Police Commissioner Richard Chambers says a legacy media outlet clearly breached the Radiocommunications Act by airing police radio audio from the night an officer was shot and Tom Phillips died, but prosecution has been ruled out in favour of preventing a repeat.
In an opinion piece in legacy media today, Chambers said the decision not to take the matter to court does not downplay its seriousness, stressing the distress caused to staff and families, the sensitivity of the evidence, and the potential impact on multiple ongoing investigations.
He warned that publishing such communications risks influencing officers’ recollections and could undermine future police operations by making staff hesitant to speak freely during critical incidents.
While reaffirming his commitment to transparency and “media openness”, Chambers urged outlets to act responsibly, noting most media respected the sensitivity of the material and declined to broadcast it.
Double speak
Come on, it’s not exactly like the mask was ever really on 🤷🏼♂️
such communications “risks influencing officers’ recollections”
ie preventes lying about what was said.
And if it had been alternative media and not corporate media, well now, there would have been charges, fines and jail time.
Censorship protecting the kids or the police?
Quite frankly , the public have not ruled out the seriousness of police ambushing, a man and his child, placing the child in harms way, then covering up what really happen.
This father was protecting his children from a corrupt family court system who awarded an unfit drug abusing mother custody of young children.
That child will one day grow up and tell the world what really went on.
If you want to see just how corrupt governments end, look no further than the UK and Ireland to see the citizens take back their countries from authoritarianism. This is not a new or a theory or concept.
The coverup continues
They want it to “go away” as there is already a lot of interest in this case and it makes fudging things, that much harder…….
I can imagine how a radio transmission that does not match up with events could be distressing to sworn police.
“The media release “He warned that publishing such communications risks influencing officers’ recollections“. What sort of nonsense statement is that? The public view lying police isn’t being addressed.
I have watched a policeman fabricate evidence and been caught out in a cross examination. Hard for the faithful public to accept the truth. But there you are.
Now you would think such conduct would automatically warrant a criminal charge of perjury, prosecution, conviction and prison. While the crimes act says up to 7 years, it does not apply to police.The consequences were limited to a very shameful and lingering silence followed by a quick not guilty verdict.
A few words back I mentioned the term “faithful public”. How small has that number become after such conflicting radio message evidence?
The New Zealand people expect nothing less than complete openness and transparency from police. It used to be a privilege to live in NZ. With an unbalanced family court and corrupt police force, not so much now.
Finally, a government who fails to address its problems, fails to be re elected.