Dominion Post
March 6, 2004

Investigating officer rejects judges' censure in Nicholas case
by Fran Tyler

The police officer criticised by judges over the way police handled Louise Nicholas' rape complaint against three policemen when she was aged about 18 said he did not have a chance to explain himself.

The Dominion Post has successfully had some suppression orders lifted in three rape trials against a man accused of raping Mrs Nicholas when she was aged about 14.

The lifting of the suppressions allowed criticisms of investigating officer John Dewar, made by Judge Michael Lance in 1995 and Judge Philip Evans, to be made public. Judge Lance criticised Mr Dewar in a costs decision against police.

In a statement from his lawyers, Stace Hammond, issued yesterday, Mr Dewar said he did not know at the time about the costs application and decision. Nor did he know at the time that he had received name suppression in that decision. He did not at the time have the criticisms put to him by the court and did not have the opportunity to explain his position.

"He rejects the criticism. He will explain his position in the appropriate forum. John Dewar did his duty and will continue to do his duty and denies any wrongdoing. He looks forward to the commission of inquiry."

The first two of the three trials against the man were abandoned because Detective Inspector Dewar, then Rotorua CIB chief, gave hearsay evidence at critical points of the Crown case. The man was acquitted after the third trial.

Details of multiple rape allegations made by Mrs Nicholas against Clint Rickards, now assistant commissioner, and former officers Tauranga city councillor Brad Shipton and Napier car dealer Bob Schollum emerged during the trials but were suppressed. The men deny the allegations.

Mr Dewar, who had assigned himself to investigate the complaints in 1993, told the court that he had advised Mrs Nicholas not to record the allegations because they were not specific in "time and event".

Judge Lance, in court documents in the later costs decision against police, said: "I am of the view the failure to record and detail these allegations was not only remarkable it was utterly incredible. After all, he was an experienced detective inspector investigating allegations of serious sexual offending.

"During his interview with the complainant, he is told of allegations of potentially serious sexual offending by three other named and currently serving police officers.

"Such disclosures should have triggered alarm bells that would have permanently silenced Big Ben, no matter how vague in terms of time and event.

"Even more surprising than the failure to record is the officer's deliberate advice to the complainant not to make a statement about her allegation against these officers."

In the second trial, Judge Evans questioned Mr Dewar's motives in giving hearsay evidence at a similar point in the trial to where he gave hearsay evidence in the first trial.

Meanwhile, the commission of inquiry into police conduct is asking for expressions of interest from those who want to be part of the inquiry. Spokesman Colin Feslier, who is helping to set up the commission, said those people were being asked to register their interest by March 15.