Thursday, September 30, 2010

Perverting the Course of Justice, More Strange Twists and Unusual Turns:

The decision of Judge Behrens QC begins with the words "This case has taken some unusual turns."

Yesterday's hearing of the application by the Crown Prosecutor bore a remarkable similarity to that of the charges heard by Judge Behrens.  The hearing of those charges was stopped and the summarily laid charges withdrawn when it became obvious that the officer in charge of the case was about to commit perjury.  I was later acquitted on the indictable charges also.

Yesterday the Crown made a formal application to the Court under Section 344(A) of the Crimes Act for an order to have Constable Laura Rhymer's evidence ruled admissible in the current proceedings, regarding the matter of the charge of Escaping from Custody.

The result of the hearing was that not only was her evidence called into question, but the charge itself was dismissed.  Such a dismissal is deemed to be an acquittal.

Crimes Act:
344A Interlocutory order relating to admissibility of evidence
(1) Where any person is committed for trial and—
(a) the prosecutor or the accused wishes to adduce any particular evidence at the trial; and
(b) he believes that the admissibility of that evidence may be challenged,—
he may at any time before the trial apply to a Judge of the court by or before which the indictment is to be tried for an order to the effect that the evidence is admissible.
(2) The Judge shall give each party an opportunity to be heard in respect of the application before deciding whether or not to make the order.
(3) The Judge may make an order under this section on such terms and subject to such conditions as he thinks fit.
(4) Nothing in this section nor in any order made under this section shall affect the right of the prosecutor or the accused to seek to adduce evidence that he claims is admissible during the trial, nor the discretion of the Trial Judge to allow or exclude any evidence in accordance with any rule of law.

This Crown application was a pre trial matter to decide this particular issue of the interlocutory application regarding the admissibility of the evidence regarding the actual arrest, prior to the Jury Trial.  The result at the end of the day was that I was deemed to be acquitted of the charge entirely.

The day started off well with the train trip, the train managers on the Wairarapa line were as wonderful as ever - true ambassadors of good will, the conductors are always polite, helpful, cheerful, great at dealing with people, they're always a pleasure.

And then, Court.  "A Section 344(A) application was filed by the Crown in response to a letter dated 12 February 2010 from the amicus curiae in this matter objecting to the admissibility of evidence.

The objection relates to the second charge of escaping lawful custody and in particular the "admissibility/or validity of the Bill of Rights and arrest procedure on the Escaping Custody charge."  It is anticipated the objection will be on grounds that the accused was not in lawful custody, and relies on the evidence of Constable Laura Rhymer." said the Application.

I was met at the Court by Anne Smith, a thoroughly nice lady who I met when I first came to the Wairarapa, who works for the Corrections Department (Prison Service or something like that).  Anne was kind and helpful and gave me really good advice, looked after me really well, as always.  Thanks Anne.

Then ex Mayor of Cartoontown and Official Village Idiot Gary McPhee and some of his friends were evicted from the Court, which was good, especially given the outcome of his trespass charges against me - which were dismissed after the Judge agreed with my lawyer that he had no authority to evict me from the Council meeting he was presiding over in the usual bully boy manner.  Wellington Court staff were all good, as usual, and Judge Barry presided again.

Crown Prosecutor Ms Ewing called Constable Laura Rhymer, who gave her evidence.  Constable Rhymer to her credit said truthfully that I had come into the station to make a number of complaints about recent matters and that she had had previous dealings with me and had refused to take any of my complaints.  She said that she refused to discuss my complaints, and that she wanted to talk to me about something else and that "we could go to the Masterton police station to discuss it" (p3), and on page 8 and 9: " I then said that I needed to speak to her in relation to another matter and that we'd go the Masterton Police Station to make that statement".  As opposed to, "You are under arrest, you have the right to remain silent," etc.

Constable Rhymer got a bit carried away in some of her other evidence, but she she was cross examined by me (well, sort of - Judge Barry was helpful and patient) and then Mr Yeoman the amicus curiae, then further cross examination by me, then re-examination by Ms Ewing.

Ms Ewing was very helpful in providing me with all sorts of other case decisions about a Mr Abdulkadir Juma Ahmed and a prostitute called Ginger, which is truly, luridly, sordid (and filmed on 'Ginger's cellphone apparently), this arrived the day before the hearing, and I read the whole thing - all thirty or so pages - wondering what on earth they had sent it to me for, and others: R v P, Burgess v R, Ballantyne v Police, Hotene v Police, etc, which were being discussed.  I was trying very hard to follow it all.

Ms Ewing said there were two elements at issue: Firstly, whether or not I was in custody, which was a question of fact and an issue for the jury to decide regarding the "determination of whether the conduct objectively viewed  by words or conduct would reasonably inform the subject they were not free to go."

The second element was whether the "arrest" was lawful, which was a question of law.

She referred to a Court of Appeal decision, Burgess v R, and two issues regarding that matter, firstly the police officers conduct, and secondly whether there was submission or acquiesence to the alleged arrest.  She put it to the Court that no particular words were necessary to effect an arrest, just the police officers conduct generally.  She agreed that Constable Rhymer had not given me my rights, and acknowleged other facts.  I think it was Ms Ewing who raised the matter of Section 347.

The amicus curiae also spoke about Section 347.

Then Judge Barry spoke about Section 347 and culpability.  I didn't know what Section 344 or 347 said at that time.  Judge Barry said that at Depositions on 20 November 2009 I had been committed for trial by two Justices of the Peace.  I don't think he mentioned the hearing on the 8th December when Constable Rhymer didn't turn up because she'd applied for annual leave two days earlier, but he did mention the wrongful issuing of the warrant for my arrest on 16th February 2010, which resulted in my illegal imprisonment on 22nd and 23rd February 2010.

I raised the issue of the hearing on the 8th December in more detail and Judge Barry listened and asked questions.  Then he talked about a discharge due to the low level of culpability under section 347 rather than 344 because my objection was based on the assertion that I was never lawfully arrested.

