Legal Beagle: The Police Investigation into the GCSB
57 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Sacha, in reply to
the crimes act
classic misdirection
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
V for Vendetta?
“I didn’t know the gun was loaded”
…removed from context,
to act as a kicker for a serious
WTF piece of ongoing police work !!
__"…and where were you on the evenings
around the 17th of June, 1970?”Arthur Allan Thomas has been required by police to provide an alibi for the night Harvey and Jeanette Crewe were murdered. …
…
Police refused to directly answer questions this week about the review.Acting Assistant Commissioner Glenn Dunbier said speaking to people connected to the case was “a logical and appropriate step in any review of this nature”.
“We would be remiss if this wasn’t carried out,” he said.
Classic passive aggressive Concern Troll behaviour…
-
Graeme Edgeler, in reply to
Arthur Allan Thomas has been required by police to provide an alibi ...
Well, that's not accurate. The Police can't require anything like that.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
The Police can’t require anything like that.
Require vs demand, maybe?
It must be the Weekend Herald colluding with Roget and twisting words then......Deputy Commissioner Rob Pope agreed they would conduct a "thorough analysis and assessment of the Crewe homicide file in an endeavour to answer questions raised by Rochelle Crewe".
But this month, almost three years on, the senior officer charged with carrying out the review, Detective Superintendent Andy Lovelock, began asking new questions of the Thomas family, including demanding alibis for the night of the murders from Arthur Thomas' sister Margaret Stuckey and her husband Buster.Still doesn't look good...
Does NZ have Double Jeopardy laws?
Maybe you've already written on this Graeme? -
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Does NZ have Double Jeopardy laws?
We do:
No one who has been finally acquitted or convicted of, or pardoned for, an offence shall be tried or punished for it again. -
Does NZ have Double Jeopardy laws?
Maybe you’ve already written on this Graeme?We do. But given that people have asked for the case to be looked at again, should police ignore a prime suspect?
One way of the re-look going is surely: police have looked at the evidence again, and have decided not to continue looking further because AAT did it and they’d be wasting further time looking for someone else?
-
’In Zimbabwe police have raided newspaper offices after the Prime Minister made a complaint about journalists. The ruling party alleged the journalist was a member of an opposition party attempting to smear the government…”
This grates with me. It's my understanding, that as a matter of policy most major media outlets in NZ will not hand over any evidence to police without execution of a search warrant. This is to protect sources, and for the media to maintain a proper neutral position. If that's not the case I'm happy to gripe about the police 'raiding' media outlets.
However if my understanding is correct then the police haven't raided media outlets as part of any heavy handed state actions, it's the only way for them to gather full evidence for their investigation. In the case of Ambrose (for example) they might have gone off the rails with their conclusions from the evidence, but they can't fully investigate the complaint put before them without collecting the evidence.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.