01 Home Invasion (drugs)
Perverting the course of justice. 1
This letter started it all off.
ARMSTRONG BARTON 4 December1984
The Treasurer
Riamaki Society Incorporated
RD 6
RAETIHI
ATTENTION: MR J CORNELIUS
Dear Sir
RIAMAKI INCORPORATED SOCIETY
We have been instructed to act on behalf of Mr J Van der Lubbe concerning his membership of the abovenamed Society.
We refer to various correspondences your Society has had with Mr Van der Lubbe and particularly letters dated the 8th of March 1983, 15th of March 1983 and the 8th of August 1983. In each of these letters you state that Mr Van der Lubbe is no longer a member of the above Society. It would appear that the Society’s conclusion is based on the amendment to Rule 7 of the Society’s Rules, that amendment having been registered in early March of 1983. Rule 7 now reads “subscriptions remaining unpaid on the 2nd day of May each year shall be deemed to be in arrears. If these arrears remain unpaid 3 months from the due date the member automatically ceases to be a member of the Society and his or her share moneys shall be paid out to them in the same manner as resigned members”.
We note that on the 7th of March 1983 you wrote to Mr Van der Lubbe advising him of the date of the 6th Annual General Meeting of the above named Society. However on the 8th of March he received another letter stating that he was no longer a member. It is now clear that Mr Van der Lubbe’s membership was withdrawn because his annual subscription for the years 1979 to 1980, 1980 to 1981, 1981 to 1982 and 1982 to 1983 remained unpaid. However the amendment to Rule 7 states that annual subscriptions remaining unpaid on the 2nd day of May each year shall be deemed to be in arrears. This amendment was not registered until early March 1983. Therefore, the subscriptions in issue relate to years prior to the amendment to Rule 7.
Your Society has therefore purported to retrospectively implement the amendment to Rule 7 without any authority to do so. There is no general right at law or any specific right in the amendment to Rule 7 to implement the somewhat draconian measures set out in that Rule on a retrospective basis.
Furthermore on the 15th of March 1983 Mr Van der Lubbe forwarded to the Secretary of the abovenamed Society the arrears requested and also an advance payment for the oncoming year. This cheque was not accepted. A further cheque was forwarded to the Secretary on the 1st of June 1983 and this cheque was also not accepted. However, your Secretary did state that the arrears still remained owing as a debt to the Society. If that is the case on what basis did you purport to advise Mr Van der Lubbe that he was no longer a member of your Society? The annual subscription fee for the oncoming year had not yet fallen due and therefore if arrears for the previous years remained an enforceable debt then clearly they were enforceable against a member. It is also to be noted that under the amendment to Rule 7 once the member ceased to be a member of the Society, his or her share moneys would be repaid to them in the same manner as resigned members. Mr Van der Lubbe has never received such a repayment. If in fact, in your view, Mr Van der Lubbe is not now a member of your Society, why has this money not been repaid?
Therefore, in our view your Society has acted quite improperly by purporting to prevent Mr Van der Lubbe from exercising his clear right of membership. Your Society’s actions are wrong both in general law and one not permitted by the Rules of the Society. We finally refer to your letter of the 8th of August 1983 when in writing to Mr Van der Lubbe you suggest that he obtain further clarification of this matter from a Solicitor. Mr Van der Lubbe has obviously now done this and views with considerable anger the actions that your Society has taken against him. We further understand that there are several other people who have suffered the same fate as Mr Van der Lubbe. No doubt now Mr Van der Lubbe is, aware of the legal position, these people will also learn of your Society’s improper actions and may also wish to take the appropriate measures. We look forward to your early reply to this letter and your recognition of Mr Van der Lubbe’s continuing membership of the abovenamed Society.
Yours faithfully
ARMSTRONG BARTON
PER:
A F Cameron.
*
Every man’s house is his castle. Legal Maxim.
“If one is willing to make allegations, one must also provide credible evidence to support them.” Gordon Waugh.
