MUST READ: Ross Meurant – DEMOCRACY is based on SEPARATION OF POWERS

By   /   January 13, 2019  /   10 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

In case someone out there, scoffs; ‘Who is Ross Meurant to pass judgement on our stout fellows in the front-line facing danger and death every day in the course of protecting the nation from evil,’ I respond as follows:

They should never have died: Grieving mothers resist new legal protection for police who kill

Ten years after her son was mistakenly shot by the police, Ivoni Fuimaono just wants to sit down and have a cup of coffee with the officer who killed him.

The mother of Halatau Naitoko has written two letters to the officer and made repeated pleas to meet the cop known only as Officer 84.

I’ve lost count of how many people police have shot dead since 2007 when Craig Bellingham was shot by police in Christchurch where he was attacking cars with a hammer.

But I have kept count of how many prosecutions police have filed against their own members where death has followed a shooting by police.  NONE.

The problem I have with this parody of justice is that review of police killings is conducted by a so-called independent agency; the IPCA.

The forerunner of the IPCA was set up to ensure “integrity of evidence” was available to courts.  Police had gone through a bad patch of presenting evidence in court cases which was supportive of their allegations but avoided presenting evidence which tended to favour the accused.  The IPCA forerunner was envisaged as a state agency to ensure justice in the courts was exposed to all relevant evidence

This was in the wake of the initial fallout from the Royal Commission into the Crewe homicide and I addressed this matter a few weeks earlier on this blog here:

I am a devout believer in the theory of evolution.  However, this belief does not extend to endorsing the evolutionary path of the IPCA has taken. The IPCA was never set up to, or intended to be, a court.  It was always and, in my understanding should still be, an investigative body. But as I watch this beast evolve, I fear that it has become de facto, a court.

The IPCA should not be permitted to be the final arbiter of culpability of police. I contend that the ICPA has usurped the role of our courts.  How senior members of your esteemed Judiciary, appear to sit idly by and let this happens, baffles.

Let’s take a couple of examples:

Take the Bellingham case. The fellow was beating the snot out of parked cars. The cop who shot him said that he feared for his life.

The law is very clear when police may kill a human being. They must fear, on reasonable grounds, death or grievous bodily injury to themselves or a third person and that the death or grievous injury cannot otherwise be avoided than by killing the offender.

In my view, the cop who shot Bellingham should have backed off. The circumstances were such that he could have “otherwise prevented” the killing. What the hell if a few cars were smashed!  But to step up and shoot a man dead in the circumstance as reported?

Worse still. The culpability or otherwise of the cop, should have been put before a court.  That’s why we have courts. The decision on the cop’s culpability should not have stopped with the IPCA. This is where the role of the “Man on the Clapham bus” assessing what is reasonable via an objective test, should be vested in a Jury.

Let’s take a comparison with non-police killings.  A bloke mistakes his mate for a deer and shoots him. Tragic. Never intended to kill his mate.  But the death is prima facie, negligence on the part of the shooter and on a good day, that is a conviction for manslaughter. Every time however, the culpability is decided in a court of law.

Take the Tongan courier diver who police shot by mistake on Auckland’s north western motorway in 2009.

The fact that the police actually missed the “offender” and hit an innocent person introduces the question of whether or not they were reckless or negligent in their use of firearms. There is no question of the police deliberately hitting the wrong person – that would be an absurd assumption.  But negligent and/or reckless use of a firearm is axiomatic in this case and these elements form the basis of manslaughter.

The fact that an innocent bystander was shot must raise concern that the shooter failed to identify the target or was a poor shot. The “miss” factor must also be a concern if juxtaposed against the police in another Christchurch situation, when 13 shots fired at a dog, all missed!  Alarm bells should be sounding somewhere.

Back to the Courier driver. Unbelievably this matter stopped with the IPCA. But who are the IPCA?  As I understand, today a fair number of ex cops make up the investigation unit of the IPCA.

In 1986 when I was a police inspector in Auckland, I was required to make inquiries for what was then the IPCA. The fact that the subject matter of the IPCA was a sergeant on my section, did occur to me at the time as hardly qualifying as, “independent”, but I was still deep in the forest of police culture at the time, so I went with the flow.

Finally, let’s look at the bloke shot near Puhoi north of Auckland in 2018.

A young male is pursued by police across the city.  Fast cars. Sirens. Adrenalin. Cops jump out of their vehicle and bang x six shot fired.  One hits the “offender” in the back!

This suggests the offender was moving away from the police and not putting them in a position where they feared on reasonable grounds death or GBH.

This matter and others referred to above and about a dozen others since Bellingham, have all avoided going before a properly constituted court of law where the truth of the matter might be exposed under cross examination of witnesses on oath, by defense counsel.

