The Courts Perjury alleged against detective, customs man

Press, 31 October 1979, Page 4

The Courts Perjury alleged against detective, customs man

The hearing of private prosecutions by a Timaru man. alleging perjury by a detective and a customs officer to secure convictions against his son in a Supreme Court trial in 1977. began in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. The case, which will continue today, attracted con-

siderable interest and the gallery- overflowed the Court room, leading to its transfer to a larger Court at the morning adjournment. The prosecutions have been brought by Wallace Bruce Reed, a self-employed person, of Orbell Street, Timaru. The defendants have been granted continued interim suppression of their names. The detective is represented by Mr K. N. Hampton and the customs officer by Mr R. L. Kerr. Mr P. J. McAioon, S.M., is on the Bench. The detective faces six charges of perjury and two of conspiring to obstruct or defeat the course of justice.

The customs officer faces four charges of perjury. The alleged offences were said to have been committed to secure the convictions of Gregory Carl Reed on charges of importing narcotics. Two of the perjury charges against the customs officer alleged his intent to

iprocure the conviction of (Brent Ainsley Summerton. Some of the perjury charges mention magazines, iwhich it had been contended Iby police at the original trial of Reed and Summerton, had been hollowed out to send narcotics from Bangkok to Christchurch addresses. Gregory Reed was sentenced to six years imprisonment on a charge of importing narcotics, on which he was found guilty at a Supreme Court trial in February, 1977. He served 17 months of this sentence before a Court of Appeal decision in May last year ordered a retrial. At the second trial in Julv

last year Reed was acquitted of the charge. Summerton was tried and convicted in the Supreme Court in March, 1976. on a charge of importing a narcotic, and was jailed. At the outset of the hearing yesterday the detective had been charged with 13 alleged offences and the customs officer with eight.

However. five charges against the detective and four against the customs officer were dismissed after Mr Reed had called for their withdrawal. The Magistrate continued the interim order for suppression of the defendants'

names on the application of the two counsels. After hearing their submissions he said the two defendants held responsible positions and their employers had seen fit to continue their employment. Publication of their names before the present inquiry into and circumstances of

the charges had been traversed could prejudice them in their work. He said the interim suppression order would be subject to further review at the end of the hearing. A Wellington solicitor, Mr .1. B. Stevenson, then sought leave to hold a watching brief and make notes during the hearing. He said he rep-

resented Wellington Newspapers, Ltd. publishers of the “Dominion” and “New Zealand Truth” newspapers. Mr Stevenson said a Christchurch solicitor. Gerald Ross Lascelles, had issued proceedings against thei company as first defendant, I in respect of articles pub-

lished in these newspapers, i He said Radio Avon had ‘ been named as the second defendant. Both defendants had filed statements of defence denying liability. Mr Stevenson traversed some of the statements of claim but objections were made by both counsel, on the

basis of the lack of relevance of the present prosecutions to the civil claim. Mr Reed raised no objection to Mr Stevenson, and Mr G. Thompson, also made a similar request on behalf of Radio Avon, being present and taking notes "so long as there was no further interruption.” The Magistrate said he did not recognise them as parties to the present case, but granted their request to remain and take notes. Mr Reed gave an outline of his case in the prosecution of the 12 charges against the two defendants. However, after an objection from Mr Hampton the Magistrate suppressed publication of Mr Reed's outline, in the interim. He said the opening address was "wider” than one would normally expect to hear on charges of this type. Mr Reed’s outline had freiquent references to other (matters dealt with by other courts and he was not sure that the evidence to be adduced would go towards proving the allegations made, the Magistrate said. He said it would be prudent at this stage to supress; publication of the opening, and limit publication to the evidence. Six witnesses were called by Mr Reed during the first'

day's hearing. including court officers who produced transcripts of trial evidence from the Supreme Court trials. John Alexander West, chief document examiner of the Police Department, said he. had given evidence for the Crown at Gregory Reed's trial. In that trial he had referred to an examination of seven labels, all made from, envelopes of similar material. They had hand-written ad-i dresses which, he considered, ; were made by the same person. He concluded that post-' marks, which had been placed on magazines had been dated on September 271 and 29, 1975, with postmarks used at rhe Chief Post Of- ■ ifice in Bangkok. Cross-examined by Mrj Hampton, Mr West said that: when he received the magazines and labels in July, 1976, his object was to compare the labels and any evidence which would tend to link the magazines to a common source. He said the evidence he was giving in the present case related to tests on the labels and magazines made after Reed's first trial. From his examinations he concluded that the seven magazines had been posted

from the Central Post Office in Bangkok. Six of the magazines hac been posted on Septembei 29. 1975. and the other magazine, "Coins." on September 27. He said he gave evidence to that effect at the Court of Appeal hearing.

Mr West was referred by 1r Hampton to a charge igainst his client of commiting perjury by making assertions at Reed's trial that he had no way of knowing when the magazine, “Coins." had been sent from Bangkok, knowing!his to be false. He said his examination

did not take place until August. 1977 — six monthi after the first trial The postmark on this magazine was not legible or able to be made out by the naked eye. Other scientists had seen the stamps and had Icome up with different answers.