|
|
Allegations of Abuse
in NZ |
|
|
|
|
A woman has testified that the top
police officer in her Northland town lied to her about investigating her rape
complaint against a constable then doctored her formal statement. The cover-up allegations emerged
on day two of the Auckland District Court trial of a former officer accused
of raping the woman in a police station 18 years ago. The accused's version of the
alleged attack was also revealed during cross-examination: he claimed the
woman asked to be handcuffed during consensual sex then told him he was
"a naughty little policeman". "This is someone else's
fantasy, not mine . . . I was raped," the woman said. The man denies rape, attempted
sexual violation and assault charges arising from the March 1998 incident. The woman told defence lawyer Gary
Gotlieb that others at the pub had that night discussed an LA Law episode
involving sex and handcuffs, but denied that she kissed and flirted with the
accused in the car park afterward. She denied that the pair fondled
each other as they drove down the highway and that she willingly went into
the police station for sex. The woman said she complained to
police the following morning. She approached an officer she knew and he referred
the matter to the town's senior officer, a sergeant who had been drinking
with the accused on the night. She received assurances from him
that it was under investigation and she believed the constable had confessed,
was under house arrest and faced criminal charges. She later found the accused was
still on duty. It was only after a social worker and lawyer raised the matter
with police that a formal statement was taken, on June 24. When a detective from another town
investigated, she said, "I realised [the sergeant] had been lying to me
for three months." She sought legal advice when no
charges were laid and in 1991 filed High Court civil proceedings alleging an
inadequate investigation. She lost the case and an appeal. In cross-examination the woman
said her June 24 statement was tampered with between the time it was taken
and when she received a copy the day the civil trial began in 1994, when she
mistakenly submitted it as accurate evidence. She later realised it was six
pages short and her daughter's name was misspelled on the final page, which
handwriting experts thought was falsified. "I think it's extraordinary
that this page came to light several years later -- [the sergeant] had left
the police force and he was still carrying the final page of my statement in
his pocket." Cross-examination continues today.
Yesterday, presiding Judge Michael Lance QC rejected a media request to lift
name suppression for the accused. |