The Riamaki Society Incorporated was formed by a group of people to control what could be described as a private Ohu, at the end of Croatons Road, Ruatiti Valley, Raetihi. All went well with this arrangement until Jerry Cornelius arrived on the scene. From that time until the winding up of the Society there was factional fighting (divide and rule) and illegal actions such as that described in the lawyer’s letter. Cornelius and the other remaining members of the society secretly wound up the Society and sold the assets, which included a one thousand-acre bush farm to Jerry Cornelius while the matter of my membership was before the Court. Cornelius paid me out my full share money out of his own pocket after I placed a Caveat on the Title to the farm. I was proved right and my lawyer, who is now a Judge, took all the money. Lesson number one.
Less than two weeks after the lawyer’s letter was sent to Cornelius (4/12/84) the Wanganui Drug Squad, detective Colin Irvine, came a-knocking at my door. He told me that he had a warrant and that he wanted to search the property for illegal drugs.
“Principles are a mug’s game.” JVDL
After complaining about the legalised home invaders to that brick wall the Police Commissioner and his cronies, I was suffering from righteous indignation, I complained to the then last resort the Ombudsman. I have numbered his report and will comment on it where I thought it necessary.
1 No Police Reports or files were made available to me.
2 If it was true that Irvine ‘was told by the informant on a number of occasions over a week that [I] was involved in the distribution of hard drugs’ it would indicate that the informant had an ulteria motive for the Police to take action. A person acting without malice or an agenda would go to the Police, give the information and let them get on with it, not go back several times to hound them into action. And why would they need to be hounded into action? Because I was unknown to Irvine and unknown in drug circles.
3 Shows that the informant associates with at least three hard druggies and or chemist shop burglars. The informant’s knowledge of what was stolen in the burglary shows that he didn’t just pluck his information from the newspaper, those details were not reported in the papers. It could also be that Irvine simply added the unreported details in order to obtain the search warrant/s for his fishing trip.
4 For the first three months of that year (1984) I was living 783 kilometres from Wanganui at Hihi Beach, Northland so Irvine’s statement is demonstrably false. He made up the whole of that paragraph to vilify my name to mislead the Ombudsman. It’s quite clear that he was sucked in by Irvine’s lies. When Sandra, the wife, read what Irvine had told the Ombudsman she nearly spontaneously combusted. She shot straight into the Police Station and demanded that Irvine prove his malicious accusations but all she got for her efforts were some bruises on her arms when she was unceremoniously ejected from the premises by a couple of “goons”.
5 The Police had no ‘reasonable grounds’ to obtain a search warrant and that was the first thing I told Irvine after he said that he had one. A single, persistent informer with no supporting or corroborating evidence are not the ‘reasonable grounds’ that are required.
4
6 ‘The file suggests’ is a bit thin. Irvine’s visit to my traffic cop brother Eric was to test the reliability of the ‘recent’ information, nothing else. He hadn’t received any other information ever. Eric told Irvine his information was bollocks but still he went ahead.
7 I was aware from the beginning of who the informant was.
On the night of the home invasion I said to Irvine “I know who’s done this, Jerry Cornelius.” At that Irvine flinched and walked away without denying my allegation. Another Policeman piped up saying, “Well if you know him you must be guilty.” I then showed Irvine the lawyer’s letter but he refused to read it. If you try to explain matters they either ignore you or they say, “Look I’m not here to argue with you” and then they barge on with their nefarious business. To that time I had met Cornelius just once and on that one occasion he volunteered to me that he had done time for burglary. Why did he do that? He was fishing to see if I was a criminal like him. I guess that if I had told Cornelius that I was a burglar like him the burglary squad would have invaded my home. He chose drugs (I did have long hair) and his gullible and corrupt mate Irvine.
8 The Ombudsman has omitted the fact that two warrants were issued. Irvine got the address all wrong on the first one, an address nowhere near my place. He went to that address armed with his bogus warrant and found that he had cocked-up. So much for his ‘reliable intelligence.’ Without a second thought, an alarm bell should have rung, he went back to the previously ‘satisfied judicial officer’ who granted him a second warrant. If a cop asks for a warrant he will get it, simple as that. No probing questions asked. All lies believed.
