LOL - Duncan, to be sensitive to your comments I'd have to care what you think of me. I was simply offering advice on how to improve the quality of your posts, for everyone's benefit.

Thanks for your comments Tandor but I would have thought your skin to be a tad thicker than a piece of rice paper. For as long as you commit your writing to a public domain you are open to personal criticism, especially if you write garbage like this article. As you are entitled to your opinion, (and boy, you do like to let everyone know it.) I also am entitled to an opinion and like you I like to let other opiniated people know it. So if you don't like people thinking you are a tosser find something else to do with your time or change the tone of your words. I am sure you are not a tosser but at times you do write like one. But hey, at least your not afraid to put it out there. Kind regards, Duncan.

Thanks for the comments. Some general responses: This isn't about whether the police do a good job in general. It is specifically about whether they are the best people to decide what charges to lay and to prosecute in the courts. These 6 examples are an illustration not a rigourous study, but spend a couple of days in the district court and you will soon observe many more cases of poor prosecutorial decision-making. Alternatively speak to a criminal lawyer. As regards the Abbott case, yes a jury eventually decided that his actions were justified. I'm not arguing about that (in this article). I'm saying that it needed to be tested in the courts, not decided by the police alone. If anyone apart from a police officer had approached Steven Wallace when he was smashing windows and then shot him dead when he advanced towards them, they would have been prosecuted by the police. In fact citizens have been prosecuted (and acquitted) for far more straightforward cases of self defence. Finally, Duncan, he wasn't a mate, he was just someone I know. Wanting people to be charged for the offense they committed is hardly an attempt to pat them on the back. In addition, it is a ridiculous waste of judicial time to leave it to judges to ensure that the right charges are being laid. Lastly, your post would have been improved by leaving out the personal insult and psycho-babble.

What role does a Judge play, could it be as an objective referee who can differentiate between frivolous time wasting in the courts to that which warrants genuine attention. Your boys will be boys attitude i.e, pat them on the back with a willful damage charge because boys will be (drunk) boys is EXACTLY the same as what you are arguing against! Just because there were bars to the window that was smashed does not disprove an intent to burgle, the bars may have been an added challenge, simply to see if they could could get passed. Why do you want to encourage this anti-social behavour, unless, perhaps, deep down simmering within your psyche is a social anarchist hiding behind a mask of opaque green that you wear in pretence for your social change agenda. Or, is this simply a juvenile attempt to defend a mate from a proven crime, he did plead guilty.

I personally have only had negative involvement with police & wouldn't rely on there help. The 1st court case I had was when i was really depressed & attempted suicide (yes that is a crime)the cops changed the story to wasting police time & because of may aspergers syndrome my emotions aren't always what they appear. the police withdrew the case. the 2nd time I went to court was when I was working at a liquor store & accidently sold to a minor which turned out to be a police sting, I got instant diversion & the 3rd time i went to court was when I got court with about $8 worth of weed & after 10 months of waiting, 5 court cases. the case was dismissed. I want to be a useful working helpful member of society & yet I am treated like a criminal. Btw everyone the thc oil in cannabis cures 90% of cancer. Open your eyes people

With regards the case of Steven Wallace, while there were tactical and procedural errors made the only person responsible for his death is Steven Wallace. It is quite easy to sit back pick apart a few isolated cases and complain about police conduct, but on the whole they do a very good job, better than other comparable countries.
They are underfunded under trained and work in a thankless job that many of the left wing whiners on here would never have the courage to do.

I agree with most of what Nador says. The Voorkamp case was a disgrace and Tiki Taane was only charged because he dented the ego of some regional copper. There are other recent cases of poor judgement around Police prosecutions. There is the case of the man who left the handbrake of his van off which then rolled into a lake drowning his son. It was clearly an accident yet the Police insisted up pursuing a prosecution to the full force of the law. Luckily a sensible judge discharged the man without conviction. But contrast that to the Police shooting of an innocent courier driver in Auckland. In that case the Police exonerated themselves and claimed that they had done nothing wrong.

I totally agree with this article, if you look at the statistics that show the probability of a successful conviction over the last 10 years it shows clearly that police are clogging the courts with ridicules cases that should never have been brought (assuming you remove the traffic offences in the stats). This has lead to the government restricting jury trials due to the cost to the country. Isn’t anyone concerned about this. In my opinion if you want a free country you must separate Police, Courts and Corrections, one to enforce the law, one to interpret the law and one to carry out the instructions of the courts. Having Police prosecute there own cases pollutes the independence of a free societies justice system

Tax payers payed over 50k to get my conviction for growing a few weed plants. Now the tax payer is paying for my dole payments because nobody will employ me because of my conviction. The law is a silly thing and the big wigs at the top are not looking at the bigger picture.

My son and I have been saying this all year. Let the cops do the arrest and enforce order, and let the justice system prosecute. Cops don't seem to have the brains, and are far to emotionally involved to get it right. This article alone almost makes me want to vote green, it's the most sensible thing I have seen from people in power for ages. @James. There are many many instances of our system being flawed, not only these examples. But then most Kiwis are about as brainless as our boys in blue and aren't of an ability to make their own informed decision, instead relying on biased journalism and police propoganda (thomas, ellis, watson to name a few). Open your eyes NZers, pull your heads out of the sand.

Nice one Nandor. Great to see an objective assessment of Police prosecutions getting aired. It is not simply a case of the Police making up charges and changing statements to suit such but the courts inability to apply common law precedents to outright dismiss unlawful acts of police. Instead we see pressure to remove trial by Jury which would only serve to remove the peoples protections from unjust laws and prejudice by Crown agents.

Really interesting article, thanks. How does this work in other countries?

Absolutely agree with the argument and the prescription. The police power of prosecution is not just used in thoughtless ways but in deliberately obstructive ones too. A friend is at the moment defending assault charges made by a police officer designed to forestall an IPCA complaint. This is despite the fact he is the one nursing the broken jaw and dislocated shoulder. Police powers of arrest per the Summary Offences Act also need to be curbed. They offer too much scope for an individual police officer to take offence and effect an arrest on the spot.

I totally agree, as someone who has worked with young people with homelessness and other compounding issues I can cite many cases of boarder line illegal prosecutions and maliscious behaviour by police, sometimes against people as young as thirteen. however i have found that it is not until a member of their extended social or family group is treated badly that middle class people loose the blinkers.

@James not to mention not tell the full story about the four cases. With stupid articles like this, you only get one half of the story, making the offender sound like a victim.