"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts

Until we have legislation adopted into law to ensure fiduciary accountability and transparency in public affairs we will continue to have human rights breached because the existing crown immunity and lack of any independent oversight invites corruption to flourish.


"Question authority, and think for yourself" - Timothy Leary


"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts


"Information is the currency of democracy" - Thomas Jefferson


‎"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." - Margaret Mead

"The truth is like a lion, you don't have to defend it. Let it loose, it will defend itself."

"I = m c 2 [squared] where "I" am information" - Timothy Leary

"Ring the bells that still can ring, forget your perfect offering, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Leonard Cohen

"The internet is a TV that watches you"

IPCA - INDEPENDENT Police Complaints Advocacy



Matter pertaining to complaints made to the so called 'independent' Police Conduct Authority are not subject to the Official Information act or the Privacy Act apparently, and even if they are, the repeated refusal of the NZ Police or the IPCA to engage with the public, who pay their wages, in any constructive or transparent manner is legendary, and getting worse all the time, with staff commonly referring to Police National HQ as "Bullshit Castle" according to Dame Margaret Bazely's report (click on the link via the highlighted text to access the report) and numerous other sources. 

We encourage everyone to publish the EVIDENCE of their complaints (deleting any personal references or identifying details if desired), publish the actual complaints, and the actual responses you receive - there is no law against that, publish Court documents, and other EVIDENCE.  As you can see from the communications published below, the Authority simply ignores things it doesn't want to address, and there is no recourse - except for our initiative - which exposes the corruption for all to see, and then takes action in the Courts, parliament, and other constructive courses of action.

I filed an application for Judicial Inquiry despite the efforts of the Court appointed 'lawyers' who tried to derail the application, as part of the corrupt conspiracy to pervert the course of justice following the attack on me in my own home by a lying benefit fraudster and his mates.  By publishing this evidence others can use it as a template, and better understand how 'the system' works.  I am in the process of filing other Court action against the Police and the Authority.  If we unite we can achieve results.  I was only able to file my application because of the support of people like Benjamin Easton and Maria van der Meel and others, who provided me with basic resources such as writing materials - pen and paper - and copies of legislation - after I was corruptly detained. OURNZ founder Kelvyn Alp has also been of great assistance regarding these matters

Here is documented evidence of how the NZ Police, PCA and IPCA have blatantly ignored serious complaints by senior lawyers and Judges regarding politically motivated corruption.  Following the public meeting to discuss the plan by the group who illegally took over the Carterton Community Centre and then asked for six million dollars to build another one after they illegally closed it down after it was evident that the group had no support and could get no funding because of the evidence of their fraud and malfeasance, I was corruptly charged with five offences.  After I was acquitted of all five of them, Michael Appleby wrote this complaint to the IPCA.  We eventually received this response, months later, because P O Box 5025 is the address of the IPCA, not Michael Appleby - Mr Bean stuff!  The Manager of Professional Standards can't even address a letter properly.  - You will note the response bears very little relation to the actual complaint, which at the link above:




The request also completely ignored the serious allegations pertaining to former MP Georgina Beyer's role in the cover up of the fraud and malfeasance at the former Carterton Community Centre, District Council, etc, which was the reason Beyer was booted out of parliament and has been unable to get a job ever since - despite extremely slanted and biased 'media reporting' of Beyer's history, and the efforts of other unscrupulous politicians like the leader of the Mana Party - if the Mana Party put Beyer up, the Maori Party put David Tua up and National do a deal with Colin Craig instead of the pitiful "man date" of Peter Dunne and John Banks, heaven help us.



