GUEST BLOG: My Son has been wrongfully convicted of rape – Part Two


Looking back on the whole journey, it seems like a horrible movie script. How I wish it was just a movie I could switch off. Unfortunately this is very much real life.

In my first part I wrote about our experiences in the trial. I would like to say thanks to those who read and supported my first article.

Following the trial, we were asked to gather references of Jamie’s character from all who knew him. Some for his whole life, some for parts of his life and some more recently. These people were from all walks of life and standing in the community and when I put the word out, they were more than happy to write references for Jamie.

96 references were passed onto the judge before the sentencing. At the sentencing, the judge awarded him a 25% discount on his sentence ‘due to previous good character’ and also followed up by saying to Jamie ‘you do a lot of good for your community’. I noted a change in the Judge’s demeanour from the trial.

Following the trial, we were shocked to find that the police had withheld crucial evidential documents until after the trial was finished! The judge, nor the Jury knew of this evidence throughout the trial. This withheld information was not brought before the court or the jury during the trial. These documents were only revealed once we made further enquiries after the trial. Why they were hidden was never explained and yet again, this information has been suppressed to the public.

We knew we were definitely taking this to the Appeal Court. We had a solid case to prove a miscarriage of justice – knowing the jury hadn’t heard the majority of evidence for the defence because of it being unfairly deemed inadmissible or withheld at the trial.

Nearly 6 months later, our appeal date came. We were offered only half a day or the option to wait a further 3 months. We took the half day in the hopes to get through most of the 11 points we had (6 of which pertained to crucial evidence excluded in the trial)

3 weeks prior to the appeal date, as per expectations of the Court of Appeal, our lawyer sent through 51 pages of submissions along with a 145 document containing all the material for the case as email attachments. A hard copy of these were also posted to the court along with multiple USB sticks containing video evidence from CCTV to back up our points. We received two emails confirming receipt of both the email attachments and the hard copies within a day of the submissions.

TDB Recommends

Everything was in place.

An hour and a half into the proceedings, Justice Courtney claimed they didn’t have the 145 page document with all the material of the case or the USB sticks. Despite the earlier email receipts and multiple references to this important document/videos in the other submissions they had received, none of the three Judges had queried its whereabouts; a crucial document important to prepare them for the hearing that day.

I wasn’t the only one in the room astounded by the lack of preparation for the Court of Appeal. I could hear the sighs and whispers of dismay from the other 60+ supporters in that courtroom.

Following the admission from the judges of this error, they offered to adjourn but ‘couldn’t tell us when we might get another hearing’ or cancel the Appeals scheduled for the afternoon. After waiting this long, we agreed to continue.

It took a further excruciating 5 and a half months of waiting for a decision to be delivered. The Court of Appeal agreed with 4 of our points, yet still came to the decision that it would not have changed the verdict a jury may have come to. Isn’t it supposed to be a trial by jury, not trial by an appeal Court? They also never addressed the withheld evidence found after the trial either. I honestly don’t think it’s possible to say with any degree of confidence what a jury may or may not have decided had they heard all the evidence.

There is so much to this story that the public do not know and may never get to know with suppressions in place. These aren’t just name suppressions.

That’s why I think it is important for me, as a mother, to come forward with my story – the parts that I can tell – not just for my son but for anyone who will go through this in the future.

All we’ve ever hoped for is a fair go. Everyone deserves a fair go – to be able to state their truth and share all their evidence.

My aim in sharing this story is to shine a light on issues on a system that is failing its citizens and putting innocent people in prison.

I’m hoping for change, for a better future for Kiwis and for justice for my son.

Jackie is a hardworking mother and grandmother; she is also the Managing Director of her own business. From humble beginnings, Jackie endured hardships during her childhood, spending time in Women’s Refuge and working from a young age to help support her mother and siblings. She has been married for 26 years and resides on the Hibiscus Coast with her family.


  1. In my experience of going to trial within our bad taste joke Justice system you simply CANNOT trust officers of the court to do their job. Administration in our court systems is dodgy as fuck.Your information and evidence will mysteriously go missing. Emails will fail to arrive . copies will be doctored juries will not receive affidavits. You have to courier EVERYTHING with tracking and signatures. You cannot rely on electronic means of communication. You will be blocked and suddenly your desktop functions disappear and nothing goes thru in time. You have to use Mac laptops thy are the only systems secure enough all your phone communication will be tracked use encryption. That has been my experience. Our Justice system is filthy and rotten.

  2. Hi Jackie, after reading your first article I was astonished with the process and the withholding of vital information to enable the jury to make informed decisions. Like the Court system can determine what evidence is allowed to be shared is unbelievable and freedom of speech is completely stolen by a system, a system that should allow anyone to protect them selves by sharing evidence.

    Now to hear the NZ Police withheld further evidence from the court is a sure sign that they did not want the hole truth to be shared in the first place, I hate to say a pre-determined outcome ‘by-design’ as apposed ‘by-trial’ – it is unacceptable and needs to be reheard with all facts delivered to a new jury.

    I also do not trust the Court of Appeal have delivered an insightful review, I get the feeling this is considered administration to them, document reading and easier to leave Jamie behind bars rather than to consider the wrongs that are now so clear and obviouse in the lead ups to his judgement.