5
9 I made comments but to no avail.
The last thing one of Irvine’s co-invaders, the “If you know him you must be guilty” cop said to me as they left my place empty handed was, “We’ll get you.” And man did they try!
I should have had my blood tested for illicit drugs, another thing I didn’t think of. That would have proved Irvine and his informant were/are full of crap.
The Police then entered into my Wanganui Computer file, ‘Has made a complaint against Police.’
Not long after that I went with a friend and a land agent to look at a farm that was for sale in the same valley as the Cornelius farm and as soon as Cornelius learned that we had been in ‘his’ valley he complained to his buddy Irvine that I had stolen some (unspecified) tools from his farm. Irvine, the shameless fool, believed him again and tried to interview me about it. I told him that there was now no doubt whatsoever as to who his ‘earlier informant’ was. I never heard any more about the stolen tools.
During the search I got angry and kicked up a bit of a stink and some cop, maybe Irvine said, “Only guilty people kick up a stink.” The Dog handler, Brechmanis said, If this was America you would have been shot by now.” That after he insulted the state of our unfinished house. Another cop piped up and said, “It looks alright to me.”
Next day after I told my lawyer what had happened he said, “I hope you kicked up a fuss?”
———————————————————————————————————————–
LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS
Friday, 28 April 2006
The Police Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
PO Box 3017
Wellington
Dear Sir,
Back in 1987 I complained to the then Ombudsman John Robertson about a
case of Police corruption concerning a Detective Colin Irvine of the
Wanganui Drug Squad and his rewarded criminal informer Jerry
Cornelius.
My complaint was that Colin Irvine used false information to obtain
two search warrants and later failed to prosecute Jerry Cornelius for
supplying information to the Police that he knew was false and
malicious.
The Ombudsman dismissed my complaint because Detective Irvine told him
a pack of lies about me, his alleged reliable informants and his relationship with Cornelius.
If you go to www.bentcops.org and click on 01 Home Invasion (drugs)
you will gather what I’m on about.
Attached is some fresh information that I received via email from a
visitor to page 01 on my site which I believe shows that my 1987
allegations about Detective Colin Irvine and his probable double
killer mate Cornelius were correct and that Colin Irvine lied to Mr
Robertson to protect himself and his criminal informant Jerry Cornelius from justice.
********************************************************************
“Jack I came across your site while searching for information
regarding the suppressed information in the Louise Nicholas case. I
didn’t find what I was looking for, but I found the name of Jerry
Cornelius.
When Jerry Cornelius first arrived at the Riamaki commune up in
Raetihi, he was already a valuable informer of some years standing for
the police. Jerry had done some valuable work for the police in
regards to the infamous Mr Asia drug conspiracy. Colin Irvine from
Wanganui was Jerry’s controller and protector. You had no chance. (My emphasis)
From the very beginning Jerry Cornelius intended to gain control of the
land, which was known as Riamaki, as you know the rest is history. It
was used to grow weed with the full knowledge of Irvine and co and
this weed was later sold to the underworld via jerry who then passed
on the information to Irvine and co who used it to arrest the
wrong doers and put them in prison. (They call it justice) To say
Jerry and Irvine were friends would be an understatement.
Are policemen who turn a blind eye to or actively avoid investigating or prosecuting a reported case of perverting the course of justice also guilty of that crime? I say YES!
Jerry changed his name to ***** ********* in the early nineties to give
himself a new persona but as they say, “the leopard cannot change its spots”.
Cornelius often hosted members of the Wellington and Wanganui drug
squads at Riamaki for “lost weekend” hunting trips. Another reason why
he did what he did to keep people out of “his” valley. He made people
frightened of him. He used his friendship with the police to hide his
nefarious activities. Which included growing large amounts of weed
that the police never officially knew about but helped him distribute
while he was on the job for them. I suggest the police had an idea
this might be the case but since Jerry was delivering the goods they
turned a blind eye. In his own way Cornelius was very clever.
