Police face new probe into the killing of Steven Wallace

more than 8 years on ...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10520080&pnum=0

Police face new probe into street shooting
Saturday July 05, 2008
Patrick Gower



On April 30, 2000, Steven Wallace walked down the main street of Waitara in Taranaki, smashing shop windows with a golf club and a baseball bat.

He was shot dead by Senior Constable Keith Abbott who was acquitted of murder but later criticised in a coroner's inquiry. Now - eight years after the shooting - a new independent body in charge of police conduct is investigating the killing.

A new inquiry into the 2000 shooting of Steven Wallace has started.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority is investigating possible misconduct or neglect of duty by the officers involved.

The new authority has reviewed the shooting and found "matters that require further independent investigation".

Authority head Justice Lowell Goddard, QC, has made a symbolic visit to the scene of the shooting on Waitara's main street as part of the 10-month inquiry.

Mr Wallace's family, witnesses and several police officers - included the shooter, Senior Constable Keith Abbott - have been interviewed.

The extensive inquiry into the contentious shooting suggests Justice Goddard is determined that the IPCA will make its mark as an independent civilian oversight of the police, unlike its much-criticised predecessor, the Police Complaints Authority.

Justice Goddard has also visited Ruatoki as part of an inquiry into police actions in the Tuhoe terror raids.


The IPCA is aiming to release its findings on Mr Wallace's shooting in October and police must act on its recommendations - which could include that disciplinary action be taken against officers.

Mr Wallace, 23, had been walking down Waitara's main street breaking shop windows with a golf club and a baseball bat before Mr Abbott killed him with two shots from a pistol.

The IPCA would not go into specifics of its inquiry, saying that it was "looking at everything from when the police were called out" and "questions of misconduct and neglect of duty".

The former authority used police officers to complete its inquiries into Mr Wallace's shootings.

The result of these was never made public because of its practice of not reporting until police investigations, court hearings and a coroner's inquest were completed.

The coroner ruled on Mr Wallace's death in August last year, allowing Justice Goddard to "resume" the inquiry with the IPCA's independent investigators.

Justice Goddard said the eight-year delay was regrettable, and the IPCA had changed its practice of waiting for an inquest.

The authority had reviewed evidence from the Wallace family's unsuccessful private prosecution of Mr Abbott for murder.

And it was taking Coroner Gordon Matenga's ruling into account.

Mr Matenga's criticisms that Mr Abbott and the other officers involved, Constable Jason Dombroski and Sergeant Fiona Prestidge, erred in decision-making and had a lack of leadership were dismissed by Commissioner Howard Broad last year.

Mr Broad said he had "nothing but praise for the officers involved".

Police headquarters declined to comment yesterday on the IPCA inquiry, as did Mr Abbott's lawyer, Susan Hughes, QC.

Police Association president Greg O'Connor criticised the inquiry, saying it was an attempt to "satisfy the unsatisfiable".

Mr O'Connor linked the inquiry to recent criticism of police for being "tentative" before going in to assist fatally shot Manurewa liquor store owner Navtej Singh.

"The only thing police are tentative of is shooting someone because this is what they have to go through," Mr O'Connor said.

The police had "moved on" from Mr Wallace's shooting through "review after review".

"But the system just won't let this go away".

Mr Wallace's mother, Raewyn, hoped the inquiry "gets us the truth".

She was pleased the IPCA was independent and was looking at issues over police actions and procedures raised, but not necessarily addressed, in the private prosecution and the inquest.

"Justice Goddard came to where it happened. She looked and listened. I appreciated that."

STEVEN WALLACE: THE INQUIRIES

April 2000: Senior Constable Keith Abbott shoots Steven Wallace dead.

Police homicide inquiry begins. Police Complaints Authority begins separate inquiry, saying it will not report back until after the coroner has ruled.

June 2000: Police homicide inquiry clears Mr Abbott of criminal charges.

May 2001: Coroner opens inquest, but it is adjourned while the Wallace family take a private prosecution.

December 2002: Jury clears Mr Abbott of murder.

July 2003: Coroner reopens inquest, but it is delayed by legal challenges from Mr Abbott's lawyer.

September 2005: Coroner resumes inquest.

August 2007: Coroner releases findings.

