The Bazley Report
The Bazley Report is out, and can be viewed here.
The early focus will be on the numbers – 313 complaints of sexual assault against 222 police officers from 1979 to 2005. Of those 313, 141 were thought to have enough evidence to lead to charges or internal discipline.
While in no way mitigating that there has been some disgraceful behaviour, it is only fair to look at the fact that over that 27 year period there were probably 20,000 police officers or so.
Bazley finds no organised coverup, but many officers condoning or turning a blind eye to sexual activity of an inappropriate nature, protection of those officers complained about; negative, stereotyped view of complainants, and a culture of scepticism in dealing with complaints of sexual assault.
Also there were no polices or procedures to deal with such complaints against colleagues, and no guidelines on appropriate sexual behaviour – especially in terms of using their position to secure sexual favours.
There are 60 recommendations in all.
John Key has pointed out that sadly the Police may not be getting it. To quote him:
The police response to the comprehensive Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct is of deep concern, says National Party Leader John Key.
“Police Minister Annette King should be as concerned as I am at Police Commissioner Howard Broad’s written response which states: ‘the report does not point to systemic failings with police policy, procedures, standards, training or behaviour’.
“That flies in the face of the Dame Margaret’s press release which states that ‘the good work done by many investigating officers, particularly in the past 15 years, has been placed in jeopardy by systemic flaws that need attention…’
“Just as worrying is Dame Margaret’s comments that she is concerned the police impetus for change may not be sustained once the Commission has reported.
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:13 pm
It would be interesting if some analysis could be done on the data across time and location.
Where are the complaints coming from? Was is systemic or just isolated to some areas
Who was the district commander at the time in those areas? Did the complaints decrease if he left the area and increase where he moved to…
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Well in my 30 years service in 5 different major stations and some smaller ones I either handled or heard of complaints of every description but I never received one alleging indecency of any description. I note ex D.I. Graham Bell stated something similar on ZB during his 33 year service. Like him I resent the implication that the 80s cops were the ‘bad’ generation. The discipline and recruitment standards then were much stricter than now.Bazley laments the lack of a code of conduct. The last Public Service Commissioner who replaced a corrupt Commissioner in the 50s had a formal Police Creed which was inscribed in honour’s board style at the Public Entrance of every Police Station. Every cop cringed at the santimonious tone of it , and at country stations it generally ended up on the inside of the toilet door, still in hindsight it might have had some effect. It disappeared and was replaced by volume after volume of General Instructions, which one had to display a comprehensive though fleeting knowledge of in order to qualify for promotion. The present Commissioner seems to think the answer may be recruit more women and more ethnic minorities.Well ethnic minorities do make up a large percentage of penal inmates so has the Public Perception of the moral image of the Corrections Department improved since they started employing female wardens to supervise
male inmates.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:49 pm
I just wonder how Police will enforce standards of behaviour relating to sexual activity on members of the force. I mean, it will have to worded pretty explicitly.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Baxter – Was the 32-year police vet and legal expert Tom Lewis correct as the author of Coverups and Copouts?
He said he was just exercising his personal power .
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 pm
Tnis has been orchestrated to take PC control of the police. Well we will all now get it in the neck. Lets think who are would you trust to handle police compaints and promotions? – the police or labour government stooges. No competition.
Then they’ll be able to have a serious look at those WM smacking quotas.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 pm
Take on 20000 public servants – one to check up on each police officer. Pay them twice as much so they cant be corrupted. Each police officer has to report to their probation public servant for a 10 minute cup of tea each month. The rest of the time the bureaucrats could do something really useful like spam their own websites with pdf discussion documents on how to reduce the human sex drive. And get a free trip overseas each year to present their findings at the muldovian summit meeting on how to live together in harmony in a multicultural society.
Sounds like a plan.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:49 am
The general thread of intent I get by reading the recommendations is that Labour want to make it easier to lay historic, or any, sexual abuse complaints – no proof necessary, just make the accusation and let it run it’s course. Some of that course being that any complaint should automatically predjudice the accused. Also that the community under the watchful eye of government or government influenced organisations will now run the police. These solutions do not match the suggested problems, would could have been addressed far simpler. As guessed, this is just an oppourtunity to drive left wing ideology into the Police force and more or less castrate their power to combat and reduce crime. One recommendation suggests police should employ more ethnic minorities and women…what the hell has that got to do with anything? Can a fijian indian spot fijian immigrant crime faster than a NZder? Does a woman PC intrinsically know more about sex abuse cases than a male officer?
