Rickards not guilty
March 31st, 2006 at 4:45 pm by David FarrarAssistant Police Commissioner Clint Rickards (and his two fellow defendants) have been found not guilty on on all 20 charges.
I am not surprised in that that there seemed to clearly be reasonable doubt, with the testimony of the flatmate especially.
I actually predicted back in February 2004 that this would be a lose-lose affair, and it has been.
While Rickards and co have been found not guilty, I don’t think their careers or reputations will recover. And their actions, while not found to be illegal, reflect badly on them. Whether Rickards can just return to his former role in the Police is highly debatable.
I’ll blog more on this tomorrow, but am being cultured and about go go out for a recital by the NZ Symphony Orchestra.
Related posts:
- Not guilty for ex cops – again
- Rickards allowed to practice law
- The Rickards payout
- Rickards resigns
March 31st, 2006 at 4:58 pm
I was at the High Court to hear the verdict, and was quite amused that the vehicle Clint Rickards left in (which was stopped on the footpath outside the Court) had a parking ticket!
So even the cops can’t escape the wonderful Auckland City parking wardens!
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 5:02 pm
Idle thought: are name suppression marvellous things?
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 5:07 pm
They could always become Labour Party MP’s.
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 5:09 pm
That is to say, this is worth taking into account: [Deleted by DPF - please do not link to posts which are in contempt of court by breaking name supression orders]
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 5:26 pm
So will Louise Nicholas now be charged with making false accusations?
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 6:05 pm
DPF, glad to see you are supporting the arts, even though we are subsidising you out of our taxes, for this pleasure. I wouldn’t be telling Brash/Hide you are interested in being “cultured” by a taxpayer funded organization. I believe their view of Culture is anything out of the Ayn Rand society. enjoy I have supported the NZ orchestha myself.
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 6:11 pm
It’s a shame we don’t have a “Not Proven” verdict in this country.
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 6:34 pm
While juries can come up with bizarre decisions — for example, they found Wi Huata guilty when there was not a shred of evidence against him – it would be been a sad day indeed if this jury had brought in a guilty verdict.
It is extremely hard to mount a defence against charges to do with events 20 years before, and where the media is howling for your blood, as in this case.
What Rickards admitted he did was sleaze of the worst order especially for a police officer, but it doesn’t make it a crime.
The tears on the faces of the wives of the other two acquitted men said it all. God, what they are facing. They are the two I feel the most for.
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 6:39 pm
> They are the two I feel the most for.
That looks ambiguous.
I am referring not to Skipton and Schollum but to their wives, who must be beyond grief tonight.
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 7:41 pm
David, why should Rickards’ career be over? If we all knew what you did in the privacy of your own home, would that mean the end of your blog? I hope not. Remember that these events happened 20 years ago, and the accused were found not guilty. I think you’re skating on very thin ice to suggest that Rickards’ career is over.
Also remember, which many seem to have fogotten, that Nicholas didn’t take this case to the police in 2004. It was a journalist who I believe was investigating another case who came across her name and then approached her. I think all the media that sensationalised this case and splashed the allegations over their front pages should take a good look at themselves. Why did they run with this story when the accuser was untrustworthy and whose testimony was inconsistent with her flatmate’s? Nicholas claimed that 7 policemen, among others, had raped her. If the media had done the slightest bit of investigating, they might have decided to let the case run its course without giving it much attention because it sure didn’t deserve the attention that it got.
How many millions of dollars have been spent on the police inquiry into alleged police sexual impropriety? And what is there to show for it?
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 7:42 pm
David, why should Rickards’ career be over? If we all knew what you did in the privacy of your own home, would that mean the end of your blog? I hope not. Remember that these events happened 20 years ago, and the accused were found not guilty. I think you’re skating on very thin ice to suggest that Rickards’ career is over.
Also remember, which many seem to have fogotten, that Nicholas didn’t take this case to the police in 2004. It was a journalist who I believe was investigating another case who came across her name and then approached her. I think all the media that sensationalised this case and splashed the allegations over their front pages should take a good look at themselves. Why did they run with this story when the accuser was untrustworthy and whose testimony was inconsistent with her flatmate’s? Nicholas claimed that 7 policemen, among others, had raped her. If the media had done the slightest bit of investigating, they might have decided to let the case run its course without giving it much attention because it sure didn’t deserve the attention that it got.
How many millions of dollars have been spent on the police inquiry into alleged police sexual impropriety? And what is there to show for it?
Vote:March 31st, 2006 at 8:39 pm
David,somebody sharper than me observed that “when I am faced with culture I reach for my revolver”.I hope you will not have to be shot at the end of your evening>Ta Ta.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 2:26 am
Well, I thought she was just a slut. But really, it is a shame to damage the reputations of otherwise respectable pigs.
