Scott Watson links

[Skyryder]

I know Bain is getting all the publicity at the moment and rightly so but there is one other innocent 'doing bird.' Some interesting links here. Some deal with issues raised in Trial by Trickery, others not. Just come to you own conclusions as to guilt or innocence.

http://trudyandtom.tripod.com/index.htm

Skyryder

[98tls]

Scott Watson is just where he deserves to be..........ive met him and hes a freak...............end of story.

[Skyryder]

Scott Watson is just where he deserves to be..........ive met him and hes a freak...............end of story.

Yep just like a closed book.

Skyryder

[Maha]

Cool thread...had a beginning...a middle and an end....:yes:

[98tls]

Yep just like a closed book.

Skyryder Most people have only seen scott watson in a suit and tie on the six oclock news...pretty normal clean cut sort of bloke they must think.........truth is he was a F%@k up way before he did what he did............i cant honestly say i know he did it but i without a doubt believe the guy capable of doing it..if you knew the guy you would agree for sure...........

[oldrider]

It's not a case of whether they did or didn't, it's a case of beyond all reasonable doubt! Tried and "true."

There are too many currently that are put away because they are silly buggers who fit the bill and were conveniently around at the time.

Bain, Watson, Tamaheri, Ellis even goes back to Arthur Allan Thomas, to name just a few and the fisherman on the West Coast who's name escapes me!

I make no judgement myself because I just don't know, I just feel ill at ease about the competence and quality of our judicial system and the quality of the policing involved.

Then you have the Corrections and the Parole board examples of late and the way authorities handle the gang situation in New Zealand, if this continues we (NZ) will be a world laughing stock!

Sorry but I don't think it's funny. :oi-grr: John.

[iwilde]

I always wouldered, if those two kids were black and from poor families, would the police have treated the case differently? Mr Watson still might be free.

[Patrick]

I always wouldered, if those two kids were black and from poor families, would the police have treated the case differently? Mr Watson still might be free.

NO??????????? He might not have killed a black poor couple...so maybe you are right...???

[Skyryder]

This will take about three or four minites.

http://trudyandtom.tripod.com/pcacomp1.htm

Consider that the Crown spent two million on investigation and you begin to see why Popes integrity sailed away with the Mystery Yacht.

These lies can be proved 'beyond reasonable doubt.' To my knowledge the Crown has no interest in pursuing this any further. It is just too embarressing for both the judiciary and the police.

Skyryder

[Swoop]

I intend to read the book quite soon.
There does seem to be, however, a distinct lack of credence placed on the boating fraternity and their evidence.
If a racer had his/her bike stolen and another racer said "yeah, it had ABC tyres, an ACME rear shock, XYZ fairings" etc, that would have some credence to it... yes?:yes:

[Patrick]

This will take about three or four minites.

http://trudyandtom.tripod.com/pcacomp1.htm

Consider that the Crown spent two million on investigation and you begin to see why Popes integrity sailed away with the Mystery Yacht.

These lies can be proved 'beyond reasonable doubt.' To my knowledge the Crown has no interest in pursuing this any further. It is just too embarressing for both the judiciary and the police.

Skyryder

"Family," I see??? "Clutching at straws" rings a bell...

[Skyryder]

"Family," I see??? "Clutching at straws" rings a bell...

Well the dad has nothing to lose, but the 'fact' remains that Pope lied. Once you get into some of the finer detail there have been other instances of this sort of thing too. For instance court records show that Watson was convicted for burgely assault. When in fact his convictions were for burgerley, assault etc. The missing comma makes a lot of difference.. If memory serves me correctly these were eleven years 'prior' to the murders. Seems he had 'turned his life around somewhat.

Skyryder

[Patrick]

Well the dad has nothing to lose, but the 'fact' remains that Pope lied. Once you get into some of the finer detail there have been other instances of this sort of thing too. For instance court records show that Watson was convicted for burgely assault. When in fact his convictions were for burgerley, assault etc. The missing comma makes a lot of difference.. If memory serves me correctly these were eleven years 'prior' to the murders. Seems he had 'turned his life around somewhat.

Skyryder

That damn comma... guilty as sin then...!!! Especially for burgely... or burgerley....

[Skyryder]

That damn comma... guilty as sin then...!!! Especially for burgely... or burgerley....

Yep that bloody comma. Got a lot to answer for in history. Just like my spelling, or lack of it.:dodge:

Skyryder

[Patrick]

Yep that bloody comma. Got a lot to answer for in history. Just like my spelling, or lack of it.:dodge:

Skyryder

Like women who say "Don't. Stop. Don't, stop, don't stop...":dodge: See? Another damn comma!

[Forest]

Bain, Watson, Tamaheri, Ellis even goes back to Arthur Allan Thomas, to name just a few and the fisherman on the West Coast who's name escapes me!

Tamaheri was definitely guilty.

[Ronin]

Tamaheri was definitely guilty.

Which one? lol

[Forest]

Which one? lol

Haha! :)

David Tamihere (not his brother John).

[Patrick]

Bain, Watson, Tamaheri, Ellis even goes back to Arthur Allan Thomas, to name just a few and the fisherman on the West Coast who's name escapes me!

I'll bite... again...

ALL guilty... maybe not the fisherman thing tho...

See the BAIN thread...
WATSON - Don't know of any boaties who bleach the entire inside of their boats out... and that is from a boaties viewpoint.
Now Teenaged kids from ELLIS'S reign speak out occasionally...
TAMAHERE didn't like the O/C Case and would have coughed if it was someone else....
THOMAS was let off because of the planted bullet, as a punishment for the Police doing a fit up, not because he didn't do it....

IMHO...

[The Stranger]

I'll bite... again...

ALL guilty... maybe not the fisherman thing tho...

See the BAIN thread...
WATSON - Don't know of any boaties who bleach the entire inside of their boats out... and that is from a boaties viewpoint.
Now Teenaged kids from ELLIS'S reign speak out occasionally...
TAMAHERE didn't like the O/C Case and would have coughed if it was someone else....
THOMAS was let off because of the planted bullet, as a punishment for the Police doing a fit up, not because he didn't do it....

IMHO...

So do the Police ever get the wrong guy?

[Winston001]

So do the Police ever get the wrong guy?

Absolutely - but that simply means policemen are human and capable of mistakes. The pressures on the police to solve high profile cases is immense and officers can come to believe they have identified the offender. Human nature then resists suggestions that they might be mistaken, particularly if the suspect fits the theory of the case.

Having said that, the criminal investigation system isn't one man and his dog doing all of the work. Many officers are involved with this type of case and they have to generally agree on the strength of the evidence they have gathered. Ron Pope for example was simply the lead detective in the Watson presecution.

As well as the police, the Crown solicitor's office of lawyers is involved and they have to be equally convinced of the strength of the case.

So there is a whole cohort of people involved in weighing whether a suspect should be prosecuted, long before it gets to trial.

At trial the defendant has his lawyer and the chance to have his say. He doesn't have to give evidence but frankly you have to wonder why he doesn't in many of these cases. For example, David Bain. He blames his lawyer but if the guy was as innocent as driven snow, that was his chance to get up and say so. He didn't.

[Patrick]

So do the Police ever get the wrong guy?

yeah... the guy out Avondale way (DONNELLY??) who raped the kiddie next door, she identified him as the offender etc etc and he spent time in jail... but DNA proved it wasn't him.

I've never got the wrong guy... all my lockups have been guilty, except for an EBA once where you push a button before attaching a mouthpiece on a screening device (which doesn't change the eventual evidential result on another machine, BTW...) means they weren't drunk after all...

And as I said before, maybe not the fisherman thingy...

[oldrider]

Tamaheri was definitely guilty.

That's a big call, I don't profess to know about any of them but the information available is less than convincing to me and many many others that have read it.

I grew up feeling confident that we had a great justice system and police force in New Zealand, I am sorry to say that my confidence is somewhat eroded today and I would like to have it back again! :yes: John.

[Skyryder]

That's a big call, I don't profess to know about any of them but the information available is less than convincing to me and many many others that have read it.

I grew up feeling confident that we had a great justice system and police force in New Zealand, I am sorry to say that my confidence is somewhat eroded today and I would like to have it back again! :yes: John.

Mine fell apart after reading Trial by Trickery. (scared the heebee jeebeez out of me. I kid you not) I was in the Rakia area when that chick Kirsty somone from Ashburton was found. Duly went in to remove myself from the suspects list etc. I wonder where I would be if the Police spent two million in trying to frame me for that. All I can say is thank god I don't have any criminal convictions................there but for fortune go I......and by the sounds of the Justice system that applies to 'all' of us.

Skyryder

[scott411]

i believe the NZ police have found the person and made the evidence fit to many times, ratehr than letting the evidence find the man,

saying that, i think Watson has more to cry about than Bain, i do not think Watson killed those 2, but i am not so convinced about Bain

[SPman]

Tamahere was at least guilty of being terminally stupid!
Thomas did not do it - I saw parts of both trials and was appalled by what I observed at the time - it was well and widely reputed to have been Jeanettes father.
Ellis was stitched up, by the wave of self proclaimed child abuse "experts", sweeping the world at that time - his only "crime" was being gay and liked by the kids, as is often the case - a long way from being the depraved paedophile he was made out to be - the ideas planted in the minds of the "victims", by the police and their psychologists was far more of a criminal act, with long term harm quite possible.

IMHO.

[Rasta]

I've read Hunters book and Kalaughers and met Watson. I've also read Justice Thomas' 2006 report on miscarriages of justice in NZ and what factors make them more likely and they were almost all present in Watson's case. I am convinced he is innocent.

I'm not convinced he's a nice guy - I found him to be ok but have heard other people say he's nasty. Being nasty doesn't make him a killer. If that was a basis to convict people, maybe a few more of us would be doing time.

