Chch lawyers cite police beatings and distortions

Press, 7 July 1977, Page 1

Chch lawyers cite police beatings and distortions

Bv

GARRY ARTHUR

Some Christchurch policemen have been known to beat up their prisoners and to get away with it, said three Christchurch lawyers yesterday. The lawyers, all experienced in criminal law, said they also knew 7 of cases in which the police had falsified verbal statements by accused persons, and had given false evidence in court.

Their allegations supported those made by Auckland lawyers on TVl’s "Dateline Monday” programme. But all three emphasised that the majority of policemen behaved responsibly; only one or two were guilty of malpractice.

A clear example of wrong evidence by the police arose from police intervention against demonstrators in the James Hay Theatre at the Town Hall on November 8, 1972, when Mr John Marshall, then Prime Minister, was speaking. Murray Donald Horton, a student, was charged with resisting Constable (now sergeant) Brendan Thompson. Constable Thompson said in evidence that he had dragged Horton out of the row of seats, but was dropped to the floor by the demonstrators. The next thing he knew. Horton had been arrested and taken outside.

But a picture taken by a photographer from "The Press” showed that Constable Thompson was not where he said he was. Dismissing the charge, the Magistrate remarked on the considerable and "startling" conflict of police evidence. He said the pho-

tograph tended to heighten the obvious conflict. Mr R. J. Murfitt, who represented Horton in the case, said yesterday that the case was a good example of the reluctance of magistrates to disbelieve police evidence. Only when faced with conclusive evidence was the Magistrate convinced that the police case should be dismissed.

Complaining to the police about police violence can be a hazardous course. Mr Murfitt quoted a case in November, 1974, when a man complained of being roughed up by the police. Instead of an inquiry, the police immediately charged him with falsely alleging assault by the policeman. When the case came before the Magistrate’s Court and the police began presenting their evidence, they were told bv Mr Paul Molineaux, S.M., that it was not acceptable. If the case was not withdrawn, he said, he would be forced to "make a finding” — implying that the finding might not be complimentary to the police. The police withdrew the charge. Mr Murfitt gets an average of one case a month in which an accused person says ’ the police used violence to extract a statement. Most of these com-

plainants were people who had a lot of contact with the police. They were not telling him about it so that he could bring it out in court, said Mr Murfitt. They knew that would be fruitless. So far as he could see, they had no reason to lie to him about it. Mr M. J. Glue, a Christchurch lawyer specialising in criminal cases, said: “I believe that on occasions the police beat people up. And, if they want to whitewash one of their officers, they will do so.” A specific case he recalled happened in 1971. He went to the police station at about 3.30 a.m. and found that his client had been “clouted.” His dentures were smashed. "I’m quite certain,” he said, “that he was thumped in interrogation. I saw him fresh from his interrogation.”

Mr Glue accompanied the man when he made complaints of police violence. An internal police inquiry was held, but no proceedings were taken against the officer concerned. “I believe they whitewashed him,” Mr Glue said. “They do close ranks—my word, they do. But if they do decide to take proceedings against an officer it is brought into the open and usually a

commissioned officer is brought in to prosecute.”

But Mr Glue does not believe that violence is condoned within the police force. On the contrary, he thinks it is disapproved of very strongly. In the main, he said, the police displayed a responsible attitude.

“A hell of a lot of complaints are made about police violence,” he said, “but the vast majority are groundless. However, some of their customers are shocking characters, and the police get a lot of provocation. Frequently they are dealing with very nasty people indeed, and they can’t be blamed for hauling off and bopping them.”

Mr Glue said he had to go a long way back to cite one definite case of police violence. “A little bit of it happens,” he said. "Every day you have someone saying that undue force was used by the police. Responsible counsel treat those claims with caution.”

The procedure for investigating complaints, however, was unsatisfactory. “If the police are going to cover up,” he said, "they will cover up—-for someone they feel is worth protecting. On the other hand, if they find they’ve got a bad apple, they’ll toss him out.”