Police Complaints Authority responses corrupt:

Above are responses to the submission to the Police Complaints Authority from Michael Appleby, following the public meeting in Carterton to discuss whether to give 6 million dollars to the same people who took over out last community centre and closed it down amid allegations of fraud and serious misfeasance, and let them just build another one and run it as corruptly as the last one.

Below is another letter from Mr Appleby.  The matters refered to in paragraphs numbered 3-5 inclusive have never even been acknowledged or addressed in any way, this is evidenced by the responses:
_____________________________________________________________________________

Wellington

Phone: (04) 9349 389

Mobile: (0274) 40 33 63

Email: m.g.appleby@gmail.com

Police Complaints Authority
Level 5
342 Lambton Quay
P O Box 525
Wellington

16 February 2008

Your Honour,
Re: Kate Raue – your ref 05-0761/ghe:bpd
Thank you for your letter of 1 February 2008, enclosing the documents sought.
The letter of complaint dated 8 June 2007 contained a further paragraph 5 that appears to have been inadvertently deleted from the actual letter which you received.
I attach a copy of the letter as it should have been, and you will note that Mrs Raue wished a further separate investigation into the reluctance of the Masterton Police to actually investigate the frauds and illegal takeover of the Carterton Community Centre, frauds which her previous lawyer, Mr Ken Daniels, himself believed to have been committed.
This protest at the refusal by the Masterton Police to investigate these matters was explicit in the paragraph 5 that was inadvertently omitted from the letter actually sent to you.
In spite of the implicit complaint against Police Officer Murray Johnston in paragraph 4, the response ignores this.
A copy of the response from the Masterton Police to me dated 22 November 2007 was sent to me at the address of the Police Complaints Authority, PO Box 5025 Wellington, and it was finally resent to me on 10 December 2007, but not received by me until 5th February.
It seems from that response by Inspector Johnston that he has not addressed the refusal to investigate the fraud by Sgt Murray Johnston.  Are the two men related?
The protest in the complaint at the refusal by the Police to investigate these allegations was certainly made explicit in the missing paragraph 5, but it is clear from paragraph 4 that this refusal by Sgt Murray Johnston should have been investigated by Inspector Johnston.  It was not.
His response dated 22 November 2007 makes no reference to it at all, and in view of the inability of the Authority to complete its investigation for several more weeks (as advised to me by your office on 5 February 2008), there appears to be time for the Authority to ask the Masterton Police as to why they treated the original complaint into fraud in such a cavalier way, when Mr Daniels had clearly indicated that he himself had serious concerns.
A further example of their cavalier attitude is contained in their letter of 28 July 2003, attached “A”, to Mrs Raue, as if the Mayor and MP, Georgina Beyer, were sacrosanct, and immune from investigation.
Please investigate Officer Murray Johnston’s behaviour, as well as the other breaches of Mrs Raue’s human rights as set out in the actual letter sent to you by me on the 8th June 2007.
I look forward to your advice as to this further explicit complaint, as well as the other complaints regarding the breaches of Mrs Raue’s rights.
Moreover the response dated 22 November 2007 by Inspector Johnston, at page 3, comments that it is standard policy and practice at the Masterton police station not to have accepted Mrs Raue’s handbag from her friend Mr Allomes even though her medicine was in it, yet another admission by the Police that their particular branch appears to ignore the fundamental right set out more particularly by me in the “Twenty Third Breach” that “everyone deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the person.”
The Police could have quite easily searched the handbag, and confiscated any items that they thought were inappropriate, before giving the handbag containing her personal items and medicine to Mrs Raue.
Moreover, Inspector Johnston’s comment in his penultimate paragraph, that “from the Doctors observations of her, he was able to give an opinion, which was that she did not require medication at the time” is simply quite untrue.
A copy of the relevant Trial transcript containing the Doctor’s evidence is attached “B” from which it can be seen that the Police Doctor, Dr McGrath actually stated under oath that he did not even recall seeing Mrs Raue at the police station, at all, and that he had no record of seeing her.
Although Inspector Johnston has conceded in his response that a number of Mrs Raue’s rights were breached, I believe it was appropriate, really, that he address each and every breach of Mrs Raue’s rights as set out in my letter: i.e: all twenty seven breaches individually, rather than the selective approach he has taken, merely responding to four of the criticisms by Judge Behrens, or the five matters he chooses to deal with as set out on page 2 of his letter.
It would have been of more assistance, surely, if Inspector Johnston had dealt on a thorough and professional basis with the twenty seven breaches complained of.
It should also be noted that Inspector Johnston was actually rung up personally the day after the political meeting by Mr Kennedy, a concerned citizen who was aghast at the treatment meted out to Mrs Raue.
Inspector Johnston however refused to either interfere in the prosecution of Mrs Raue, or to order his officers to at least question, and take statements from, other more neutral witnesses.
Inspector Johnston’s own behaviour in this sorry saga seems to not be beyond reproach, and it appears inappropriate that he has conducted the investigation.  A neutral Investigator would be more appropriate to investigate the background of the behaviour of the local police, rather than the local Inspector, who seems part of the problem.
I would be grateful if you would advise the Authority’s next step, and the time frame within which you expect the complaint to be finalised.