November 2007: Independent Police Conduct Authority formed with new powers and Wallace inquiry gains new impetus.

see also:

http://uriohau.blogspot.com/2007/06/shooting-of-steven-wallace.html

http://uriohau.blogspot.com/2007/08/steven-wallace-coroners-report-released.html

UN to investigate New Zealand Settler Grubbyment over conduct of the Oct 15 raids

UN to investigate raids | Raids in Ruatoki | History repeats itself | Raids across Aotearoa | The arrestees | Maori, the Labour government and the UN

Links: October15thSolidarity.info | Te Mananmotuhake o Tuhoe | Te Kotahi a Tuhoe | Aocafe

UN to investigate New Zealand Government over conduct of the Oct 15 raids (from the newswire)

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights while Countering Terrorism has agreed that there are grounds to investigate the New Zealand Government over its conduct during the October 15 raids. This is the first time that a complaint from a group against a nation-state has been accepted by the Rapporteur. The complaint was lodged by lawyers acting on behalf of the Tuhoe nation and some of the accused in the case. It is based on some 14 specific instances of breaches of human rights.

The New Zealand government has now been issued a list of questions by the United Nations and it is required to provide a response to these within six months. The complaint was submitted pursuant to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The grounds of the complaint are acute breaches of rights to privacy, freedom from discrimination and personal liberty, for which there is no available domestic remedy. The violations arise from conduct of the police, elected politicians and media, and pertain to what has been termed, albeit without objective or legal foundation, an ‘anti-terrorism’ operation. Depending on the response of the Government, or the lack thereof, the Rapporteur may make a ruling on the complaint or decide to investigate further, possibly visiting Aotearoa New Zealand in order to interview victims of the raids, arrestees, lawyers and naturally, members of the police and Government.

There is no domestic mechanism capable of inquiry into the collective rights of self determination and culture held by the Tuhoe Nation. A civil action may be pursued on behalf of individuals who were affected, but even if this succeeds at considerable cost and delay it cannot address the collective and systemic harm caused to the affected communities and the Tuhoe nation. Attempts to secure recourse through the Waitangi Tribunal for a violation of te Tiriti o Waitangi would likewise be ineffective as the Tribunal only has powers to make recommendations on such matters to the government, and has failed to report on the earlier claim by the Tuhoe nation that was concluded several years ago.

The New Zealand Government likes to extol its human rights record to the world. Meanwhile, it conveniently ignores the condemnation of various UN bodies when they don’t suit the Government’s fairy tale of amicable race relations. In 2006, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous People visited Aotearoa New Zealand to investigate breaches of human rights as a result of the Foreshore and Seabed Act. Following the investigation, the Rapporteur issued a report detailing the violations of human rights which the New Zealand Government has roundly ignored.

Needless to say, people around the world are not blind to the New Zealand Government’s double-speak when it come to Maori. Statements from around the world, including the Canadian Postal Worker’s Union and the Zapatista Liberation Army indicate that support for the right of Maori to self-determination will not be denied.

From the Comprehensive Statement of Facts



Raids in Ruatoki

In one raid, a schoolgirl and a woman were ordered from their house and into the street with their hands above their heads. They were separated and not allowed to communicate. Dressed in their night attire, crying and wet from the rain, both of them were body searched by police officers in full public view of their neighbors. The woman was made to lift her breasts. The schoolgirl was crying "shame". They watched in fear as their husband and stepfather was held face down on the street with a gun to his head. They were taken to the police station and questioned for a number of hours before being released.

In another raid in Ruatoki, a family with young children were held for hours, cold and shivering, in a shed at the side of their house without food and water or nappies for their babies.

Armed police established a dawn to dusk roadblock around the township of Ruatoki. Cars and a school bus were stopped and searched. Armed 'ninja' police made the occupants get out of their cars and photographed them with identification labels. A 76 year-old woman was one of the first to be subjected to this indignity.

The children of Ruatoki were deeply traumatised by the presence of armed police at their houses and in their village. The day after the raids the Kohanga Reo (Maori language pre-school) asked for counsellors to be sent to work with the children. When a school pupil is killed in a car accident it is common for the government to send counsellors to the school the next day. One month later, there is still no response to the request from Ruatoki.

History repeats itself

For the people of Tuhoe, 15 October 2007 repeated a history of armed invasions by the colonial power. Tuhoe has always maintained te mana motuhake o Tuhoe - the independent authority of the Tuhoe nation. They have never acknowledged the Crown's claim of sovereignty. A claim to this effect has been laid with the Waitangi Tribunal. Those hearings began in 2003 and finished in 2005. The Tuhoe people are still waiting for the tribunal to report.

The Tuhoe territories, Te Urewera, have been repeatedly invaded by the Crown. In the 1860s, the freedom fighters Te Kooti Rikirangi and Te Rau Kereopa sought refuge within te Urewera as they were hunted by colonial troops. Notwithstanding the fact that Te Kooti was escorted from Te Urewera, and Te Rau Kereopa was handed over to the Crown by Tuhoe, their lands were confiscated. The Crown claimed its action was justified as a means of suppressing rebellion by taking the wealth and breaking the autonomy of the Tuhoe people. In a clear provocation of these old wounds, the cordon around Ruatoki in Operation Eight was established on this historic confiscation line.