On the other hand, maybe they did it but she couldn;t prove it. I had a flatmate who accused a guy of rape, but because she drunkenly got into bed with him it was too hard to prove. She did wake up with his fingers insidee her though.
Nice.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 2:27 am
Well, I thought she was just a slut. But really, it is a shame to damage the reputations of otherwise respectable pigs.
On the other hand, maybe they did it but she couldn;t prove it. I had a flatmate who accused a guy of rape, but because she drunkenly got into bed with him it was too hard to prove. She did wake up with his fingers inside her though.
Nice.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 7:59 am
Maybe the issue of consent needs changing and place the burdon of proving consent on the defence on the balance of probabilities. That should raise convictions from their present 5% level when consent is the issue.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 8:01 am
This case alone cost the Crown somewhere in the area of $12,000,000 (yes, twelve million). The Ahmed Zaoui (spelling?) case cost about 5 times less than that.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 8:18 am
“Maybe the issue of consent needs changing and place the burdon of proving consent on the defence on the balance of probabilities. That should raise convictions from their present 5% level when consent is the issue”. Really? On the balance of probabilities, I think Nicholas was lying.
Last year a Hamilton cop reportedly said that of all the rape allegations his office received, 60-80% were false. How many men will be falsely charged if we go with your idea? Our legal system is uncomplicated: you are presumed innocent until found otherwise. It is not good practice to resolve cases of he-said-she-said in favour of the accuser without any supporting evidence. Where was the supporting evidence in this case?
Earlier this year retired Chief Judge Sir Thomas Thorp said there were probably 20 people in prison who shouldn’t be there because they were wrongly convicted. Making it easier to convict rapists by changing the playing field will also ensure that more men will be falsely convicted. Is that what we want?
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 9:04 am
I agree – but this stupid cow running the following blog probably won’t agree.
http://atthebay.blogspot.com/
One day, maybe men should actually have to get written consent from a woman – ie. fill out a form, send it off in the post, get it approved, registered, pay a fee, etc, just to avoid the 60-80% of false claims against them.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 11:28 am
And how many people who make a complaint fail to get justice because the defendant was acquitted. The way the scales are balanced the legal system seems to think it better to shaft a victim than an accused. I note the 20 in prison but I bet the number of victims who did not get justice are at least 10 times that. But I agree people wrongly convicted place the legal system in greater disrepute than people wrongly acquitted – or do they.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Louise Nicholas was out to earn a nice little super scheme for herself at the expense of the NZ taxpayer, this has to be the best verdict handed down in the last 15 years, as it will send a message to all the feminazis, justice is alive and well in the hearts and minds of New Zealanders. A few lawyers have adjusted their super schemes adequately with the Crown pursuing dead-loss cases like this, however it costs to slow the old PC pendulum
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 12:35 pm
Well said Simo.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Well said my arse. Vile misogyny.
The standard for conviction is “beyond reasonable doubt.” A difficult thing to achieve after 20 years. A failure to convict by no means shows she was lying, merely that the jury didn’t believe the evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 2:25 pm
Well, if anyone was looking for confirmation that the term ‘arrogant socialist’ was alive and well then refer to the posting from Cadmus above. For anyone to infer that support for the NZ Symphony Orchestra is the sole preserve of the chardonnay swilling ‘left’ is demonstrating their own ignorance.
And a final piece of advice for the Rt Hon’s poodle. Don’t be afraid of using your spell checker. You need to. “Orchestha”? Do you lisp as well ………
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 4:41 pm
As I recall it these events happened twenty years ago when Nicholas was a 17yo college girl and the accused were 30+ detectives. She tried to complain some years later but was refused or led to believe that it was not in her interest by the then head of the Rotorua CIB. Subsequently her complaint was received an investigated by D/C/I Miller of Hamilton CIB. He said on TV years later that he was convinced Nicholas was telling the truth, but against the cohesiveness of the Rotorua CIB he was unable to build a case suitable for Prosecution. He was however so concerned when he learnt that Commissioner Robinson was about to promote Rickard to District Commander East Coast that he rang the Commissioner and urged him not to. The Commissioner chose not to take thaT advice and fast tracked Rickard through to the position he holds today.Robinson had been an NCO at Rotorua Cib at the time under scrutiny. The member in charge of the Rotorua CIB subsequently left the Police and went to employment with the Free Ambulance Service. He was replaced by a Det. Insp. Bell from Auckland, who has since retired and been employed on a Crimewatch program with TVNZ. …Nicholas was subsequently approached by a journalist who had received information about her case and offered support. So Simo it wasn’t Acc support she was after indeed lump sums were not availiable at the time of her complaint..Assis. Commissioner Long was detailed to form a squad to investigate the matter and this court case resulted. The Jury probably reached the same conclusion as D/C/I Miller.
