‘Police failed to clear up cartridge-case allegation’

Press, 16 March 1982, Page 6

‘Police failed to clear up cartridge-case allegation’

PA Wellington The police did not make use of opportunities to bring evidence before the Royal commission of Inquiry into the murder conviction of Arthur Allan Thomas that Chief Inspector Bruce Hutton had not planted a cartridge case at the Crewe farm, counsel for the commission told the Court of Appeal yesterday. It was the first day of an expected three-week hearing into the Police Association’s challenge to the commission’s findings of impropriety and criminal misconduct against Mr Hutton and the late Detectjve L. J. Johnston;

The association also appeals against a High Court decision that ruled the com-mission-comprising a New South Wales judge, Mr Justice Taylor, a former Cabinet Minister, Mr Peter Gordon, I and the Rt Rev. Allan John-’’ ston—was not guilty of bias against the police. No evidence clearing Mr Hutton of the allegation was produced tb the Commission and yesterday the counsel

who had assisted the police at the commission, Mr John Henry, Q.C., said he believed all available evidence for the police had been produced to it.

The appeal is before 'the full Bench of the court, comprising the Chief Justice (Sir Ronald Davison), Mr Justice Cooke, Mr Justice Richardson, Mr Justice Somers, and Mr Justice Casey. ' The hearing opened before a packed public gallery. Among those present were Mr Justice Taylor; the Commissioner of Police, Mr R. J. Walton, Mr Arthur Thomas, sen., and members of the Thomas Retrial Committee; the Wellington Police district commander, Mr W. R. Fleming, and the Police Association’s national secretary, Dr R. A. Moodie. Mr Henry was cross-exa-mined by. counsel for the commission, Mr T. Eichelbaum, Q.C., about assertions by Mr Hutton that hehad not been able to give his side of the story when he made his

second appearance before the commission. The court heard that before his second appearance, Mr Hutton had been aware of certain conflicting evidence which held that he had planted one cartridge case, switched another, and later improperly destroyed them both. Mr Eich.elbaum said that Mr Hutton, in an affidavit prepared for the court, had “complained" or “quibbled” that Mr Henry had not prepared his brief of evidence for the commission. Mr Henry agreed with Mr Eichelbaum that he had not written out Mr Hutton’ prepared statement but he believed all available evidence had been produced to the commission. The appeal seeks to quash findings and inferences made by the commission members in their report. Mr Henry will continue to give evidence today. Other witnesses to be called are Mr Hutton and counsel assisting the commission, Mr Michael Kite.