SCOTT WATSON

Despite plenty of pointers to the contrary the police in New Zealand get quite a good rating from the general public. This may be from watching Police Ten-7 or Motorway Patrol. The guardians of the law are very nice on those programmes. And yet a smiling policeman is a duplicitous creature.

I have had personal experiences in previous decades where police took the side of the offender by taking the view that if only one person had a problem with the situation then he must be at fault. That is not very nice. And only last year a very nice policeman decided not to pursue a case by quoting reasons totally at variance with legal advice previously obtained. He had no obligation to put in writing why the police decided to drop the matter.

However, these are trivial matters. The real problem with police in New Zealand is to make sure you are not anywhere near the scene of a high profile murder. It is almost a tradition now for the police to get it wrong by picking on an innocent person. Without thinking twice I can name Arthur Allan Thomas, David Bain, David Dougherty, Rex Haig and Scott Watson. I know there are others I should remember. Then there are uncertain cases where they may have the right person on fabricated evidence – David Tamihere, or Mark Lundy.

What is laughable about this conviction of innocents is that it always begins with a detective’s hunch. And yet the police establishment has the cheek to criticise psychics! Indeed, if we put two reputable psychics on a case under such conditions as laid down by the TV programme Sensing Murder, we would arrive at a far more reliable outcome. A hunch is nothing more than a very low-level, unreliable psychic event.

Some time ago I wrote to the Minister of Justice about the injustice of keeping Scott Watson in prison for a crime he did not commit. Indeed, if any crime was committed it was by certain persons who worked hard to put him in prison. He replied to the effect that something was being done. I now find that all that is being done is to appoint a crown prosecutor to assess the case. Is this really good enough?

Does the Minister of Justice not wish to personally take responsibility and acquaint himself with the details of a case of injustice? He only has to read the book and / or watch the DVD by investigative journalist Keith Hunter. In reading that book or watching that DVD all he (or anybody) needs is 1) common sense and 2) a sense of justice. He does not need to hide behind the obfuscations of legal protocol. It is the devious paths of legal procedure which have contributed to this case of injustice. And now he is asking the same malicious nonsense to assess the previous crime.

I find it embarrassing to discover that I know and care more about an important matter of injustice than the Minister of Justice of my country. In comparison with the Bain case the Scott Watson case is completely clear-cut. Some of us may still be unsure about the former, but unless we want to be perverse the latter is certain. The work has been done for us.

Does our Minister of Justice not think something should be done about crooked police officers and corrupt prosecuting counsels? There are far too many high profile cases in New Zealand in which innocent people are being convicted. It is not the fault of juries. It is not just that New Zealanders can be subject to police incompetence. Quite clearly we can far too easily be subject to police criminal behaviour.

Should there not be a law whereby such police and prosecutors who knowingly convict an innocent man can be punished?

Update. In August 2010 the Independent Police Complaints Authority reports on the miscarriages of justice as outlined by Keith Hunter and concludes there were none. This after an inordinate length of time and the statement that it has been exhaustive, implies as always that they must have got it right. The ongoing injustice is sickening. Indeed, it declares that where the police failed in best practice was when the public and media interfered. It would not have been the quiescent establishment media the Authority is pointing at but the very investigative journalism which has dared to question police and prosecution integrity. No doubt it also includes those members of the public who felt used, duped or ignored by police during the process of setting up Scott Watson, and who have had the temerity to complain.