This site is an archived version of Indymedia prior to 5th November 2012. The current site is at

Findings by police authority send disturbing messages to the general public


The Independent Police Conduct Authority review by Justice Lowell Goddard found among other things, that when an officer claims to have been backed in a corner that they are justified in killing whoever supposedly threatened them.

Is this the message that Justice Goddard is sending to all New Zealanders? One that clearly states that any shooter needs to merely state they had no other option to shoot, that they were backed into a corner therefore they now have the right to dispatch any persons with the use of armed force?

Somehow this is probably not the intended message Goddard is portraying with the findings into the death of Stephen Wallace but one has to speculate that if not then is this the creation of a separate law only applicable or afforded to police officers.

Currently if a civilian finds their selves in the same situation they would most definitely face a jail term awaiting trial.

What of Bruce Emery now, who claimed himself to be in the same position after chasing down Pihema Cameron for what he believed was willful damage to property, then claiming to find himself in a position where he had no choice but to kill Cameron.

The findings of this enquiry will no doubt become the basis for many appeals including Emery's, who till this day considers himself to be in the same position that Abbot claimed he was in.

I am not for one moment defending Emery's actions, but am merely pointing out the types of dangerous messages that underpin the findings of this enquiry.

Also hidden in amongst the rhetoric are hints to clues surrounding the Wallace families suspicion that Abbot was intoxicated at the time of the shooting.

Furthermore, are the essences of these findings yet another small shift in the uniting of State and the judicial which previous to this case could have been claimed by some to be independent of each other.

As it has been said, history has shown us that even under the best forms of government, those entrusted with power have, "in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny".

The Independent Police Conduct Authority would do good to remember this fact, it needs to ask itself for whom is it responsible to, the people? or the State?

What it seems to be lacking in my view is the courage to stand up to the armed force of the State in defense of the people for whom it should be soley representative of.

What seems apparently clear in the report is the timidity of the Independent Police Conduct Authority in the face of strong police protectionism of their own no better opitomised by the actions and comments of police stooge Greg O'Conner.

Timidity is of course the serenity of despotism, chosen over the tumultuousness of un-faulting justice, Goddard in this case, failing to act concisely and without fear.

Are the police now to be considered a threat to the general public, who at any time can act with impunity against whomever they consider to be a threat?

Is this not the basic premise for tyranny?

Fortunately for the police, there has only been one version of the story made prominent in the media and that is the version created by the likes of Greg O'Conner and his crew of spin doctors. Therefore there is only one version that the general public are aware of.

There are no real surprises there since it has been a long while since mainstream media employed the tactics of asking the hard questions or considered themselves answerable to the people rather than their corporate governors.

So the victims of this case remain so, fore mostly Stephen Wallace whose story has yet to be told, that of his family who have been reduced to 15 second sound bites, and the minds of the people who have been wooed once again into the surreal world of police might over their right to know the truth.

Chappy Turner


Re: Findings by police authority send disturbing messages to the

On National Radio this morning (morning report, 18/3/09) Greg O'Connor from the Police Association was wondering if the NZ public were 'mature enough' to accept that police officers are sometimes under the influence of alcohol when on duty.

Re: Re: Findings by police authority send disturbing messages to

Hmm, I have worked at more than one place where it has stated in the contract that I must not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs whilst at work. Now we a supposed to be mature enough to accept that police officers may be under the influence whilst they are driving? handling firearms? etc?

I think not.

Re: Findings by police authority send disturbing messages to the

This is not solely a police matter,there appears to be a problem in the Judiciary. Who are they responsible to, the govt, the police or the people?.

Re: Findings by police authority send disturbing messages to the

The problem with the judiciary is that it lacks the temerity to make the necessary calls to reign in the tyranny of the unaccountable institution of the NZ police but rather take the well trodden path of soft justice, thus mere justification of tyrannous despotism.

The judiciary in finality of the findings of the Independent Police Conduct Authority who is headed by none less than a high court justice (for the want of a better title) has also shown it is incapable to adjudicate law and justice to all by the same rule and the same measure.

This authority has also completely neglected to recognise the failings of the supposed enforcers of the law who have blatantly and consistently disregarded from day zero, the fact that the life of Stephen Wallace should have been deemed precious before the law until the facts had proven otherwise, but was instead inflicted with the punishment of immediate death, a punishment that used to be reserved for high treason.

But equal to the punishment metted out to Mr Wallace was and is the inexorable malice the NZ Police coupled with the spineless, inept and benign lack of will power of the NZ media to critically report on this tragedy.

Conspired and conspiring to destroy any chances of Stephen Wallace receiving a fair hearing of the character of his person in the court of public opinion by determining to present only the police version of events to the general public as the only viable version.