Judge Barry said that the background to the allegation was that a series of events on 8th April 2009 saw police considering Perverting the Course of Justice charge based on the premise that I had inveigled Aaron Brook to make a statement that Michael Murphy had burgled my house.  Constable Rhymer says that Brook later retracted his statement and said that I made him say something that wasn't true.  The escalation arose, Judge Barry said, when I arrived at the Carterton Police Station at ten to eight on the morning of the 17th April 2009 to make complaints about a number of matters.  The exchange that followed subsequently led to the Escaping from Custody charge.

Judge Barry said 'the Crown case is that when Constable Rhymer gave evidence in her depositions about what happened at the police station, she advised Katherine Raue that she needed to speak to her.  She never formally laid hands on the accused.  It was an emotionally charged situation and Constable Rhymer had maintained a reasonable space."

Judge Barry then said that I had made my position crystal clear by putting a set of propositions: that the officer never actually said that I was under arrest, that she had merely said that she wanted me to go to Masterton with her, that I couldn't understand why that was (given that I had gone there to make complaints after having phoned about them the previous day), and that in fact I thought that the arrest hadn't happened (which was perfectly logical and understandable to any reasonable person, including Judge Barry thankfully).  He said "Ms Ewing submits and I accept that the charge contains key elements including whether at the time Katherine Raue left the station she was in lawful custody.  That would depend on evidence she had been arrested.  There is a question of fact and a question of law." (I made notes and this is to the best of my recall)  The question of fact was about whether the officers conduct, objectively viewed reasonably informed the subject of the arrest.  He referred to Hotene v Police and Ballantyne v Police.  Then he said that looking at the question of fact it can only be an issue of fact that is appropriate for a jury to consider.  

"But the matter does not end there" he said.

"Firstly, there is a clear picture that the alleged offending was at the lower end of the spectrum of culpability of escaping from custody charges, and moreover, a dislocation of proceedings led to unfortunate, and unlawful, consequences.  Now I need to set out my understanding of this" he said.  "The Crown framed an indictment . . . "  
My notes are incomplete at this point due to the fact that I was having a bit of difficulty trying to think, talk and write notes all at the same time, and Judge Barry was allowing me to explain things to him so I was concentrating on trying to do so clearly and concisely.  We discussed the manner in which the Crown had framed the indictment, and tried to separate the charges, which had been rejoined by Judge Behrens QC on 8th December when Constable Rhymer had failed to turn up to Court, and applied for annual leave two days before the hearing - much to everyone's disgust - why has she not been charged with contempt of Court?.

"Unfortunately, that fact was never acted upon in respect of the summary charge which lay in the Masterton Court and was never withdrawn."  I believe it was withdrawn, on 8th December, and not recorded by Court staff.  "Unbeknown to the Crown, the amicus curiae, or Katherine Raue the summary charge still lay in the Masterton Court and was proceeding on it's own course.  A bench warrant was issued for the arrest of Katherine Raue on the 16th February and she was arrested on the 22nd and taken to Arohata and had money taken which has apparently not been returned."  My notes are brief and incomplete, so I will type them as they are written rather than try and fill in the gaps where I can't remember exactly:

This particular part of jurisdiction to discharge
Ms Ewing  sets out Crown position, responsibly accepts the low end culpability
Ballantyne, Hotene
acknowledging confusion, penalty would be nominal
Go to jury:  (1) Jury accepted arrest? (2) Evidence of acquiesence? 
Secondly, and allied with the low end culpability bit is the consequences already visited.
This rare use of S 347 
no useful purpose
R v Harrington:   p 763  Judge Casey p 764
No guidelines as to how discretion applied.

Judge Barry then commented on R v Matenga in the High Court in Gisborne, 5 October 2006, in which Justice Baragwanath referred to Harrington in a case with an unusual combination of (1) Thinness of the Crown case, (2) Process failure, and (3)The likelihood of further publicity for a political issue (occupation of land in that case).  Refusal to commit was commented on.

"I consider this case falls within the threshold required and a discharge is appropriate.
Core culpability is the Perverting the Course of Justice charge and this charge has arisen as a sideshow to that.  The conduct alleged is at such a low end of offending I cannot see it going to trial.  

The accused is discharged on Count 2.

347 Power to discharge accused
(1) Where any person is committed for trial, the Judge may, in his discretion,—
(a) of his own motion or on the application of the prosecutor or the accused; and
(b) after giving both the prosecutor and the accused reasonable opportunity to be heard on the matter; and
(c) after perusal of the depositions and consideration of such other evidence and other matters as are submitted for his consideration by the prosecutor or the accused—
direct that no indictment shall be filed, or, if an indictment has been filed, direct that the accused shall not be arraigned thereon; and in either case direct that the accused be discharged.
(2) Where an indictment is filed by the Attorney-General, or by any one with the consent of the Attorney-General, under subsection (3) of section 345, the Judge may in his discretion, after perusal of the statements of the witnesses for the prosecution, or after hearing those witnesses, direct that the accused shall not be arraigned on the indictment, and direct that he be discharged.
(3) The Judge may in his discretion, at any stage of any trial, whether before or after verdict, direct that the accused be discharged.
(3A) Every direction under this section shall be given in open court.
(4) A discharge under this section shall be deemed to be an acquittal.
(5) The provisions of section 106(3) of the Sentencing Act 2002 shall extend and apply to a discharge under this section.
(6) Nothing in this section shall affect the power of the court to convict and discharge any person.