I digress - So Mr Appleby then responded to the IPCA thus:
16 February 2008
Your Honour,
Re: Kate Raue – your ref 05-0761/ghe:bpd
  1. Thank you for your letter of 1 February 2008, enclosing the documents sought.
  2. The letter of complaint dated 8 June 2007 contained a further paragraph 5 that appears to have been inadvertently deleted from the actual letter which you received.
  3. I attach a copy of the letter as it should have been, and you will note that Mrs Raue wished a further separate investigation into the reluctance of the Masterton Police to actually investigate the frauds and illegal takeover of the Carterton Community Centre, frauds which her previous lawyer, Mr Ken Daniels, himself believed to have been committed.
  4. This protest at the refusal by the Masterton Police to investigate these matters was explicit in the paragraph 5 that was inadvertently omitted from the letter actually sent to you.
  5. In spite of the implicit complaint against Police Officer Murray Johnston in paragraph 4, the response ignores this.
  6. A copy of the response from the Masterton Police to me dated 22 November 2007 was sent to me at the address of the Police Complaints Authority, PO Box 5025 Wellington, and it was finally resent to me on 10 December 2007, but not received by me until 5th February.
  7. It seems from that response by Inspector Johnston that he has not addressed the refusal to investigate the fraud by Sgt Murray Johnston. Are the two men related?
  8. The protest in the complaint at the refusal by the Police to investigate these allegations was certainly made explicit in the missing paragraph 5, but it is clear from paragraph 4 that this refusal by Sgt Murray Johnston should have been investigated by Inspector Johnston. It was not.
  9. His response dated 22 November 2007 makes no reference to it at all, and in view of the inability of the Authority to complete its investigation for several more weeks (as advised to me by your office on 5 February 2008), there appears to be time for the Authority to ask the Masterton Police as to why they treated the original complaint into fraud in such a cavalier way, when Mr Daniels had clearly indicated that he himself had serious concerns.
  10. A further example of their cavalier attitude is contained in their letter of 28 July 2003, attached “A”, to Mrs Raue, as if the Mayor and MP, Georgina Beyer, were sacrosanct, and immune from investigation.
  11. Please investigate Officer Murray Johnston’s behaviour, as well as the other breaches of Mrs Raue’s human rights as set out in the actual letter sent to you by me on the 8th June 2007.
  12. I look forward to your advice as to this further explicit complaint, as well as the other complaints regarding the breaches of Mrs Raue’s rights.
  13. Moreover the response dated 22 November 2007 by Inspector Johnston, at page 3, comments that it is standard policy and practice at the Masterton police station not to have accepted Mrs Raue’s handbag from her friend Mr Allomes even though her medicine was in it, yet another admission by the Police that their particular branch appears to ignore the fundamental right set out more particularly by me in the “Twenty Third Breach” that “everyone deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the person.”
  14. The Police could have quite easily searched the handbag, and confiscated any items that they thought were inappropriate, before giving the handbag containing her personal items and medicine to Mrs Raue.
  15. Moreover, Inspector Johnston’s comment in his penultimate paragraph, that “from the Doctors observations of her, he was able to give an opinion, which was that she did not require medication at the time” is simply quite untrue.
  16. A copy of the relevant Trial transcript containing the Doctor’s evidence is attached “B” from which it can be seen that the Police Doctor, Dr McGrath actually stated under oath that he did not even recall seeing Mrs Raue at the police station, at all, and that he had no record of seeing her.
  17. Although Inspector Johnston has conceded in his response that a number of Mrs Raue’s rights were breached, I believe it was appropriate, really, that he address each and every breach of Mrs Raue’s rights as set out in my letter: i.e: all twenty seven breaches individually, rather than the selective approach he has taken, merely responding to four of the criticisms by Judge Behrens, or the five matters he chooses to deal with as set out on page 2 of his letter.
  18. It would have been of more assistance, surely, if Inspector Johnston had dealt on a thorough and professional basis with the twenty seven breaches complained of.
  19. It should also be noted that Inspector Johnston was actually rung up personally the day after the political meeting by Mr Kennedy, a concerned citizen who was aghast at the treatment meted out to Mrs Raue.
  20. Inspector Johnston however refused to either interfere in the prosecution of Mrs Raue, or to order his officers to at least question, and take statements from, other more neutral witnesses.
  21. Inspector Johnston’s own behaviour in this sorry saga seems to not be beyond reproach, and it appears inappropriate that he has conducted the investigation. A neutral Investigator would be more appropriate to investigate the background of the behaviour of the local police, rather than the local Inspector, who seems part of the problem.
  22. I would be grateful if you would advise the Authority’s next step, and the time frame within which you expect the complaint to be finalised.
Yours sincerely,

Michael Appleby
_______________________

Mr Appleby then acted most unethically, after initially indicating that he would act pro bono in the matters he then sent me accounts for around $45,000 and accepted money from the father of a woman who sent me threatening text messages - saying "You need a bullet", and "watch your back", allegedly in relation to these accounts, shortly prior to Mr Appleby deliberately losing three of my appeals following receipt of the money from this third party.  When I expressed opposition to the idea of paying the accounts, Mr Appleby visited the Office of the Ombudsmen and deliberately mislead one of Leo Donnelly's representatives that the Carterton Community Centre matters had nothing to do with the District Council, CYFS, WINZ, or the Ombudsmen's Office - which of course they did.  Mr Appleby then spitefully tried to sabotage my matters and made it known he had ceased to act for me, he discussed me and my matters with his mates in a most unprofessional manner, and one of his 'mates', Julian Tyerman, wrote about it on  a website he built on which he exhorted me to commit suicide and published the address where I live.  Such are Mr Appleby's 'friends' (links to more information regarding these matters will be included in this post soon).

