Saturday, May 21, 2011

Belated vindication for Vivien Harrison?

Vivien Harrison died April just gone, never having been 'deframed' from the travesty of injustice imposed on her. She was 'identified' by the Prosecutor (later Judge) David Morris as the mystery woman who fed the baby Rochelle Crewe after her parents Jeanette and Harvey had been murdered. David Morris had driven the spectre of this lie into the reputation of, as she was then Vivien Thomas, to ensure that her then husband Arthur would be convicted of the murders. David Morris did this despite information on the case file that another person, later to be the wife of Len Demler father of Jeanette, Norma had been identified as the woman seen on the property in the days before the discovery of the bodies.

Much of this information is contained in a North and South article by Chris Bird and as much as it vindicates the late Vivien and Arthur Thomas it incriminates the complicity of Police in wilfully exercising a Miscarriage of Justice. However, more than that it shows that the strongest circumstantial evidence available to the police to have enabled a conviction was that against Len Demler. He, like his 2nd wife Norma, fudged and prevaricated that Norma was 'on the scene' that is in Pukekawa around the time of the murders. The police had a positive identification from Bruce Roddick who despite immense pressure was unwavering in his evidence that the woman he was on the Crewe's farm in the days after the murder was not Vivien but indeed was Norma Demler, the later information was never put before a jury as was also excluded the note in Detective Len Johnson's work-diary '..that Roddick was going to identify the woman he saw as Mrs Demler,'concluded with the further entry 'confirms our suspicions re identification.'

Of course if the allegation of Morris was negated, and the proof positive revealed that Mr Roddick had identified Norma Demler the case against Arthur was shot, as were the obscene allegations against Vivien. Moreover, a complete case was built against the true perpetrator of the crime Len Demler. I say the true perpetrator because there was no reason for Len Demler to lie about when he met Norma Demler or when she was 'on the scene' cooking for the shearers. All of this is substantiated by various people including even members of the extended Demler family. What becomes revealed is that among the police was evidence and belief that Norma had fed the baby and that therefore her husband to be was implicated in the murders.

Birt's article shows the role Norma Demler soon began to assume in the affairs of the trust which own the various farming properties associated to Len and his family even though Colin Harvey, a trustee said of her involvement 'She had no right to be there (at the meetings of the trust) as she was not a trustee and she did all the talking.'

Even the unshakable recollections of Bruce Roddick as to the identity of the mystery woman would sought to undermined by another Detective Mike Charles who considered that it was important to determine what the sexual inclinations of the late Bruce Roddick were, as though anyone could imagine the relevance of that an issue as the reliability of Bruce's identification of Norma and 'failure' to identify the favourite of Prosecutor Morris - Vivien.

The Crewe case remains a rare, if yet still raw, blight on the landscape of Justice in New Zealand, and rarer still for the now public knowledge that while one man was prosecuted members of the Police believed it was another man 'courted' and cultivated into a role of innocence that some within the Police believed was guilty and who was never thoroughly investigated and became unwatched under the blind eye of Justice that seeks a result no matter the cost and the issues of right or wrong or of basic fairness and Justice.

Chris Birt's article is a must read for those interested in or affected by this case, and reveals other startling information that the the Commissioner of the time, Walton, instructed Auckland Police (at a point after the convictions) to not formally interview Norma Demler. At work from the very top down was activity to lay open shortcomings in the original investigation, Walton told Chris Birt that if he should see the officer involved again to 'ask him what the reason was.' Another startling demonstration of self-protection by a request to ask the officer receiving the order what the reason was for Walton to have made the order.

