Rex Haig: police help the guilty man frame Rex Haig?

https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/crime/rex-haig-case-concerns-over-how-immunity-was-granted-to-crewmates/

It has taken me a couple of days to absorb the news in the link above, which is a report from investigative journalist Mike White. In the modern era the New Zealand public generally realise that police in New Zealand do sometimes frame the innocent, albeit police may well think the accused person is guilty because of 'gut instinct' and all the other factors that may contribute. I am aware of one case where police gave immunity to 2 men to provide evidence against a 3rd, who police argued was the principal offender. The result was the jury finding the man guilty as a party, indicating the jury's belief that one of the 2 provided with immunity was the main offender who never went to prison whilst the lesser offender was sentenced to life imprisonment. To put that in context compared to what happened to the late Rex Haig it has to be absorbed that according to the paperwork obtained by Mike White through the Official Information Act police knew that one of the persons they gave immunity to in the Haig case had 'confessed' to the murder police attributed to Haig.

That alleged confession wasn't to a single person, but rather to up to a dozen different people - ordinarily, in most cases more than enough to prove guilt. That's what has taken me time to absorb, it is almost too evil to comprehend it could happen in NZ. Of course, if it has happened once, it more than likely has happened before. As the article shows one man who heard the confession was killed, Hogan, the immunity witness and probable killer according to those he had confessed to, was never even interviewed about the death of Anton Sherlock a witness to the confession of Hogan and a man who had said he has been threatened by Hogan if he revealed Hogan's confession. 9 days before Sherlock was due to provide evidence, he was found murdered - a killing which police also attributed to Rex Haig. Just going over that again - police believed that Haig killed a man who had exculpatory evidence for Rex Haig. Later another man, Nigel Johnson, would be convicted of the murder of Sherlock, despite protesting his innocence.

Sometime later when an internal police inquiry looked to deal with the death of Anton Sherlock, the investigator Detective Inspector Winter would dismiss Hogan's involvement using the following extraordinary reasoning:

“If killing Sherlock to stop him providing evidence was the motive, then there was David Barr and at least 12 other people who were potential victims who lined up to give affidavit evidence prejudicial to Hogan,” Winter wrote. “As Barr and some of these others are now deceased, perhaps it is suggested that Hogan has had a hand in those deaths also?”

It seems DI Winter did not consider that Hogan, who according to others had already killed 1 man, and threatened to kill a 2nd if that person (Sherlock) revealed Hogan's confession, did not appreciate that the at least 12 people who claimed to have also heard the Hogan confession might well have felt it was too dangerous to cross Hogan.

Collapse of the Watson Case?

 

                              Have the First Signs of the Collapse of the Watson

                                                       Case Emerged?

It's been very clean for a long time that Scott Watson was framed. Well, clear to many of the public, but without a way ahead to collapse it. That is, until around 10 years ago when the author considered the Royal Prerogative of Mercy, a fairly ancient part of the Lawyer with its own history of Petitioning for Mercy. Mercy in itself been an ancient concept that one, particularly a King or Queen, could be swayed toward being merciful for a subject who had befallen unfortunate times and may indeed have been innocent of a crime he or she was convicted of and could take a case to the King or Queen who might find reason in their explanation or indeed see that a misfortune had befallen the person who wished to illustrate why they could not be guilty of for example a capital crime that brought with it a death sentence. Or alternatively that it was an accident of some sort or a life and death arisen in some manner.

The history is far deeper and more real than can be explained here returning to Scott Watson it was the King or Queen's men who had picked him out as someone expendable and distanced him from any feeling they might have that they were about to commit a crime almost as severe as the ones they would convince themselves, somewhat was guilty, was that type and therefore expendable for reasons we may yet find out in Scott Watson's case because clues abound.

Around that time, I was interested in some international cases that were discussed online and "met" so to speak to Americans, one was Professor Chris Halkides who was working with another man "Charlie," his name will come to me on the Elizabeth Knox case which they tore to shreds with logic and from memory found the actual offender. While Chris work in the institutions teaching how Miscarriages of Justice might happen - Charlie came from another spectrum, the type that reasoned things through and was only happy when he could understand the situation.

It was Charlie that first said the very obvious thing about the Watson case, the couple could never have been killed on a boat in a raft up without the alarm going off and the couple fighting back, and certainly not in the way 2 prisoner "witnesses" would claim. This was over one Xmas around the new year and so I decided to write to some of the people whom I knew were involved in fighting the case. Somewhat to my surprise they all responded and when I might be first personal meeting with Keith Hunter and Neville Munro at a coffee shop in the city, Keith on having read a one-page letter I wrote about the use of the RPOM said, putting the document on the table, "this could work."

At another time, I will perhaps write more about this, and in better detail and with a clearer memory of one man who came with Mike Kalaugher to my house with the news he'd seen the ketch in Milford Marina, I think it was - and that in itself is another story of how a door opened in relation to that. Relatively quickly I would meet the people who had the paperwork I wanted, and information I needed, and I got to write. I had always liked the concept that you could write yourself out of prison, and therefore write another person out of prison - that in itself leads to a big story, but for now, this remains about the heading above.

About 9 months I had a petition almost finished and had either written to Scott about or given him a copy before I visited him to ask if I could submit the RPOM, that day I also met his dad Chris and Scott said "put it in" speaking to the draft I'd given him.

It took 3 more months or so, and it did go in, and another fight began. A fight to justify a Miscarriage of Justice that was never going to lose, despite the fight from police still in power. They had chosen their side and I had chosen mine, outnumbered to heck.

Here it is 2026, and if the truth is the currency I'm no longer out numbered to heck thanks to support and help from all over New Zealand, the Kraken has woken, and the truth has flown free. I will Petition the King, well, the modern version of it the Supreme Court, that may turn the Petition of one man for another away, or they may read instead of more than a 100 people who say they saw a boat, they'll never forget, and some who even saw Ben and Olivia on it and that's what matters.