So Constable Laura Rhymer will give evidence on the charge of Perverting the Course of Justice, and on the charge of Escaping from Custody a discharge under Section 347 is deemed to be an acquittal.  This is remarkably similar to the decision of Judge Behrens QC, which resulted in the submissions to the Police Complaints Authority from lawyer Michael Appleby, after the trial was stopped when it became apparent that the officer in charge of the case was going to commit perjury, by dishonestly saying he arrested me at a public meeting in front of over a hundred witnesses, many of who were prepared to swear to the fact that he hadn't arrested me at all, just assaulted me for no reason and falsely imprisoned me all night and wasted thousands of dollars of tax payer's money pursuing a number of corrupt prosecutions based on perjurous "evidence".  The trial was stopped after evidence was given by the police themselves that I hadn't been arrested at all.

The only bad bit was having to cycle home from Featherston in the rain after I missed the last train, but on the bright side, at least I didn't get a puncture.  Many thanks to the three kind people who gave me a lift from Wellington to Petone, Petone to Upper Hutt, and Upper Hutt to Featherston.

Next call over date 2 November 2010 at 2:15.  New Zealand tax payers should be disgusted at this corrupt waste of money and resources pursuing the malicious vendetta of a couple of corrupt local police officers.

Constable Basher - Something needs to be looked at all right!

Regarding Constable Basher's interest in my blog (see the previous post), I suggest he spends a little less time worrying about his image and a bit more on investigating serious violent crime and domestic abuse.  The Carterton police spent their time smoking cigarettes and looking at the internet.  Mayor McPhee's big deal about getting another police officer for Carterton - wake up and smell the coffee people, we've ended up with "family friend" of Constable Cunningham's daughter, according to a picture published in the Dominion Post, UNSWORN staff member Acacia Simpson, who can answer the phone, pass on messages make cups of tea, and not much else.

But seeing as Constable Basher spends so much time reading my blog, I'll post my complaints on it from now on, and the official police response  - or lack of it:

I received a text message from Tim Reynolds on 29 August 2010 at 9.01 pm saying: "Wayne found racheal taylor in yor room when he got outta the shower on sat nite they have fight then she left had a bag with her sori wasn't there from 0211540 645.  Rachel Taylor is famous in the Wairarapa for being a methamphetamine addict (and any prescription drugs she can get her hands on, pills etc), police informer and thief.  There have been innumerable similar complaints to police.  Wayne Friend likes to associate with people like this and let them roam through wherever he's living, which is why his mother doesn't want him living with her.

The following day I received a message from Tim Reynolds saying "come down then" in response to a request from me to come and see what had been taken.  When I did I was assaulted and detained illegally for some time (kidnapping), all of which is recorded on the audio record of the call as well as video footage on Friend's cell phone, which is evidence of these SERIOUS crimes, as well as other incidents when I have gone to the property to attend to the horse and been abused, threatened and assaulted by Friend and his mates, and as such should have been seized by police by now.

I received a text message on *** saying: "Tim has given me full control of the property you have 1 week to sort a place for your house stuff or the cops have a shed i CAN put it in :)dr feel good:) from 027 270 5152.  It was apparently sent on 4 Sept 2010 at 1.53 pm by Wayne Friend alias dr feel good, the methamphetamine addict, who's mother doesn't even want him living with her.

Reynolds refers to me as his me as his "partner", as such I am entitled to protection from the law and the police and the Courts, both of who are responsible for bailing me to that address recently, in spite of it having been rejected by police and myself because Mr Reynolds has a history of violence toward me and other women.  Here's an email I sent to police this morning: To:,
"kevin.basher" ,
Ken Daniels ,
Independent Police Conduct Authority ,
Independent Police Conduct Authority ,
"J Collins (MIN)"

I went to attend to the horse in Gallon Road and check my property on Wednesday and discovered a considerable amount of damage to my property including the following:
  1. Damage to property in my car including a tv set and kitchen equipment that would have taken a very high level of violence to effect.
  2. Broken glass throughout the drawers of my dressing table, amongst all my clothes. 
I insist that police go to the address immediately and photograph this damage and take statements from Friend and Reynolds about the theft of my property by Rachel Taylor which I have reported clearly and repeatedly.. 
I insist that the audio recording of the phone call from Friend to the police during the attack on me is provided immediately.
Further to the email sent a few minutes ago it goes without saying that I expect police to take statements from Friend and Reynolds about the damage to my property.  I also found a bike of mine thrown outside which had previously been in the laundry, Friend was the one who had access and was responsible for the property.  It appears Friend changed the locks at around the same time he sent me the text message, I expect police to fingerprint the car and the dressing table, etc and conduct a full scene examination and investigation.  

I also request immediate assistance to get a Protection Order and any other orders necessary to secure the safety of myself and my property, which Tim Reynolds threatened yesterday to put on the road tomorrow.
Kate Raue
Further to earlier emails, when I arrived at the property the horse's water container was empty and had not been filled for a long time by the look of the horse.  
Horse food which Bill Armstrong delivered and paid for, for the horse, was being fed to the goat instead by "Friend", there was a full container by the goat and none by the horse.
I want him charged with theft and cruelty to animals.

Here are my Court papers, thrown outside on previous occasions.  Wairarapa has one of the highest domestic violence rates in the world, here's why, corrupt police and politicians.

When I went to the police station to report these, and other, matters recently, I was assaulted and tormented for hours by Constables Paul Dallinger and Gregory Peters, and others.  Sgt Johnston's email response up soon watch THIS space.

When I arrived at the Carterton police station the door was locked, Dallinger was inside having a smoke.  He finally unlocked the door and released a foul cloud of stinking smoke, laughed at my attempts to actually make a complaint, then started to bash me and push me round in front of witnesses, and street cameras.

I wrote the initial request for all the camera footage regarding the incident, including all that from the Masterton police station, clearly on the Bail Bond I was asked to sign, weeks ago.  Police think it's funny to ignore requests routinely and respond arrogantly and dishonesty when they bother at all, like the Principal and Board of Trustees of the South End School in Carterton.

This is the face of the Wairarapa. 

