Allegations
of Sexual Abuse |
|
|
|
A jury considering the
fate of Assistant Commissioner Clint Rickards and two former policemen have
been told to put aside their own moral views on sex to decide if Louise
Nicholas was raped. The jury of seven women
and five men retired just after 1pm yesterday to consider 20 sex abuse
charges against Rickards and Bradley Shipton and Robert Schollum. It was standing room
only at the High Court at Auckland yesterday morning as Justice Tony
Randerson summed up the case on day 11 of the trial. Rickards' family stood
outside courtroom 12 and said a karakia. Shipton and Schollum's
extended families were also there in force. Court staff had to
provide extra chairs, taking the number of seats to about 90. Two hours after the
jury retired they were back in court with questions for the judge. As well as wanting a
whiteboard and a break, they wanted information that had not been directly
covered in evidence, including whether police officers owned their own
uniforms. Justice Randerson said
witness Ray Sutton had said detectives were encouraged but not required to
own uniforms. Mrs Nicholas alleges
Rickards and Shipton visited her at her Corlett St flat in Rotorua, between
six and 12 times in the mid-1980s for sexual intercourse and oral sex without
her consent. She had testified in
her evidence they sometimes wore their police uniforms and other times were
dressed in suits. Rickards and Shipton
told the court they had consensual sex with Mrs Nicholas but they were CIB
officers and were never dressed in police uniform. Mrs Nicholas has also
alleged she was violated with a police baton, which left her bleeding for
days. Earlier yesterday,
Justice Randerson had told the jury to base their verdicts only on the
evidence presented in court and to put aside their own moral views about sex
and stay focused on the law. The jury had to be sure
of the defendants' guilt to convict, and each charge against each accused
required its own "mini-trial". A critical issue for
the jury was whether they found Mrs Nicholas to be both truthful and reliable
– that she did not hold genuine but mistaken beliefs. There was no direct
evidence to corroborate her evidence, but that was not required under law,
they were told. Shipton and Schollum
had not given evidence, but that could not be held against them. Rickards' own evidence
about his achievements as a police officer was primarily relevant to his
credibility and could be taken into account when considering whether he was
the type of person to commit the crimes alleged. "But good
character was not in itself a defence, as good people can fall from
grace," Justice Randerson said. There could be many
reasons why a complainant did not immediately come forward and there was no
time limit, the jury was told. But delay could affect
memories. It could make it more difficult to prepare a defence. It meant the jury had
to scrutinise evidence with particular care. |