10 comments:

  1. Justice in many if not most so-called civilised societies is a farce. Most societies are governed by boys in men's clothing who are ego-driven specimens ultimately corrupted by the love of money and power. There is absolutely no way in which justice can exist in such a milieu. Remove the money and you remove a large portion of the the longing for it and the criminal deeds that so many commit to obtain it. The same applies to power. What is so new if Len Demler (with the aid of his woman friend, Norma)murdered his own daughter and son-in-law for money/property left by Maisey Demler to her daughter Jeannette Crewe. Hey, but shame on her (Maisey) for showing favouritism. See what happens when money and the resulting attribution of power is accorded/shared unequally. It simply incites envy. Remove money and power and the prospect of a just society is greater.
    Anonymous

    ReplyDelete
  2. The removal of 'money and power' is an entirely seperate issue, the more pressing point here is that Vivian Harrison was incorrectly 'identified' by the Prosecutor Morris despite him knowing of a positive identification of Norma Demler as the 'mystery' woman feeding the baby. Vivian lived the rest of her life under that false cloud, one that was created to sheet home a false imprisonment and the destruction of the truth. If Len Demler did kill his own daughter it was only his silence that made him a participant in the wrongful conviction of Arthur Thomas, the blame for that lies elsewhere, as we see from the Chris Birt article - at the door of the then Commissioner of Police, Walton.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Does the instruction from Commissioner Walton not to interview Norma Demler still stand after all this time? If Len Demler did murder Jeanette and Harvey Crewe (and lets face it, that has been obvious to everyone for the past 40 years except for perhaps the police and justice department) doesn't that make Norma Demler an accessory to murder seeing as she was identified as the woman seen at the Crewe's after the murder? Why are the powers at be not insisting on her being questioned, if she is still alive. Who knows, after all these years she may now have a conscience. Rochelle Crewe has been carrying this burden for 42 years, she deserves some closure (for want of a better word) and she sure as hell deserves to have this huge weight lifted off her shoulders. Surely it's about time someone stepped up to the post and put right the wrong that was done in 1970.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Excellent point. Of course the instruction can no longer stand.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A question rather than a comment!
    In his book "Beyond Reasonable Doubt" David Yallop
    declared that he KNEW the identity of the woman who fed Rochelle Crewe and was seen by Bruce Roddick on the property that Friday.He passed on
    the information to Mr Muldoon but didn't tell us
    (the readers). Did David Yallop get it right?

    ReplyDelete
  6. In that Bruce's identification was positive as the woman he saw being Norma Demler, which David Yallop doesn't appear to have disputed - it seems he was right.
    Vivian was never identified as being the woman but it suited the Crown, Morris in particular, because the implication it was her destroyed Arthur's alibi - it also destroyed the fabric of their lives. Of course Vivian is dead now, the 'evidence' against her never existed - it was purely innuendo, part of the armoury of those that set up Thomas. Arthur didn't kill the Crewes, leaving again the question of what motivated who ever it was that fed Rochelle.
    The woman identified by Roddick played an active role in the administration of the dead couple's estate - despite having no mandate to do so. She also lied about when she was in Pukekawa, eventually attempting to shift the date by several years.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There is always the possibility that people were Hired to kill the Crewes, especially if there was some kind of land or title dispute involved. It would be interesting to know what happened to the Crewes assets after their death

    ReplyDelete
  8. could it be that Jeanette killed Harvey after Harvey assaulted Jeanette? how else did Jeanette get her facial injuries? from Len? seems unlikely. Harvey smashes Jeanette, then Jeanette shoots Harvey, then suicides with gun. Len finds scene, and "cleans up " out of shame?

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's unlikely Jeanette would suicide in the event of what you say is right. Her injuries would have been proof of any attack on her by Harvey. I doubt also she would have left her child. Harvey was dead first, after which Jeanette was bashed. Why would Len even think of cleaning up if he weren't the killer?

    ReplyDelete
  10. WTF is this all about? Sounds to be an official cover up to protect people in the Government. Why didn't the police just do their job? Here the police in a country then considered the least corrupt in the world, have been acting like police from Philippines. Something doesn't add up. The unimaginable happened in N Z.

    ReplyDelete