Eventually the police woke up to the fact Jerry was a socio-path and as
such very dangerous to them as well as to others. Jerry’s usefulness
was coming to an end, and he was retired as a credible nark. But while
he plied his trade he did a great deal of damage to the innocent as
well as the guilty. I am lead to believe he is still on very friendly
terms with Irvine.
Around 1997-8 after receiving information from a very reliable source,
the Ohakune police under the direction of then sergeant Mike Hill
launched a very discreet double murder inquiry in the back blocks of
Raetihi with Cornelius as the prime suspect. It was a very
comprehensive investigation carried out of the public eye, but with
the alleged murders having been committed some 20 years previously and
no bodies, it didn’t get very far. But Cornelius remains the major
suspect. A very difficult situation for the police to deal with.
To get the police off his back and to cover his tracks Jerry
eventually sold the land to Gary Rawnsley and moved north with a
pocket full of cash. The last I heard (about 2000) he was living in
Auckland.
Those murdered were a nephew of Jerry and his friend. The nephew was
the son of jerry’s sister. She lives-lived up Whangarei somewhere.
Because Jerry was the last person to see the boys alive he always
maintained they had decided to go to Australia, This is the story
Jerry told his sister. She lived in hope he was alive and would come
back.
I remember Mike Hill drove up to Whangarei from Ohakune to interview her.
They had gone bush with Jerry to put in a dope plantation back in the
late seventies. Sometime during that period the nephew and his friend
became disenchanted with the idea of growing dope and wanted out.
Because they were so far into the bush Jerry agreed to take them back
to civilisation. (A couple of days hike through the bush) That was the
last anybody ever saw of the nephew and his friend. The theory is that
Jerry would not have trusted them to keep quiet so he shot them both
with the shotgun he always carried and disposed of their bodies in the
wilderness.
The police started their investigation with a missing persons inquiry.
This is back about 97-98 and is a matter of public record. They made
extensive enquiries around the Raetihi district seeking information.
There was a story about the missing pair on the television show
Crimewatch and a newspaper article in the Auckland Herald if my memory
serves me well. But at no time did the police make any mention of
Jerry Cornelius. It was kept as a missing persons enquiry. But while
all of these enquiries drew a blank, I assure you the police
investigation under the control of Mike Hill is in no doubt foul play
took place and the finger is pointed at Jerry Cornelius. Because of
the way this all developed, concern was raised by vested interests
with Mike Hill about the connection between Jerry and the police and
who could be trusted (in this instance Mike Hill is the good guy) Mike
assured everybody concerned this matter was being treated with upmost
seriousness. When police first questioned Jerry about the missing pair
he denied everything of course. But what he did was run straight to
Colin Irvine to find out what was going on. Eyebrows were raised in
the police ranks by Irvine’s enquiries about the case and he was kept
out of the loop, strange as it may appear, It seems Irvine is not
trusted by some in his own ranks.
A lot of the people Jerry narked on were his friends or so they
thought and would never believe him capable of treachery towards them.
As far as I am aware the people he helped put in jail for his own
rewards never knew of his deceptions. Jerry has always been very good
at creating divide and rule. Promote confusion and doubt and offer
friendship. A very treacherous man.
I suggest to you Cornelius saw everyone as the enemy to be used in
whatever way he deemed appropriate to further his own aims and
objectives. (whatever they were)
I also suggest to you the chemist shop burglary you mentioned was
carried out by Jerry and he then fingered you to the cops for his own
ends but also to discredit your credibility. With the cops on his side
it wasn’t hard to do. Not that they knew Jerry did the burg. After the
accusation is made its very hard for you or anybody to disprove. It’s
a tactic Jerry used many many times to discredit those around him.
It was suggested to me that jerry would steal property from one person
and then secret it at the property of another, then tip of the cops.
He would then sit back and play both ends against the middle. Could he
have done this with you?