    I applaud your braveness to share your story and I really hope it is heard and that there is someone in the justice system who can move beyond mistake, and right the wrong by providing a fair trial with full evidence.

    I am sure there are many more who have experienced an unjust justice system.

  3. “Following the trial, we were shocked to find that the police had withheld crucial evidential documents until after the trial was finished!”

    How does this align with the fair trial rights? Not only was his defense taken away by suppressions and evidence being deemed inadmissable but then evidence doesn’t even make it to the trial at all? And by the Police themselves?
    This is insane! What are they hiding?

  4. This witch hunt against a victim of assault based on a mothers belief that suppressed evidence would exonerate her son is shameful. No one commenting here knows what that evidence is and a mothers belief (which we should all know is a lower threshold than is legally required) is not a reason to believe that it proves anything.
    We are asked to believe that cops, judges, lawyers and appeal judges are all colluding to convict an innocent man.. Really?

    • Kia Ora Kim, Martyn Bradbury here, editor of the daily blog.

      I know what the redacted evidence is. I’ve never seen a police prosecution this corrupt. If NZers knew what was superseded, if they knew what the Police prosecution did, there would be an immediate uproar and the case would over turned. I will be blogging on this shortly .

      • Hi Martyn. Thanks for your reply. i am no fan of the police and am completely against the proposed changes to the laws around rape prosecutions. I just find it really hard to believe that multiple police officers, judges and prosecutors are that corrupt that they will purposefully convict one of their own who they believe is innocent. I just don’t get it. Why would they risk their careers if there is no truth behind the allegations?
        If you say that the evidence proves his innocence i will drop it but someone had to try and inject some balance.
        I don’t know either way if he did it or not but that wasn’t my motivation.

        • Comrade – I researched this story before we went with publication and this case is fucking shocking. Your skepticism is 100% legitimate, I asked the exact same thing, but then I saw what was suppressed.

          It is my belief that if NZ knew how the Police conducted this prosecution, they would demand a retrial.

      • Gday Martyn. My submitted comment wont appear despite numerous attempts. Is the an open forum/conversation, or vetted to suit one side?

      • Hi martyn
        Could u please tell me how to contact you,i have similar story to tell you ,even worst than this,thank you

    • I was at the appeal where they spoke openly about all the facts, suppressions and evidence withheld at the trial. And where they also instructed the three media reporters what they weren’t allowed to report on.

      It was open to the public and quite a lot of people were there so I’d say there are quite a few people who do know what the evidence is, including myself and can (and do) back the mother up in her claims that indeed, if the jury heard everything, it would exonerate her son.

      Maybe go see the Judgement document from the appeal and see just how much is redacted. Backs up the story of just how much is actually suppressed and just how much they’re trying to hide.

  5. So, some of the original evidence was deemed “inadmissible”. Then, a significant amount of evidence that was presented was later redacted. After the case was wrapped up, yet another body of evidence surfaces.

    Too much information is being held back for the case as-is to be the full picture.
    What are they hiding, who wanted it hidden, and why?

  6. They are hiding a lot.
    Corruption at the highest level and nothing you can do about it.
    Jackie’s narrative is completely true and accurate.
    They needed a scapegoat. Jamie is the New Zealand police’s scapegoat.
    The suppressed evidence is damaging to the upper echelon of this investigation.
    The truth will out, eventually, one day, as it always does.
    In the meantime an innocent man accused of rape and his family are being subjected to a traumatic ordeal.
    Have no faith in the police, the law or the judicial system. Be afraid. Be very afraid!

    • Does anyone remember how little media coverage or punishment was handed out to the drunken and lewd spree the policemen including senior sergeants engaged in that night til the early hours.
      And early the next morning with at the very least bad hangovers…at the very worst still in a drunken state their long drive to guard the Prime Minister of this country.
      Does anyone marvel at how Jamie Fosters accusation of rape, the very public sham of a trial, and his conviction came as a very convenient distraction.
      How this sacrificial lamb served, among other hidden agendas, to appease the public outrage that should have erupted at the unbelievably appalling behaviour of our police.

  7. Wow, I can’t believe what I’m reading. I went to school with that guy. We weren’t close mates but he was a great guy. no way he’s done this. I feel for his family. This sounds like the makings of the next Netflix hit!

  8. Advice from someone familiar with the long campaign to fight to clear Peter Ellis:
    You will be in this for a long haul. Start collecting data now. All of it. Use OI requests, show up in person to court registrars, front up to police station desks, get everything – from officials and from any private parties, legal correspondence, all legal advice, correspondence between yourself and others to politicians etc, Court transcripts – get the lot, don’t be scrupulous about the the protocols but don’t break any laws. Dig dig dig. You may be rewarded with what turns up. This is advice to you, not to your legal team who will have their own guidelines to adhere to.

  9. Hi Jackie Hi Martyn, sorry to take so long to comment but I got waylaid by PTSD when I saw yesterday’s political caption thing. I have met Jamie Foster and my impression was that he is of a most impeccable character, respectful, honest and meticulous. That’s how we would like our police force: straight up. We all dream of winning Lotto too.

Comments are closed.