"Her account included a number of persecutory ideas. However on balance, considering her ideas and reviewing the other materials, I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness, particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions." He also says "I would further observe the litigious quality to her presentation means that she has an exaggerated intellectual understanding of court process and would be well capable of following legal process and both entering a plea and instructing a lawyer." (Dr Barry-Walsh 19 November 2010)
"Ms Raue presented as pleasant, polite, well groomed and looked physically quite healthy and relaxed." "Her manner was pleasant and quite relaxed throughout the interview and she showed no evidence of any pressure in her thinking. Her speech, while a little speeded at times, was not noticeably pressured and her thought processes were logical and rational throughout the period of the interview. We spent some time discussing the issues of the court, the charges and her intended defence. She was able to explain clearly and rationally the way in which she intends to defend herself against the charge and remained focused on this throughout, without introducing any extraneous or irrelevant material and without displaying any paranoid thought processes in relation to the charges. Her understanding of the legal issues is very good and she has the ability to formulate and enter a plea and to follow all the matters pertinent to the court." "Overall my impression is that she will be able to interact successfully with the court for the purpose of conducting her defence. In my opinion she is fit to stand trial." (Dr N Judson 13 June 2011)
How naive of me to have expected any actual justice. In some sort of Kafka-esque joke, the Crown Solicitor Grant Burston has come up with this insult to justice, and insult to the intelligence - I was entitled to a trial!
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON CRI 2009-035-0805
THE QUEEN v KATHERINE RAUE
MEMORANDUM OF THE CROWN:
Presented for filing by GJ Burston, Crown Solicitor
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT
1. Katherine Raue is charged with one count of attempting to pervert
the course of justice. The offending is alleged to have occurred in
April 2009.
2. A trial is set to proceed on 5 July 2011.
ALLEGED FACTS (sic)
3. It is alleged that Ms Raue went to her neighbours and told them to
tell police that she had seen a man by the name of Michael Murphy
outside the front of her house. Ms Raue then rang police and made a
statement to police saying that her house had been burgled. Ms Raue
advised police that her neighbours had seen Michael Murphy outside the
front of her house at the time of the alleged burglary.
KR: No, FIRST I rang police and reported the burglary by Michael Francis Murphy, who broke into my home to remove evidence of his earlier crime at that address, a violent home invasion (- which was witnessed and reported to Police by no less than three other people), some days later the neighbours from across the road came over and told me that they had seen Murphy driving his car outside my house at the same time that I had reported him leaving my house with the property he had stolen. I was correct in advising police that the neighbours had seen Murphy outside the front of my house at the time of the alleged burglary. The neighbours have consistently stated that fact.
4. Police spoke to Ms Raue's neighbours, they gave a statement to
police and shortly after that they retracted their statement. The
neighbours claimed that they had not seen Michael Murphy outside the
front of Ms Raue's house, instead they told police that they had on
instruction from Ms Raue told police that they had.
KR: The neighbours have consistently told police that they saw Murphy driving his car in the near vicinity of the front of my house at the date and time I had earlier reported the burglary. There are alsoseveral serious discrepancies in the "evidence" presented by Police regarding the alleged statements of the neighbour, discrepancies that amount to perjury by Constable Rhymer.
5. Ms Raue was charged with attempting to pervert the course of
justice on the basis of the false statement she made to police.
KR: I was falsely, deliberately, corruptly, charged on the basis of corruptly formulated "evidence" which was never going to stand up to scrutiny in the first place, which is why the Crown are now advising the Court they do not intend to produce any evidence at trial.
CURRENT SITUATION
Ms Raue's mental health
6. On 23 November 2010, pursuant to the Criminal Procedure (Mentally
Impaired Persons) Act 2003 ("CP(MIP) Act") the Court ordered two
assessment reports be provided to the Court by 22 March 2011 to assist
in determining whether Ms Raue was fit to stand trial and/or whether
she was insane.
7. Ms Raue failed to answer her requisite appointments with psychiatrists.
KR: I certainly did attend appointments, Dr Barry-Walsh wrote a report dated November 2009 after one such appointment which I went to considerable trouble to attend, having to bicycle from Carterton to Masterton in the rain to attend. In this report, Dr Barry-Walsh wrote: "Ms Raue displayed marked distress, reported low mood and appeared depressed. She was pressured on interview and gave a digressive and detailed account of herself. She was emotional. Her account included a number of persecutory ideas However on balance considering her ideas and reviewing the other materials, I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness, particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions." He also says "I would further observe the litigious quality to her presentation means that she has an exaggerated intellectual understanding of court process and would be well capable of following legal process and both entering a plea and instructing a lawyer."
8. On 8 March 2011, Judge Davidson ordered that Ms Raue be detained
pursuant to section 38 (2) (c) (ii) of the CP(MIP) Act. He directed
that two reports be provided to the Court by 22 March 2011 to
determine whether Ms Raue was fit to stand trial and/or whether she
was insane.
9. Ms Raue was admitted to the Rangipapa Unit on Tuesday 8 March 2011.
KR: On the 4th March 2011 Dr Barry-Walsh, who had previously written"I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness, particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions" wrote: "I could find no evidence on an albeit brief assessment that there had been any change in her underlying psychiatric state from my previous assessment."
10. On 12 March 2011, while committed to hospital pursuant to the
CP(MIP) Act, Ms Raue's mental health declined. She was provided with
compulsory assessment and treatment pursuant to section 13 of the
Mental Health Act (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1932
("Mental Health Act").
