Bent Cops

27 Credit where it’s due


Full marks to Constables Brent Grey and Earl Fincham and to DB (Dave) Kerr (below) who, at long last, didn’t try to muck me round before admitting to the truth.


Police pay up for private poaching case prosecution
03 May 2001

Police have paid “substantial” costs incurred by a Napier hunting guide for his private prosecution of a security guard deer poacher.

Police dropped poaching charges against the poacher’s mate ?a Whakatane police sergeant also caught red-handed.

The case, reported in The Dominion seven months ago, led to Whakatane policeman Stephen Tresidder being referred to the Police Complaints Authority after a judge said he did not believe evidence Tresidder gave on oath.

Tressider and his mate, Whakatane security guard Michael Joseph Lourie, were pursued well past the boundary fences of Ngamatea, the huge high country Hawke’s Bay’s station where they were caught on hunting guide Bruce Bates’s video camera during a winter poaching trip in 1999.

Mr Bates and a Napier barrister had tracked the two poachers to their hideout by following their footsteps in the snow.

Mr Bates tried to get police to prosecute Tresidder and Lourie for telling lies about who they were, and where they lived, and for illegal hunting.

But because of stonewalling by Tresidder, who refused to tell Rotorua’s top detective who his hunting companion was till the last minute; ignorance of the law by senior police who were investigating the poaching; and an arrangement between Tresidder and the top detective, police dropped the case.

Tresidder persuaded police to drop the more serious charge of illegal hunting if he pleaded guilty ?which he did ?to the charge of giving a false name and address.

Police mistakenly believed that the law did not allow them to prosecute Lourie because six months had lapsed since the offending took place.

They were wrong and Mr Bates asked Napier lawyer Leo Lafferty to prosecute.

Mr Lafferty initially intended to prosecute both men.

But because of the arrangement made between Tresidder and Detective Inspector Graham Bell (Ten/7 TV star) of the Rotorua CIB, the court ruled that Mr Lafferty could not continue with his intended poaching charge against Tresidder.

Instead, he pursued Lourie and the case was heard before Judge Grant Fraser in Taihape District Court in July last year.

Tresidder gave evidence for his friend during the hearing but six times Judge Fraser said Tresidder was not a credible witness.

The judge said both men were without doubt hunting on Ngamatea. He found Lourie guilty of both offences and fined him $350 for each offence.

Mr Lafferty confirmed yesterday that after months of negotiation the legal section at police headquarters had agreed to pay the “substantial” costs involved in investigating and taking the prosecution.

He said police agreed to pay for the costs incurred by the investigation into Tresidder’s offending in spite of his taking no prosecution against Tresidder because of the police arrangement.

Tresidder was referred to the Police Complaints Authority after a story in The Dominion in December last year about unlicensed car dealing by Whakatane policeman Peter Sandle and the town’s police prosecutor Mark van der Kley.

Tresidder helped promote the Whakatane “Cops for Cars” business by finding buyers for the imported vehicles.

The Police Complaints Authority, Judge Ian Borrin, said investigations into Sandle and Tresidder were not yet completed. He was unable to say when inquiries would be completed.

Mr Bates said he was delighted police had agreed to pay his costs.



The Commissioner of Police

Dear Sir,

I was interested to learn that the Police have decided to reimburse Napier hunting guide Mr. Bruce Bates the costs incurred by him in bringing a private prosecution against Whakatane deer poaching security guard Michael Joseph Lourie after the Police failed to proceed.

On 30 March 1993 my Barrister Mr. Peter Brosnahan of Wanganui brought a private prosecution in the District Court at Wanganui on behalf of myself against one Donald Peter Britton for assault. Britton was eventually convicted of using threatening words and was given the pathetic sentence of come up if called upon within six months. He got off almost scott free but I had to fork out $2000 to have him prosecuted after the Police, Constable Cullum McGillivray, refused to proceed even though “There was ample evidence on which Britton could be found guilty”. (Mr. Justice Herron.) I had hoped that a conviction would stop Britton offending against my family but alas it made no difference. He continued on with his campaign of offending with the knowledge that the Police would not proceed against him.

I now ask you if you would please reimburse me the $2000 that I paid Mr. Brosnahan to do the job that the Police should have done.

Yours faithfully

S M Van Der Lubbe.
1/22 Trigg Ave


10 May, 2001

S M Van Der Lubbe
1122 Trigg Avenue

Dear S M Van Der Lubbe

On behalf of the Commissioner I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 3 May 2001, concerning a private prosecution in the District Court in 1993.

Please provide a copy of the invoice concerned so that it can be placed before someone to reconsider the matter.