I'm convinced that he is innocent because all the crucial evidence points away from him - description of the likely perpetrator, description of the boat, circumstantial evidence (Watson painted his boat but to the colour of the suspect boat, not to another colour). The compelling evidence that convinced the jury, as far as I can see, was DNA evidence from a hair from Olivia alleged to be taken from a blanket on his boat.

However the first examination of hairs from the blanket only revealed black curly ones - mostly pubes. A much later examination of the same set of hairs found a long blond one. Curious it wasn't found the first time, only later, and shortly after samples from Olivia's hairbrush had been examined in the same place. Very poor procedure. In addition. a 1 inch slit was found in the bottom of the sample bag. Given Pope insistence that Watson was the killer as soon as he'd seen his profile, that worries me a great deal.

The real issue IMO is that there is no proper procedure to deal with these kinds of cases. The appeals system doesn't work for various reasons which I have highlighted at "rasnandor.blogspot.com/2009/06/bain-found-not-guilty-how-about.html". I think its time we followed Justice Thorpe's recommendations and instituted a Criminal Appeals Review Office, like they have in the UK.

ps I've been lurking on this board for a few years now. Thanks for all the great info

[Rasta]

pps - Patrick, I think you mean Doherty. The Association for the Wrongfully Convicted has looked at cases from the USA where DNA evidence later proved the convicted person was innocent. The no. 1 cause of wrongful conviction? Eyewitness ID!

[JimO]

Tamaheri was definitely guilty.

what about the watch, a big part of the case against him was that he gave urban's watch to his son but when the skeleton was found it still had the watch on. tamaheri was a theif and had a earlier murder conviction but i dont think he did this one........Scott watson is another dodgy conviction didnt a off duty cop see the mystery boat whilst out fishing?? David Bane was found not guilty by a jury who heard all the evidence..The dunedin police need a major rocket up them for the series of fuckups they made on this case and if he is indeed guilty only have themselves to blame for him being free now

[pete376403]

fisherman = Rex Haig, convicted on the word of his nephew who was given immunity, but was quite possibly the guilty person http://www.rexhaig.com/

[NDORFN]

Absolutely - but that simply means policemen are human and capable of mistakes. The pressures on the police to solve high profile cases is immense and officers can come to believe they have identified the offender. Human nature then resists suggestions that they might be mistaken, particularly if the suspect fits the theory of the case.

Having said that, the criminal investigation system isn't one man and his dog doing all of the work. Many officers are involved with this type of case and they have to generally agree on the strength of the evidence they have gathered. Ron Pope for example was simply the lead detective in the Watson presecution.

As well as the police, the Crown solicitor's office of lawyers is involved and they have to be equally convinced of the strength of the case.

So there is a whole cohort of people involved in weighing whether a suspect should be prosecuted, long before it gets to trial.

At trial the defendant has his lawyer and the chance to have his say. He doesn't have to give evidence but frankly you have to wonder why he doesn't in many of these cases. For example, David Bain. He blames his lawyer but if the guy was as innocent as driven snow, that was his chance to get up and say so. He didn't.

Pitty they act like they're superior.

[Laxi]

Haha! :)

David Tamihere (not his brother John).

some would debate that and say both:laugh:

[merv]

Shame there are so many liars in the world. If everyone told the truth then there would be no need for jury trials. I just wish Watson would show the cops where he dumped the bodies.

[maxlev]

WATSON - Don't know of any boaties who bleach the entire inside of their boats out... and that is from a boaties viewpoint.


the police expert said between 30% & 50% was cleaned.
This was increased to "all" by those who wanted to show Scott as guilty.
No mention of bleach being used anywhere.

[maxlev]

.Scott watson is another dodgy conviction didnt a off duty cop see the mystery boat whilst out fishing??

Yes, a policeman from New Plymouth, on holiday.
I watched him say what he saw in court, on tv.
He had his head down and spoke quietly, perhaps he knew what he was saying would hinder any future promotion in the force.
Good on him for being honest tho.

[Skyryder]

Shame there are so many liars in the world. If everyone told the truth then there would be no need for jury trials. I just wish Watson would show the cops where he dumped the bodies.


Has it ever occured to you that he can't because he did not kill them.



Skyryder

[JimO]

Has it ever occured to you that he did not kill them.



Skyryder

same goes for david bain

[bane]

How about this summary:

'Watson is as guilty as Bain is innocent'.

[P38]

I also think Scott Watson while being a bloody dodgy bastard in innocent of the crime he has been convicted for.

The big question that has never been asked or proved is

Has a murder been committed?

There are no bodies and in deed no other evidence to support both people have been murdered.

Yes two people are missing under suspicious circumstances.

Maybe even murdered.

Based on all the evidence presented that I have heard and read it has never been proved "Beyond Reasonable Doubt" that a murder has been committed let alone that it was committed By Scott Watson.

