Police inquiry into ‘serious allegations’

Press, 6 July 1977, Page 1

Police inquiry into ‘serious allegations’

From

CEDRIC MENTIPLAY

The Commissioner of Police (Mr K. B. Burnside) has invited persons alleging police misconduct to send details and supporting evidence to him.

Not only does he promise an inquiry, but he says that an investigative team headed by “a very senior officer” has been assigned to the inquiry. He promises “they will see all the persons involved in the television programme and anyone else who can shed light on the extremely serious allegations raised.” Mr Bumside was referring to a programme, “Dateline Monday,” on TVI on Monday evening, which dealt with alleged police misconduct. “Because of happenings in other countries it appears that it is a worldwide trend at the present time to allege improper conduct by those having the unenviable task of keeping law and order,” Mr Burnside said yesterday. "Allegations of perjury, fabrication of evidence, and other police misconduct outlined in the news media are naturally of grave concern to the police administration. Fabrication of evidence and perjury are serious crimes, and along with any form of police misconduct are not, and will not’ be, condoned.” He said two cases mentioned in the programme — those of Evans and Bower — were under review by the police. The allegations had not been brought to the attention of the police at the time of the trials six or seven years ago. "It is difficult to comprehend that if there was

any truth in them that the presiding judges did not comment and call for an investigation, and neither the defence lawyers nor the Crown prosecutor made any complaints or reported the matter,” said Mr Burnside.

He said Mr P. J. Booth, who had made submissions on police misconduct when presenting a plea in the Arthur Allan Thomas case, had been asked to produce supporting evidence. So far, he had not done so. “When Mr Booth made his submission to ministers in December, 1976, he insisted that confidentiality of his information be preserved,” said Mr Burnside. “This precluded me from starting an investigation at that stage. Immediately the embargo was lifted on the Cabinet decision’s being released on May 2 last, I appointed two senior officers to review all the allegations presented, using notes made at the December meeting between Mr Booth and the Ministers.

Mr Booth yesterday repeated his earlier request for a public inquiry and again declined to make his material available to an internal police investigation, the Press Association reported. Mr Bumside said that the “Dateline Monday” programme had been markedly devoid of evidence and had included unsubstantiated statements by a former policeman, who had resigned in 1976 when involved in illegal currency transactions, for which he had later been convicted in the Magistrate’s Court at Auckland. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) said

that the allegations made against the Auckland police should not be swept under the carpet by the Minister of Police. “I believe New Zealand has one of the best police forces in the world,” said Mr Rowling. “It has a proven record over a long period for integrity and efficiency.” Mr Rowling said that the allegations made against a part of the police in Auckland were so serious that they could not be ignored. In order to clear the name of the police, the Minister should order an independent investigation of those allegations. If they could not be substantiated, public confidence would be restored, but if there was some truth in the claims made by the Auckland lawyers appearing on the programme, it was essential that the culprits be made to account for their actions. Mr Rowling said. "Our police can only work effectively as long as they retain public confidence,” he said. “The Dateline Monday television programme must shake that confidence. The Minister of Police must take decisive action to clear up this unfortunate situation.” However, the Minister of Police (Mr McCready), has refused a public inquiry into allegations against the police made in the programme. “It is ridiculous to call for a public inquiry, because the system as it stands is quite proper,” he said. “A lawyer accused of malpractice goes before the Law Society, a doctor before the Medical Association, and a policeman before a disciplinary board under the auspices of the Commissioner of Police.

“To say that this is inadequate is a slur on the Commissioner of Police,” he said .