This morning Helen praised the courage of Louise Nicholas, a proven liar and layer of false sexual abuse complaints. I take it Helen is now Chief of Police for NZ? When can we expect her to judge and imprison Rickards, Shipton and Schollum based on her gut feeling?
This government’s intent is plain. What exactly will it take for the majority to wake up and vote them into oblivion?
April 4th, 2007 at 7:55 am
Oh yes, and just how effective will any audit made by the Auditor General be after his ‘audacity’ to call judgement against Labour over the election theft debarcle? I guess if anything comes up that does not support Labour’s goals, they’ll get some other ‘legal advice’ to overturn their (once again) appointed official.
April 4th, 2007 at 8:21 am
Horace – ” I take it Helen is now Chief of Police for NZ?”
Yes the plight of men does look to make the endangered list ( eunuchs , homosexuals and girlymen are ok -eh H2, B1 and K1 ), as Supreme Leader cranks the “ism ” up another notch ?
April 4th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Quite right Horace. AG’s input is laughable!
April 4th, 2007 at 9:35 am
Dear Leader has just been on morning report,sitting high on her high horse showing moral outrage at Rickards and co and there ”disgusting” behaviour from men in positions of responsibilty and power.
Now remind me again what cabinet minister panty boy gets up to in his spare time!
April 4th, 2007 at 10:01 am
John Key has highlighted the fact there may be resistence in the Police to follow things through. Placing the Police on a 10 year probation period is extraordinary. This is also against the background of gross financial mismanagement of a complex computer system. This suggests to be there are considerable weaknesses at the corporate level of the Police [and other Government Departments]. There is probably a need to strengthen the “corporate” level of the Police. Promoting a good old plod to handle thses issues may need to be reconsidered. Maybe there is a case to merge a number of Departments at the corporate level, but have strong delegations at a Regional level to handle operational issues. The old Treasury model of having a separate policy/operational department I think is a failure.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:04 am
This whole investigation is a total waste of money.
And is it just me, or is KKKlarKKK looking more and more like a pig with lipstick?
Does she cut her own hair? Maybe she does the front and Mr Clark has a clip at the back?
April 4th, 2007 at 10:16 am
I hate to say this, I really really hate to say this, but, good post Mr Barclay.
Whether or not it’s endemic or if there were just isolated events, the Bazley report highlights the deficiencies in behaviour amongst police in NZ in the 80s, and if there are only 3 bad egg cops (Rickard, Shipton and Schollum come on down) that’s still 3 too many.
There is no spreading of Left Wing ideology you bunch of conspiracy theorists you, there is a desire to have a fair and just police force, who will police the police if not?
When I start seeing the cops forcibly taking people’s wealth and redistributing it to the poorer underclasses then I will believe it’s a left wing conspiracy.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Swift Man -please refrain from attacks on the PM’s personal appearance. Attack her on her policies, not her looks.
Towaka – the official title is Panty Slut Boy, not just Panty Boy.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:48 am
David C – police inaction on crime (30% success rate for robbery) is already acheiving that, thanks.
Now wait – on top to those 20000 new jobs in bureacracy to control the police we will nee 1000 “psychologists” to profile all the police to make sure they “understand traditional New Zealand values”. And to support the suspension of police who do not agree with their political masters (the public hospital employers already use that tactic).
April 4th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Yes a 30% success rate on robbery is indicative of it being a Left Wing conspiracy Porcupine. Does this not sound slightly wacko to you?!?
Are you saying Clint Rickards was suspended for not obeying his political masters? If his “masters” ordered him not to, you know, have group sex with 16 year olds whilst in a position of authority, then I’m all for our police being ‘mastered’.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Sorry DPF,I was just trying to be charitable to panty slut boy.I will use his correct title next time.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Why doesn’t National ask the tough questions in parliament?