In 1916 armed colonial police invaded the Tuhoe nation again. This time, they arrested Tuhoe prophet Rua Kenana, shooting dead two men, one of whom was Rua's son. Once the armed constabulary gained control at Maungapohatu, they gathered together the women and children, and raped them under armed guard.

The invasion of 15 October 2007 repeats this tragic history of repression, arbitrary detention and racist abuse. This time, the Crown claims that its invasion of Tuhoe is justified as the suppression of terrorism; yet it has no evidence to lay anything more than firearms charges.

Raids across Aotearoa

In total, more than 60 homes and workplaces around Aotearoa have been searched under warrants authorised pursuant to the Terrorism Suppression Act. Stories are still emerging, as many of those who were targeted are fearful that they will be branded 'terrorists'.

Many of the searches followed a similar pattern to those in Ruatoki and Whakatane. Residents were woken by load hailers to find their houses surrounded by large numbers of armed police, who forced entry by breaking down doors. In a number of cases, very young children and old people were confronted with weapons.

In one raid an estimated 40 armed officers entered a house where there were 8 people, two of whom were under 12. Distressed children were separated from their parents and not allowed to speak to them for the whole period of the raid. Two men who were later arrested were marched onto the road outside their homes, made to kneel for lengthy periods with hands behind their heads with guns to their heads.

Some of the police actions can only have been intended to humiliate. One young woman was detained in a room while her house was searched, and then taken to her bedroom as the police went through all her drawers. They took away her underwear. In another case, police took all the baby's clothing.

The arrestees
Initial applications for bail were refused for ten of those accused, largely because of the pending terrorism charges. They faced the prospect of eighteen months to two years on remand while awaiting trial, with the loss of livelihoods, severe financial hardship, trauma to their families and children, and damage to their wairua.

On 30 October the Crown prosecutors notified counsel for the accused that the names of 12 of the 16 had been forwarded to the Solicitor General for consideration of charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002. On 8 November 2007 the Solicitor General announced that there was insufficient evidence to lay charges against any of the accused. As a result of this decision the ten people who had been held in custody since 15 October were released on bail.

Sixteen people now face charges under section 45 of the Arms Act 1983.

None has yet entered a plea. All are due to appear next in Auckland March 3rd 2008.


(Headings by AIMC)

Maori, the Labour government and the UN

• In March 2005, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) released its decision on the Foreshore and Seabed Act, concluding that the legislation appeared, "on balance, to contain discriminatory aspects against the Maori", and urging renewed consultation and dialogue.
  The Government responded by criticising the UN Committee and denigrating Maori groups who took their concerns to the UN in the first place.
• A year later, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples was called to review progress made by New Zealand in addressing these concern. His comprehensive report outlining action recommendations was universally condemned by Government.
• In August 2007, the UN CERD Committee reported that the New Zealand Government's actions tended "to diminish the importance and relevance of the Treaty and to create a context unfavourable to the rights of Maori". This time, Dr Cullen admitted that the Committee had put the Government on notice.

This is a Government, of course, which was happy to vote against the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples - an international human rights declaration which 143 other nations supported (while only 4, New Zealand, Australia, the United States of America and Canada, opposed).

(This background is taken from a Maori Party media release - thanks.)

Related

• http://october15thsolidarity.info
• http://tuhoe.net

Auckland police face new allegations of racism

NZPA | Sunday, 15 April 2007

An Auckland man has made a formal complaint against three police officers alleging he was subjected to a racist roadside interrogation.

David Newell, 29, alleges during the incident in Auckland last week that an officer pulled down his pyjama pants and called him a "monkey".

The allegations have been referred to the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) following a formal complaint to Auckland police last week, The Herald on Sunday reported today.

Queen's Counsel Peter Williams told the newspaper it was the worst racial incident he had heard of in his legal career and he has also formally complained to the Attorney-General.

Mr Williams said unless action was taken against the three officers involved he will seek punitive damages.

Police spokeswoman Noreen Hegarty told the newspaper Mr Newell had been stopped on Monday evening after allegedly being clocked at 107kmh in a 50kmh zone and subsequently charged with refusing to provide a blood sample.

Newell denies he was speeding.

Ms Hegarty said that when confronted by police, Mr Newell said his mother-in-law was a High Court judge and he was a Kenyan diplomat.

He then pulled down his pyjama pants in front of the three officers and a civilian observer who had been accompanying them on patrol, she said.

Mr Newell, she said, was then told to pull his pants up before being handcuffed and put into the back of the police car.

Mr Newell's lawyer, Christopher Reid, has accused police of fabricating a story, saying the officers involved were going to extreme lengths to discredit his client.

