Celebrating 25 Years of Scoop
Special: Up To 25% Off Scoop Pro Learn More
Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search


1100 People View Suppressed Police Affidavit

More Than 1100 People View Suppressed Police Affidavit

By Jeremy Rose

Note: In a call-over hearing in the Auckland District Court today several of the accused have been remanded again on bail to appear next in March 2008.

The person responsible for posting the police affidavit from the so-called Urewera 17 "terrorism" case on the internet says it was accessed by 1100 people before it was withdrawn. (Many of those people are likely to have forwarded the document to friends and colleagues suggesting the total number of people who have now read the rambling document numbers in the thousands.)

The affidavit has also been sent to most of the country's mainstream media outlets, including: Radio New Zealand, Sunday Star Times and Maori Television.

Scoop contacted the person via a contact email address on the site hosting the affidavit and requested an interview. The request was declined but the person, whose email identifies him as Michael Ross, did agree to answer some of our questions.

He or she (Scoop assumes Michael Ross is a pseudonym) declined to confirm or deny whether he was responsible for leaking the affidavit to the DominionPost and/or TV3.

QUESTION: Why did you decide to publish?

"To expose the corrupt practice of 'secret justice' in New Zealand. While certainly secret, it is anything but justice. This goes on every day. Kiwis need to know how the police and judges do it. "

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

QUESTION: The DominionPost was widely condemned by supporters of those arrested. Part of the criticism was due to the partial and sensational nature of the quotes - and by publishing the affidavit in its entirety you've avoided that - but many were also critical because it made a fair trial impossible. How do you respond to those who would say you've jeopardised their chances of a fair trial?

"A fair trial is NEVER possible in a secret court. This is the problem in New Zealand. The 'supporters' of the accused have been misled by their lawyers who are beholden to the secret system of doing everything corrupt judges order.

A CASE IN POINT. The most damaging parts of the Police affidavit were read out by Auckland High Court Justice Helen Winkelman in open Court when she read out quotes "White men are going to die in this country" and "I'm going to go commando". This, along with Tame Iti shooting the New Zealand flag on the ground, were broadcast repeatedly in the New Zealand media.

This was EXTREMELY prejudicial. Along with the fact that 17 people were ordered arrested on 'TERRORIST' charges and HELD WITHOUT BAIL for a month led everyone in New Zealand to believe these people were guilty. "

QUESTION: How do you respond to those that say, 'Yes the police have over-reacted, but there does appear to be evidence that people were training with guns and planning for some sort of armed conflict?'

"As you can now see, reading the entire affidavit, the Police watched and listened to every word these people said for a full year. How many of us haven't made a remark like 'I'm going to go commando' or 'I could kill Helen Clark' in anger (but not actually meant it)? By reading these select quotes in open Court, the judge (who obviously read the entire affidavit and should have known it was bullshit) deliberately perverted the course of justice in the case at the onset and wrongly incited the public to believe things were worse than they were.

I am trying to set the record straight by exposing the secret justice system.

Twenty one people with [weapons] in the woods - some of whom are wearing camouflage, does not constitute terrorism. People can now see by looking at the entire police case that the police and judge conspired to create bias among the public against the accused. Of course they are now WARNING the accuseds' lawyers that revealing the police affidavit will hurt the accused changes for a fair trial. This might be so if nothing had been released, but the worst bits already have. "


© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
Top Scoops Headlines


Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.