Richard Chambers: Police Commissioner on the investigation into the McSkimming scandal

The Police Commissioner's instructed specialist investigators to see whether the McSkimming scandal amounts to a perversion of justice.

Fallout continues from revelations in an IPCA report that's found senior police staff inadequately managed serious allegations against former Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming.

Harassment charges against the complainant have been dropped, but she's still being prosecuted for emails sent to the lead investigating officer - and his wife. 

Richard Chambers says he's checking the legal situation. 

"Because I want to be reassured that there's nothing more to see here. I've asked that, I haven't got that answer yet."

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Afternoon. Police are today defending the fact that they are
still prosecuting the woman at the center of the Gevin
Mcskimming saga. Now it's not for the emails that she
sent him and other officials. Those charges have been dropped.
It's related to alleged harrising emails she later sent the
officer who originally arrested her, and also emails she allegedly
sent that officer's wife. Richard Chambers is the police commissioner

(00:21):
and with us High Richard, Hello Heather Richard. In some
people's eyes, this is not a good look for police.
Are you confident you're doing the right thing?

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Well, look, we police have instructed as Sing your criminal
barrister to deal with us for police, and it's obviously
highly inappropriate for me to comment about it. You know,
some of the stuff that we've been dealing with this
week relate to seeing your officers interfering in processes. But
one thing I can say heither is that, of course

(00:50):
I have reassured myself and assured myself that the proper
processes have been followed in bringing this case. So you know,
I've just got to let that take its course. It's
a judicial process. And I cannot get involved.

Speaker 1 (01:02):
What does it mean that you've hired a senior criminal barrister?
Does that mean it's been done independently of police?

Speaker 2 (01:08):
Well, that does help. It's always good to have whilst
we've instructed our seeing a barrister, it's always good to
have that opinion across it as well. And that's the
right thing to do. To take it away from police,
albeit they are instructed on behalf of this, But take.

Speaker 1 (01:21):
It away now. Are you telling me that this is
a decisions are being made about prosecution here by the
barrister rather than by officers.

Speaker 2 (01:27):
No, no, no, not at all heither. No, I understand
that input was sought from independent people and on behalf
of Crown law. And you know that's the right thing
to do in a situation like this.

Speaker 1 (01:40):
Do you mean it's like a second set of eyes
to say, yep, this this meets whatever test it needs
to be.

Speaker 2 (01:46):
That's absolutely, absolutely, that's the process. And that's what I
mean when I talk about seeking some assurance that the
proper processes have been followed, because look, I it would
be very very concerned if proper process hadn't been followed,
because that's one of the things that I've been fronting
the media this week to just don't explain on my
in respect of my predecessors. So you know that we

(02:07):
have to be very very careful as we step through
that obviously.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
Now look, please just feel free to say you can't
answer questions if you can't answer questions, but I am
going I'm going to try and ask you some questions. Okay.
So what I want to know is there will be
people who say that this woman should be let off
the hook because the reason that she is behaving the
way that she's allegedly behaving is because she's been driven
mad by police. What do you say to that?

Speaker 2 (02:30):
Yes, look, I can't. I don't want to get drawn
into that, Heather, as much I appreciate people will want.

Speaker 1 (02:37):
You, can you tell me whether you've done a public like,
whether you've done a public interest test on prosecuting her?

Speaker 2 (02:44):
Of course? Is that that's that's absolutely that's the case.
That's very important when we make decisions around prosecution.

Speaker 1 (02:52):
Have you investigated the allegations she made against HIV and mcskimming,
the stuff about you know, wanting to blackmail who with
photos and stuff.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
Like that, Well, that's all been part of the work
that police has done once in November last year, once
everything was put in place in the way that it
should have been right at the very beginning. Once that
was done and there was a lot of all the
right things were put in place, independent oversight from the
i p C, a support from Crown Law.

Speaker 1 (03:18):
All sorts of charge with any of that.

Speaker 2 (03:23):
No, there are still aspects of that that are being
followed up, but the primary allegation has been dealt with
and the decision balancing that against you.

Speaker 1 (03:32):
Guys are obviously still looking into the stuff about him
using his credit card and all that kind of like
police problems, police policy. But what about the criminal stuff
that she's alleged. Has that been in charge?