Vote:All these matter have appeared either in the Press or on TV….We will never know what evidence D/C/I Miller, The Former Rotorua CIB chief now ambulance employee,Commissioner Robinson or Ass. Commissioner Long and his team gave. It was suppressed. Suppression often applies to the names of victims or witnesses fearing Criminal Retribution. I can’t recall it ever being given in relation to the evidence of Police Officers. The result was no publicity of evidence which may have been damaging to the accused, yet a blaze of Publicity surrounding the denials of the accused including castigation of Nicholas…Whether the lopsided publicity influenced any of the jury we will never know but it does seem to have influenced the views of some of the commentators above….RossF It wasn’t a Hamilton Cop that gave that rediculous statistic it was an anonymous Police Source in the Herald.
April 1st, 2006 at 4:51 pm
Graham, I don’t drink white chardonnay. I drink red Shiraz, or Cab Sav as far as wine is concerned. I believe your leader Mr Hide didn’t want part of the NZSO as it ran at a loss. In other words enjoy the Orchestha as long as possible I would say if Hide was part of the govt it would have been flogged off by now.
Vote:April 1st, 2006 at 10:15 pm
Oh the irony, David. You went to hear Rhapsody in Blue while three boys in blue didn’t get a rhap over the knuckles.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 1:08 am
Cadmus wrote: “Graham, I don’t drink white chardonnay”.
I reply: I’m not responsible for what Ross Miller writes. To the best of my knowledge, we’re not even related!
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 10:01 am
Baxter,
NZ Herald
August 8 2005
False rape complaints annoy police
by Nicola Boyes,
“Hamilton police will decide this week whether to charge two women who made separate false rape complaints at the weekend.
Detective Sergeant Nigel Keall said police spent time and resources investigating the women’s complaints.
“It’s just a waste of resources that could have been used elsewhere.”
Both complaints were lodged on Friday.
One was made by an 18-year-old and the other by a 19-year-old.
Senior investigators estimate that between 60 and 80 per cent of rape complaints made by women are false”.
Clearly, you want to argue semantics. The fact is that a hell of a lot of alleged rapes are falsely reported. Instead of bleating about the not guilty verdicts in this case, why don’t you do some research into the punishment for women who falsely allege rape. Do they receive the same punishment as convicted rapists? They should.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 1:08 pm
You’re a bit confused Ross. There is a difference between complaints made to the police, and charges subsequently laid by police. They don’t lay charges unless they have confidence in the complainant and a reasonable case to make. So even if 60-80% of complaints made are false (and boy does that sound like an off-the-cuff estimate) that tells us absolutely nothing about the truth of charges made or convictions obtained.
I note that you quote Thorp as saying there are probably 20 people in jail now who are wrongly convicted – considering the total number of inmates, that’s a very small proportion. And since of course you could be in jail for many reasons, how many of those 20 were wrongly convicted of rape? Very few.
Why you think slander (false accusation) should have the same punishment as assault (rape) is beyond me.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 2:45 pm
I can’t find any evidence for the 60-80% figure but I did find these considerably lower figures reported from the same police district in 1999:
Waikato Times
February 20 1999,
False Sex Complaint Rate High : Police
by Kris McGehan
“Hamilton police are becoming increasingly frustrated with false sex complaints which make up a quarter of sex offences they investigate. Last year, 147 sex offences were reported to Hamilton police. More than one quarter (41) were found to be false. In the greater Waikato, police dealt with 297 sex offences last year and 77 proved groundless.”