If I was on the jury I would vote "Not Guilty" because of this.

[Skyryder]

I also think Scott Watson while being a bloody dodgy bastard in innocent of the crime he has been convicted for.

The big question that has never been asked or proved is

Has a murder been committed?

There are no bodies and in deed no other evidence to support both people have been murdered.

Yes two people are missing under suspicious circumstances.

Maybe even murdered.

Based on all the evidence presented that I have heard and read it has never been proved "Beyond Reasonable Doubt" that a murder has been committed let alone that it was committed By Scott Watson.

If I was on the jury I would vote "Not Guilty" because of this.

This is one of the big ifs.
There is no evidence of murder other than two people are missing. But this in no way offers an opinion than murder has not been committed.

I think there is a greater probability that there has been a murder than there has not. There has been no evidence that Smart of Hope planned to elope so on this basis alone there is a reasonable assumption that they both have been murdered.


Skyryder

[Skyryder]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sounds-murders/news/article.cfm?c_id=622&objectid=10478198


Skyryder

[Maha]

Has it ever occured to you that he can't because he did not kill them.



Skyryder

Watson quickly became the prime suspect, even though police were searching for a ketch that water-taxi driver Guy Wallace said he dropped the pair off at with a "mystery man".
The inquiry focus soon switched to Watson when he was mentioned as a potential suspect.



Maybe you can help me Skyryder....
I was talking to some people today about the Bain thing, and the Thomas thing, they mentioned Watson. They said the police were very interested in him over the Hope/Smart case because he (Watson) was involved with a similar incident on Great Barrier Island some time prior to Ben and Olivia going missing, maybe a couple of years prior?
I had not heard about this until today, do you know anything about it?

[Skyryder]

Watson quickly became the prime suspect, even though police were searching for a ketch that water-taxi driver Guy Wallace said he dropped the pair off at with a "mystery man".
The inquiry focus soon switched to Watson when he was mentioned as a potential suspect.



Maybe you can help me Skyryder....
I was talking to some people today about the Bain thing, and the Thomas thing, they mentioned Watson. They said the police were very interested in him over the Hope/Smart case because he (Watson) was involved with a similar incident on Great Barrier Island some time prior to Ben and Olivia going missing, maybe a couple of years prior?
I had not heard about this until today, do you know anything about it?

This??

Monday, 13 September 1999

POLICE INVESTIGATE WATSON LINKS WITH GREAT BARRIER

Auckland police have been investigating possible links between Scott Watson and the mysterious disappearance of a woman on Great Barrier Island. 48-year-old American Nancy Frey went missing from her island home two years ago this month - her body was never found. Police won't confirm they have spoken with the detectives who investigated the murders of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope but admit they have checked out where the man convicted of their killings was at the time. Inspector Dennis Woods says Watson was in Whangarei when Nancy Frey went missing, but the yachtie is likely to have stopped at the nearby island in the following days. Inspector Woods says there will be no further attempts to link Watson to Nancy Frey's disappearance.


I have added a link for the reviews of TRIAL BY TRICKERY. For those diehards on this I draw your attention to the second review by Chris Gallavin, and Keith Hunters Commentary of this review. Hunter raises further quiries in October 3.

http://www.hunterproductions.co.nz/bookreviews.htm

Skyryder

[candor]

The below quote from another site concerns me. This is because I long past warned Watsons team about things I know about the deceased Judge Heron. Very bad things. They never followed up. But the things I know more interestingly now pertained to his conduct (unbecoming a Judge) and his relationship with Kristy McDonald - who did traveling courts with Heron in the late 80s. I have written to the Solicitor General already raising concerns about potential future honors as my alarm was raised by her ascent up the career ladder - they have the letter dated 3 years ago, which speaks of her unusual relationship with Judge Heron - one that I would say compromises her as a fit person for dealing with the Watson case today.

I approached the winebox reporter Jenny McManus about this Heron / McDonald stuff mid 90's. She did an opinion article just saying - what if there were corruption in our judiciary, and got hammered. I said it'll keep.

I have taped evidence from the 1980s from people McDonald spoke to at the Chateau Marlborough, but should not elaborate except by again speaking to the Solicitor General about Ms McDonald - I CAN NOT BELIEVE that she has been given the Watson case, knowing what I know about her and Heron. And knowing that I shared it at high levels due to concerns over her years ago. The NZ Justice system is absolutely rigged - Judge Herons trials are none of them "safe" and high levels in the Justice system confirmed awareness of this to me 1990s. He put 7 year suppressions on transcripts of cases he'd perverted to avoid scrutiny but thats only a start. He went from being the systems dirty secret to Watsons nightmare. Kristy surely knows this - but Heron having taken her innocence and hopefully ability to sleep at night could now, years on, influence her either way from his putrid grave.

Perhaps she'll seek to put right wrongs of Heron that she was intimately and ? ambitiously caught up in. Or else true to lawyer form she may continue obeying the sick loyalty code and do so under yoke of belief the system must never be seen to have erred. Those with things to hide can be leveraged, its worth considering.

Kristy McDonald:sick:QC has been appointed to enquire into Scott Watson's petition to the Governor General. This has to be cynism at its very best.

Keith says, 'Scott Watson's accusations are against the Deputy Commissioner of Police, the three Crown Prosecutors and the late trial judge. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is also being attacked where a blatantly untrue statement falsely legitimises the whole trial as a fair one, provoking questions as to that Court's compettence and/or integrity.' He goes on to say there are many Queen's Counsel appropriately qualified for this appointment but Ms McDonald :eek5:seems not to be one of them. It seems her principal employer is the Crown, particularly as prosecutor for the Crown Law Office, and as counsel for the police. She began her career as a prosecutor, was appointed Crown Counsel at the Crown Law Office and is a Crown Prosecutor of long standing. Appointments as prosecutor are made by the Crown Law Office through the Deputy Solicitor General (Criminal).

Ms McDonald :bash:clearly cannot adjudicate on the conduct of her employer, her colleagues or her competitors.

[dangerous]

Scott Watson is just where he deserves to be..........ive met him and hes a freak...............end of story.
That might be, but did he do it? who knows it was a stich up from start to finish.
Trudy and Tom Watson are good friends Guzzi riders, and Tom being Scotts bother would know beter than anyone.
Scot was a prick, a knowen shit head (lived near my dad) but what evidnce that was given is a crock a shit.

[Raine Logan]

i see this thread is old and while i'm familiar with most arguments as the the inappropriateness of mcdonalds appointment to watsons case, you seem to believe you know more.
why can't you say what that is? i for one would love to know; as would others.

[Mully]

i see this thread is old and while i'm familiar with most arguments as the the inappropriateness of mcdonalds appointment to watsons case, you seem to believe you know more.
why can't you say what that is? i for one would love to know; as would others.

Libel laws for one thing, would be my guess.

Plus keeping your powder dry......

[oldrider]

How about this summary:

'Watson is as guilty as Bain is innocent'.

Oddly enough on today's revelations and understanding of events, that summary is now more likely than ever to be correct! :shifty:

[Raine Logan]

Libel laws for one thing, would be my guess.

Plus keeping your powder dry......

i thought it's only libel if it's not true.
(and i also thought i was replying to a specific post, glad you knew what i was talking about though, lol, thanks)

[oldrider]

i thought it's only libel if it's not true.
(and i also thought i was replying to a specific post, glad you knew what i was talking about though, lol, thanks)

Skyryder is having a little sabticle time out from KB currently, if he is the poster that you were directing your own reply post too!

[Raine Logan]

Skyryder is having a little sabticle time out from KB currently, if he is the poster that you were directing your own reply post too!

o0o ... hoping it wasn't for talking about scott watson. heh.
it was 'candor' i meant to address though.

[dangerous]

o0o ... hoping it wasn't for talking about scott watson. heh.
it was 'candor' i meant to address though.

then click "reply with quote" then we will know whom you refer.

Oldrider, good poingt the old bastard hasnt been on line for a while, perhaps I should visit the stick.

[oldrider]

then click "reply with quote" then we will know whom you refer.

Oldrider, good poingt the old bastard hasnt been on line for a while, perhaps I should visit the stick.

True! I thought old women his age didn't get a period anymore! :lol: Education just never stops, does it! :shifty:

[Flip]

Well the dad has nothing to lose, but the 'fact' remains that Pope lied. Once you get into some of the finer detail there have been other instances of this sort of thing too. For instance court records show that Watson was convicted for burgely assault. When in fact his convictions were for burgerley, assault etc. The missing comma makes a lot of difference.. If memory serves me correctly these were eleven years 'prior' to the murders. Seems he had 'turned his life around somewhat.

Skyryder


The Jury would not have known about Scott Watsons convictions. (Which I actually think is wrong)

[dangerous]

Just a reminder... http://www.freescottwatson.com/

[neels]

Well, I don't know if he did it or not, but I'd be right pissed off if one of my kids was convicted on the evidence that he was. And I agree with previous posts that reasonable doubt that he did it would be that there is actually no evidence that anybody has been murdered, as there are no dead people to demonstrate this.

I know a couple of people that knew him, and agree that he was a bit of a bad boy when he was young, it doesn't mean he's a murderer (with no real motive).

Another good book is this one, written by someone that had no axe to grind but just thought it was all a bit dodgy...

The Marlborough Mystery (http://www.abebooks.co.uk/9781877178917/Marlborough-Mystery-Kalaugher-Mike-1877178918/plp)



The Jury would not have known about Scott Watsons convictions. (Which I actually think is wrong)
The jury are supposed to decide guilt on the facts of the case, rather than presupposing that because somebody has been convicted of a crime previously they are a criminal and therefore must be guilty.

