Four AR-15 rifles, seized in West Auckland raid
Malcolm Lock made this Official Information request to New Zealand Police
The request was partially successful.
From: Malcolm Lock
Dear New Zealand Police,
In regards to the AR 15 firearms seized recently in Auckland.
I request the following information
1. Make of each firearm
2. Model of each firearm
3. Were the serial numbers still legible?
4. If serial numbers are legible, when were each of these firearm legally imported in to New Zealand?
5. Were any of these firearms ever reported stolen?
Yours faithfully,
Malcolm Lock
From: Malcolm Lock
Dear New Zealand Police,
Apologizes,
I forgot to included the link to the relevant article for your reference
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/1007420...
Yours faithfully,
Malcolm Lock
From: SEDGWICK, Alexandria
New Zealand Police
image001.png
10K
Download
image002.png
1K
Download
image003.png
0K
Download
image004.png
1K
Download
image005.png
1K
Download
Dear Mr Lock
On behalf of the Commissioner, I acknowledge your request of 20 January
2018 in which you asked:
In regards to the AR 15 firearms seized recently in Auckland. I request
the following information
1. Make of each firearm
2. Model of each firearm
3. Were the serial numbers still legible?
4. If serial numbers are legible, when were each of these firearm
legally imported in to New Zealand?
5. Were any of these firearms ever reported stolen?
Your request is being actioned and you will be responded to in accordance
with the provisions of the Official Information Act 1982.
Kind regards
Ali
Ali Sedgwick
Advisor
Ministerial Services
E [1][email address]
[2]wordmark transparent
[3][IMG][4][IMG][5][IMG][6][IMG]
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
3. https://www.youtube.com/user/policenz
4. http://www.police.govt.nz/facebook
5. http://www.police.govt.nz/twitter
6. http://www.police.govt.nz/instagram
From: SMALL, Roger
New Zealand Police
image001.png
10K
Download
image002.png
1K
Download
image003.png
0K
Download
image004.png
1K
Download
image005.png
1K
Download
OIA Lock 2018 02 01 12 12 44 262 rsap88.pdf
40K
Download
View as HTML
Dear Mr Lock
Please find attached a letter in response to your recent OIA request.
Regards Roger
Roger SMALL
Area Manager Investigation
Waitakere Police
P +64 1 234 5678
M +64 21 123 4567
E [1][email address]
[2]wordmark transparent
[3][IMG][4][IMG][5][IMG][6][IMG]
show quoted sections
J Devere left an annotation ()
My bad - got this confused with the one where they left the guns on the dealers lawn! Still appalling responses under the OIA in both cases.
Malcolm Lock left an annotation ()
Yes I had realized the confusion...still watch this space
From: HOUSLEY, Paul
New Zealand Police
Dear Mr Lock
I understand you made a complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman regarding
your information request of 20 January 2018 to Police.
Our legal counsel have discussed your complaint with the investigator for
the Ombudsman and in an attempt to resolve the matter we are able to
provide you with the following information. Police can confirm that the
firearms in question were Armalite AR-15 which can be purchased legally in
New Zealand provided the purchaser holds the appropriate license.
We believe we have provided you with all of the information you are
entitled to under the Official Information Act. The Ombudsman’s office
will be in contact with you to discuss further
Kind Regards
[1]cid:image003.png@01CC4866.BDD7EAD0 Paul Housley BSc [
Senior Sergeant
District Case Management Coordinator
District Official Information and
Privacy Act Co-ordinator
Kaiwhakahaere-a-Korero
"Case Management; everyone's
responsibility"
Henderson Police Station
7 Buscomb Avenue | Henderson |
Waitakere
P O Box 21-162, |Henderson |
Auckland 0650
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
From: Malcolm Lock
Dear HOUSLEY, Paul,
I have discussed your reply with the representative from the Ombudsman's office.
And as pointed out to her the pictures provided in the media release by the NZ police and as noted in my original OIA there appear to be two Aero precision firearms in the picture. That is 50% of the claimed seized firearms and your response claims that 100% ol the firearms are Armalite firearms.
I am asking you go go back to legal services and review the file and the pictures provided and then reply with a more informed response.
It is clear to me that you and legal services may not have had the full information regarding this case.
Please look at the manufacturers markings and make comparisons to the markings on the firearms in the picture NZ police supplied.
Armalite manufacturers marking google search https://tinyurl.com/ybmjdh9o
Aero Precision manufacturers markings google search https://tinyurl.com/ybeoptwc
There is no way anyone could remotely say these marking are similar in any way.
Also in reply to being denied any further information as per your original declining of ANY information relating to this case, I bring to you attention another OIA request from myself relating to how a non government organization has detailed information relating to this case in which they used at a public seminar on the 14th February 2018. Just weeks after my OIA was refused
If this non government organization has been release ANY information about this case why was my OIA request refused on the ground that any information may prejudice a fair trial etc?
One must ask themselves, how did such information end up with this organization?
https://fyi.org.nz/request/7865-informat...
The Ombudsman's office suggested I submit a new OIA request, But I thought I would give you and legal service one chance to sort this out via this request
Yours sincerely,
Malcolm Lock
From: SMALL, Roger
New Zealand Police
Dear Mr LOCK
My apologies for incorrectly advising you that the weapons seized were AR15.
You quite correctly when looking at the photos identified this information was inaccurate.
There was certainly no intent to deceive, it was simple a case of the exhibit officer when documenting the weapons, recognising them as MSSA's and called them all AR15 when there was 3 x Aero Precision and a Colt.
Please find the weapon details below.
- 1 x Aero Precision X15 .223 cal MSSA rifle with free standing pistol grip
- 1 x Aero Precision X15 .223 cal MSSA rifle with free standing pistol grip and Magpul collapsible stock
- 1 x Colt M4 carbine .22 LR cal MSSA rifle with free standing pistol grip and Magpul collapsible stock
- 1 x Aero Precision X15 .223 cal MSSA rifle with free standing pistol grip and Magpul collapsible stock
Regards Roger
Detective Senior Sergeant Roger SMALL
Area Manager Investigation
Waitemata West
M +64 21 1914485
E [email address]
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this message or any of its contents. Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in error, please email or telephone the sender immediately.
show quoted sections
From: Malcolm Lock
Dear SMALL, Roger,
Thank you for your reply.
It took awhile to get the information, but we finally got there
Yours sincerely,
Malcolm Lock
Mike Loder left an annotation ()
Um...did I miss the part where police said they were imported legally and reported stolen? Or did they just ignore those questions? I did see this criminal was just sentenced. Concurrent sentence. I wonder if he will serve a day for the guns? Why do police push for registration when numbers are ground off as in this case?
Malcolm Lock left an annotation ()
Thanks Mike, I must follow up on the one firearm that the serial number was legible. I wont get an answer for those they can not track or the partial number but should get an answer for the colt M4 Carbine in which they state the serial number is visible
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request
J Devere left an annotation ()
What exactly are the police trying to hide here? They have variously responded that it didn't happen, it did happen and is subject of an employment investigation, and now seemingly that is the subject of a criminal investigation. The Ombudsman is already looking at this but it would be a good case for a half decent journalist to pick up and look closely at. Section 6 cannot be used for a blanket refusal - each and every document should be tested whether grounds exist to withhold it. An exhibit sheet for example - if they redacted the name and address, why couldn't it be released? Very fishy.
Link to this