I remember a time when he was milling native timber at Riamaki. He was
having a running battle with his own son Max. Jerry hammered 4-inch
nails into several rimu logs and then accused Max of sabotaging his
operation. He would create the suspicion. Who after all would destroy
their own property? Jerry could spin a story so well and convince the
gullible as to its authenticity. Jerry would go to the pub, buy drinks
for people and them tell them stories about people, places and events
that were nothing but lies. I suggest to you generally speaking people
have no comprehension of how “EVIL” Jerry Cornelius is.”
LooseLips
********************************************************************
So there you have it, someone in the know but unknown to me has confirmed my allegations that Jerry Cornelius was Colin Irvine’s ‘nark’ and that Cornelius used the gullible Irvine in attempt to scare me off my civil legal action against the Riamaki Society Inc. Even though Irvine knew he had been duped by his “reliable” informant he did what all “good” cops do, he lied to all the people he needed to to protect himself and his man Cornelius. I believe it’s called noble-cause corruption. Colin Irvine therefore perverted/defeated the course of justice by lying about me and my history, the circumstances of the search warrants, his alleged informants and by not prosecuting Cornelius for supplying false, malicious information about me to the Police.
He is also guilty of lying to Judge Bill Unwin. (1987)
It is because of Irvine’s lies about me that my family and I have been denied our civil rights by the NZ Police since 1984. I for one am not at all surprised that certain people, a little less stable than myself, run amok when they tire of bashing their heads against the brick wall that has been erected by evil police officers to protect themselves and their equally evil criminal mates. Just think, if Cornelius had been prosecuted by Irvine for making false statements about me in 1984 his informer’s cover would have been “blown” and the killing of the two aforementioned would-be cannabis growers would not have happened.
What I want to know at this stage is this; did detective Colin Irvine of the Wanganui Police ever employ/use Jerry Cornelius as an informer and if so was Colin Irvine Jerry’s controller and protector and also did sergeant Mike Hill of the Ohakune Police ever launch a murder inquiry in the back blocks of Raetihi with Jerry Cornelius as the prime suspect?
This request is made pursuant to the Official Information Act 1982.
Yours faithfully
Jack Van Der Lubbe
Wanganui.
———————————————————————————————————————–
———————————————————————————————————————–
4/26/06
Sergeant? Mike Hill
Wellington District Headquarters
PO Box 693
Wellington
Dear Sir
I have received the below information via email from a visitor to my web site bentcops.org
Please correct any inaccuraties.
“Around 1997-8 after receiving information from a very reliable source, the Ohakune police under the direction of then sergeant Mike Hill launched a very discreet double murder inquiry in the back blocks of Raetihi with Cornelius as the prime suspect. It was a very comprehensive investigation carried out of the public eye, but with the alleged murders having been committed some 20 years previously and no bodies, it didn’t get very far. But Cornelius remains the major suspect. A very difficult situation for the police to deal with.
To get the police off his back and to cover his tracks Jerry eventually sold the land to Gary Rawnsley and moved north with a pocket full of cash. The last I heard (about 2000) he was living in Auckland.
Those murdered were a nephew of Jerry and his friend. The nephew was the son of jerry’s sister. She lives-lived up Whangarei somewhere. Because Jerry was the last person to see the boys alive he always maintained they had decided to go to Australia, This is the story Jerry told his sister. She lived in hope he was alive and would come back.
I remember Mike Hill drove up to Whangarei from Ohakune to interview her.
They had gone bush with Jerry to put in a dope plantation back in the late seventies. Sometime during that period the nephew and his friend became disenchanted with the idea of growing dope and wanted out. Because they were so far into the bush Jerry agreed to take them back to civilisation. (A couple of days hike through the bush) That was the last anybody ever saw of the nephew and his friend. The theory is that Jerry would not have trusted them to keep quiet so he shot them both with the shotgun he always carried and disposed of their bodies in the wilderness.