[freedom-wedge]

Scott Watson is just where he deserves to be..........ive met him and hes a freak...............end of story.

just like were looking for a black black man and any one will do. Once the crown/police decide they have their man despite people saying they actually dont, in this country the outcome is assured, and now if they dont get you the first time they get another jury and then another. So hes a bit different and has history where he stepped over the line for what ever reason, it dosnt make him guilty, nor does the fact the jury saw it a different way, the people who sat in jugement of Thomas got it dreadfully wrong becuase they were mislead, its all well documented and will be the case for Watson one day to the shame of our own Authorities I feel

[scumdog]

just like were looking for a black black man and any one will do. Once the crown/police decide they have their man despite people saying they actually dont, in this country the outcome is assured, and now if they dont get you the first time they get another jury and then another.

The way they got David Bain?

And the way he never got a second trial?

[scumdog]

ferkkin double-post shit..

[Littleman]

just like were looking for a black black man and any one will do. Once the crown/police decide they have their man despite people saying they actually dont, in this country the outcome is assured, and now if they dont get you the first time they get another jury and then another. So hes a bit different and has history where he stepped over the line for what ever reason, it dosnt make him guilty, nor does the fact the jury saw it a different way, the people who sat in jugement of Thomas got it dreadfully wrong becuase they were mislead, its all well documented and will be the case for Watson one day to the shame of our own Authorities I feel

I'm pretty sure BAIN/WATSON/THOMAS were white dude.

[freedom-wedge]

Absolutely - but that simply means policemen are human and capable of mistakes. The pressures on the police to solve high profile cases is immense and officers can come to believe they have identified the offender. Human nature then resists suggestions that they might be mistaken, particularly if the suspect fits the theory of the case.

Having said that, the criminal investigation system isn't one man and his dog doing all of the work. Many officers are involved with this type of case and they have to generally agree on the strength of the evidence they have gathered. Ron Pope for example was simply the lead detective in the Watson presecution.

As well as the police, the Crown solicitor's office of lawyers is involved and they have to be equally convinced of the strength of the case.

So there is a whole cohort of people involved in weighing whether a suspect should be prosecuted, long before it gets to trial.

At trial the defendant has his lawyer and the chance to have his say. He doesn't have to give evidence but frankly you have to wonder why he doesn't in many of these cases. For example, David Bain. He blames his lawyer but if the guy was as innocent as driven snow, that was his chance to get up and say so. He didn't.

There are valid points here, the worry for me is that you have a body of people who are used to backing each other up for the sake of their own professional integrity, driven in most cases by a person who has extreme influence over an investigation, to get out of step with the common consensus of an investigation or to question findings can result in alienation for individual police persons or department of justice employees. Getting it wrong in public hurts the justice system, destroys our confidence in it, and that I’m afraid can and will result in perjury to protect their own, its only human nature. There are many decent police and justice workers but they may find themselves in difficult positions and have their loyalty tested where there is pressure to obtain a result that will show the system in a positive way or in the way its expected to result.

Pedro

[freedom-wedge]

I'm pretty sure BAIN/WATSON/THOMAS were white dude.

Yes youre right but I think you missed the sentiment. You needed to of understood the Hurricane case in America so its my mistake

[freedom-wedge]

i believe the NZ police have found the person and made the evidence fit to many times, ratehr than letting the evidence find the man,

saying that, i think Watson has more to cry about than Bain, i do not think Watson killed those 2, but i am not so convinced about Bain

I tend to agree on these points, the bain case does have some disturbing twists however I feel

[freedom-wedge]

what about the watch, a big part of the case against him was that he gave urban's watch to his son but when the skeleton was found it still had the watch on. tamaheri was a theif and had a earlier murder conviction but i dont think he did this one........Scott watson is another dodgy conviction didnt a off duty cop see the mystery boat whilst out fishing?? David Bane was found not guilty by a jury who heard all the evidence..The dunedin police need a major rocket up them for the series of fuckups they made on this case and if he is indeed guilty only have themselves to blame for him being free now

I wondered when the watch would be mentioned, what ever you think of Tamaheri, he was axed by the watch. It would of had the Jury convinced beyond a doubt that there was unlawfull connection apparant, and would of brought all the other evidence under consideration wether questionable or not to one conclusion. The seesaw of justice once its been ballanced one way, it takes somthing heavy to get it righted.

[freedom-wedge]

The way they got David Bain?

And the way he never got a second trial?

I,m concerned with how bain was convicted and how the investigation transpired, like many others, I am yet to be totally convinced bain didnt do it however, although much evidence points to the father. The trail has cost this country so much so far, I would be so disapointed if it were just to save face and preserve the integrity of an investigation. The fact he had to seek overseas council to decide if there had been an injustice which to some degree was upheld is a shame, it shows there are flaws to the appeal system. To whome do we turn now that avenue is closed, how do we achieve a hearing without possible bias ??.

