News (Media Awareness Project) - New Zealand: Lawyer to Investigate Police Perjury Claims |
Title: | New Zealand: Lawyer to Investigate Police Perjury Claims |
Published On: | 2004-03-12 |
Source: | Dominion Post, The (New Zealand) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-18 18:55:08 |
LAWYER TO INVESTIGATE POLICE PERJURY CLAIMS
Police are to call on a senior lawyer to investigate claims of
widespread perjury and drug use in the police undercover programme.
The move came after Prime Minister Helen Clark ruled out a Government
inquiry into the long-standing claims made by six former undercover
officers on the Holmes programme on Wednesday night.
They alleged they were trained to perjure themselves by claiming they
only pretended to smoke cannabis while undercover, when in fact they
were often stoned for long periods during operations.
The perjury was designed to avoid the officers' evidence being
compromised by defence claims that they could not accurately recall
details of alleged drug dealing. They also claimed evidence had been
tampered with, and that undercover officers regularly took drugs from
evidence samples.
The claims of drug use among undercover officers have been public
knowledge since the officers, part of a group of about 25, first
sought compensation in the early 1990s for the harm they say they
suffered as a result of their undercover work. The claims were
extensively reported more than 10 years ago by The Dominion and The
Evening Post. It was reported in 1992 that growing numbers of former
undercover agents were saying their lives had been ruined by drug operations.
The admission of perjury brought calls for a wide-ranging commission
of inquiry from ACT MP Muriel Newman.
Miss Clark rejected a new inquiry or broadening the sexual misconduct
inquiry to include the undercover claims. She said they were not new,
and the programme's procedures had been reviewed and changed since the
officers left.
"The police should look very carefully at what was said last night
(Wednesday) to see if there's any new evidence that hasn't come to the
fore before, and if there is new evidence of serious criminal
offending then they should investigate that. If there are allegations
that police have broken the law that is something the police should
investigate."
It was up to people who had been the subject of undercover operations
to act if they felt they had been wrongly convicted because of
perjury, she said.
Police Commissioner Rob Robinson said last night that the allegations
were serious and warranted investigation. He would engage a senior
barrister to assess the most recent allegations and advise on any
possibility of further inquiries.
"The independence of this advice and oversight is necessary to assure
the public of the integrity of the investigation process."
Meanwhile, the board of the Police Association, the force's union,
issued a statement yesterday expressing support for president Greg
O'Connor after former undercover officers claimed he smoked cannabis
while working undercover. Officers are supposed to use drugs only if
their life or the security of the operation depends on it.
The board said it "has every confidence in Mr O'Connor and commends
him for fronting up to the allegations made". Mr O'Connor could not be
reached yesterday.
Police are to call on a senior lawyer to investigate claims of
widespread perjury and drug use in the police undercover programme.
The move came after Prime Minister Helen Clark ruled out a Government
inquiry into the long-standing claims made by six former undercover
officers on the Holmes programme on Wednesday night.
They alleged they were trained to perjure themselves by claiming they
only pretended to smoke cannabis while undercover, when in fact they
were often stoned for long periods during operations.
The perjury was designed to avoid the officers' evidence being
compromised by defence claims that they could not accurately recall
details of alleged drug dealing. They also claimed evidence had been
tampered with, and that undercover officers regularly took drugs from
evidence samples.
The claims of drug use among undercover officers have been public
knowledge since the officers, part of a group of about 25, first
sought compensation in the early 1990s for the harm they say they
suffered as a result of their undercover work. The claims were
extensively reported more than 10 years ago by The Dominion and The
Evening Post. It was reported in 1992 that growing numbers of former
undercover agents were saying their lives had been ruined by drug operations.
The admission of perjury brought calls for a wide-ranging commission
of inquiry from ACT MP Muriel Newman.
Miss Clark rejected a new inquiry or broadening the sexual misconduct
inquiry to include the undercover claims. She said they were not new,
and the programme's procedures had been reviewed and changed since the
officers left.
"The police should look very carefully at what was said last night
(Wednesday) to see if there's any new evidence that hasn't come to the
fore before, and if there is new evidence of serious criminal
offending then they should investigate that. If there are allegations
that police have broken the law that is something the police should
investigate."
It was up to people who had been the subject of undercover operations
to act if they felt they had been wrongly convicted because of
perjury, she said.
Police Commissioner Rob Robinson said last night that the allegations
were serious and warranted investigation. He would engage a senior
barrister to assess the most recent allegations and advise on any
possibility of further inquiries.
"The independence of this advice and oversight is necessary to assure
the public of the integrity of the investigation process."
Meanwhile, the board of the Police Association, the force's union,
issued a statement yesterday expressing support for president Greg
O'Connor after former undercover officers claimed he smoked cannabis
while working undercover. Officers are supposed to use drugs only if
their life or the security of the operation depends on it.
The board said it "has every confidence in Mr O'Connor and commends
him for fronting up to the allegations made". Mr O'Connor could not be
reached yesterday.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...