Sunday Star Times
August 8 2004
Police bug telephone of rape-accused cops
by Miriyana Alexander
The telephones of the top
cop and two former officers accused of raping Louise Nicholas almost 20 years
ago are being bugged by police investigating her claims.
The Sunday Star-Times
understands the courts issued an interception warrant several months ago
against police assistant commissioner Clint Rickards and former officers Bob
Schollum and Brad Shipton, who strenuously deny rape and say the sex was
consensual.
While the law allows
police such powers - a district or high court judge must grant the warrant,
which in this case permits monitoring the trio's landlines and mobile phone
calls - the move is raising eyebrows in the legal community.
Top criminal barristers
say the move is unusal given the 18-year lapse
between the even and the investigation. Nicholas claimed the alleged rape
happened in 1986.
King, a member of the NZ
Law Society's criminal law committee, who stressed his views were his own, was
alarmed about the impact of the warrant on the trio's ability to get legal
advice. "These guys will be in the throes of preparing their defence and
are likely to be speaking to all kinds of people. It's one thing to say they
(the police) are not going to use it (the information gathered), but it's a
pretty serious breach of the Bill of Rights if any person is prevented from
talking freely and frankly over the phone to their lawyer."
Gary Gotlieb,
also the Auckland Distrcit Law Society
vice-president, echoed King's concerns. "On the face of it, this seems a
fairly huge invasion into normal privacy and if there is discussion between
co-accused and lawyers being recorded, that would have to give most people -
and civil libertarians certainly - some alarm." Gotlieb
said police must have good reason to seek such a warrant, but because those
reasons were argued behind closed doors they were often never revealed. Such
warrants were commonly used in drugs cases.
"It's a particularly
interesting precedent to set. There may be perfectly valid reasons for it, but
there is always limited disclosure in the end so...watch this space."
But
"If there is reason
to believe that conversations between two police officers now in 2004 will give
evidence of a crime 20 years ago then that satisfied the standard (for getting
a warrant). They are a legitimate investigation technique."
Optican said the warrant seemed
farcical given the trio appeared aware of its existence.
Clint Rickards' QC, John Haigh, declined to comment, saying the warrant was
"one of number of serious concerns, together with the delay, which will be
addressed in due course".