[freedom-wedge]

Apologises for being late to the thread, and posted so much at once, I believe an injustice has occurred in the case of Watson verses the Crown, I believe also that he will not receive an impartial hearing into that fact due to certain currant circumstances. I believe in the individual members of the police of this country who have mana just as I believe in its armed forces who follow political will and make sacrifice for our cause. I fear political influence within all areas where it should not reside, a result one way or another should be free from pressure for it to be any which way. It was this way for Watson I feel. He was heavily outmatched and was facing much pressure to obtain a conviction for the good of our country and its reputation over seas regardless of his guilt or otherwise, the case in fact backs up this theory when all notes are digested, just to many questions left unanswered for it to of ended guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Pedro

[Raine Logan]

Apologises for being late to the thread, and posted so much at once, I believe an injustice has occurred in the case of Watson verses the Crown, I believe also that he will not receive an impartial hearing into that fact due to certain currant circumstances. I believe in the individual members of the police of this country who have mana just as I believe in its armed forces who follow political will and make sacrifice for our cause. I fear political influence within all areas where it should not reside, a result one way or another should be free from pressure for it to be any which way. It was this way for Watson I feel. He was heavily outmatched and was facing much pressure to obtain a conviction for the good of our country and its reputation over seas regardless of his guilt or otherwise, the case in fact backs up this theory when all notes are digested, just to many questions left unanswered for it to of ended guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Pedro

i fully agree with you.

i think keith hunter did a bloody good job in his book of exposing the case for the sham it was. he sent a copy to every MP in parliament when it was published and only two, tanczos and hide, had the gumption to do anything (not a lot though, as it turned out). that right there is a real worry.

you have to wonder why. the book is obviously a money making venture and i don't think anyone is denying that. but that doesn't discredit the content. it was a difficult read, imo, but that's understandable considering how complex the case actually is. hunter did eventually bring it all together and didn't blur his own opinion with real facts too much. it was easy enough to see when he did too if you made an effort to read it objectively so you could ignore the spin.

so what is up with our government members? do they not care? can the not read very well? or are they all too worried about their own butts to make a stand?

[Littleman]

Yes youre right but I think you missed the sentiment. You needed to of understood the Hurricane case in America so its my mistake

Gosh, how did I miss that one, it was obvious.

[freedom-wedge]

Gosh, how did I miss that one, it was obvious.

Just as obvious as the Watson case is an absolute travesty of justed to anyone who is not stone walled by the crowns argument ???

[scumdog]

Just as obvious as the Watson case is an absolute travesty of justed to anyone who is not stone walled by the crowns argument ???

Hmm, Watsons lawyer obviously not up to task then??

[freedom-wedge]

Hmm, Watsons lawyer obviously not up to task then??

Maybe so, or maybe the other side was just better prepared to obtain a conviction. You know what a hostile place a courtroom can be to a defendant I,m sure. In situations like that with so much at stake you have to have the best and maybe they were less than that.

[dangerous]

Hmm, Watsons lawyer obviously not up to task then??Its a crock a shit SD and you know it ;)
apart from the fact there are/were no bodys found (on the Carribean partying up?) read the facts in the www I posted, the Blade that was seen in the straight At a certain time suposedly dumping the bodys was then seen up the channel x hours later, Scotts Dad took the Blade from point A to poing B and theres no way in hell at full speed tide in favour that the boat could have been in both places... another flaw the water taxy guy droped the missing couple of at a boat that needed a ladder to bord, Watsons tub sits SFA above water line. Any one in Chch check it out its mored in Purau.

The boat that they were droped of to was seen then disapaired, I was told it was a knowen dealers boat from Oz... do the maths... all this and no bodys???
The scrath marks under the hatch suposedly done by Olivia trying to ecsape... well its pollystyreen and Scotts sister said her kids did that damage...

weather he did it or not fucked if I know but theres no way in hell the guy should be locked up.

[Skyryder]

Not a U-turn but it’s a change in direction for Watson at long last.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news/article.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=10666144

However, the detail of the report - obtained by this newspaper - is in striking contrast to the press release.
The report reveals that IPCA head Justice Lowell Goddard was actually sharply critical of aspects of the investigation, led by present Deputy Commissioner Rob Pope.

Reading between the lines I suspect that given the immanent retirement of Broad, political forces within the Police hierarchy are at work to prevent Pope from becoming top cop.

The Press release according to the Herald is in striking contrast to the report. There still appears to be a significant lobby within the Police who are still in denial mode of the injustice against Watson. Just watch the layers of Popes protection come crumbling down once he retires and those in denial mode retire with him. There will be some young bucks wanting to make a name for themselves, who have nothing to lose or fear who will go after the truth like zealots.

Skyryder

[Patrick]

...... although much evidence points to the father.....

You're joking, right? "Much eveidence pointing at him???" Like what????? Blame the dead guy. It worked.


.... You know what a hostile place a courtroom can be to a defendant......