Mr Newell told the newspaper he was still shocked by what had happened, could barely sleep and was undergoing counselling.

"It was such a violation, I couldn't believe it. I was humiliated when they pulled my pants down and exposed my private parts," he said.

A police spokesman said Newell was due to appear in court later this month.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4027170a10.html

Police in racism probe after 'monkey' claims

5:00AM Sunday April 15, 2007
By Stephen Cook

David Newell, who has lodged a complaint against the police, with his partner Amber. Photo / Janna Dixon

A group of Auckland police officers have been accused of subjecting a motorist to a racist roadside interrogation - which resulted in one officer allegedly pulling down the man's pyjama pants and then calling him a "monkey".

The allegations - described by leading Queen's Counsel Peter Williams as the worst racial incident he has heard of in his legal career - have been referred to the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) following a formal complaint to Auckland police last week.

Williams has also formally complained to the Attorney General and says unless action is taken against the three officers he will seek punitive damages.

The claims cap off a difficult fortnight for police, already under fire over the Bazley report which resulted in an unprecedented apology to the public about historic police behaviour.

Police said the complainant's account of the events differed greatly from those of officers.

Police spokeswoman Noreen Hegarty told the Herald on Sunday the complainant, 29-year-old Auckland man David Newell, had been stopped on Monday evening after allegedly being clocked at 107km/h in a 50km/h zone and subsequently charged with refusing to provide a blood sample. Newell denies he was speeding.

Hegarty claimed that when confronted by police, Newell said his mother-in-law was a High Court judge and he was a Kenyan diplomat. He then pulled down his pyjama pants in front of the three officers and civilian observer who had been accompanying them on patrol, she said.

Newell, she claimed, was then told to pull his pants up before being handcuffed and put into the back of the police car.

Newell has rubbished the police version of events and has agreed to undergo a polygraph examination to prove he is telling the truth.

His lawyer, Christopher Reid, has also accused police of fabricating a story, saying the officers involved were going to extreme lengths to discredit his client.

If he had, in fact, removed his pyjama pants he would have been charged with indecent exposure, he said.

In a sworn affidavit, Newell - a policy analyst with the Franklin District Council - said on the evening he was stopped he had been making a quick trip to his local Pt Chevalier shops to buy nappies for his three-year-old daughter. At the time he had been wearing a loose-fitting top and pyjama bottoms with no underpants.

He was stopped by one officer and the civilian observer in a marked patrol car on Great North Rd - one male and a female - on suspicion of speeding and was told his vehicle would be searched, according to his affidavit. While that was happening, two other uniformed officers turned up in an unmarked car - another woman and another man.

Newell claimed that the male officer asked him where he was from, to which he replied north London in the UK. The officer, who had an English accent, told him: "we used to deal with you people all the time," a reference, Newell said, to the colour of his skin.

According to Newell's affidavit, he was then ushered to the side of the road and asked if he had been drinking. Newell replied he had had half a glass of beer at lunch with his partner Amber but nothing that evening.

Then suddenly and without warning, Newell claimed, the police officer with the English accent "whipped down" his pyjama pants, exposing his private parts to the other officers.

The officers were all giggling and making jokes related to black men and the size of his penis, according to his affidavit. He said he was also called a "black ****".

With Newell's pyjama pants still around his ankles, he said he was asked to undergo a breath screening test and despite two attempts he claimed police were unable to obtain a reading.

Newell bent down to pull up his pyjama pants and was then handcuffed and put in the back of the police car and taken to the Balmoral Police Station, according to the affidavit.

He claimed he was then unnecessarily brutalised and suffered cuts and bruises as he was taken from the car into the station by one of the female officers.

Once inside the station, he claimed, he was hit in the face by the officer with the English accent and called "a monkey". That officer, he said, refused to accept his word he did not have a criminal record, saying "all you people (black people) have convictions".

In his affidavit, Newell said he had been happy to undergo a blood test but had wanted to go home after the ordeal. As there had been little objection, he did so and made a formal complaint at Auckland Central Police Station the next day.

He told the Herald on Sunday yesterday he was still shocked by what had allegedly happened, could barely sleep and was undergoing counselling.

"It was such a violation, I couldn't believe it. I was humiliated when they pulled my pants down and exposed my private parts," he said. "I came to New Zealand because it was supposedly a great place to raise kids. The last thing I ever expected was this. "

Williams said he had spoken to Newell, who presented as a "highly credible young man", and was astonished police could have behaved in such a "disgusting inhumane" fashion.

The police spokesman confirmed Newell had been taken to Balmoral Police Station and had chosen not to engage the services of the duty solicitor, preferring instead to call his partner. He was then charged with refusing to supply a blood sample. He is due to appear in court later this month