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

HIGH COURT SUPPRESSES ORDER [**censored by the New Zealand Government**] IN "TERRORIST" RAIDS

17 September 2009 -
In a monumental Court decision, Judge Helen Winkelmann of the Auckland High Court last week [** CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**]  authorised by the Court in the "Tuhoe Terrorist" raids in 2007.  The Judge ruled there was "No [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] for issue of [CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT]".  Winkelmann J also ruled the Police [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**]to be on the various roads and track for the purpose of covert surveillance. 

Counter-intuitively the Judge ruled [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] under s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.  The legal admissibility of the evidence collected in the [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] to be the subject of another hearing.

In an [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] -page judgment, Justice Winkelmann [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] to reach a conclusion [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] threatened New Zealand's clean-green image, and life itself.  Her ruling points the finger instead at the [CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT] of the Police raids and seizures which occurred with the [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] of some New Zealand Judges.

In a sour note to Justice Winkelmann's historic ruling, Her Honour ordered her findings suppressed from the media, seemingly to save embarrassment to the Police, as well as fellow High Court Justice Judith Potter - who was the judge [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**].  In stark contrast to this current shroud of secrecy, the Police raids and massive arrests consumed "mainstream media" coverage for weeks in New Zealand when they occurred two years ago, as well as prompted breaking news bulletins around the world.   In 2007, Judge Winkelmann herself read out, in open Court and in front of national TV news cameras, the very worst evidence from the Police affidavits - before ordering the affidavits themselves concealed by judicial order from the public.

What started out as a prosecution under the Terrorist Suppression Act 2002 by Solicitor General David Collins in 2007 has now been diluted into an Arms Act 1983 prosecution.  In November 2007 S-G Collins backed down from the Terrorist charges after a month of mass protests brought attention to the lack of credible evidence being publicly released and resulted in increased suspicion concerning the NZ Court's blanket order suppressing the Police affidavits.

The 18 accused are represented by 14 barristers and countless solicitors, as well as Amicus Curiae Paul Dacre - an Auckland barrister who is the former Pitcairn Island Public Defender.  An 'Amicus Curiae' is a neutral 'friend of the court' appointed by the Judge to give an independent analysis of the facts and relevant legal position.  After several weeks of deposition hearings last year, 5 of the 18 defendants were additionally charged with participating in a gang under the Crimes Act.  The cost of all this to the Crown has already surpassed $8 million and could exceed $20 million.  Most of the defendants are on legal aid.

Preeminent defence barrister Rodney Harrison QC has been recognised by consent as lead counsel for the accused, with Maori rights lawyer Annette Sykes afforded distinct status by the Court in relation to the tikanga of Tuhoe and implied licence.

The written factual background laid out by the Judge in the substantive prosecution [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] but quite simply can be summed up as "[ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**], resulting in an intensive 13 month covert operation, 9 court-ordered land warrants, countless other search warrants and road blocks." 

Gone is the seditious language used when the story first gripped the nation that men in "paramilitary uniforms" were being trained in guerilla warfare by foreign terrorists and planned to use "napalm bombs" in coordinated attacks against State institutions.  In retrospect, it now seems odd that [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**] on a Police affidavit that could not determine whether the number was closer to [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**].  Perhaps they were too-well camouflaged for Police.  But then this is why it is the responsibility of the Judge to ask such pertinent questions before [**CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**].

In Para. [55] of her judgment, Winkelmann J [ **CENSORED BY THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT**].

In oral submissions, Crown prosecutor Ross Burns argued that it was in the public interest for the Judge to allow the case to proceed unimpeded by legal technicalities.  He is being assisted in the prosecution by Meredith Connell employee Emma Finlayson-Davis.  In contrast, Mr Harrison QC for the defence provided the Court a dissertation on the relevant law, providing intricate details which gave rise to those laws in Parliament.  Harrison concluded his submissions by stating his own limitations relative to the specificities of each individual defendant, advising the Court may need to hear arguments from each defendant's counsel.  "The (evidence) exclusion issues can then be addressed by all counsel in a focused and hopefully helpful manner." 
The parties were again in the Auckland High Court on Tuesday for further arguments.
BACK TO FRONT PAGE                            - with kind permission from Vince Seimer, editor,

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Sgt Kevin Basher---07/09/2010 07:47:45---"Something needs to be looked at regarding RAUE using her 'Blog' to make statements regarding our staff"

Here is the latest email from the Wairarapa police.  - Not worried about assaults, violence or burglaries, - worried about my blog!  "Kevin Basher---07/09/2010 07:47:45---Something needs to be looked at regarding RAUE using her 'Blog" to make statements regarding our staff" - -   - Indeed!  I am about to request the rest of this message under the OIA and Privacy Acts in a minute!  And request the police to get down to the address and photograph the damage and investigate it properly.

I've just been down to see our community garden horse at my former home, to discover there's no water in the paddock for the horse, but Wayne Friend is feeding the horse feed to the goat.

During the recent heavy rain the SPCA sent me a number of emails about our other horse Flynn, threatening to take action and demanding that the horse be shifted into another paddock because the one it was in was allegedly too wet.  This is the same SPCA which stole a horse from a paddock in Dalefield recently.  Wayne Friend's mother's relation made the complaint, she came out of a house over the road while I was shifting him in the downpour to gloat.

Also noted while down there, and even more disturbing, was the fact that someone has used the pots and pans I put into a box in my car, to smash the television that was also in there with such force that many of the pots and pans have huge dents in, bleach has been poured through the car by the look of it, the car is filled with broken glass, pretty much everything in it's been smashed, my beautiful old bike was left out in the rain during all the bad weather last week, and now yet another act of serious and utterly senseless - mindless - violence.  This is the real face of Carterton.  This is the face of Wayne Friend, entrusted to look after things while Tim Reynolds was away - what a joke!  "Friend" was letting methamphetamine addicts like Rachel Taylor and Kylie Donnelly in to steal my stuff even before Tim went away!