- Did Clark knife Doone because she was already well aware of the “culture” in the Police?
- What did Doone know about this “culture” at the time that he was Commissioner?
- How did Robinson (Clark’s hand picked replacement) not manage to get a code of conduct for Police?
- Did the government deliberately leave Nicholas and xxx off the terms of reference so that there would be no issue of compensation for them?
- Who will EVER be held accountable for ANYTHING in this country?
There’s little doubt that this government is rotten to the core and that the rot has pervaded the civil services that they preside over. The culture of “cover up and deny” comes from the top, so it’s little wonder that inquiry after inquiry is finding that there are significant deficiencies in the way that things are done.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:53 am
No David, I’m saying beware what you wish for because it might come true.
If you want a police force where there is more political interference than we already have be my guest. They are now going to take control of promotions and have full public disciplinary hearings where anyone can say anything against an individual police officer with impunity. This will achieve their aim of demoralising the police further and further undermining public confidence in what is still a great police force.
There are major problems with the police force but it is not the stuff of this politically motivated inquiry. It is a result of the government’s deliberate attempts to demoralise the police force and penny pinching to force out experienced officers and replace them with inexperienced young turks. Now almost all of us know stories like were told on Holmes this morning of law abiding teenagers being battoned and cuffed first and questioned second.
Now the problem to deal with this is to give the police real powers to investigate and discipline their own behind closed doors and the money to employ quality non-corruptible police officers.
But then again since when has a government ever tried to really solve a problem eh? Successive governments have brought this problem on, not the police.
Agreed NeilR but BTW – the compo and all their costs will have already been paid out with the usual secrecy clause.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
David C wrote: If his “masters” ordered him not to, you know, have group sex with 16 year olds whilst in a position of authority…
Can you please provide us with evidence that he had sex with a 16 year old. You’ll probably recall that in the last high-profile trial, Rickards said he had never had sex with the then 16 year old complainant. Indeed he had a plaster cast on one of his legs when he was alleged to have subjected her to violent sex. If you have evidence that the rest of us are not privy to, please do tell.
Are you suggesting that the age of consent is too young and should be raised?
April 4th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
“It is a result of the government’s deliberate attempts to demoralise the police force ”
Err why would a government do that??!
“Now the problem to deal with this is to give the police real powers to investigate and discipline their own behind closed doors and the money to employ quality non-corruptible police officers.”
This is exactly what was done in the 80s, didn’t work out so well for us.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Neil asked: “Did the government deliberately leave Nicholas and xxx off the terms of reference so that there would be no issue of compensation for them?”
Excuse me? Compensation for a self confessed liar?
The reason she didn’t appear before the commission was because her case was subject to a criminal investigation. And those that did appear will not, to my knowledge, be receiving any compensation.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
To Baxter, who said: “Well in my 30 years service in 5 different major stations and some smaller ones I either handled or heard of complaints of every description but I never received one alleging indecency of any description.”
So Baxter, are you saying it didn’t happen or something?
aladin
April 4th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
David in case you are really interested and not just trolling here goes:
“Why would the government do that:”
For a number of reasons
1. Firstly they are terrified that if they pay police well the big unions (teachers and nurses) will go for pay parity and use the sex card saying that (mainly) male police are paid higher than (mainly) female nurses and teachers. My opinion is if you want police pay then join the police, although that is being tempered a bit by the fact that so many teachers and nurses are in danger, now that violent crime is totally out of control.
2. The left has always considered the police their historical enemy because they used to break up demonstrations and pot parties – payback time. I used to be one of them I know what goes on.
3. All anti-freedom governments, both right and left have always seek to control the police force and that is what you are seeing now. With more control, more direction will be able to be applied as to who the police go after – as you have seen recently there is already quite a lot of political control over that – do you want it to get worse?
The method of gaining more control is to make the police look bad and then lauch in saying hail the conquering heros to the rescue – like they did to doctors in the 80s to the total detriment of the health system. Its a re-run.
“This is exactly what was done in the 80s, didn’t work out so well for us.”