Lawyer Frank Minehan then wrote to the IPCA because the matter was relevant to other matters before the Court and received this response:

And I received this one.
Paragraph 6 of this letter has to be seen to be believed!:



This was the next letter I received:


The third paragraph on the second page is outrageously arrogant and dishonest!  I have repeatedly asked for a meeting with a representative of the Authority, to be recorded by video camera, with a photocopier handy to copy documentary evidence.  The so called 'investigator' should be sacked for deliberately ignoring the most important part of the whole complaint!

The blatantly corrupt refusal to address the following aspects of the complaint is completely unacceptable!:
[16 February 2008

Your Honour,
Re: Kate Raue – your ref 05-0761/ghe:bpd
Thank you for your letter of 1 February 2008, enclosing the documents sought.]

The letter of complaint dated 8 June 2007 contained a further paragraph 5 that appears to have been inadvertently deleted from the actual letter which you received.

I attach a copy of the letter as it should have been, and you will note that Mrs Raue wished a further separate investigation into the reluctance of the Masterton Police to actually investigate the frauds and illegal takeover of the Carterton Community Centre, frauds which her previous lawyer, Mr Ken Daniels, himself believed to have been committed.

This protest at the refusal by the Masterton Police to investigate these matters was explicit in the paragraph 5 that was inadvertently omitted from the letter actually sent to you.

In spite of the implicit complaint against Police Officer Murray Johnston in paragraph 4, the response ignores this.

A copy of the response from the Masterton Police to me dated 22 November 2007 was sent to me at the address of the Police Complaints Authority, PO Box 5025 Wellington, and it was finally resent to me on 10 December 2007, but not received by me until 5th February.

It seems from that response by Inspector Johnston that he has not addressed the refusal to investigate the fraud by Sgt Murray Johnston. Are the two men related?

The protest in the complaint at the refusal by the Police to investigate these allegations was certainly made explicit in the missing paragraph 5, but it is clear from paragraph 4 that this refusal by Sgt Murray Johnston should have been investigated by Inspector Johnston. It was not.

His response dated 22 November 2007 makes no reference to it at all, and in view of the inability of the Authority to complete its investigation for several more weeks (as advised to me by your office on 5 February 2008), there appears to be time for the Authority to ask the Masterton Police as to why they treated the original complaint into fraud in such a cavalier way, when Mr Daniels had clearly indicated that he himself had serious concerns.

A further example of their cavalier attitude is contained in their letter of 28 July 2003, attached “A”, to Mrs Raue, as if the Mayor and MP, Georgina Beyer, were sacrosanct, and immune from investigation.
Please investigate Officer Murray Johnston’s behaviour, as well as the other breaches of Mrs Raue’s human rights as set out in the actual letter sent to you by me on the 8th June 2007.

I look forward to your advice as to this further explicit complaint, as well as the other complaints regarding the breaches of Mrs Raue’s rights.

Moreover the response dated 22 November 2007 by Inspector Johnston, at page 3, comments that it is standard policy and practice at the Masterton police station not to have accepted Mrs Raue’s handbag from her friend Mr Allomes even though her medicine was in it, yet another admission by the Police that their particular branch appears to ignore the fundamental right set out more particularly by me in the “Twenty Third Breach” that “everyone deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the person.”

The Police could have quite easily searched the handbag, and confiscated any items that they thought were inappropriate, before giving the handbag containing her personal items and medicine to Mrs Raue.
Moreover, Inspector Johnston’s comment in his penultimate paragraph, that “from the Doctors observations of her, he was able to give an opinion, which was that she did not require medication at the time” is simply quite untrue.

A copy of the relevant Trial transcript containing the Doctor’s evidence is attached “B” from which it can be seen that the Police Doctor, Dr McGrath actually stated under oath that he did not even recall seeing Mrs Raue at the police station, at all, and that he had no record of seeing her.

Although Inspector Johnston has conceded in his response that a number of Mrs Raue’s rights were breached, I believe it was appropriate, really, that he address each and every breach of Mrs Raue’s rights as set out in my letter: i.e: all twenty seven breaches individually, rather than the selective approach he has taken, merely responding to four of the criticisms by Judge Behrens, or the five matters he chooses to deal with as set out on page 2 of his letter.

It would have been of more assistance, surely, if Inspector Johnston had dealt on a thorough and professional basis with the twenty seven breaches complained of.

It should also be noted that Inspector Johnston was actually rung up personally the day after the political meeting by Mr Kennedy, a concerned citizen who was aghast at the treatment meted out to Mrs Raue.
Inspector Johnston however refused to either interfere in the prosecution of Mrs Raue, or to order his officers to at least question, and take statements from, other more neutral witnesses.

Inspector Johnston’s own behaviour in this sorry saga seems to not be beyond reproach, and it appears inappropriate that he has conducted the investigation. A neutral Investigator would be more appropriate to investigate the background of the behaviour of the local police, rather than the local Inspector, who seems part of the problem.