Police are blatantly refusing to do ANYTHING about it.  Meanwhile I go up tomorrow for allegedly perverting the course of justice - what blatant corruption!   Here, read it for yourself:


I refer to your e-mail below, dated 06.09.10

The purpose of this e-mail is to notify you that Police require an extension of time in which to respond to your request, pursuant to section 41(1) of the Privacy Act 1993, because the request necessitates a search through a large quantity of information and consultations such that a proper response to the request cannot reasonably be made within the original time limit.

Police require until 15.10.10 to provide a substantive response to your request.

You have the right to complain to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner about this extension. The contact address for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner is P O Box 10094, The Terrace, Wellington 6143.

Murray Johnston
Senior Sergeant

Kevin Basher---07/09/2010 07:47:45---Something needs to be looked at regarding RAUE using her 'Blog" to make statements regarding our staff

Kevin Basher/POLICE/NZ



07/09/2010 07:47

Fw: Formal Complaint, Information Request: Assault by police, refusal to take complaints or investigate them properly

----- Forwarded by Kevin Basher/POLICE/NZ on 07/09/2010 07:42 -----

Katherine Raue

To:, "J Collins (MIN)" , Independent Police Conduct Authority , Ken Daniels

06/09/2010 15:45

Formal Complaint, Information Request: Assault by police, refusal to take complaints or investigate them properly

I request all information regarding me held by the NZ Police under the Privacy Act and the OIA.

Particularly, and with priority:
1. All camera footage, CCTV, street camera, etc, of the incidents involving Constables Dallinger and Wilton when I went to the police station to report the theft and assaults at Hodders Road South last weekend.
2. All camera footage, CCTV, etc, of me that same day at Masterton Police station, including footage of the alleyway I was sent down to the gate that wouldn't open.
3. All information regarding the complaints I made to Constables Dallinger and Wilton regarding theft and assault at Hodders Road South.
4. All information regarding any complaint of theft at Hodders Road South by Rachel Taylor.
5. All information regarding a complaint of theft of a bicycle - not just disclosure - ALL information, audiotapes, documents, all information.
6. All information regarding a complaint I made within the last few weeks about another assault at that address by Wayne Friend.
7. Audio recordings of all telephone calls to or from police regarding me since January 2007, in particular:
8. The audiotape of the call from Clare Cook and Kelly Wilson on 11 February 2009,
9. Confirmation or denial of whether Constable Dallinger was involved in any way in the corrupt investigation of the assault on me by Colin Allomes in Dannevirke.
This is a formal complaint that police continue to refuse to take complaints from me and treat me with prejudice and bias, regularly use excessive force amounting to sadistic violence and psychological torment, and have established a pattern of malicious and vexatious litigation against me which is unwarranted and a waste of public resources.

I received a message from the owner of the property at Hodders Road South, sent on 29th August at 9 pm, to say that a well known local methamphetamine addict Rachel Taylor had been caught red handed stealing my property from the room I rent at that address.  I received another message the following evening inviting me to the address to see what was missing this time and secure the room.  When I got there I was confronted, abused and assaulted by another well known P addict, Wayne Friend, whose mother is a well known local police informer, and who let Rachel Taylor into the address while the occupant was absent apparently, and allowed her to leave with my property after witnessing her in my room, and is refusing to make a statement to police regarding this blatant theft, apparently.

I was then assaulted and effectively kidnapped by the owner of the property, my former partner, and held against my will for a considerable time and assaulted during that time, while Wayne Friend called the police and told them a pack of lies.  I was only released after police advised the occupants to
do so, because they wouldn't be rushing to the address in spite of all the complaints.

Katherine Raue



The information contained in this email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this message or any of its contents.

Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in error, please email or telephone the sender immediately.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

More lies from the corrupt Wairarapa Police as they frantically try to cover their tracks:

This is a letter from the police to me regarding the complaints to the PCA, This is a letter from the police to me regarding the complaints to the PCA, Ombudsmen etc, regarding various corrupt acts of the Wairarapa police, page one is reproduced as the original, page two was scanned in a different format and so is typed below, while page three is reproduced in original form: So page one is at left and page two follows here:

1. “All information regarding police file 010518/2481’

There is no file with that number held by Police therefore your request for information is refused pursuant to section 29(2)(b) of the Privacy Act 1993 as the information does not exist.

2. “All information regarding a complaint of theft by the same group of people against myself and Jennifer Armstrong and Oasis Trust regarding a derelict caravan on the site of the former Carterton Community Gardens in Moreton Road.
I am advised by Senior Sergeant Johnston there is no correspondence or documentation held by Police on the theft of the derelict caravan. He further advises that this matter was dealt with at the time on the telephone. Your request for this information is refused pursuant to section 29(2)(b) of the Privacy Act 1 993 as the information does not exist.

3. “All information regarding the complaints relating to the illegal takeover, fraud, theft of mall and theft of all assets of the former Community Centre”

Police currently have insufficient information to locate the information that you have requested. Police will require more information from you in order to locate the information.

Please provide Police with details such as the date(s) of the above mentioned incidents, the approximate time(s) of the incidents, any Police staff involved and what specific information you require from Police.

Police will consider and process your request for information once further details are received.

4. “All information regarding the phone calls made to the police by Larry Mason (through 111 emergency services I believe), Rachel Betteridge and Ewen Hyde (either 111 or directly to Masterton Police station), including all transcripts and audio recordings, job sheets, etc regarding the complaints made against me to the police by these people”

Police currently have insufficient information to locate the information that you have requested. Police will require more information from you in order to locate the information.Please provide Police with details such as the approximate date(s) of the above mentioned phone calls, the approximate time(s) of the phone calls and any further information that you think will help Police in the search for information about the phone calls.

5. “Any information that any attempt whatsoever was made by police to obtain any evidence of Rachel Betteridge’s claims.”