Instead, the matter lies fallow in the bowels of the IPCA. In years to come when the dust has settled and the public (but not the family and friends of the deceased) have lost interest; a report will be released.  Usual platitudes and whitewash. But no proper court scrutiny. No penalty for doing wrong.

Successive governments condone this as, Justice.  Which just goes to confirm the opinion I formed about many peers when I was a member of Parliament.  Too many are too stupid to or lack the courage to think for themselves and merely follow the bullshit emanating from the bureaucrats from the various Ministries.

In this country we have this thing we call, DEMOCRACY.  Fundamental to the integrity of democracy, is the SEPARATION OF POWERS.

Parliament makes the laws.  Government agencies implement the laws. Courts decide whether the laws are properly applied.

The police are a government agency. The IPCA is a government agency.  Spot the defect?

There are laws which police must follow or we have rule of the police, not rule of law.

In my view, every death which is a result of a police shooting or force used in arrest or death in custody or from a car chase, must be heard in a proper court of law.  Sanitizing police actions by this model, will produce court recommendations for future police behavior and will result in greater public confidence in the constabulary.

Oh!  And by the way.

In case someone out there, scoffs; ‘Who is Ross Meurant to pass judgement on our stout fellows in the front-line facing danger and death every day in the course of protecting the nation from evil,’ I respond as follows:

In 1987 while duty front line inspector, I drove into Lorne street, Auckland – in time to witness a European male armed with a sawn-off shot gun, run from a bank. He saw the marked police car about the same time I saw him.  He stopped, middle of the street.

I got out of the car.  I produced a snub nose .38 smith & Wesson. I adopted the firing position.  I was doing the math’s in my mind. My revolver is good for about 10 meters.  The bandit was about 15 meters away. His sawn off was definitely good for 20 meters.

I was also doing the legal calculations. I can shoot if I fear death or GBH.  He only has to lift the barrel of that sawn-off 30 centimeters and I am directly in his line of fire.  He can’t miss. Will he move swiftly and shoot me? He has just robbed a bank.

I was also thinking about my kids.

“Put it down, Pal,” I said.  The bandit hesitated. I demurred. Do I shoot?

“Put it down, Pal,” I repeated.

He put down his sawn-off.  He went to jail. I went home to my kids.

About a month later, again as duty inspector, I picked up two cops from the beat in CBD to accompany me to Mt Albert where a bank robber had abandoned a car.

Shortly later we drove through a police cordon into a zone where the bandit was last seen.  We got out of the car: the two constables on the left side and me out the driver’s door to be standing in the middle of the road.  I was armed with a revolver.

We didn’t see the offender.  He was standing under a tree about 15 meters across the road from me.  He had a shot gun. He let one go at me. He missed. Unbelievable!

I never shot this bandit either. He was later charged with attempted murder on me.

Point of relevance?  I have been there.

In early 2018 some deviant crashed a vehicle into a crowd of people in Canada killing over a dozen people. The police located the offender who was armed with a firearm.

A Canadian cop lifted his firearm and sighted it at that bandit.  Even though the bandit was still armed and had just taken out all those people; the Canadian cop never shot him.

“Put it down,” said the Canadian as he put the sights of his gun on the bandit and the bandit put down his weapon.

Point of relevance?   You don’t have to shoot someone just because you have a gun and you’re a cop.  The Canadian cop didn’t. I didn’t. Twice.

 

Ross Meurant: 

After 21 years as a cop, Meurant resigned with the commissioned rank of inspector O/C Criminal Intelligence Section & V.I.P. Security; a nationwide profile role as a Red Squad riot group commander and an earlier reputation as a ruthless detective with a tendency to enforce the rule of police.

During 9 years as a Member of Parliament and the Executive as Under Secretary, he was accused of being an arms trader; was fired from the Executive by Jim Bolger for having a perceived conflict of interests (becoming a director of a Russian bank) and started the first political party to be registered under MMP.

After 4 years in the wilderness teaching kids to ride horse and property developing, he returned to Wellington as parliamentary adviser to Rt Hon Winston Peters where allegations of conflicted interests with roles he had with three major fishing companies and a race horse baron and later in false allegations of corruption culminating in the Scampi Enquiry.  

From 2005 Ross lived abroad pursuing commercial options in Zimbabwe, the Balkans, Czech Rep, Syria, Russia, Morocco, UAE, Iran & North Korea.  

Today in New Zealand he is trustee and managing director of NZ forestry and property assets owned by absentee Russians & Honorary Consul for Morocco.

Ross has a B.A. in politics; a Master’s in economics and law and COPs in law.       He speaks Russian, rides horses and water-skis.

He is the author of:

Two biographies:  The Red Squad Story & Beat to the Beehive.

Two novels: The Syrian Connection & Sex, Power and politics.

