Police pressured into 'inaccurate' statements

Senior police officers have been accused of pressuring a young constable to make "inaccurate" statements against his boss as part of a vendetta which ruined the careers of both men.

In a landmark decision, the Employment Court has allowed former Counties-Manukau sergeant Mark Creedy to pursue a personal grievance case against police - despite the claim being well outside the usual 90-day filing period.

In 2001 Mr Creedy was found guilty of 31 internal disciplinary charges including disgraceful conduct, sexual harassment and pepper-spraying a fellow officer.

He quit the police in December that year under the Police Employment Rehabilitation Fund (Perf) scheme, citing stress, before police decided what disciplinary action to take.

Since then he has been battling police over his right to pursue a personal grievance, claiming he was forced out of the police as part of a long-standing vendetta against him. He claims his reputation and career as a policemen was destroyed and the stress ruined his long-term relationship at the time. He said he now wanted to get on with his life, get his job back and be awarded compensation.

The Employment Court found there were several reasons that warranted Mr Creedy being allowed to raise a personal grievance - including the fact there had been communication issues with his lawyer.

Mr Creedy claims to have affidavits from police officers saying they were pressured by senior staff to make incorrect statements about him.

He claimed one high-ranking police officer, who had a "meteoric rise through the ranks", told him "they came to me four times and put a very persuasive offer to me why I should give evidence against you".

Brett Stonyer, a former police constable, told the Herald on Sunday he was promised his "stripes" - promotion to sergeant - if he signed a statement against Mr Creedy.

When he expressed concern that the statement was not a fair account of what happened, he was pressured to sign. "I was too concerned about my career to see the wood from the trees."

Mr Stonyer, who is now a customer relations manager for an international bank, denied that he had gone as far as lying in his statement but said "you can lean the evidence to strengthen your case".

He claimed he was told to "push the boundaries of telling lies under oath and I wouldn't do it".

But what he did do was sign a statement that was misleading. "It was worded in such a way that implied a major sexual come-on, when in fact it was just mucking around.

"I tried to say to them that this was not right, that the whole place does it. But they told me to sign it."

The resulting statement, which Mr Stonyer now says was inaccurate and exaggerated, effectively helped to end Mr Creedy's career.

The statement incident followed an informal complaint by Mr Stonyer to his supervisor, about the level of violence used by police when apprehending offenders, and harassment of a young female constable which had got out of hand.

Yesterday Mr Stonyer said he despised the way the police had behaved and dealt with both the Creedy case and his own. Mr Stonyer eventually left the police in 2002 after he felt he could no longer do his job safely.

He alleges he was assaulted by a sergeant and other police for being a "snitch" and that staff would not work with him because they knew he would not be given backup in dangerous situations. Mr Stonyer has since taken his own personal grievance against the police and has settled out of court.

Mr Stonyer says he would like to return to the police but would not on principle.

"I could have been an asset to them but they chose to perform in this manner because they wanted to use me to get to another guy who they had issues with."

A spokesman from Police National Headquarters said police were not in a position to make comment while there was a case possibly pending.