Looks to me as if someone exaggerated in the Herald article and others are quoting the 60-80% statistic without examining it because it suits their “all women are liars” point of view.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 3:53 pm
The claim of 60-80% was challenged on One News on 8 August:
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 4:17 pm
Ross F…Having spent 30 years some in Hamilton,in the Police I have some idea what I am talking about.If the 60-80% figure had any credibility at all it would not be from an anonymous source. At the last busy cosmopolitan station at which I worked at most we would receive two or three complaints of rape per month and one or two established false complaints a year.In many cases a complaint could not be proven up to Prosecution standard,though usually medical and scene examinations tended to confirm the veracity of the complainant.. A District wishing to improve its clearance of statistics might construe an un-established case as a false complaint..Statistics can also be skewed if the matter is reported with a view to qualifying for lump sum from ACC. I note the article quotes sex offences and this covers a much wider ambit than Rape. From memory the 60-80% false complaints of rape statistic (from anonymous Police Source) appeared in the Herald one or two days before the Jury retired to consider their verdict in the Rape case against a competent and popular District Commander. They may have a problem in Hamilton, it is 15 years since I was in the Police. A more reliable indication would be in how many of the false complaints they prosecuted the person making the complaint.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 4:25 pm
DPF, you’ve brought up the flatmate’s statement twice in your blogs and you believe it to be key evidence, yet the flatmate also said: Once, when Mrs Nicholas was in the bedroom with Schollum
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Aladin – I have no way of knowing the truth on the baton incident. I would observe though that is Nicholls had not claimed that every single encounter had been non-consensual but had said some had been consensual, but she did not consent to the alleged baton incident – then she may have been more credible. Of course if that is not what she believes the truth to be, then it is beside the point.
As for Shipton and the flatmate, it confiorms he was or is a sleaze. But that by itself is not rape.
Vote:April 2nd, 2006 at 7:24 pm
Re: baton incident. My memory is hazy, but I do recall this coming to light a number of years ago via a current affairs show, 60 minutes or Sunday. In that show, I recall one of the accused being confronted by a reporter, who then basically confirmed the baton incident. Does anyone else recall that program?
Vote:April 3rd, 2006 at 6:40 am
Presumably if there was not a batton incident it was added for strategic reasons.
Vote:April 3rd, 2006 at 10:10 am
“Why you think slander (false accusation) should have the same punishment as assault (rape) is beyond me”. Yes, I can see why it would be beyond you. False allegations can lead to arrest and conviction of the alleged offender. Remember David Dougherty, falsely accused and falsely imprisoned by a neighbour alleging that he raped her? False accusers do indeed need to be punished severely.
Vote:April 3rd, 2006 at 10:16 am
“Why you think slander (false accusation) should have the same punishment as assault (rape) is beyond me”. Yes, I can see why it would be beyond you. False allegations can lead to arrest and conviction of the alleged offender. Remember David Dougherty, falsely accused and falsely imprisoned by a neighbour alleging that he raped her? False accusers do indeed need to be punished severely. Apart from their potential to punish a non-offender, they waste resources which could be used to investigate geunine rape cases.
Vote:April 3rd, 2006 at 10:17 am
“Why you think slander (false accusation) should have the same punishment as assault (rape) is beyond me”. Yes, I can see why it would be beyond you. False allegations can lead to arrest and conviction of the alleged offender. Remember David Dougherty, falsely accused and falsely imprisoned by a neighbour alleging that he raped her? False accusers do indeed need to be punished severely. Apart from their potential to punish a non-offender, they waste resources which could be used to investigate genuine rape cases.
Vote:April 3rd, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Mil…As I recall it apolicewoman serving at the time came forward after Nicholas made her complaint and at a time when there was some skepticism as to whether the story was true. She claimed not only had she heard that it was true but that it was her baton that had been used. (female batons are much small er than batons issued to males)It had become a joke about the station, which she failed to see the humour. We are not allowed to know whether she gave evidence at the triaL….rOSS f…I have deliberately refrained from expressing my view on this case. The suppression of Prosecution evidence produced a lopsided impression of the trial… I accept the Jury verdict as honest and fair but maybe biased by the publicity given to Rickard’s story,while the Police Enquiry conclusions were suppressed. The Jury sat in judgement of the accused,and had to give them the benefit of the merest doubt. They did not sit in judgement of the complainant.
Vote:April 6th, 2006 at 11:42 pm
I have read all the comments above. I spent 3 weeks attending the trial out of interest of a criminal trial and to learn the processes.
It is interesting how everyone have opinions with out hearing/viewing ALL the evidence. The public who did hear it all certainly must be ashamed of the public judgement. The jury had a very difficult job and after knowing all the evidence made an educated and impartial judgement. There was in fact a lot of actual evidence and it was not just “he said she said”. It is time to stop being emotional and irresponsible. The crown put across a very strong case but it would result in the defense putting across a more factual and stronger case than the crown had. I am sure that in the jurys mind that the evidence proved the main rape/batton allegation DID NOT happen. Mrs Nicholas own evidence helped to prove this.
The leaflet drop is most interesting, as those who are dropping them are now not able to tell us why they have had to change the content. This is double standards. I suspect the leaflet drop with leave egg on some faces in the future.
I certainly will never judge a case again through what I read or hear.
My aroha to all the families (including Mrs Nicholases family) who have had to suffer from the cruel public scrutiny and grueling court case.
If any woman is ever raped she can still trust our system I am SURE!
Vote: