Charges dismissed after lengthy defended hearing - IPCA complaint imminent:

My hearings eventually started at about 3:45 p.m. today - the last train was 3:40 so I missed that, and had to bike back from Masterton again.

All charges were dismissed after the Judge found that there was no case to answer - AGAIN - and the Court Manager,Mark Elliott, was ordered by his supervisor to hand over the postal articles he's been refusing to give me. 

Judge Behrens and the Court staff were great, it was really really stressful but the right outcome so all worth it. Will now request the written decision and proceed with a complaint to IPCA about the actions of Constable Gallagher, and Sgt Wilson. I was really ill yesterday, managed to get about two hours sleep the night before Court, felt sick all day with really bad stomach pains later (- the water jugs at the Court were filthy and the water tasted disgusting). Judge Behrens was great as usual, throughout a challenging hearing.

Lawyer Louise Elder apparently didn't inform the Court OR legal aid she wasn't representing me any more because she was on the Court list as my lawyer but there was no sign of her - no surprise really, lawyer Ian Hard hurried out of Court in case he was asked to represent me, after he was present when an adjournment was granted to Police after Prosecutor Jodie Lawrence correctly pleaded a conflict of interest to Judge Hobbs, but then acted as Prosecutor at the subsequent fixture - which was held in a old supermarket building with a shipping container (after formerly being held in a caravan parked outside the Courthouse) out the back although nobody bothered telling any of the defendants Court had moved - and duty solicitor Jock Blathwayt tried his usual excuses but was told to man up and give me some assistance, he was as unhelpful as possible, as usual.

Also as unhelpful as possible was local Police sergeant Warwick Burr, who refused to accept a witness summons for Constable Kevin Brown, who had been obliged to warn witness Barry Dixon for threatening and assaulting me on several occasions - Sgt Burr and Garry Wilson corruptly boasted how Constable Brown had been sent on "a training excercise" - fully admitting that they knew he was required as my witness because they'd been informed of that!

There were also a large number of issues about disclosure and other information requests to which we've received no response, etc - I haven't seen Constable Gallaghers notebook entries for example. I elected to proceed with the hearing regardless, and represent myself, making it clear that I would appeal any conviction that might eventuate and there would be very good grounds to do so.  I don't like to waste the time of the Court - unlike local police!

The hearing took a couple of hours, prosecutor Gary Wilson - who has a long and well documented history of corrupt, failed prosecutions against me - began by trying to cut a deal, saying that he and Constable Gallagher accepted that no assault on Constable Gallagher really happened, and that if I pleaded guilty to assaulting Kathryn McIraith they'd withdraw the charge of assaulting Constable Gallagher.  Of course I refused - I'm not going to plead guilty to assaulting someone when I didn't! This isn't some sort of game! So off we went, with the prosecutor calling Ms McIlraith to give evidence.

I cross examined her, and her so called 'evidence' fell apart from start to finish as she lied, and contradicted herself, and displayed (and was forced to admit to0 her nasty, aggressive, delusional nature,, then Wilson tried to tell the Judge that was the end of the case for the prosecution. Constable Gallagher insisted that Wilson call another witness, Barry Dixon. The word "hillbillies" comes to mind when thinking about these witnesses. Their confrontational and aggressive attitudes were plain to see - as did their propensity to contradict themselves and try and lie, and manipulate the truth. As I cross examined Dixon his evidence fell apart exactly like McIlraith's had.

I was the one who rang Police about the incident, nobody else, and that was because I was the one who was assaulted, nobody else.  Thankfully Judge Behrens saw through the prosecutors lies.

Constable Gallagher never did give evidence, I was dying to cross examine him, but Wilson wasn't silly enough to call him up and swear him in and let me question his fictional stories.  That's why the first thing Wilson did was withdraw the charge of assaulting Gallagher - he knows perfectly well what I'd say if I ever got the opportunity to cross examine Gallagher!  I published the information at that link the night before the hearing - late.  Wilson didn't even want to call his second witness, Barry Dixon because he knew how totally unconvincing he was!  He announced that he had no more evidence to offer then Gallagher insisted that Dixon be called, which was the final nail in the coffin of the case for the prosecution!  - And the evidence that the police prosecutor is perverting the course of justice again!

Judge Behrens reminded me that I didn't have to, which on reflection, was an indication I think that he was of the view that the police had failed to prove the case for the prosecution on the basis of the evidence given so far (for the prosecution). If there's no case to answer a defendant doesn't have to defend it. |

Never one to miss out on an opportunity to talk, and wanting to leave no stone unturned and avoid any risk of having to appeal one of Judge Behrens's Judge Behrens decisions again, I elected to give evidence myself. I'm innocent, I put the facts about what occurred on the internet at the time it happened because I had nothing to hide.  (Williams J, who heard my Appeal in the High Court, made special note in his decision that I had no criticism of the way Judge Behrens conducted the hearing I was appealing, which was conducted in my absence, after the date and place of the hearing had BOTH been changed and I hadn't been advised, and with the same police prosecutor who had obtained the permission of Judge Hobbs to have the formal proof hearing adjourned at the last hearing of the matter because she felt that she had a conflict because she is a friend of mine, which is correct, Judge Behrens was deliberately mislead, almost certainly by Liz Harpleton, and Mark Elliot).

I swore on the Bible, and told the Court what actually happened. Before that I had only been allowed to ask questions of the witnesses, not actually say anything else. I got quite good at saying "I put it to you that this and that happened . . ." though when I was cross examining them. Anyway I told the Judge what happened and then of course Wilson got a chance to cross examine me. I just kept telling the truth. I established that there was a background - Dixon was a right dork - every time I asked him a question he'd try and refuse to answer it, saying it was "irrelevant" - I had to remind him several times that it was up to the JUDGE to decide that, not him. The Judge had to tell him AND McIlraith to answer the question on numerous occasions. It was disgraceful to see how low the police stooped regarding these witnesses - anyone could see what a travesty the police's case was!  I pointed out that it had been ME who called the police, not the complainant, because I was the one who had been assaulted, not her, which is why she didn't contact police and I did - it's hardly rocket science.

Judge Behrens then gave his decision, which was short and sweet, that the prosecution had failed to prove there was a case to answer and the charges were dismissed.  This post will be updated.  Here's how your taxes are being wasted - pursuing malicious vexatious vendettas by corrupt cops like David Gallagher!

The Crimes Act 1961 says this:

Crimes Act 1961 - Section 110 False oaths

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who, being required or authorised by law to make any statement on oath or affirmation, thereupon makes a statement that would amount to perjury if made in a judicial proceeding.

Crimes Act 1961 - Section 115 Conspiring to bring false accusation

Every one who conspires to prosecute any person for any alleged offence, knowing that person to be innocent thereof, is liable—
(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years if that person might, on conviction of the alleged offence, be sentenced to preventive detention, or to imprisonment for a term of 3 years or more:
(b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years if that person might, on conviction of the alleged offence, be sentenced to imprisonment for a term less than 3 years.
Compare: 1908 No 32 s 136
Section 115(a): amended, on 26 December 1989, by section 3(4) of the Abolition of the Death Penalty Act 1989 (1989 No 119).

Crimes Act 1961 No 43 - Section 116 Conspiring to defeat justice

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who conspires to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice in New Zealand or the course of justice in an overseas jurisdiction.

This matter is the last of a lot of charges which have been corruptly instigated as part of a politically motivated campaign of bullying and corruption, abuse of power and position on the part of politicians and public servants, the judiciary, and others in positions of fiduciary responsibility to the public in general and victims of crime in particular.

Ex Constable Gallagher might be "unconcerned about that matter" and about the submission containing the announcement of the decision of the prosecutor to offer no evidence.  I am very concerned about it - it was a deliberate decision to proceed with all of these prosecutions against me in the absence of any evidence that there was even a crime committed let alone that I might have committed it.  The prosecutor and Constable Gallagher knew that there was no evidence in the first place.

More on the background to this matter can be found at the following links:

http://kate-raue.blogspot.co.nz/2012/12/your-dna-can-now-be-taken-by-force-for.html

http://kate-raue.blogspot.co.nz/2013/03/police-wholesale-dna-harvesting-unlawful.html