Justice clerks’ trial seen as momentous

Press, 10 February 1983, Page 11

Justice clerks’ trial seen as momentous

PA Wellington The trial of four Justice Department clerks was not being held simply to protect the interest or image of that department, the High Court in Wellington was told.

Crown counsel, Mr Robert Fardell. in his opening address said that the case was one of considerable moment. The Crown asserted that the “very basic fabric" of society, fhe legal order upon which the social interests of the State depended, the true administration of the criminal law, was “on the line." Michael Peter Waluszewski, aged 25, Kevin Joseph McGlinchey, aged 24, David John Thompson, aged 26, and Linda Anne McQuade, aged 24, have denied conspiring with one another and other persons to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice. They are charged with interfering with proper court

procedures in relation to notices of traffic prosecution filed by the Ministry of Transport in the District Court in Wellington in respect of parking infringements allegedly committed by themselves and others.

The four have also denied charges of wilfully attempting to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice by returning to the District Court notices of traffic prosecutions relating to parking infringements for the purpose of having those notices filed "not served," knowing at the time -that those notices had been served. The trial is before Mr Justice Greig and a jury. His Honour told the jury that the case had been the subject of a considerable amount of publicity in the newspapers, radio, and television for some time, and so had a commission which had been making inquiries into certain aspects of the matter which came before the jury.

“It is a fundamental aspect of our court system, and I will say something more about this to you later, that accused persons when they are dealt with in a court, are dealt with only on the evidence that is given in this court,” his Honour said. “That means that you must forget and put aside anything that you may have read in the newspapers or anything you may have heard from other people about this case or about the other matters about the District Court.” Mr Fardell said the allegation of the Crown concerned various dealings the accused had with notices of prosecution relating to parking infringements allegedly committed by themselves and others, either colleagues working in the District Court or members of the public. “But this trial is not being held simply to protect the interests or image of the Justice Department, nor being held to find appropriate scapegoats to bear the blame,” he said. “This, trial is concerned with the wider public interest in ensuring that, when

the Crown proves to the required standard offences committed, the offenders responsible are suitably punished.” Mr Fardell said the main thrust of the Crown case was the conspiracy charges laid against each accused. Other counts had been laid in the alternative because, conceivably, the jury might feel that the" proper way of viewing things was to see each accused as working on his own rather than working in concert. Mr Fardell said the Crown alleged that the four accused and others wre parties to a scheme to secure for themselves, colleagues, and certain members of the public favourable treatment regarding notices of parking offence prosecutions. The Court would hear that at all relevant times the accused were employed as clerks at the District Court in Wellington and held the position of assitant deputy registrar. “As that title indicates, they were therefore persons of some standing and experience,” Mr Fardell said. “They were persons in whom the Justice Department had felt able to repose confidence and trust. The Crown case is that, sadly, that confidence was misplaced and that trust abused.” Mr Fardell said the trial was concerned only with parking offences, or parking infringements. The jury would hear that the matter first became uncovered when a Mr Pask, a deputy registrar in the court, found three minor offence notices in the name of court staff at the desk of McQuade.

Mr Pask had realised this was irregular. He reported his findings, and inquiries were started.