|
Allegations of abuse
by NZ Police |
|
|
peterellis
Home / police allegations / Rickards,
Shipton, Schollum vs Jane Doe Page 2 - 2007 Trial of
Rickards, Shipton, Schollum Week 2 |
|
|
The wife of a former policeman on
trial for sex crimes has broken down in court after her cousin appeared as a
surprise witness, contradicting her evidence. The prosecution called the witness
yesterday in the trial of suspended police assistant commissioner Clint
Rickards and two former policemen. Rickards, 46, Brad Shipton, 48,
and Bob Schollum, 54, have pleaded not guilty in the High Court at Auckland
to kidnapping and indecently assaulting a 16-year-old girl between November
1983 and August 1984. Shipton's wife, Sharon,
emotionally denied trying to influence her cousin against testifying at the
trial. Mrs Shipton finished testifying on
Monday, but crown prosecutor Brent Stanaway, QC, called her to the stand
again to cross-examine her about contact last week with her cousin, then a
potential witness. After being asked repeatedly if
her intention in contacting her cousin had been to influence her testimony
and prevent her from testifying, Mrs Shipton broke down. She said she could
not believe Christine Filer was contradicting her statements. Mrs Shipton
said she never attempted to influence what her cousin would say. "As God strikes me down, I
never said such a thing. I can't believe Christine would say such a
thing." Mrs Shipton gave evidence on
Monday that she and her husband were on a month-long holiday in Wanganui and
Wellington in February 1984, during part of the time of the alleged offences
in Rotorua. The couple stayed with Ms Filer in Wanganui, she said. Yesterday, the Crown flew in Ms
Filer from Perth, where she was on holiday. Mrs Shipton admitted she had
phoned her cousin but said it was not to counter evidence given by the
alleged victim. Mrs Shipton said she had asked Ms
Filer if she could stay with her when she was visiting in July and then asked
if she recalled the visit in 1984. "Did you tell her not to say
anything?" Mr Stanaway asked. "I did say to her that if she
was going to do it (talk to police) to tell the truth." Mrs Shipton said she knew from the
investigation that if police contacted witnesses they would "intimidate,
they will say the most vile things about these men". Mr Stanaway said: "You were
trying to influence her and the way she might answer questions." "No, that was not my
intention." Told her cousin had contradicted
her evidence, Mrs Shipton said she was "stunned, totally stunned she is
saying something different". Mr Stanaway asked Mrs Shipton if
she had told her cousin she had been in court. "No, Mr Stanaway, I can
honestly say that I did not tell her that." "But your purpose in
contacting her was to make sure she was onside?" "No, the purpose was to make
sure that I was accurate." After repeated questioning about
the nature of her conversations with her cousin, Mrs Shipton broke down. "I take it that you deny
(trying to influence her)?" Mr Stanaway asked. "I categorically deny it on
my daughter's life." Asked if she had told her cousin
to stay away, Mrs Shipton said no. Ms Filer told the jury that when
the Shiptons visited it was generally for three to five days. "Any recollection of them
staying for a majority of a month?" "No." "Would you remember
that?" "Yes." "And did they?" "No, they did not." Asked if she recalled the Shiptons
staying for a week and a half, then travelling to Ms Filer said Mrs Shipton had told
her if she was contacted by police she did not have to say anything and that
she did not have to answer questions if she could not remember. Ms Filer then said Mrs Shipton had
told her she had been in court. She said she told Mrs Shipton she
had not booked a ticket to return to Brisbane, where she lives. "She
said that was probably a good thing, if I stayed in Perth it would be
better." In closing remarks for the Crown,
Mr Stanaway said errors about "peripheral details" the complainant
had given in evidence were forgivable given the evidence was about a
"genuine event". Mr Stanaway said Sharon Shipton
was a victim of the trial who was under enormous pressure and had come up
with a "jackup that has not held up under scrutiny". The complainant was certain the
three accused were at the house when she was assaulted and the man she knew
as Clint was there and actively participating. Rickards' lawyer John Haigh, QC,
said there were gaps in the crown case which could not be bridged. "Of all the things she has
got wrong, the identification of this man must be at the top. If there was an
incident, he wasn't involved." Shipton's lawyer Bill Nabney said
there were so many contradictions in the woman's statements, it was clear the
incident never took place. The trial continues. |