No its not. The police here as elsewhere are under a lot of pressure to back each other up, quite rightly. If it was done by responsible police bosses behind closed doors the police would feel freer to criticise and learn from each other and try to do improve their methods without every tom dick and harry who no nothing about what they are up against thinking they have a right to tell them what to do.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
1979 – 2005
While John Keys is ripping into the government about the state of the police etc etc, he should remember that during the period that Dame Margaret Bazley investigated (26 years) National was in power for 14 of those years and Labour only 12. Blaming the present incumbents for behaviour of the past and for the lack of adequate structures then seems more like political point scoring rather than an attempt to make serious comment on the issue!
April 4th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
1979 – 2005
While John Keys is ripping into the government about the state of the police etc etc, he should remember that during the period that Dame Margaret Bazley investigated (26 years) National was in power for 14 of those years and Labour only 12. Blaming the present incumbents for behaviour of the past and for the lack of adequate structures then seems more like political point scoring rather than an attempt to make serious comment on the issue!
April 4th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Ross you only have to convince a social or mental helath worker that you are the victim of a sex crime to get compo – there is no burdon of proof.
BTW 141/300 odd accusations did not hold water – is this a glimpse at the false accusation rate being around 60%?
April 4th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Dear Almac
With only a 2 year difference in time in government between Labour and National, your statement is clutching at straws. John Key is speaking to the current police heirachy, in particular the current head of the police (a labour govt appointment)
However, what we have here is a well researched report from Dame Margaret Bazely, having been conducted rapidly, with broad terms of reference, delivered in a timely fashion with well defined conclusions and strong recommendations.
Contrast this with the Ingram report into the dealings of one Taito Philip Feild.
April 4th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
[quote]No its not. The police here as elsewhere are under a lot of pressure to back each other up, quite rightly. If it was done by responsible police bosses behind closed doors the police would feel freer to criticise and learn from each other and try to do improve their methods without every tom dick and harry who no nothing about what they are up against thinking they have a right to tell them what to do.[/quote]
Back up is fine, provided they aren’t backing up a culture that is morally reprehensible, if not downright illegal.The trouble is, the police are a “public service” organisation and have to be seen to be squeaky clean. Minor matters in day to day running can be handled internally and usually are. Its when the serious allegations arise, that this system can’t and shouldn’t be used. A totally independent P.C.A. would go some way to restoring the Polices rather battered credibility on these matters – and I mean TOTALLY independent – but – it’ll probably never happen….
April 4th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
One area that I dont see has been covered is
What did they know
When did they know it
What did they do about it
I refer to the current senior levels in the Police. If there are people there who knew and didnt take the appropriate action then that calls into account their ethics and judgement and ability to continue in their present role.
In fact from a governance perspective I would argue that the encumbents are tainted by the information that is already in the public domnain and therefore are unable to have any credibitity.
Until we get the answers we must question whether the problem has been solved or merely swept under the carpet.the balls still in the governmenst court. Dame Margaret hasnt answered the third question.
April 4th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
No Jon it would have the opposite effect like it has for doctors. They would clam up and become suspicious of the PCAs motives, be more reluctant to admit that they made errors or that their methods could be improved. Also every accusation would be reported in infinite detail by the news starved press leading to even further decreased public confidence. And further demoralising good police officers.
Think about it – if you were falsely accused of making a mistake in your job would you want it all over the media, only to be finally told oh sorry there is no case to answer?
Oh and this BS about every time one police officer questions another police officier’s use of force in an arrest it automatically becomes a criminal case is just fuckin bizarre.
These matters should be sorted out in house to the satisfaction of both parties.
April 4th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Rather tame by overseas standards of Police conduct.
But,I suppose nip it in the bud before it gets out of hand in NZ, better than pack raping women and then killing them, taking them out to the woods or river or isolated spot in the trunk of a police car and dumping the body.
Who knows it’s bound to happen here sometime in the future ? only when ?
April 4th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Dad…I don’t know Tom Lewis and have never read his book. There are many retired disaffected members of the Police both with and without cause.Aladin I was simply quoting my experience and that of a Senior Officer from a different part of the country.BAZLEY states that 141 cases were thought to be sufficiently strong to warrant a prosecution one wonders if she means there was corroboration and if she has given the accused the chance to reply to the allegations. During the 80s we had one of our finest widest respected Commissioners ever in Bob Walton. Morale within the Police was generally high…As others have suggested I foresee the big winners as a result of this review being the criminals. The cops will be under the microscope treading on eggshells and afraid to take positive action.