Yours sincerely

Sally Duffy (for)
N Trendle
Officer in Charge
Commissioners Support Group


OUR REF: 921018

Mr & Mrs J Van Der Lubbe
C/- 14 Ballance Street


BY Amount received as retainer 2000.00

TO My Fee & Disbursements as attached 2000.00*

$ 2000.00




E & OE

4 March 1992


13 June 2001
Mr S M Van Der Lubbe
1/22 Trigg Ave

Dear Mr Van Der Lubbe

Thank you for providing the copy of the Invoice you say was for privately prosecuting Mr Britton. The file has been referred to me to consider reimbursement.

Unfortunately our file contains little reference to your private prosecution other than a reference to it in a summary of Senior Sergeant Haggart’s report of copy of which was supplied to you on 20 December 1994.

In that report mention is made that you prosecuted Mr Britton on 4 separate charges namely: threatening language, threatening to kill, discharging a firearm and lurking or loitering near a dwelling.

In your letter of 3 May 2001 you state that you prosecuted him on a charge of assault but he was convicted of using threatening words.

Our Law Enforcement System computer contains no record of such a conviction but that is not surprising being a private prosecution but it means I must ask you for further information. I have to be satisfied that there is a proper foundation for an ex gratia payment of public money to be made.

You mentioned in your letter a quote from Mr Justice Herron. Do you have the full judgment that you could send me a copy? Also the invoice you supplied related to a retainer and did not detail the work done by Mr. Brosnahan. Do you have a copy of his final bill that you could send me a copy? Were there newspaper clippings of the court case that you kept copies of which you could send me?

Please address correspondence on this issue directly to me because I have the responsibility to finalise this matter.

Yours sincerely

D B Kerr
National manager
Legal Services


15 June 2001

D B Kerr
National Manager
Legal Services

Dear D B Kerr

Thank you for your letter dated 13 June 2001.

Attached you will find copies of the ORAL JUDGEMENT OF HERON J and a news paper clipping pertaining to the private prosecution.

The 4 March 1992 Invoice from Mr. Brosnahan that I supplied to you was the only thing I got from him. Proof that the bill was paid is evidenced by the words, AMOUNT DUE NIL.

I trust that the enclosed document copies will be enough to provide a proper foundation for the reimbursement of the $2000 it cost me to get Britton convicted.

Yours faithfully

SM Van Der Lubbe.

1/22 Trigg Ave.

PS Could you please see to it that the conviction is entered into your Law Enforcement System computer. Thank you. SMVDL.


18 June 2001

Mrs S M Van Der Lubbe
1/22 Trigg Avenue

Dear Mrs Van Der Lubbe

Thank you for your letter of 15 June enclosing copies of Mr Justice Heron’s judgement and the newspaper report of the proceedings.

I have considered all the facts and agree that you are entitled to have your legal costs reimbursed on an ex gratia basis.

I have ordered our Accounts Department to have the cheque drawn and it should be posted to you next Tuesday.

I have taken the necessary steps to ensure that the conviction is properly recorded.

Yours sincerely

D B Kerr

National Manager
Legal Services.

The Police were legally obliged to make the prosecution and morally obliged to pay us for doing the job they, through malice, refused to do.



July 10, 2001

D B Kerr

National Manager
Legal Services

Dear Mr. Kerr

Thank you for your letter of 18 June 2001.

You are a breath of fresh air Mr. Kerr. For the first time in more years than I wish to recall I have obtained a fair and satisfactory outcome to my request for action on a matter concerning my civil rights.

Full marks and many thanks for your amazingly prompt and efficient response to my request for reimbursement of money spent by me in bringing a prosecution that the police should have brought and also for ensuring that the conviction I obtained was properly recorded.

Yours sincerely
S M Van Der Lubbe

1/22 Trigg Ave.

Am I sorry that I dropped the private informations (because of the cost) that Dave Kerr alluded to in his letter of 13 June 2001? Just a tad.

Former policeman jailed for perjury


Former police officer Stephen Tresidder was today given nine months’ jail for perjury when he appeared in Tauranga District Court.

He has been given leave to apply for home detention after serving one month in jail.

The former Whakatane-based sergeant resigned from the police after being found guilty of perjury by lying to help out a hunting mate.

He was accused of perjury after a court case in July 2000, when he gave evidence in defence of his friend who faced a charge of unlawful hunting.

The Crown said Tresidder lied on oath that he and his friend were not hunting on Ngamatea Station, off the Napier-Taihape highway, and were not armed with rifles.

The perjury conviction was the first ever for a New Zealand police officer. (The corrupt cops thought they had buried the poaching matter but didn’t recon on Mr. Bruce Bates.)

They don’t regard their lying under oath or otherwise as immoral or a perversion of justice but see it as a bona-fide tactic to obtain the desired outcome.

If all the liars were prosecuted there would be very few cops left. In my experience 90% of them were corrupt to varying degrees.

And with that I rest my case.

“The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
Winston Churchill



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: