Freedom New Zealand: crime

Welcome to Freedom New Zealand.

A New Zealand based blog publishing information about cover-ups by big business, politics and the like. Thinking outside the pyramid of enslavement.

Quote: The amount of truth you know equals the amount of freedom you have to use that information as a weapon against the oppressor, Red Pill - Admin of this blog.

To login or for more options click the 'options' menu located to the top left of the site. You don't need a Google Account to comment and respond to any post. We may not support all views, material or opinions of any external linked sites, blogs and or similar.

Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts

Urewera Activists: Gang Charges Under Fire

⊆ 09:13 by Red Pill | ˜ 0 responses »

The decision to lay new charges against five of the Urewera activists has been described as "ludicrous" by supporters of the defendants.

Global Peace and Justice spokesman John Minto said authorities had "failed to brand" the activists as terrorists so the charges were nothing more than an attempt to "brand them as criminals".

Tame Iti, Emily Bailey, Urs Signer, Tuhoi Lambert and Whiri Kemara are all expected to be charged within the next few weeks with participating in a criminal gang.

The charge, which carries a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment, will be added to firearm charges the individuals are already facing.

Those charges were laid more than a year ago against 17 people who were alleged to have participated in weapons-training camps around the country.

Police had originally wanted to charge the group under the Terrorism Suppression Act but that was not allowed by the Solicitor-General, who said the legislation was flawed.

Yesterday, politicians were reluctant to comment on the new charges. Prime Minister Helen Clark and National leader John Key had no comment to make, while Police Minister Annette King said the first she knew about it was when she read the story in the Herald yesterday morning.

Iti said he had been told not to talk to the media about the latest charges and referred all queries to his lawyer, Annette Sykes. Ms Sykes did not return the Weekend Herald's calls.

"Why lay these charges more than a year after the arrests?" asked Mr Minto। "It seems the police will leave no stone unturned in trying to make the case look more serious than it is and in the process to salvage some credibility from the hopeless mess they have got themselves into."


- NZ Herald

 

Urewera raids: Accused face fresh charges

⊆ 08:55 by Red Pill | ˜ 0 responses »

Fresh charges are to be laid against some of those seized in the Urewera police raids - more than a year after they were arrested.

Five of the 18 people arrested during the nationwide operation last October are to face new allegations of participating in a criminal gang.

One of the five is Maori activist Tame Iti.

The charge carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and has angered supporters of the accused, who claim the Government is trying to save face after failing in an attempt to bring charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act.

Seventeen of the 18 defendants charged with firearms offences were committed to trial last month.

They were alleged to have participated in weapons-training camps at various locations around the country.

But the Crown has added new charges of participating in a criminal gang in a draft indictment sent to lawyers of five of the accused.

The new charge would be laid under section 98A of the Crimes Act and is expected to be added to the list of charges the five already face.

Because it is more serious than the firearms charges, it will have to be heard in the High Court.

A group called Justice Now Collective, which is supporting the accused and their families, last night reacted angrily to the new charges saying they were "a desperate attempt by the Government to save face after the Solicitor-General found insufficient evidence to bring charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act".

Police originally wanted to charge all of the accused with offences under the Terrorism Suppression Act but that was not allowed by Solicitor-General David Collins, QC, who said the legislation was flawed.

Instead police laid firearms-related charges under the Arms Act.

All but one of the 18 who were originally charged were committed to trial on those charges at a depositions hearing in the Auckland District Court last month.

More than 300 charges were heard at that hearing.

Some charges, relating to three of the alleged camps, were dismissed by Judge Mark Perkins, who found there was insufficient evidence to support them.

But Crown Prosecutor Ross Burns said last night the crown would be re-laying those charges in the same indictment with the new charges.

Justice Now Collective spokeswoman Sally Darity criticised that decision.

"This is part of a systematic attack on Maori communities," she said.

"The Government's support of the war on terrorism in the passage of a raft of anti-terrorism laws and expanded police and Security Intelligence Service budgets confirm their agenda to control the population through surveillance and brutal repression of any genuine dissent."

The Crown is entitled to reinstate charges if it believes there is sufficient evidence to support them, as not all available evidence is presented at a depositions hearing.

The other four defendants facing the new charge are Emily Bailey, Urs Signer, Tuhoi Lambert and Whiri Kemara.

A YEAR ON
* October 15, 2007: Police raid several properties including suspected weapons-training camps. Several people are arrested on firearms charges, with the possibility of more serious charges being laid under anti-terrorism laws.
* November 8, 2007: Solicitor General David Collins, QC, rules against the police's application to charge the accused under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
* October 17, 2008: Charges are dropped against one of the accused, Rongomai Pero Bailey. The remaining 17 are on bail awaiting trial.
* October 28: After a month of depositions hearings, the Crown issues an indictment charging five of the accused with participation in a criminal gang under the Crimes Act.


