Dear Independent Police Conduct Authority,

Please tell me the process from completion of investigation, to how the Commissioner comes to sign off on the file with his decision of the result, e.g. "conflict of interest" upheld.

I require this under urgency.

Yours faithfully,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

As IPCA does have the facility to hold an overseeing role in some complaints of a category 2 and category 1 nature, I fail to see how IPCA cannot know how the result of such a matter they have commenced and overseen, occurs.

Please advise the process.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Thank you for your clarity. It is most instructional.

This being the case, if allegations made through complaint to IPCA are withdrawn by the complainant prior to any disciplinary hearing, then there is or can be no complaint.

Please advise how a matter so withdrawn still becomes resulted 15 months after the complainant withdrawal of those allegations and resignation of member.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Thank you

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Thanks Pieter again, the only problem is Tom Firmin stated "the file is now concluded and prepared for forwarding to IPCA". Therefore the matter rested with IPCA. I also have correspondence which states the files should be filed in the 50 year archive after the first 12 months with IPCA. Why therefore does the file still reside in the HR / PPS offices of the relevant District?

Something is not adding up. You are in IPCA, you are the Complaints Manager - could you please explain how something supposed to be concluded, with the allegations withdrawn is still very much alive and kicking in a local HR district, complete with fallacies such as telephone calls which never happened, rather than closed and filed without further repercussion upon the subject member?

All this information is requested and required under the OIA and Privacy Acts as it relates directly to me.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

So it is blatant corruption at its best.
IPCA claim no knowledge and blame police;
Police blame IPCA....
around and around and around.

so what is the story then with breaches of s25 (3) IPCA Act? who 'polices' that when it is brought to attention?

The truth endures.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

my apologies it may be s25 (4) ipca act ... use of information prohibited in any other inquiry or procedure or court.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Let me refresh your memory. IPCA were informed of this in 2013 and again in 2015:

From: ****** ***** [mailto:******@*************.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 2 November 2015 7:30 p.m.
To: '[email address]'; '[email address]'
Cc: '[email address]'; '********.*****@policeassn.org.nz'
Subject: CoC***: Investigation
Importance: High

Dear Parties,

Who tests the veracity of information tendered by an Applicant or witnesses in relation to an IPCA investigation?
How is that veracity tested?
Please provide this information.

And upon receiving no response I reiterated the request being more specific:

Dear Parties,
Under the relevant principles and sections of the Privacy and Official Information Acts, currently in force, please respond to my question.
I refer specifically the tendering of an unofficial Tribunal hearing transcript, complete with errors and added emphases.
This was not a court provided transcript.

Thank you
****** *****

I received a very bland response as quoted further below:

I now also have evidence as provided by that person's barrister as the result of a Law Society Disciplinary Hearing that the complainant in the IPCA matter recorded the teleconference herself in breach of Disputes Tribunal Rules and Disputes Tribunal Acts, and had it transcribed for herself, then tendered it directly to the IPCA in the first instance through her barrister as a true document when in reality it is a forgery and fraud. Her Barrister was cautioned by the Law Society that he should have advised IPCA of the true identity of the author of that document.

This information and other information, including statements given to the IPCA were then disclosed to an Incorporated Society in 2013, in breach of the IPCA Act s.25 - using answers and statements given to an IPCA investigation / inquiry in another proceeding or inquiry. That matter is now before the High Court and this breach of the Act by that complainant will be exposed.

I find it abhorrent that I had to go to extreme lengths including working through the Court administrative system, and Law Society complaints system to get solid proof that this documentation is exactly what it is. Forgery and fraud. As the complainant was paid money in a settlement, really, tendering forged document intending it to be acted upon as genuine for pecuniary gain is forgery and fraud. That's all your elements, yet the IPCA chose to not respond, not reply and ignore it simply answering:

"The veracity of information tendered to an investigator is tested by the investigator's supervisor".
K Irvine (IPCA)

In this case the supervisor was Inspector Keith Brady, who is no stranger to dubious documentation. The matter was raised with Inspector Brady and ignored.

IPCA and PPS/IA based some of their decisions in that matter upon forged material - that's disgraceful and corrupt especially when advised. PPS / IA were also advised and chose to ignore the matter. This has been placed into the affidavits for the High Court - the Judges' responses should be interesting.

It would be nice to think IPCA would take this as seriously as you have just stated it might be, and put it in front of the Crown Solicitor, given I have proven beyond doubt that transcript is fake, and also that other information used in an IPCA investigation was disclosed for use in another inquiry and proceeding.

I look forward to IPCA response.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Please advise when IPCA shall be requesting this breach of the IPCA Act will be put in front of the Crown Solicitor.

Thank you

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

so exactly what will it take to have breaches of the IPCA Act acted upon???? or shall I take our own action naming IPCA as a party in the claim for their inaction.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM

Dear Pieter Roozendaal,

Police AND IPCA have been informed multiple times in writing since discovery in April 2012 to present date, up to and including the Privacy Commission (I received an apology for part of it) that information was divulged, and that forged/fake documentation was presented as 'evidence', and other information given in breach of the IPCA Act.

NEITHER has acted - Police don't "refuse" to act, they simply do the usual blanketing with silence hoping it will go away. IN the meantime I have conducted my own further inquiries and received a response from the person's barrister that SHE recorded a private tele-hearing (breach of Disputes Tribunal Rules Act and Disputes Tribunal Act) and had it transcribed for herself. The Law Society Disciplinary Committee found that the barrister SHOULD HAVE advised IPCA of the correct author of the document (that is, his client or, if you like the "forger"). The Queenstown District Court has confirmed that NO transcript has been applied for or produced and could not confirm for the Law Society Disciplinary Committee the veracity of the transcript, and have also stated that it is doubtful the recording even exists now for such purpose. Therefore the document is a fake.

Further statements and answers given in the course of that inquiry to IPCA investigators were released by the "complainant" to the New Zealand Kennel Club, which matter is now before the High Court, with me as appellant, due to the losses caused in part by the tendering of that forgery to IPCA, and the release of IPCA-specific information to the NZKC.

Therefore I think it is abhorrent that Police do not wish to take this forward as there can be no more obvious disregard for the law, for the IPCA Act, and others than this circumstance here. To whit, it would appear even Police are disregarding the law.

I look forward to a response.

Yours sincerely,

JennyM