abuse of the *555 system Police failing to investigate filing court action without evidence.

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 16^th 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

1. he  did not   take statements
2. record  drivers explanations
3. that a  ticket had been issued  on the uncorroborated say so of  a driver who had earlier tried to push me off the road
4. That the uncorroborated verbal allegations of a third party was sufficient to  have me charged.

I was  disappointed  that

1. Despite my  many requests for review of the case   no one compared the statement of the  *555 caller  with the original phone calls .
2. 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
3. That the court  system can be abused  by the laying of information’s which are not accompanied  by affidavit.
4. 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

1. to the handling of *555 calls

1. the   minimum requirements   of  proceeding to prosecution   based on information obtained  by complaint

1. The need for a signed   statement before laying a  charge  against a person based on  the allegation of a member of  the public

1. 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

1. 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.
   1. 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.

1. 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.

1. The  number  of prosecutions  we have had in the past  three years for  perjury
   1. In  court evidence
   2. In an  affidavit
   3. 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.

1. All material is  submitted with  sworn affidavits
2. JP’s  have a preliminary hearing  to ascertain the at the affidavits  set out the facts of the matter
3. If the facts stack up  the matter goes to a judge   for decision on legal issues
4. 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/

Advertisement