The police started their investigation with a missing persons inquiry. This is back about 97-98 and is a matter of public record. They made extensive enquiries around the Raetihi district seeking information. There was a story about the missing pair on the television show Crimewatch and a newspaper article in the Auckland Herald if my memory serves me well. But at no time did the police make any mention of Jerry Cornelius. It was kept as a missing persons enquiry. But while all of these enquiries drew a blank, I assure you the police investigation under the control of Mike Hill is in no doubt foul play took place and the finger is pointed at Jerry Cornelius. Because of the way this all developed, concern was raised by vested interests with Mike Hill about the connection between Jerry and the police and who could be trusted (in this instance Mike Hill is the good guy) Mike assured everybody concerned this matter was being treated with upmost seriousness. When police first questioned Jerry about the missing pair he denied everything of course. But what he did was run straight to Colin Irvine to find out what was going on. Eyebrows were raised in the police ranks by Irvine’s enquiries about the case and he was kept out of the loop, strange as it may appear, It seems Irvine is not trusted by some in his own ranks”
This request is made pursuant to the Official Information Act 1982.
Yours faithfully
Jack Van Der Lubbe
Wanganui.
———————————————————————————————————————–
The offence of Perverting the course of justice is committed when an accused:-
does an act or series of acts;
which has or have a tendency to pervert; and
which is or are intended to pervert;
the course of public justice.
The offence is contrary to common law and triable only on indictment. It carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and/or a fine.
The course of justice must be in existence at the time of the act(s). The course of justice starts when:-
an event has occurred, from which it can reasonably be expected that an investigation will follow; or
investigations which could/might bring proceedings have actually started; or
proceedings have started or are about to start.
In (R v Cotter and Others [2000] TLR) it was held that ‘the course of public justice included the process of criminal investigation following a false allegation against either an identifiable or unidentifiable individual.’
The offence of perverting the course of justice is sometimes referred to as “attempting to pervert the course of justice”. It does not matter whether or not the acts result in a perversion of the course of justice: the offence is committed when acts tending and intended to pervert a course of justice are done.
—————————
The following are examples of acts which may constitute the offence, although General Charging Principles, above in this chapter and Charging Practice for Public Justice Offences, above in this chapter should be carefully considered before preferring a charge of perverting the course of justice:-
persuading, or attempting to persuade, by intimidation, harm or otherwise, a witness not to give evidence, to alter his evidence or to give false evidence;
interference with jurors with a view to influencing their verdict;
false alibis and interference with evidence or exhibits, for example blood and DNA samples;
providing false details of identity to the police or courts with a view to avoiding the consequences of a police investigation or prosecution;
————————
giving false information, or agreeing to give false information, to the police with a view to frustrating a police inquiry; for example, lying as to who was driving when a road traffic accident occurred;
————————
lending a driving licence to another to produce to the police following a notice to produce, thereby avoiding an offence of driving whilst disqualified being discovered;
agreeing to give false evidence;
concealing or destroying evidence concerning a police investigation to avoid arrest;
assisting others to evade arrest for a significant period of time;
and
making a false allegation which wrongfully exposes another person to the risk of arrest, imprisonment pending trial, and possible wrongful conviction and sentence.
————————
It is likely that perverting the course of justice will be the appropriate charge when:-
the acts wrongfully expose another person to risk of arrest or prosecution;
the obstruction of a police investigation is premeditated, prolonged or elaborate;
the acts hide from the police the commission of a serious crime;
a police investigation into serious crime has been significantly or wholly frustrated or misled;
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I came upon this site quite by accident. I haven’t read all the site, but the names #Van Der LUBBE# and #BRITTON# appear to feature so far….let it be known for the record that I was a serving copper in Wanganui from 1980 until 1986. Let it also be known that I was part of a team on one occasion that executed a drugs warrant at the Van Der LUBBE address in Ballance Street Wanganui, in the early 80’s. Quite surprisingly, Det Colin IRVINE made the mistake of speaking with a Van Der LUBBE family member (brother of the warrant target) the day before (probably because the brother was a traffic cop), with the consequence that no drugs were found. However, we coppers were all shocked to see a loaded high calibre rifle under the master bed, shocked because the Van Der LUBBE’s had young children living in the house. What was even more surprising was Mr Van Der LUBBE knew the loaded rifle was under his bed, but was not at all concerned about the fact.