I would be grateful if you would advise the Authority’s next step, and the time frame within which you expect the complaint to be finalised.

Yours sincerely,

Michael Appleby
____________________________



It is obvious that we have a serious problem with the IPCA and their blatant refusal to address serious complaints backed up by letters from several well qualified lawyers and Judges!  This systemic dysfunction which amounts to incompetence and corruption, waste of money and lack of action is endemic and infects other complaints mechanisms such as Commissions of Health and Disability and Privacy, Human Rights, Ombudsmen, etc.  Huge amounts of our taxes are funding this corruption and it's time it was addressed.

Here's the latest on the great gravy train that is the cover up of the attack on me by Michael Francis Murphy:



This is just outrageous, I rang the IPCA a number of times to ask who the so called investigating officer was because I have still not heard from any investigating officer and there is NO excuse for the continued refusal of the Police to charge Michael Francis Murphy with aggravated assault!  Just like there's no excuse for their ongoing refusal to charge the people associated with the Carterton District Council and others with fraud and other offences regarding the unlawful theft of money from the bank accounts of the organisations controlled by the committee of the Carterton Community Centre Inc.

After local police corruptly conspired with certain 'psychiatrists' who are far madder than I am to lock me away for a while to try and shut me up from telling the world about their incompetence and corruption regarding the cover up of Murphy's attack, and create an excuse to get out of the mess they'd got themselves and 'the Crown' involved in regarding their corrupt campaign of malicious and vexatious prosecutions against me.   I wrote to another lawyer asking for assistance, and pointing out that this is a blatant and corrupt abuse of Court process and taxpayer's money, it is blatant corruption, criminal negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.  This is after a series of other lawyers had milked my situation for all it was worth for months and years.  I provided the relevant information, and in due course I received the following responses:

Katherine

I have read your emails of today.

I am too busy to deal with complaints from 2005.

I am sure why you didn't complete that complaint process, but I don't have time to consider them.

I would be prepared to consider having  a look at the recent complaints to see if I can accept instructions.


Should you prefer to have one person look at the lot, rather than me please let know
______________________________

Katherine

In respect of the IPCA, there is little that can be done short of a High Court challenge that their  decison is wrong.

For the current case, I would need your lawyers file and you fuller explanation of what happened 

Dear Katherine

I will first comment on your email.

In respect of complaining about the IPCA, there is no process I know of short of the High Court in litigation.

However a new Authority is about to be appointed Sir David Carruthers previously Parole Board Chairperson, and before that Chief District Court Judge.

You could complain to him that his staff have not done their job, as a new broom he might be interested.

Other matters

Given the significant time delay in providing the files [caused by the previous lawyers not forwarding the files to him] and changes in Legal Aid funding I should advise you I am not going to be able to take your case on legal aid.

I have been doing criminal legal aid files for some time, but with the introduction of fixed fees and the associated administrative burden now required for legal aid, in order to make a living I am forced to reduce the amount of legal aid cases I can do.

Partly as  result of this tightening in the year ended March 2011 , i.e. 12 months ago and that I had my worst year ever earning less than the average wage $$50,000, as a result I have been forced me to reconsider the number of cases on legal aid I can take.  [sic]

In the civil area, where your case falls, the paperwork required from the Legal Services Agency is onerous.

It is does not surprise me that of 4000 lawyers willing to take legal aid prior to 31 December 2011 now only about 2000 will.

I regret given the time delay and still not having all your files, and the new legal aid regime that trying to take on your case requires more time than I have. 

Regrettably the payment offered form civil legal aid (which you of course are likely to be required to repay) does not provide a fair reward for work done.

Whilst I do not like to reduce the decision to a financial one, I regret having to be more selective in taking legal aid cases, and have turned down 10 in the last month, your potential case is not even ready to be considered and in addition to financial considerations I regret I don't have the time.

I will return your files. 
 Yours faithfully,
Tony Ellis 
This is what passes for justice in New Zealand, it all comes down to how much money you've got to pay lawyers.
"In respect of complaining about the IPCA, there is no process I know of short of the High Court in litigation.

However a new Authority is about to be appointed Sir David Carruthers previously Parole Board Chairperson, and before that Chief District Court Judge.

You could complain to him that his staff have not done their job, as a new broom he might be interested."

Unfortunately not - I wrote to Sir David Carruthers, and received a letter back from "The Complaint Management Team" informing me that all my files had been closed and would not be reopened.

My tupuna did not sign a Treaty to be governed like THIS, and pay taxes that are funding blatant corruption like the systemic cover up of hundreds of child abuse complaints, running Court from a caravan and delivering third world 'services' to our community while pocketing exorbitant and unjustified wages and salaries for it!

I will shortly be uploading the Court