|
Allegations of abuse
by NZ Police |
|
|
peterellis homepage / police allegations / Louise
Nicholas vs John Dewar |
|
|
IN COURT: John Dewar has
"categorically refuted" allegations that he attempted to obstruct
or defeat the course of justice. BRUCE MERCER/Waikato Times
DENIAL: Louise Nicholas entering
the High Court in Hamilton today. Ms Nicholas never told police about
allegations that she had been raped by three policemen, former Rotorua
policeman John Dewar told the court today BRUCE MERCER/Waikato Times Former policeman John Dewar denied
in court today manipulating evidence during the trial of a former policeman
charged with raping Louise Nicholas. He said Mrs Nicholas refused to
make a statement to him about being allegedly raped by three other policemen,
despite asking her about the allegations. Crown prosecutor Brent Stanaway
began his cross-examination of Dewar this afternoon and questioned why Dewar
did not take a formal complaint from Mrs Nicholas despite hearing her make a
statement in court that she had been raped by the three men. Dewar said today Mrs Nicholas
refused to talk to him about the allegations. Dewar, 55, self-employed of Hamilton,
faces four charges in the High Court at Hamilton of attempting to obstruct or
defeat the course of justice between 1993 and 1995. Dewar was chief inspector of the
Rotorua CIB when Louise Nicholas approached police in 1993, with two historic
sex allegations, including those against suspended assistant commissioner
Clint Rickards and former policemen Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum. The Crown alleges Dewar suppressed
allegations Mrs Nicholas made against the three men and attempted to prevent
the course of justice during the rape trial of a former policeman, who has
permanent name suppression, by giving inadmissible evidence. Mrs Nicholas, alleged the man had
sexually assaulted her, then aged 13, which led to two mistrials before a
third trial acquitted him. Among those in the public gallery
today were Mrs Nicholas, members of Shipton's family and Dewar's wife and
daughter. Earlier Dewar said he was
"shocked, surprised and concerned" when Mrs Nicholas made the
allegations of rape against the three men in the second retrial. Dewar said he asked Mrs Nicholas
afterwards if the allegations were true but she did not answer. Dewar said he thought Mrs Nicholas
had lied under oath and decided not to push the issue because she could have
been charged with perjury. Under cross-examination Mr
Stanaway told Dewar that he had "manipulated the evidence in the way you
investigated the case in order to protect Louise Nicholas and in order to
manufacture the outcome of the `former policeman's' trial." Dewar replied "I didn't
manipulate anything." If at any time Mrs Nicholas wanted
to make a complaint, it would have been investigated but she would not talk
to him about it, he said. During an increasingly tense
cross-examination Mr Stanaway stopped his line of questioning and told Dewar
there was nothing personal between them and he was simply doing his job. Dewar said after 3 ½ years he had
been "pilloried" by the media, and was now being "badgered' by
Mr Stanaway over whether Mrs Nicholas had made a statement. "She had ample opportunity
and she chose not to," Dewar said. "In the end I made a
judgement call, which is what I'm paid to." Dewar said if Mrs Nicholas had
told him she had lied under oath he would have had to charge her with
perjury. "It was not your
decision," Mr Stanaway replied. "It was my decision and it's
the same one I would make today," Dewar replied. Dewar said if he did not follow
procedure by reporting the allegations made under oath to the district
commander it did not make him a bad policeman; he was interested in
protecting Louise Nicholas. Mr Stanaway said Dewar wanted to
avoid sparking an Internal Affairs or a Police Complaints Authority
investigation about the allegations. Dewar repeated he was motivated by
protecting Mrs Nicholas. Mr Stanaway asked "do you
mean to tell us that as a Detective Inspector you were so worried about
whether a witness is lying that you protect her to the extent of lying to
your superiors?" "I didn't lie," Dewar
replied. Dewar said he did not want to
"dump any more on her". "Do you mean to tell us that
you hid from your superiors your concern that Louise Nicholas may have lied
on oath?" Mr Stanaway asked. "Yes," Dewar replied. Mr Stanaway asked if Mrs Nicholas
was wrong when she asked Dewar after each of the three trials to take a
statement from her. "Louise Nicholas is
lying," Dewar said. Mr Stanaway questioned why Dewar
would interview Louise Nicholas during the Miller Inquiry – which
investigated the mistrials – which she was the focus of. Dewar said his involvement with
Mrs Nicholas at that point was to correct an error in her statement. "What on earth were you doing
interviewing the woman who was the foundation of the Miller Inquiry?" Mr
Stanaway asked. Dewar said while he was also
subject of the inquiry, inquiry head Detective Chief Inspector Rex Miller
told him the inquiry was "going nowhere". Mr Stanaway said despite hearing
on at least two occasions Mrs Nicholas say under oath her allegations of
sexual misconduct, Dewar did nothing. Dewar said he faced a dilemma as
he had heard Mrs Nicholas give evidence in trials where he knew she was
lying. Tomorrow the jury will hear
closing statements and the judge will sum up on Wednesday before the jury
retires to consider its verdict. |