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

10 Comments

  1. Sam Sam says:

    I think that everyone, including the police, knows they failed in all the above examples in the ‘real’ sense, but saying they had an obligation to do x and did not do x would mean they failed in the legal sense, which would have further consequences, not just in the examples but in how policing in general is done. It’s the difference between a doctor losing a patient because of an honest mistake in treatment, and a doctor losing a patient because they committed malpractice.

    Do note that the legal principle is the same even outside the United States, and the argument that the Second Amendment or widespread gun ownership has made American citizens safer is… well, let’s just say lacking in convincing evidence. Thus NZ police having guns in all vehicles is lacking in convening evidence.

    In any case, the police do not have a legal obligation to intervene with lethal force in every specific crime or scenario, because the consequences of such an obligation would be worse than whatever problems might stem from the absence of such a law.

    Want every police officer armed, then give them the funding and training to go with it.

    Oh. Any one remeber the cop that shot a cow like 50 times and the cow just keep on walking. Yknow what I’m trying to say.

  2. G.A.P. says:

    I have tried many times unsuccessfully?? to find a tv clip (either Campbell live or news) of a number of police firing numerous shots at a dog in porirua, which appeared to be about six to eight feet away from them, and not hitting once. Every time there is a call for police to openly carry firearms, i think of that occasion and the poor courier driver going about his lawful business earning a living, being shot dead on an auckland motorway. Police already have easy access to firearms and do not require even more chances for mistakes. I completely agree that all deaths caused by police actions should be tested in a court of law, and not by the (covering up police complaints authority).

  3. countryboy says:

    Wow. Just wow. That certainly beats my Turkey story.
    Can I ask, re you say; “I am a devout believer in the theory of evolution.” ?
    Where then, do you think this evolutionary path will lead us in terms of tomorrows miscreants? I’m worried by the increasing involvement by corporates in public affairs. I can see the headlines… This police shooting was brought to you by The Warehouse. “Where everyone gets shot caught shoplifting”. Nice little jingle don’t you think?
    I am a devout believer in The Crown. I know. Not a polite topic around the fascist by default boardroom table.
    I read somewhere that The Crown was like a mantlepiece that one could lean against in troubled times or when the knees went wobbly. Like, when laws seem to be able to be interpreted in many ways and usually in favour of who has the most money at the time.
    If [we] go full Republic? We’re fucked. Off-topic? Or is it?

  4. Gary says:

    Gee Ross, You are the greatest cop who ever lived!

  5. Castro says:

    Meurant was a property developer… there is no redemption 😉 Going for more openly right wing contributors in addition to Kelsey and Trotter, eh Bomber?

    Bob Jones next?

    • Sam Sam says:

      Your losing it again, Castro. Nek minit you and Gary will be chatting about the revolution.

    • Jess says:

      Castro neither you nor Gary make sense. According to Ross Meurant’s profile he was a cop, not a property developer. He also makes a lot of sense which is more than what you and Gary do with your vacuous unintelligent comments.

  6. Martin C says:

    I’m waiting for a critique on Police car chases.

  7. Michal says:

    2 thirteen year olds and one 16 year old were killed in my city last night.

    My daughter got up to check that her male teen was home when she heard this.

    I grieve for them and their families and the Mum who has lost two sons.

    They stole a car goodness sake they didn’t kill anyone, rape anyone.

    This police car chase business has to stop and stop now.

    They are kids we know that, we know that they do stupid things because we did ourselves and we know their brains aren’t fully developed.

    And we know that the cops have already tried to cover there arses by saying they stopped pursuing.

    Until we have real independence in the inquiry into this and other police debacles I will not believe any of it.

  8. Recently (3rd March 2018) I was assaulted by an officer in Hastings Flaxmere by a Constable Recce Marshall. And he assaulted me when I was not posing any danger to him whilst handcuffed which I readily submitted to his command. He was punching me and choking me with his elbow and I lost consciousness numerous times whilst handcuffed when being transfered to the Hastings Police station and the driver of the vehicle (another cop) did nothing or said nothing to stop the assault on me.

    I also had a witness at the address when I was pulled over on the kerb outside her house and I had never meet this woman before who was a nurse. She agreed to write an affidavit witnessing the assault and was also willing to appear in court for my defense as the Police originally charging me with Disorderly Behavior,Intentional damage,resisting arrest upgraded the charge to Aggravated assault because I believe I complained to the IPCA that very day after being released about the arbitrary conduct of one of their officers.

    In the end the aggravated assault was dropped as the charge didn’t meet the category threshold and I had to plead out as the Judge I was going to appear in front of “Judge Ardern” was known to collude with police in perverting the course of justice and I ended up with 100 hrs community work. I am still left with the effects of the assault and am to have my shoulder operated on soon which resulted from the action of a Police officer Reece Marshall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.