Yours sincerely,

Michael Appleby
_________________________________________________________

Michael Appleby  B.A.  LL.B.  LL.M. (Hons), Barrister of the High Court of New Zealand

15 Fairview Crescent

Kelburn

Wellington

Phone: (04) 9349 389

Mobile: (0274) 40 33 63

Email: m.g.appleby@gmail.com

Hon Judge Goddard

Police Complaints Authority

Level 5 

342 Lambton Quay

P O Box 525 

Wellington

30 May 2007

Your Honour,

1. Further to Judge Borrin’s letter of 9 December 2005 (a copy of which is attached for your convenience and ease of reference), I write to confirm that all of the five charges have been thrown out by the District Court, and partial costs awarded against the New Zealand Police.
2. I attach some relevant documents in connection with Mrs Raue’s complaint.
3. Further background to the history of the treatment of Mrs Raue by the Masterton Police is the letter of 26 August 2004 from Mrs Raue’s previous counsel, Mr Ken Daniels, to the Police calling their attention to what Mr Daniels himself believed to be fraud at the Carterton Community Centre.
4. The only response to this letter seems to have been the brief e-mail dated 26 April 2006, from Police officer Murray Johnston, admitting that he couldn’t remember Mr Daniels letter, that he couldn’t locate the file, and scoffing at any allegations which might have been made in the letter from Mr Daniels, even though he couldn’t even remember receiving the letter.  The e-mail states:  “Any such allegation by Kate against the Community Centre management would take a very low priority from a Police perspective.  Her allegations about the Community Centre have mostly proved unfounded, emotive and simply not credible”, even though Mr Daniels is a Lawyer, and had expressed his concern at what he himself believed to be fraud.
5. The Masterton Police have, apparently, made no further investigations into Mr Daniels’ concerns about the fraud, nor do they intend to do so from the tenor of the email.  This obviously requires further investigation by the Authority and constitutes a separate complaint.

Yours faithfully,

Michael Appleby

This has been going on since the Carterton Community Centre was illegally taken over in 2001 by seriously assaulting the Secretary and Treasurer in the office of the Centre, and stealing all the assets of the Society to conceal the fraud.

You can see that the first letter at the top of the page was addressed to my lawyer at the address of the Police Complaints Authority - which meant that it was not received by us for months!  Very unprofessional!  These letters show that the fraud and misfeasance at the Carterton Community Centre, committed by the very same people behind the planned Event Centre - which all well informed members of the community oppose for very good reason, have been deliberately and corruptly ignored by local police and the PCA.

 

The letter above is once again a predictable litany of excuses, more information will be put up here in the following weeks, so keep an eye on this post which will be regularly updated with more copies of this correspondence.  The third page of this letter is particularly damning, it actually admits that Senior Constable Jackson refused to look for the medical reports I had provided immediately to the police after the assault on me, because he "couldn't be bothered getting off his backside"!!!!!  But the PCA thought this was alright!