- NZ Herald

 

Urewera 17 - Committed To Trial

⊆ 14:25 by Red Pill | ˜ 0 responses »

All but one of the 18 defendants charged with firearms offences following nationwide police raids last October have been committed to trial.

But one defendant, Rongomai Bailey, was discharged after Judge Mark Perkins said there was insufficient evidence to bring him to trial.

Judge Perkins told the Auckland District Court however there was sufficient evidence to bring the 17 others to trial.

Those 17 have been remanded on bail until a callover in the Auckland District Court on February 17, 2009 - at which they will not have to appear.

There was a heavy police presence at the court with supporters of the accused carrying banners outside the building.

Outside the court, Rongomai Bailey said he was relieved the firearms charges against him had been dropped. He said he would now head back to his farm to grow some vegetables and "chill out".

Mr Bailey would not comment on what was happening in the Ureweras and the so-called "training camps" because "it could be taken out of context".

Mr Bailey also criticised police, describing those still facing charges as "victims of police over-imagination".

He said there were a lot of negative connotations and he has found it hard getting a job.

"If anyone Googles my name it comes up in association with terror trials, terror files, terror camps and I don't even know how I could ever go to the States, they've got a terrorist watchlist of about 800,000 people," he said.

Mr Bailey's brother and sister - Ira and Emily Bailey - will stand trial. He said it depressed him to know that his friends and members of his family were still facing firearms charges.

"It's been a long year and it's been really hard to get a job where I live in the Coromandel and come up to the court case."

 

NZ Police armed with guns? Senior police already carrying up to six firearms since 2004

⊆ 12:44 by Red Pill | ˜ 0 responses »

As I don't believe any new laws should be passed for cops to all have guns, I believe this should occur below
- the admittance from the N.Z Police that senior officers do have police firearms in the locked boots of there cars.
- that a Senior Sgt. arrived at the scene of a recent shooting in Manurewa, however this has suffered much criticism and debate of why no instant action was taken.

I look at this proposal...

Rules of engagement 'to possess, present and fire'. This would outline that when a crime of violent nature occurred or that major concerns in life or death situations were raised, a allowance for a senior officer to possess or possibly present a firearm would be justified, given that it has been witnessed and not under duress by at least one witness or other member of police.

However to note that toys guns at this point being played with could end up being a very bad thing and someone playing with a toy gun and being identified in mistake could get shot. Which has happened but no one got shot, but still it's possible. I refer to a few weeks back on a NZ cop show, that a member of police was pursuing a car covertly which had been reported with someone holding a gun in. When it pulled up in a supermarket car park, a 'police dog handler' or similar dressed member emerging from a police ute or station-wagon presented and aimed with what looked like a 9mm glock pistol. Moments later, it was a kid in the passenger seat of his mum's car and it was a toy.

Furthermore SFP aka Secured First Point, are usually part of the procedure entering any such bad scene for a crime, also that cordons with police being mobile and stationary are usually part of procedure. So a independent formal inquiry should be conducted on any fuck-up's by police at this point.

We don't need a militarized police state, we could just be then just all out, if the gangs in South Auckland, the police and supporters of the idea 'cops with guns' want this to be like L.A, U.S.A, then fuck them we will be just like the yanks and declare the constitution, A RIGHT TO ARM OURSELVES TO PROTECT OUR LIVES AND PROPERTY. I'm not religous, a gun nut and obviously against violence and the N.W.O, but a maxim of law in logic is don't steal and don't hurt others (murder included). If you don't like someone or don't have something, think the risk of your life and others just for those thoughts of greed, jealousy and immaturity. If you don't care about that well, fuck you we will shoot you, your the problem that is being spoken of and you have no emotion and no respect for human life.

So screw waiting for pussy arse cops to show up or even walk into the scene, let's see if they would delay and hesitate if there car was being broken into outside late one night, further more the different scenarios with off duty cop with gun/no gun and offender having gun/no gun.

Lastly to show you the clear evidence senior ranked police already have firearms refer to the below article dated 24 Oct. 2004....


24 October 2004

Carrying guns in a holster on the hip is still not routine for New Zealand police officers - but don't ask to see what's under their armpits or in their car boots. Rachel Grunwell reports on the police officer's arsenal.

Senior frontline police carry as many as six firearms in the boots of their cars.

While New Zealand police can still claim to be among the few left in the world not openly armed, a Sunday Star-Times investigation has revealed weapons are close at hand in many situations.

A range of squads and officers attending emergencies are likely to be carrying guns - but police are instructed to keep arms strictly away from public view.

Senior officers have weapons locked in the boots of their vehicles in case they need to hand out guns to staff in an emergency. These officers include emergency response police, Crime Investigation Bureau staff, dog handlers and some rural police.

Special squads who are routinely armed include:

- Diplomatic Protection Squad officers - the dark-suited men with ear-pieces who mind the likes of Prime Minister Helen Clark and National Party leader Don Brash.

- Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch airport staff must be armed according to the Civil Aviation Act.

- Members of the Armed Offenders Squad (AOS).

- The elite Special Tactics Group, whose tasks include checking for bombs at VIP conferences.

Last month, the fatal shooting by police of Iraqi refugee Haidar Ebbadi Mahdi, who had stabbed his wife and an officer, highlighted the fact that police have guns at hand.

Police have killed or wounded nine people since 1998, a small number compared with other countries, according to police national manager of operations Superintendent Tony McLeod.

He said New Zealand police were generally unarmed, but it was necessary for a variety of groups to be armed all the time.

He was not sure if the public knew how many police were armed: "We've never claimed to not have access to firearms. It's not kept secret." But police headquarters in Wellington and a spokesman for Helen Clark's office, Mike Munro, refused to say whether diplomatic protection police who guarded Clark were armed.

Police headquarters would say only that diplomatic protection police were armed while on duty.

The Star-Times understands those who guard the likes of the prime minister and Brash are in fact always armed. The number of diplomatic protection staff guarding politicians depends on what they are doing and the level of risk associated with who they are with. But Clark always has at least one officer close by.

A senior Auckland policeman, who did not want to be named, said he and his frontline colleagues regularly wore a gun in a holster when going to violent incidents, but made sure it was hidden under a jersey.

Another said frontline senior officers in Auckland had about two rifles and six Glock pistols locked in the boots of police cars. He said some intelligence staff were also armed while on assignments and "virtually any police officer can draw a firearm if they think the circumstances are justified".

McLeod said New Zealand police had 1771 Glock pistols and 883 bolt-action Remington rifles.

The Glock pistols were appropriate for personal protection and destroying animals, while the rifle was more accurate at hitting targets from a longer range.

According to police general instructions, officers must sign out weapons, noting details such as the time, date and reason for use. The return of a weapon must also be noted, and whether it had been presented must be relayed to the appropriate district manager. If shots were fired, a report must be filed.

The instructions note: "The NZ police is generally an unarmed service. It is recognised, however, that firearms need to be available quickly, easily and safely. Minimum visibility should be applied at all times."

Police could wear guns on hip or shoulder holsters at their own discretion, but should if possible notify a senior officer.

Officers who might be required to be armed were not allowed to drink alcohol within a reasonable time before starting duty.

The Crimes Act allows police to use a firearm in some circumstances, including to defend themselves or others, while arresting threatening offenders, if the arrest cannot be effected in a less violent manner, and while trying to stop someone fleeing from custody.

Any officer could be armed if authorised by a police boss, but no authorisation was required if officers found themselves in an emergency.

McLeod said firearms were not used lightly and police were reluctant to resort to that level of force.

"We should always use the lowest level of force to contain a situation," he said, adding police had other weapons like pepper spray.

Ash Edwards, a former Auckland AOS commander of AOS for 15 years who has left the force, has never pulled the trigger on anyone, but knew several officers who had killed people in the line of duty. These officers knew they had to shoot or other lives would have been at risk.

"But they've had to live with it for the rest of their lives," he said.

Edwards said potential AOS officers were asked in the selection process `if you had to shoot someone could you?'.

Edwards believes the public was not naive. They knew many officers were armed.

Fatal police shootings

August 2004: Haidar Ebbadi Mahdi, 37, an Iraqi immigrant, was shot and killed after he stabbed his wife and a police officer in Auckland.

April 2000: Steven Wallace, 23, was shot and killed in Waitara, Taranaki, after rampaging through the town and advancing on police while armed with a softball bat.

July 1999: Eddie Leo, 31, was shot and killed by police after refusing to put down a fake gun he was pointing at them in Helensville, Auckland.

September 1996: Terrence Thompson, 43, was shot and killed in Hawke's Bay by police after a 65-day manhunt following the shooting of Hastings constable Glenn McGibbon.

September 1996: James Paul Raharuhi, 46, was shot and killed by police in Greenland, Auckland, after firing shots at a service station where his former wife worked.

November 1995: Psychiatric outpatient Barry Radcliffe, 37, was fatally shot by police outside a Whangarei sports shop after firing shots from a gun stolen from the store.

September 1995: Schizophrenic Eric Gellatly, 35, was fatally shot after a 21-hour siege at an Invercagill gun store when he ran out into the street firing shots.

July 1993: Larry Hammond died after being shot three times by police after holding hostage police and members of the public with a loaded crossbow in the Morrinsville police station.

November 1990: David Malcolm Gray was shot and killed by the armed offenders squad after a 24 hour massacre during which he killed 13 people in Aramoana, Otago.

October 1990: Paul Stowers was shot and killed by police in Khyber Pass, Auckland, after he threatened an officer with a shotgun during a routine stop.

Rachel Grunwell
Statistics compiled by Lesley Longstaff


The shooting of Steven Wallace index page

-Source