So firstly, Police File number 010518/2481.  This is the file referred to in the letter from Sergeant Reid of the Masterton Police to lawyer Ainslie Hewton's office, of course if exists.  Every time the police are told to investigate it or respond to communication regarding the complaint, by the PCA, lawyers, etc, they say the complaint has been responded to in previous correspondence - what rubbish!  Now they are saying the file doesn't exist - what utter lies.  This is how your taxes are spent folks, paying liars like Tara Sewell and her corrupt mates in the Force.  They just make it up as they go along.

What's next?  Oh yes, the caravan, and "There is nothing in writing":



There's more interesting reading on this matter, watch this space.  Jonathon Hooker is an ex police officer who perfed out and set up his own church, Oasis, another Oasis church was recently exposed for fraud.  Jonathon Hooker and his church don't care less about Community Gardens, they care about getting funding for themselves.  Here he is bribing John Creepy Crawford with a couple of hundred bucks to shut up and stop complaining to the Police about me.

Alan Royal and John "Creepy" Crawford had no authority whatsoever to make a complaint to the police about the caravan!  They are lucky they haven't been charged with making false complaints and wasting police time! 

The matter of the requests for information are typical non responses, more on that soon, watch this post.

The matter of Rachel Betteridge is evidence of deeper and more malicious corruption involving conspiracy between Police, lawyers, Court staff, and Judge Davidson.  Check out other posts on the matter, such as the one at the link, more soon.  Open these images in Paint program if you have trouble viewing them.

Monday, September 20, 2010

Drugs, an interesting perspective:

Here's a letter to the editor of the local paper from Dr Richard McGrath, who gave evidence for the prosecution during the hearing of the five charges arising from the police acted like stormtroopers, actions described by a number of lawyers in scathing terms such as politically motivated bullying, police corruption, gross misfeasance and abuse of position, process, etc. Dr McGrath regularly attends the Masterton police station in his role as a local GP, he sees a lot of the effects of drug abuse first hand, and this is what he says:

The word "drugs" is abused as much as the drugs themselves are - bring in a reliable test of actual impairment, do some proper testing - prescription drugs, alcohol, even tobacco, all have an effect on behaviour, allowing cigarettes, party pills, herbal highs and alcohol to be sold in supermarkets and dairies while conducting this witch hunt on cannabis is the height of hypocrisy really. Alcohol and road deaths are indisputably linked, and the government refuses to implement the recommendations of medical staff and others to take action against the epidemic of alcohol abuse.

Watching tv the other night there was a ridiculous government funded ad with some actors driving around in a car and the actor playing the driver "acting" in his interpretation of a "druggie" (- it's like the "Commies" in the US in the 60's that everyone had to go to Vietnam to fight -) and the mumbled dramatic narrator asking "42% of people thought driving stoned was alright - do you?" - I want to see some intelligent and independent scientific data regarding testing the actual level of impairment. Following this ridiculous advertisement (- advertisement for what you might ask - for the government to implement drug testing beneficiaries, that's what) was an ad for Effexor XR, then one for Viagra, not long ago they were advertising Vioxx and others which have suddenly been pulled from the market - we are one of the few countries in the world where you can advertise drugs on TV like that!

Drug test public servants, police, politicians, etc FIRST. A drunk politician does a lot more damage in society than a beneficiary who might have had a puff as it was being passed round a week or two ago!

Following the 'Better Work Stories' advertisement debacle and the hypocritical "Whose behaviour does your child reflect" waiting room posters, we now have to put up with the latest in police public relations exercises - they should just get on with policing.

And that's just the police - look at the state of our Courts!

We have bigger problems than people using cannabis! We have corrupt, politically motivated police, government officials and politicians!
Time for some proper debate on these matters.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

McPhee's Mind in the Gutter As Usual - On Behalf of Your Council:

To the Chief Executive Officer
Carterton District Council:

20 September 2010

Dear Sir,  


This is a formal complaint regarding the abusive, spiteful and inaccurate comment published by the Mayor, on behalf of the Carterton District Council:

"Miss Raue, the community of Carterton has had a gutsful of your bullying and negativity and I think people should be made aware that your daughter has a protection order against you and you are one of
the saddest people I?ve ever come into contact with in my life. The amount of money and time you use within the legal system is truly a travesty of justice, please do your community a favor and leave you
sad, sick, ugly, evil, bitch.

Sincerely yours

Gary McPhee
Mayor, JP, and Marriage Celebrant.

P.S. if I can personally help you shift on behalf of your council and community please do not hesitate to contact me."

His pathetic abuse of the power he holds makes a mockery of justice and democracy in New Zealand, it's right down there with the spectacle Georgina Beyer made of "her"self at the public meeting to try and talk the community into the " Community Facility/Event Centre" which was so soundly rebuked by Judge Behrens QC - right before Beyer was forced to resign from Parliament in disgrace for lying about the Carterton Community Centre and the Carterton District Council members and associates, on official letterhead!  

My family, and my personal affairs, are nothing to do with McPhee, or the Council.  (My daughter has never
applied for a protection order against me, nor has she ever had any need to, she comes to visit me regularly.)  McPhee is bitter, twisted, nasty violent drunkard.

The comment brings the Council into disrepute and as such is a breach
of the Code of Conduct.

I expect an immediate apology.

