KEY POINTS:
Former policeman John Dewar denied in court today manipulating evidence during the trial of a former policeman charged with raping Louise Nicholas.
He said Mrs Nicholas refused to make a statement to him about being allegedly raped by three other policemen, despite asking her about the allegations.
Crown
prosecutor Brent Stanaway began his cross-examination of Dewar this afternoon and questioned why Dewar did not take a formal complaint from Mrs Nicholas despite hearing her make a statement in court that she had been raped by the three men.
Dewar said today Mrs Nicholas refused to talk to him about the allegations.
Dewar, 55, self-employed of Hamilton, faces four charges in the High Court at Hamilton of attempting to obstruct or defeat the course of justice between 1993 and 1995.
Dewar was chief inspector of the Rotorua CIB when Louise Nicholas approached police in 1993, with two historic sex allegations, including those against suspended assistant commissioner Clint Rickards and former policemen Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum.
The Crown alleges Dewar suppressed allegations Mrs Nicholas made against the three men and attempted to prevent the course of justice during the rape trial of a former policeman, who has permanent name suppression, by giving inadmissible evidence.
Mrs Nicholas, alleged the man had sexually assaulted her, then aged 13, which led to two mistrials before a third trial acquitted him.
Among those in the public gallery today were Mrs Nicholas, members of Shipton's family and Dewar's wife and daughter.
Earlier Dewar said he was "shocked, surprised and concerned" when Mrs Nicholas made the allegations of rape against the three men in the second retrial.
Dewar said he asked Mrs Nicholas afterwards if the allegations were true but she did not answer.
Dewar said he thought Mrs Nicholas had lied under oath and decided not to push the issue because she could have been charged with perjury.
Under cross-examination Mr Stanaway told Dewar that he had "manipulated the evidence in the way you investigated the case in order to protect Louise Nicholas and in order to manufacture the outcome of the 'former policeman's' trial."
Dewar replied "I didn't manipulate anything."
If at any time Mrs Nicholas wanted to make a complaint, it would have been investigated but she would not talk to him about it, he said.
During an increasingly tense cross-examination Mr Stanaway stopped his line of questioning and told Dewar there was nothing personal between them and he was simply doing his job.
Dewar said after 3 1/2 years he had been "pilloried" by the media, and was now being "badgered' by Mr Stanaway over whether Mrs Nicholas had made a statement.
"She had ample opportunity and she chose not to," Dewar said.
"In the end I made a judgement call, which is what I'm paid to."
Dewar said if Mrs Nicholas had told him she had lied under oath he would have had to charge her with perjury.
"It was not your decision," Mr Stanaway replied.
"It was my decision and it's the same one I would make today," Dewar replied.
Dewar said if he did not follow procedure by reporting the allegations made under oath to the district commander it did not make him a bad policeman; he was interested in protecting Louise Nicholas.
Mr Stanaway said Dewar wanted to avoid sparking an Internal Affairs or a Police Complaints Authority investigation about the allegations.
Dewar repeated he was motivated by protecting Mrs Nicholas.
Mr Stanaway asked "do you mean to tell us that as a Detective Inspector you were so worried about whether a witness is lying that you protect her to the extent of lying to your superiors?"
"I didn't lie," Dewar replied.
Dewar said he did not want to "dump any more on her".
"Do you mean to tell us that you hid from your superiors your concern that Louise Nicholas may have lied on oath?" Mr Stanaway asked.
"Yes," Dewar replied.
Mr Stanaway asked if Mrs Nicholas was wrong when she asked Dewar after each of the three trials to take a statement from her.
"Louise Nicholas is lying," Dewar said.
Mr Stanaway questioned why Dewar would interview Louise Nicholas during the Miller Inquiry -- which investigated the mistrials -- which she was the focus of.
Dewar said his involvement with Mrs Nicholas at that point was to correct an error in her statement.
"What on earth were you doing interviewing the woman who was the foundation of the Miller Inquiry?" Mr Stanaway asked.
Dewar said while he was also subject of the inquiry, inquiry head Detective Chief Inspector Rex Miller told him the inquiry was "going nowhere".
Mr Stanaway said despite hearing on at least two occasions Mrs Nicholas say under oath her allegations of sexual misconduct, Dewar did nothing.
Dewar said he faced a dilemma as he had heard Mrs Nicholas give evidence in trials where he knew she was lying.
Earlier in the day, Dewar said that he did not know Mr Rickards or Shipton well and did not know Schollum when he first met with Mrs Nicholas in January of 1993 to discuss her rape allegation against the former policeman.
"But even if they (Rickards, Shipton and Schollum) were 'friends' I would have investigated it."
Dewar also denied claims by a woman, who has name suppression, who told the court on Thursday, he had group sex with her and Shipton.
Dewar said he would never forget in 2004 when he came home from work and saw the woman on television talking about the group sex allegations.
"I know I never had group sex with Shipton, or any woman.
"It is completely false, I never met 'the woman' until the depositions hearing."
Dewar said at the time the group sex incident was alleged to have occurred, in late 1987 and early 1988, he did not have a personal or professional relationship with Shipton.
Claims that Mrs Nicholas had been involved in consensual sex with serving police officers, made the case sensitive and led to him taking over the investigation, he said.
When he was first told of Mrs Nicholas' claims about the former policeman by Inspector Ray Sutton, Mr Rickards, Shipton or Schollum's names were not mentioned, he said.
Mr Sutton told Dewar he needed to be aware of a "sensitive matter" involving instances of consensual sex between Mrs Nicholas and serving police officers, he said.
Dewar took over the file because Shipton was stationed at Rotorua, the court was told.
In his first meeting with Mrs Nicholas, she mentioned the allegations of the former policeman but did not refer to any other policemen or being violated with a baton, he said.
"She did indicate there were other things troubling her but she couldn't quite get them straight in her head."
When defence lawyer Paul Mabey QC asked Dewar if he had acted too promptly in arresting the former policeman Dewar said he knew Mrs Nicholas had already been through a lot.
"I wanted Louise to know I believed her, that we were taking her seriously."
Dewar said he questioned Shipton about the allegations and while admitting to numerous consensual acts with her, including group sex, he denied any rape or use of a baton.
By the time of the second trial Dewar said he was frustrated that Louise "was being portrayed as a liar and I didn't think that was the case.
"I accept in my dealing with Louise, I got too close and lost some objectivity in my evidence."
Dewar said he made a "judgment call" which he believed was right given the circumstances and one which he would probably make again today.
Mrs Nicholas called Dewar during the Miller Inquiry, set up by police after the Murupara mistrials, and told him "I've done a terrible thing," he said.
Mrs Nicholas told him she had been worn down and made comments to Rex Miller which were not true, including saying she had been raped by the three men, Dewar said.
Mrs Nicholas's statement to Dewar, which was passed onto the Miller Inquiry was a truthful account from Mrs Nicholas, he said.
Tomorrow the jury will hear closing statements and the judge will sum up on Wednesday before the jury retires to consider its verdict.
- NZPA