Speaker 2 (03:44):
Yes, of very very authority. That's what That's what was
put in place in November last year, when it was
done properly. Once we put the proper things in place.

Speaker 1 (03:54):
Can I say no charges have come about as a
result of her allegations against him read the criminal stuff.

Speaker 2 (03:59):
Yes, that decision and we've said that publicly. That has
come out earlier that those decisions have been made. Once
the thorough investigation was completed and independent advice was sought
and taken them that has all been part of the decision,
maybe to ensure that.

Speaker 1 (04:14):
It is it because there wasn't enough evidence or because
it wasn't true.

Speaker 2 (04:20):
Look, I don't want to. I cannot comment on the
detail of that hither. I'm sorry. I appreciate this interest,
but I can't. I can't comment on that.

Speaker 1 (04:26):
Okay, do you intend because look, there are a bunch
of police officers here who have been been implicated in
the IPCA report, but who have gone on to retire.
A couple of them, ones gone off to work at
the CIA, just basically off got on with their lives.
Are you going to investigate them or is someone going
to investigate them with a view to potentially charging them either.

Speaker 2 (04:48):
Look, if they were still members of the New Zealand
Police then obviously employment investgations would be a consideration. But
when you're no longer a member of police, that's not possible.
But that said, we are progressing with three employment investigations
at the moment. If we identified if something was identified
of a criminal nature on the face of it, yes,

(05:08):
of course we would do that, whether you're a member
of police or not.

Speaker 1 (05:11):
Is this not perversion of the course of justice?

Speaker 2 (05:14):
Well, I have already asked for my specialist investigators were
senior oversight to have a look at that, because I
want to be reassured that there's nothing more to see here.
So I've asked that. I haven't got that answer yet
because they'll just take a little bit while for.

Speaker 1 (05:30):
Right, they're having a look at it, and as a
result of what they determine, there may be charges in
an investigation, or they may not.

Speaker 2 (05:37):
If it suggested that there's something that we may need
to look at here, then of course we would do
that because that's our job.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
Okay, Now, what about the pensions?

Speaker 2 (05:45):
Right?

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Because Geevin mc skimming is going to be on a
sweet little wicket the rest of his life as a
result of working for the cops. Can you take that often?

Speaker 2 (05:53):
No, it's not something that I can do. It's not
what I do as a Commisioner of Police. It's not
my jurisdiction. So well, it's certainly not the polics. I mean,
we have it. We have a very good pension scheme
in police, but it's not managed and led by police.
It's for police.

Speaker 1 (06:10):
It's not those guys who do the MP pay. Is
it the rem authority? Is it them?

Speaker 2 (06:15):
No, it's a police superuo.

Speaker 1 (06:18):
How much does he do to get I wouldn't have.

Speaker 2 (06:21):
A clue either. Actually, I don't really care, to be honest,
it's not my problem. He's moved on from the police.
That's a good thing.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
I feel like you have enough to care about it
at the moment. How about your speeding fine, I.

Speaker 2 (06:32):
Wasn't Wasn't that a shocker? Look, a lot of people
have had a laugh at my expense, Heather, And I'm
okay with that. I've owned it. You know, it shouldn't
have happened. I've holt terrible because I put my colleagues
in that position. But you know, hey, on these things, right.

Speaker 1 (06:48):
Is it true? Then you were cruising down the road
and you saw the lights behind you, and you pulled
over to let them through, and was surprised when they
pulled over behind you.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
Yes, I absolutely was, Heather, And yes, I was going
about my daily duty and pulled over to do the
right thing. It's what you do when you see lights
and sirens behind you, and was a little bit shocked
when they pulled them behind me.

Speaker 1 (07:07):
I thought, now you know how the rest of us feel.

Speaker 2 (07:11):
Yes, yes, yes, not good. But anyway, there's only one
person to blame and that's myself too.

Speaker 1 (07:16):
Right, Richard, thanks very much, appreciate your time. Richard Chambers,
Police Commissioner, fourteen past five. For more from Hither Duplessy
Allen Drive, listen live to news talks it'd be from
four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio