and the rash approach that there is no need for evidence.
We had the hearing on the 16th June before Two justices of the peace who concluded that the charge had not been proved.
I was staggered to hear from the officer that
- he did not take statements
- record drivers explanations
- that a ticket had been issued on the uncorroborated say so of a driver who had earlier tried to push me off the road
- That the uncorroborated verbal allegations of a third party was sufficient to have me charged.
I was disappointed that
- Despite my many requests for review of the case no one compared the statement of the *555 caller with the original phone calls .
- There appeared to be bias on the part of the police , Constable Connors supervising sergeant, Jim Corbett had been involved in a police complaints authority complaint , made by me , many years ago
- That the court system can be abused by the laying of information’s which are not accompanied by affidavit.
- That even if there is an affidavit that no one is kept accountable to the truth.
I raise these last points as in my experience in recent years I have had personal experience with the abuse of process in the courts.
There is a real danger when the law can be used to extract revenge and in the case of the *555 system I believe that it is very susceptible to abuse as the police appear to accept unchallenged the allegations of the caller.
Constable Connors admitted that with the number of tickets he does he is simply too busy to take statements. This does not serve justice it does build resentment against the police for unfairness.
From the minister of Police and Minister for Transport I request by way of official information act request All policies general instructions , directions and codes of conduct relating to
- to the handling of *555 calls
- the minimum requirements of proceeding to prosecution based on information obtained by complaint
- The need for a signed statement before laying a charge against a person based on the allegation of a member of the public
- What protocol the police have in acting or not acting on the say so of one person against another , why are some instanced filed and why are incidents of the same evidential proof proceeded with , I realise there is discretion of police officers but the discretions should never be to such an extent that a person is charged without evidence beyond the uncorroborated say so of one person existing
From the minister of Courts and Minister for justice I request by way of official information act request
- All policies general instructions , directions and codes of conduct relating to the commencement of proceedings in any court especially with regards to any provisions which would ensure that the claims made to the court are made by a person in their true identity and the claims made have a factual basis.
- I am particularly concerned with Identity fraud and it appears to me that there are no mechanisms for proving that a plaintiff in a matter is a real person or a person using their real name , this not only pertains to natural persons but also to legal persons.
- What are the guide lines by which unincorporated trusts can be represented in court and file proceedings in the court , what criteria of poof of existence of a trust is required in relation to those who claim to be trustees.
- The number of prosecutions we have had in the past three years for perjury
- In court evidence
- In an affidavit
- For a statutory declaration .
For the information of all ministers I wish to point out that I am a verification specialist and I am extremely concerned with the lack of verification of facts and accountability to the truth in enforcement and in justice.
It is my experience that the only justice there is is the size of a wallet truth and honesty play little or no part at all.
Our courts spend more time arguing process and law than looking at the cold hard facts and making a finding on facts.
It has been my experience this week that JP’s have the ability to discern fact from fiction probably because they are not distracted by legal arguments and I wonder if perhaps all claims to the court should follow the following process.
- All material is submitted with sworn affidavits
- JP’s have a preliminary hearing to ascertain the at the affidavits set out the facts of the matter
- If the facts stack up the matter goes to a judge for decision on legal issues
- If the claim is malicious or fictitious it is sent to the police to be investigated by the police for perjury
I wish to point out that I have had a perjury file with the police for some 6 months , it has not progressed it appears ironic that a fully prepared perjury file is not acted upon but a malicious telephone call can instigate a court process.
I was also with a mother of two children whose father forced them into a sexual act. The police in 3 years have not progressed the matter. Another client has lost his property, I am working for him pro bono as the police in three years have ot progressed the obvious fraud.
Policing in my day was a service one which kept us safe .. now it is a business ,…used for revenue gathering and the protection to the public is no longer there.
White collar criminals are using our courts to silence those who can expose them
Those engaging in road rage use the police to extract vengeance on the other driver
The innocent have only two options pay up and shut up or risk another beating.
I look forward to your replies I will be filing an IPCA complaint with regards to the Traffic incident
Only when we have accountability to the truth in our courts will we find justice.
When we allow our courts to be used to extract vengeance on other we reduce our courts to the level of a thug who helps in beating up an innocent person.
Something has to change I hope that you can help make New Zealand the lest corrupt by making it difficult for those who use the court to extract vengeance to do so.
I will be posting this and the replies on my blog http://transparencynz.wordpress.com/
and https://anticorruptionnz.wordpress.com/
Anticorruptionnz's Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.