April 4th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Whether this whole issue is politically driven or not, there is no doubt that the nett effect is that Police recruitment is going to take a major hit. More serving officers are going to leave and why the hell would you be a Policeman anyway in this crappy little socialist utopia.
The short term political gain HC is milking from this report is to everyones long term detriment. The PM and Key need to be standing up and condemning the miscreants but strongly supporting the Police as an institution. What these bad pricks did does not represent “police culture” at any time but all the innuendo is saying just that. I have no expectation of Labour but National are piss weak so far.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Did anyone watch Close Up tonight?
If that women is not lying I will eat my hat and the rest of my household contents.
All the nutters are coming out of the closet in the wake of the Bazeley report as is always the case when pathetically sad women want attention and the media choose to prejudicially cover absolute rubbish.
False allegations will increase undoubtedly.
April 4th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
OMG Paula You can make such assertions based on a 5 minute segment on television??? May I suggest you either must have incredibly well developed psyological assessment skills or are incredibly arrogant. Myself, I thought Oh no another woman who now feels compelled to share her story in the wake of recent allegations and developments. I also thought about the significant cost to her personally of sharing this in such a public way.Your comments about “all the nutters are coming out of the closet” is also very telling and unfortunate, in my opinion.I suggest it is prudent for all women who have historic allegations to come forward now whilst the investigating team, Operastion Austin, are still formed and public awareness is still at its height. Otherwise, as these allegations lose momentum, women who have been affected may continue to ‘suffer in silence’& it is not their shame and torture to bear!After the hat you could go for the broom Paula, as it is clear you would much prefer this horrible sordid stuff that has dominated these womens lives, & the public domain for so long, to be swept under the carpet. And that is tragic.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Can anybody here tell me how A Code of Conduct is going to keep the willies of testosterone-charged young men in their pants? Not a chance! I was in the emergency services for a number of years and I can tell you that ‘things’ are as bad today (if not worse, )than they were in 1970/1980/1990 since NZ society generally, has become far more open and promiscious. Perhaps this promiscuity does affect the judgement of people who are charged with dealing with rape complaints. I dont know and there’s no easy answer. What I do know however, is that the morals, values, personal responsiblity and respect for others, that used to be instilled in us as children and carried on through adulthood, is now at a much lower threshold of acceptability. Whilst this issue appears to be targeted specifically at the police, I also believe that the judical sysytem is as equally as culpable. Its is my strong belief that the current judicial system, needs to be thoroughly torn apart and restructured, and with a much higher level of public accountabilty imposed upon it.
April 5th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Lisa meow!
Put you claws away. This report is now becoming a witch hunt, and coming out in public on the news is looking more like attention seeking behaviour than a genuine complaint.
It is very easy to make false allegations when publicity is guaranteed and the sympathy of the female pack will swing your way.
No not arrogant, but as you are aware have lost everything because of false allegations, and I have experienced the hysteria of sexual abuse investigations and for every genuine person their will be one that ruins it for everyone else, and the vagueness of this interview last night was alarming factually and as un pc as this is, I am totally skeptical.
Mind you Mark Sainsbury has hardly given balanced coverage on the report,
It doesn’t name victims of false allegations, but it does list numbers. Not the report,
but from the NZ Herald 3 April (refer below). Between 12 and 163
police officers were affected:
* Twelve police officers were found to be victims of false allegations
* Twenty police officers were charged and acquitted – some of
which were presumably false allegations
* Two police officers were charged and committed suicide – they
may have been guilty or innocent
* 129 officers had complaints made against them that were not
upheld – some of these were presumably false allegations.
Does the fact that we do not know their names, or the names of those
who made false allegations matter. Even the 12 confirmed false
allegation cases has been completely ignored in the current
publicity. Do they not count? Do they not matter? What happened to
their accusers? Who will speak up for those accused? Hundreds of
women were prepared to march for their “belief in Louise”.