Matthew Hague: lawyer and former police officer on the IPCA report into Jevon McSkimming's conduct

Bemusement at the actions of past senior police executives and their handling of serious complaints against the former Deputy Commissioner. 

A damming Independent Police Conduct Authority report's found a the allegations against Jevon McSkimming - who was gunning for the top job - were not immediately investigated.

The complainant was then charged with harassment.

Lawyer and former police officer Matthew Hague says it's possible those at the top thought they were doing the wrong thing for the right reasons.

"I can't understand how these senior, experienced, trusted leaders thought this would withstand scrutiny." 

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
One of the questions today over the Jevin Mcskimming Andrew
Costa affair is whether there will be charges against laid
against any of these police officers. The Police Minister and
the current Police Commissioner, Richard Chambers are calling it a
cover up. Was there a cover up?

Speaker 2 (00:15):
Well, look, the report speaks for itself and you know,
I know that people will interpret it. I've had a
lot of messages from Mike, how do.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
You interpret to Oh, look, I think absolutely it is right.
That's obviously. An interview from Morning Report this morning on
Radio New Zealand. Matthew Haig is a lawyer and a
former police officer and with us now hoime, Matthew, Hey,
do you think it's a cover up?

Speaker 2 (00:37):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (00:39):
Is that like a legal term or is that just
a vibe?

Speaker 2 (00:42):
No? I think it's more than a vibe. I think
this comprehensive report makes very clear that the senior executive
of our police sought to minimize avoid criminal liability because
of a commissioner appointment process which was completely inappropriate.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
It does intent matter here? I mean, does it make
a difference if Andrew Costa was thought that the woman
was telling lies and he was trying to protect what
he thought was a good officer. Is that still a cover?

Speaker 2 (01:08):
I think yes it is, And I think intent matters
for two reasons. One is what he touched on before,
which is is there any criminal liability here? And the
second is what we might what we see is corruption.
Some people might see corruption is the stereotypical police accepting
a bribe, but corruption is much wider than that. And
there's something called noble cause corruption, which I think is this,

(01:29):
in my opinion, is a good example.

Speaker 1 (01:30):
Of what's noble cause corruption.

Speaker 2 (01:33):
So noble course corruption is I think what the New
Zealand police are at morriskov, which is they do the
wrong thing for the right reason. And the vast majority
of the men and women and our police do the
right thing for the right reason. But it's tempting sometimes
to take shortcuts to do things and not quite the
right way for what they see as the greater reason.
But as we've seen in this case, that leads to

(01:54):
an undermining and trust in the place and really bad
results for everyone.

Speaker 1 (01:57):
Are there charges that can be laid as a result
of noble cause corruption?

Speaker 2 (02:02):
No, But what I think commissioner will form a commissioner
costa and some others should be concerned about is potentially
charges of perverting the course of justice. The report doesn't
make any conclusions, and I don't have any conclusions on
legal liability, but if someone improperly seeks to influence a
criminal investigation, which in my opinion the report clearly says

(02:24):
Deputy Commissioner Terror and Commissioner Costa did maybe in their
minds for the right reasons, and there could be that
criminal liability there.

Speaker 1 (02:33):
Okay, do we need further investigations?

Speaker 2 (02:37):
I think it's very likely there will be an investigation now,
and that would have started probably when the IPCA released
their draft report to the New Zealand plice.

Speaker 1 (02:45):
And who will be running that investigation?

Speaker 2 (02:48):
It's a good question because normally I'd like to say
the police, but of course, in this case, at the
highest levels, the investigation is into the police. I think
the only lucky thing here is that there has been
a significant change in the police executive and to the
current Commissioner's credit, he's been incredibly outspoken, perhaps unusually so
for in his condemnation of this matter.

Speaker 1 (03:08):
Yeah so, Lance Boudette suggested perhaps the Serious Fraud Office
would would they be the right ones?

Speaker 2 (03:15):
No? In my opinion, No, I think the Serious Fraud
Office do deal with serious corruption, but they tend to
be sort of more white collar financial crime. That's not
to say they can't. I just think it's a tough question.
I think the New Zealand Place should technically be doing it,
but they should probably appoint all kinds of independent expert
investigators to do the work.

Speaker 1 (03:34):
I see. Okay, Now do you find it odd that
this has been released? The IPCA report has been released
and Richard Chambers has had some heads up in some
ability to read it, you know, a couple of weeks beforehand,
and yet no follow up investigations have yet been announced.
Or should we just be a patient?

Speaker 2 (03:53):
I think I'm not surprised they haven't been announced, but
I think it's highly likely they will have started, or
least they will be in the process of starting. I
don't think you can read that report and come away
feeling satisfied that there may not be criminal liability that
less needs to be investigated, because that's not the job
of the IPSA. The IPCA is conduct. It's not criminal

(04:14):
investigations that has yet to be concluded.

Speaker 1 (04:16):
Chances of charges being laid.

Speaker 2 (04:21):
I don't know. Sorry, it's a unique situation. You know, honestly,
maybe unlikely but possible, but even unlikely but possible in
these circumstances is a pretty extraordinary state of affairs.

Speaker 1 (04:31):
More serious or less serious than the Louise Nicholas case.

Speaker 2 (04:36):
I think it's hard to compare the two because you're
dealing with women who have had incredibly horrific things happen
to them. I think they're worse in different ways. The
Louise Nicholas case it went to the high levels of
police leadership, but as far as when we're not to
the police executive and Wellington at this level, whereas this case,
it's just I can't understand how these senior, experience, trusted

(05:00):
leaders thought this would withstand scrutiny.

Speaker 1 (05:02):
Yeah, hey, thank you, Matthew. It's good to talk to you,
as always. Matthew Hayge, lawyer and former police officer.

Speaker 2 (05:07):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news talks.

Speaker 1 (05:11):
It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.