KR: My mental health declined - yes, I became unhappy and depressed after being denied a phone call to a lawyer after seven or eight days. When I began to cry after about twelve days of outrageous treatment, it was claimed that this normal reaction was evidence of some alleged disorder and I was prescribed strong antipsychotic medications, including Aripiprazole, Risperidone, Olanzapine (Zyprexa), Clonazepam and others. This was an outrageous breach of human rights! Not to mention tax payer funded corruption.
11. Ms Raue has remained in hospital subject to assessment and
treatment under the Mental Health Act, section 30 (Compulsory
In-patient Order) which was made on 4 May 2011. This Order continues
until 3 November 2011.
KR: I was discharged from the hospital on 17th June 2011.
12. The District Court has received several reports from Ms Raue's
treating physicians pursuant to the CP(MIP) Act. They address Ms
Raue's fitness to stand trial and/or whether she is insane, within the
meaning of the legislation.
13. The report writers note that "Ms Raue is currently being treated
for mood disorders and for beliefs which have from time to time
reached delusional intensity". Her treating physicians report that
the beliefs are related to events in the Wairarapa community and have
now extended to conspiracy beliefs around the police, courts and
mental health authorities.
KR: On the 4th March 2011 Dr Barry-Walsh, who had previously written"I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness, particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions" wrote: "I could find no evidence on an albeit brief assessment that there had been any change in her underlying psychiatric state from my previous assessment."
14. Her treating physicians have made it clear that she cannot
represent herself without assistance from a lawyer and that her mental
health is aggravated by the court process.
KR: Dr Judson's report of 13 June 2011 says: "Ms Raue presented as pleasant, polite, well groomed and looked physically quite healthy and relaxed." "Her manner was pleasant and quite relaxed throughout the interview and she showed no evidence of any pressure in her thinking.Her speech, while a little speeded at times, was not noticeably pressured and her thought processes were logical and rational throughout the period of the interview. We spent some time discussing the issues of the court, the charges and her intended defence. She was able to explain clearly and rationally the way in which she intends to defend herself against the charge and remained focussed on this throughout, without introducing any extraneous or irrelevant material and without displaying any paranoid thought processes inrelation to the charges." "Her understanding of the legal issues is very good and she has the ability to formulate and enter a plea and to follow all the matters pertinent to the court." "Overall my impression is that the degree of improvement that we are now seeing suggests that she will be able to interact successfully with the court for the purpose of conducting her defence. In my opinion she is now fit to stand trial."
15. Ms Raue does not have a defence of insanity open to her. She
appears capable of understanding the nature and quality of the alleged
offence.
16. Ms Raue's physicians have advised that upon her release Ms Raue
will continue to be monitored and treated by Mental Health Services in
the community.
REVIEW OF CHARGE - PUBLIC INTEREST TEST
17. It is clear that Ms Raue is currently significantly unwell. She
is detained in hospital. It is likely that her mental condition
influenced her offending. Continuation of the Court process has
potential to fuel Ms Raue's delusions and paranoia. It may delay or
prevent her recovery.
KR: What rubbish! Dr Judson's report of 13 June 2011 - two days before this application was written - says: "Ms Raue presented as pleasant, polite, well groomed and looked physically quite healthy and relaxed." "Her manner was pleasant and quite relaxed throughout the interview and she showed no evidence of any pressure in her thinking.Her speech, while a little speeded at times, was not noticeably pressured and her thought processes were logical and rational throughout the period of the interview. We spent some time discussing the issues of the court, the charges and her intended defence. She was able to explain clearly and rationally the way in which she intends to defend herself against the charge and remained focussed on this throughout, without introducing any extraneous or irrelevant material and without displaying any paranoid thought processes in relation to the charges." "Her understanding of the legal issues is very good and she has the ability to formulate and enter a plea and to follow all the matters pertinent to the court." "Overall my impression is that the degree of improvement that we are now seeing suggests that she will be able to interact successfully with the court for the purpose of conducting her defence. In my opinion she is now fit to stand trial." On the 4th March 2011 Dr Barry-Walsh, who had previously written "I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness,particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions" wrote: "I could find no evidence on an albeit brief assessment that there had been any change in her underlying psychiatric state from my previous assessment." Two days after this was written I was allowed to go home.
18 In these circumstances it is considered that continued prosecution
of the charge against the accused is not required in the public
interest. Subject to any directions from the Court, the Crown intends
to offer no evidence in relation to this matter.
KR: The Crown was never going to offer any evidence on this charge anyway because there never was any evidence! Certain parties to these proceedings have strung the matter out deliberately, knowing perfectly well that there has never been any evidence in support of the charges, which have been laid in bad faith in order to pervert the course of justice. There have been false declarations made to the Court deliberately - there has been perjury and deliberate conspiracy to pervert the course of justice! It is in the public interest and in the interests of justice that this matter is investigated by judicial inquiry without further delay!
Dated at Wellington this 15th day of June 2011
G J Burstyn
Crown Solicitor
And co-incidentally, 15 June 2011 is the same day that the application for reinstatement of the judicial inquiry process was filed in the Court by Pamela Harvey, as instructed by me, after I finally found out that it had been "discontinued" three weeks earlier, and shortly after a petition was launched, two applications of Habeus Corpus were filed and protests increased outside the mental health unit where I was being unlawfully detained and the Courts where the matters were being heard. The petition calls for a judicial inquiry and there must be one! Unfortunately, access to justice is now out of the reach of the average person, justice is only for those able to pay big bills from lawyers, or corrupt local Police.