I can also say that the BRITTON family living up the para paras often came to notice of us boys in blue. I also seem to recall Matthew(?) BRITTON coming to national prominence by setting up camp in parliament grounds.
Be your own judge…
Mike Cannon | February 26th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
——————————————————————————–
I just love it when cops get their “facts” provably wrong.
1. The “drugs warrant” was executed at an address in Paterson Street. Irvine got it all wrong and he got the first warrant for my fathers place in Ballance Street. He had to tell his lies all over again to get a second one for the right address.
2. Believe it or not my brother did not warn me that a raid was in the offing. Irvine found nothing because there was nothing to be found. I am not and have never have been a druggie and Irvine approached my brother and asked him if I was involved in drugs because he had absolutly no information (other than the lies fed to him by the double killer Cornelius)that I was.
3. Saying that the rifle was loaded is an outright lie. The rifle was under the bed in the box it came in and a packet of bullets was in the box with it. That’s not loaded but it was a bit silly of me I must admit. Irvine said as much at the time but I told him my kids knew not to go near the gun. A bit nieve of me I know.
4. The Brittons` never lived up the “paraparas”. They lived in the Parihauhau Valley when their kids were young and unknown to the police. And as for Mathew Britton setting up camp in parliament grounds don’t make me laugh. He might have been there for the big cannabis smoke up but that’s all.
You’re either a lier or a fool Mike.
Jack | February 26th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
——————————————————————————–
Thanks for the corrections Jack….I haven’t been back to Wanganui for many many years, so obviously I need to consult a street directory to know the difference between Ballance / Paterson Streets.
I don’t have a particular axe to grind, I did my 16 years as a copper, and left more than 10 years ago. I’m no longer in NZ now, but I can tell you that the rifle WAS loaded, and yes, it was in a box with spare ammo.
Yes, the Brittons did live in the Parihauhau valley, which runs parallel to the parapara road at the Upuk end. I think you’re ’splitting hairs’ by drawing the distinction - you know I was referring to that general area.
I’d like to think I’m no fool, and I am certainly not a liar (nor exaggerator).
In my experience, this web site indicates someone continuously crying foul, which is a form of mock outrage. This only gets people wondering if the person(s) crying foul are not hiding some home truths anyway.
If you had a beef against the cops, ok, but do what most of us do after a while - just move on.
Mike Cannon | February 26th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
——————————————————————————–
You’re wrong Mike, the rifle was not loaded and saying it was (only drug dealers have loaded guns under the bed) and also saying the only reason you didn’t find any drugs was because I was tipped off is nothing but another attempt to smear me.
Were you the uniformed cop who accompanied Irvine to Ballance Street, Paterson Street or both addresses? Were you the “We’ll get you!” cop.
The NZ Police NEVER move on as you put it Mike so how the hell am I to?
Jack | February 26th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Informan wins appeal.
August 21, 2008
A recidivist burglar has had his jail sentence quashed and case sent back to the district court because of his role as a police informant.
Conrad Gray, 24, smashed his way into the house of a Rotorua man last November and threatened him with an axe, said a Court of Appeal judgment released yesterday.
Gray was sentenced in Rotorua District Court to three years and three months on charges of assault with a weapon and burglary.
The Court of Appeal judgment said information about Gray’s assistance to police in a separate investigation was not brought to the sentencing judge’s attention.
His lawyer had argued that Gray’s sentence was excessive when his role as an informant was taken into account.
The Crown disagreed, saying his list of convictions and the seriousness of his recent offending - committed while on parole - made the original sentence adequate.
But the Court of Appeal quashed it and said rather than reconsider the sentence, it should be returned to the District Court.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=10528195
zac, and calling yourself an arsehole fools nobody Jerry.