From a correspondent:
If the odds of innocence are similar to USA then the figure of 2-5% in
NZ represents 160-400 people that may well be innocent of the crimes
they are currently incarcerated for..
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/justice-system/news/article.cfm?c_id=240&objectid=10757045
Even at the lower figure, and halved ,could be a good indication that on any day 40 nzers are being held under a Miscarriage of Justice. In this year alone there was recognition by the authorities of at least four men falsely imprisoned and since released, so around 10% of that lower divided total. At least part of the shortfall in NZ is made up of prisoners who admit crimes they haven't committed, either under pressure from gang or crime associates, or the police. Similarly, in other cases the police using 'mopping up' charges - being those that strike a deal to plead to crimes they didn't commit in order to escape heavier punishment on crimes they did commit. Probably more interesting are the formerly mentioned - those who admit crimes they haven't committed either from pressure from gang or crime associates. This being the one area of law where the adage the 'ends justify the means' is employed by both the criminals and the police to the same end at the same time. One example of this could be the Burdett case (quoting from memory here) where a man is serving life imprisonment for the rape and murder of this woman despite DNA showing the semen of Rewa, a convicted multiple rapist, having been sampled from the deceased body.
Some readers will recall when there might be unsolved very public crimes suspected of underworld figures a tactic is often employed by the police and leaked to the media that other 'heavies' are upset with all the police 'heat' and are considering taking the 'law' into their own hands so as to be able to get back to business. How much of that is true is debatable but it shows at the very least the police admitting that both 'sides' might apply, or be encouraged to apply, someone to come forward and fess up, or a stoolie to drop someone else in it so that normal routines are resumed. This is a very grey, unsavoury area of policing that is passed its used by date. It is from these exercises of 'intelligence' gathering that result in unsafe convictions on the basis of deals done between crims and police. This situation as recorded in earlier blogs here is all but too common in NZ and a frequent factor in Miscarriages of Justice in NZ.
Another common ploy by police is to wait until a parole date has been set then confront the inmate with the proposal of plead guilty and we will ask for the charge to run concurrent and therefore not effect your release otherwise we will be waiting at the gate or turn up shortly thereafter..they fool the judge by infering the evidence has just come to light..this ploy is used extensively in non violent crimes and increases the police clearence rate statistics significantly..
ReplyDeleteBegs the question of how many times it would happen in the presence of a particular Judge before he or she smelled a rat, or perhaps it just becomes routine rather than an exception and therefore is not looked at too closely. I'm a bit sceptical really but then again because it is not uncommon pre-sentencing there is no apparent reason it might not also be common pre-parole.
ReplyDeleteI'm aware of some fairly outragous examples of people pleading to 10 or more charges of burgalry, crimes they didn't commit, to win some favour at sentencing or after to assist with parole.
What it means is that such offenders, if they re-offend, will have their prospective sentence calculated at least in part on offences they never committed whilst in the mean time the real offender has got away with at least those offences.
Justice? I don't think so. More like a worn-out tiredness and corrupt practice.