Kate Raue
Transparency in New Zealand
Friends of Caring Communities

Saturday, September 18, 2010

To Ombudsmen, 9 September 2009:


I wish to complain about the administrative acts, decisions and recommendations of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.
I complained to that office about the corrupt and incompetent so called "investigation" into my complaint by Diane Swan of that office, and about the original complaint, which was:

  1. The refusal of the South End School, Carterton, to provide me with information.  I requested all information about me after I received a letter sacking me from my job because I had allegedly been "recently charged by the police with an offence involving a child".
  2. The refusal of the School to correct the false information:
  3. The Principal of the School denied the existence of letters of complaint from parents regarding the manner in which I have been treated until confronted with the evidence.  I request an apology for this.
  4. The Deputy Principal of the School confirmed that the matter was discussed at a Board of Trustees meeting, I requested the Minutes of the meeting at which it was decided by the Board to send me the letter, and 
  5. the notes of the staff representative which were referred to by the Deputy Principal, confirming that the Board had discussed the false allegation, and the source of the allegation, the police and McPhee.
  6. The refusal to correct the information - that there was a meeting with O'Leary and I regarding these matters prior to me receiving the letter from the Board.  There was no meeting between O'Leary and I regarding these matters until after I received the letter from the Board.
  7. Principal Rod O'Leary has falsely claimed that I told him that I had recently been charged by the police with an offence involving a child, which is utter rubbish, as the Deputy Principal Dallas Powell knows, and it is an obvious lie to pretend otherwise.  I told him no such thing.  The allegation is obviously completely illogical and untrue, I hadn't been charged so there is no likelihood at all that I would say so.  Or that the Board would take such action on that basis anyway!
  8. The refusal to correct the information contained in the letter to W and J Armstrong from the School, which falsely claims:
  9. That "it was brought to the Board's attention that there could have been a problem with Kate Raue's actions out in the community and we sought only to make sure our children were safe and secure as is our responsibility."  This is an orchestrated litany of lies.
  10. I requested all information regarding the above statement, including who brought it to the attention of the Board, when, specifically how - what exactly was the allegation?  
  11. The refusal to correct the information regarding the false statement "there could have been a problem with Kate Raue's actions out in the community" - what problem?  What actions out in the community?  What relevance does any of that rubbish have to do with my actions at the School?  (None)
  12. I request that the Board write immediately to the Armstrong family apologising for providing the false information - there were no valid concerns about any problem with my actions in the community - I represent a large proportion of this community who fully support me, and this is blatant, politically motivated corruption, by McPhee and his mates in the local police.
  13. Corrupt local police and Mayor Gary McPhee deliberately provided false information to the Principal of the School and others in the community.  This fact is welll documented and witnessed, and indisputable.
  14. This is also confirmed by the Mayoral Diary, and the evidence of the Deputy Principal, which the Privacy Commissioners Office arrogantly refuses to acknowledge or investigate or confirm.  The continued refusal to delberately ignore the evidence of crucial witnesses amounts to serious corruption.
  15. The complaint has been "investigated" with extreme prejudice and bias by the Privacy Commissioner.  Clearly the decision of the Board of Trustees to write the letter sacking me for this very serious allegation would have been discussed and recorded in the minutes of a meeting of the Board, and as such the minutes must be provided as requested.
  16. The notes of the staff representative have been deliberately destroyed after I requested them, which was immediately I was told by the Deputy Principal of their existence, which was immediately after she saw them, days after the meeting.  I formally requested them in writing from the Principal, along with the rest of the information immediately after that.  This is blatant corruption, to prevent the investigator finding out the truth of the matter.  I repeat my request that Dallas Powell be required to confirm what the notes said, and the truth of what I have written in regard to these matters and the untruth of what has apparently been told to the Privacy Commission's "investigator" 
  17. Can I have access to all information regarding the "investigation" of the Privacy Commissioner's Office please?

Katherine Raue

Section 173A(2) of the Summary Proceedings Act:

At the hearing on 22nd September 2009 corrupt amicus curiae Bryan Yeoman tried to make me sign a document to the Court from the Police prosecutor, which claimed that:

"By consent of all parties of this hearing, written statements by:
Constable Laura Rhymer
shall be admitted as evidence as if these persons had given oral evidence and shall be admitted notwithstanding non-compliance of all of the requirements of Section 173A(2) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957"
       - among other things.

I refused to sign it because it was a corrupt attempt to prevent the police officer in charge of the case (Rhymer) from giving evidence in person, or being cross examined.  She is lying in saying that she had cause to arrest me and in saying that she did arrest me.  She knew there was no evidence whatsoever that I had perverted the course of justice, and considerable evidence that her superior officer Constable Peter Cletus Cunningham had grossly perverted the course of justice in refusing to charge Murphy and Greig with the attack on me on 11th February 2009.  She knew that Cunningham had encouraged Murphy to break into my house and steal the disk containing evidence not only of his own attack on me, but also of the incompetence and corruption of the police in releasing the 46 audio tracks on the disk but not the two I requested, my own call to 111 and that of Claire Cook and Kelly Wilson.  Rhymer never arrested me.  She repeatedly asked me to go with her to Masterton because I was "going to be charged."  She knew there was no evidence to support any such charge and that it was grossly corrupt to arrest me or charge me, and she didn't want to be involved, which is why she didn't turn up to Court on the 8th December 2009, because police knew that Judge Behrens would see through their lies like he did last time, and are hoping to get a corrupt Judge (like Davidson or Thomas).

Furthermore, when I looked up Section 173A(2) of the Summary Proceedings Act, I discovered that it was repealed in 2008, and apparently replaced with this:
173 Persons who may give evidence under assumed name

(1) An undercover police officer (within the meaning of section 108 of the Evidence Act 2006)—

  • (a) may make a written statement, or give oral evidence, in the name by which the officer was known during the relevant investigation; and

  • (b) may sign that statement, or the record of that evidence, in that name.
(2) A witness who is the subject of an application for an anonymity order made under section 110 or 112 of the Evidence Act 2006, or who is the subject of an anonymity order made under either of those sections,—

  • (a) may make a written statement, or give oral evidence, using the term witness followed by an initial or mark; and

  • (b) may sign that statement, or the record of that evidence, in that manner.
(3) This section overrides any contrary provision in this Part.

Here are my written instructions sent to the lawyer assigned to represent me, on 15 October 2009, following the outrageous outburst from Judge Davidson and my imprisonment after police deliberately lied to and intimidated a local family offering me a bail address:

"My instructions are that a copy be requested of the audio recording of the proceedings heard before Judge Davidson on 29th and 30th September and a formal complaint lodged about the actions and language of the Judge, in particular the shouted rant about how it's time I learned that the world doesn't revolve around me, the repeated shouting of “shut up, you shut up” and the imprisonment at Arohata.

Judge Davidson recently heard the matter of my private prosecution against Rachel Betteridge and he heard the original charge against me based on Betteridge's perjurous 'evidence'.

He excused Betteridge's appearance, which makes a mockery of my imprisonment.

He was told repeatedly during the hearing of the charges against me that Betteridge was giving perjurous evidence on oath during the hearing, and that we had evidence of it right there in the Court in the form of the phone with the extremely offensive and threatening messages from Betteridge on it. Davidson shut the hearing down, dismissing the charges before the evidence, or any evidence for the defence, could be produced. After being informed that perjury was being committed and that there was indisputable evidence of it in the Court I believe that Judge Davidson had a duty to respond to that serious allegation at the time, and again when he heard the private prosecution. I insist that the matter is addressed now.

I instruct that a formal complaint is made to the Manager for Courts regarding the practise of Liz Harpleton and Gary Wilson conspiring to pervert the course of justice. Having the prosecutor's live in lover acting as Court Registrar is completely unacceptable. Harpleton made a submission to two JP's while she was sitting on the bench assisting them in her role, on behalf of the police, asking for an ajournment, even though the matter had been set down for formal proof. Ken Daniels was present and left a message on my phone that day to say that he was appalled at what he had seen and heard in the Court.

I instruct that a written complaint is submitted to the PCA immediately regarding the decisions of the police to proceed with the prosecutions against me when they knew perfectly well that the evidence showed indisputably that I had not sent any offensive messages at all and that Betteridge and her husband had sent extremely serious threats and abuse to me, and the continued refusal of the police to charge them when the evidence clearly exists that they committed these serious crimes, and the police were happy to lay charges and proceed with a prosecution against me on the basis of no evidence at all, and police refused to even seek any information from the telecommunications company let alone look at the evidence provided to them in the form of the statements of the two Justices of the Peace, Ken English and George Groombridge..

I instruct that an appeal is lodged immediately regarding the refusal of Judge Davidson to award me costs in those matters.
I instruct that an appeal is lodged regarding the convictions for failing to stop, etc.

I instruct that an appeal is immediately lodged regarding Judge Davidson's decision to imprison me. The police deliberately lied to Bill Armstrong and told him that the Court had directed me to reside at 1 Brooklyn Rd and imposed a curfew which required the police to come to that address and check that I was there twice a night. Bill and Jennifer Armstrong have already written statements about being harassed by the police about me. Jennifer's statement about a recent incident describes how she felt frightened and intimidated after Constable Harvey Pope demanded entry to her home stating that he had the right to come in because he was in fresh pursuit of a criminal, to issue me with another bike helmet ticket and a letter about harrassing Tuakana Greig which is nothing but a pack of utter lies. Greig has physically attacked me on numerous occasions in front of numerous witnesses and come to my home and attacked me on two occasions. Bill would not have refused if the police had not lied about the curfew. Furthermore, Constable Cadwallader issued me with another bike helmet recently but refused to give me the disclosure I was entitled to regarding these matters. I would not come to the door to accept the ticket as he demanded, and Rachel Armstrong refused his demand to come inside to issue it to me personally so he gave it to her to pass on to me. Cadwallader then went to the Armstrong's, and other addresses of my friends, repeatedly, claiming to have disclosure to give me, but refused on every occasion to leave it there for me to collect.

I don't have a car and cannot get employment or accomodation because of the lies told by the police which are evidenced by the letter to the South End School, and suffering extreme financial hardship because of the excessive fines being deducted from my invalid benefit for not wearing a bike helmet in spite of the letters from my doctor. The bail bond refers to an “evidential address” - where is the definition of this? I don't even know what an evidential address is and doubt the term has any meaning or legal standing. I am forced to stay at various locations dependant on restrictions such as bad weather or darkness which make cycling unsafe. For these reasons I will not be dictated to as to where I sleep, it is an outrageous breach of my human rights.

I instruct that a letter be written to the Police Complaints Authority and to the South End School immediately about the letter I received, and the matter of my complaints of serious violence and child abuse against Tuakana Greig and her partner. Tuakana Greig limped into Court on the 30th  
with a big cut on her face and a black eye, she'd come straight from the hospital which is why she was late

I instruct that a formal complaint is made to the Human Rights Commissioner regarding my imprisonment, which was based on the lies of the police. I require the audiotape of the hearing because I heard Judge Davidson clearly refuse the request of the prosecutor that a curfew be imposed, and I heard the Judge give reasons why not. The prosecutor heard it and the police deliberately lied to Bill Armstrong and I request that an affidavit from Mr Armstrong be prepared, and also an affidavit from John Shields, who witnessed an attack on me by Greig outside East Taratahi Building Supplies in Wong Place. John Shields knows that I was nowhere near her address at all and I had come to his workshop to speak with him and gone straight back to my car and was still speaking to him when Greig ran down the road and attacked me.

The Wairarapa police are conspiring to pervert the course of justice, not me. I instruct that a letter be immediately written to the Ombudsmen regarding the refusal of the police to provide all information regarding the attack on me by Michael Murphy and Tuakana Greig at my home on 11th February 2009, particularly the audiotape of the call from Claire Cook and Kelly Wilson to emergency services. This request is directly relevant to the current charges, and to the serious risk of violent child abuse, and is extremely urgent. The audiotape of a call from another witness has been released three times and there is no valid reason not to release the tape I have requested. The transcript is not sufficient because of inaccuraies between the transcripts and audiotape of other related calls which have been released. I have all personal details, names, addresses, phone number, etc of Cook and Wilson so there is no reason to withhold them.

I gave these, and other verbal instructions at the Court on the 29th and 30th and I want them all to be carried out.

Katherine Raue"