Another crack up. Prosecution has to supply everything involving the case, whether it is going to be used in the hearing or not. From that, they can make up alibis, stories to suit, whatever... on the day in court.

The defendant doesn't have to supply a thing before any hearing, no intended defence, nothing...... Who does the system favour? Sure aint the prosecution.....

[pete376403]

No limit on how much the prosecution can/will spend to get a conviction. Often the defendant doesn't have the same financial resources, legal aid notwithstanding.

[98tls]

weather he did it or not fucked if I know but theres no way in hell the guy should be locked up.

Ever met him?i have and whether he did it or not i couldnt give a shit,best place for the piece of shite is locked up believe me,ive often chuckled at the posts in this thread from people that have never met the bloke,if they had ive no doubt they would agree,right or wrongly imprisoned is the best place for him,and the rest of NZ,hes a fuckup.

[scissorhands]

Ever met him?i have and whether he did it or not i couldnt give a shit,best place for the piece of shite is locked up believe me,ive often chuckled at the posts in this thread from people that have never met the bloke,if they had ive no doubt they would agree,right or wrongly imprisoned is the best place for him,and the rest of NZ,hes a fuckup.

' You may not like Scott Watson BUT the depths to which the Crown went to secure a conviction against him is an affront to those who meticulously obey the law. That police can with the active support of right thinking New Zealanders bend and break the law to obtain false evidence is in itself a crime. How can we expect the young to be law abiding when they see their parents applauding the police hierarchy Judiciary and Crown ride roughshod over the law is beyond me. Scott Watson was found Guilty by Detective Inspector Robert Pope on January 8 1998 who never wavered from that even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Why should the young obey the law that is not kept by its enforcers? '

[Skyryder]

' You may not like Scott Watson BUT the depths to which the Crown went to secure a conviction against him is an affront to those who meticulously obey the law. That police can with the active support of right thinking New Zealanders bend and break the law to obtain false evidence is in itself a crime. How can we expect the young to be law abiding when they see their parents applauding the police hierarchy Judiciary and Crown ride roughshod over the law is beyond me. Scott Watson was found Guilty by Detective Inspector Robert Pope on January 8 1998 who never wavered from that even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Why should the young obey the law that is not kept by its enforcers? '

One of the more intelligent posts on the subject.

Why should the young obey the law that is not kept by its enforcers? Or indeed anyone.

[maxlev]

Scott had 46 convictions, including one at age 16 for common assault, fined $240 and costs That was his only "violence offence" The rest were drug related (cannabis possession), unlawfuly taking cars, and a couple for burglary of which got him some jail time in 1989, in 1990 age 18 the judge got upset with him for repeated drug offending and sent him to prison again.

Strange as it may seem to some, but Scott did not use drugs again after his release from prison in 1990. He became much more settled, got work as and when he could and by age 20 he owned a half share in a small sailing sloop and this really got him interest in sailing. Three or four years later he built Blade in his parents backyard. He had little or no steel working experience so worked to learn marine welding and got 4711 certified (mandatory for Cat1)

Scott kept out of trouble until 1996, when he returned to Waikawa Bay to his boat and saw his dinghy on the back of a Ute leaving the marina. Scott took exception to this and demanded it be returned, but the couple in the Ute were having none of this and were determined they were taking his dinghy, Scott was determined to get it back so produced a pocket knife with a 75mm splicing spike and again demanded his dinghy back. The threat with the spike was enough and they gave back his dinghy, he was happy but they weren't and laid a complaint with police. Scott was charged with possesing an offensive weapon, namely a 75mm spike, he pleaded guilty just as he had always done in his days as a one man crime spree before he was 18. He was fined and the judge ordered the pocket knife be returned to him.

Scott worked full time on Blade, fully fitted out and launched approx August 1997. Scott was very much a loner, but he had one or two friends he met with on a sort of regular basis. He spent a lot of time sailing both before and after he built Blade and met women and had relationships with a number of women over the years. Police traced as many of these women as they could over the 18 months that they prepared their case against Scott. But the found it to be an exercise in futility as not one would say he had ever been even mildly violent to them or made kinky sexual demands. In fact police recruited his last girl friend to spy on him and ask him questions, they faxed her and she send back the answers. Scott knew she was doing this but didn't seem concerned too much.

But Scott did have a darker side and that involved drinking, as he became very obnoxious when drunk and was inclined to particularly bad language and vulgar talk which upset many people but again it never involved violence in acts but in words only. Scott was no angel but he was far from being the devil incarnate as portrayed by police and by implication and in a strange twist of logic police knew Scott was with the spying girlfriend yet seemed to have no concern for her safety.

Much was made of Scott's drunken boast to kill a woman, but again this was a twisting of his words, he had said he would kill his wife to a guy who was having marital problems, it was an empty boast as Scott didn't have a wife. This couple both gave evidence twice at Scott's Trial first where they testified about his arrival at Furneaux and their inviting him over for a few drinks. Strangely they don't have name suppression for this testimony, but do for their later testimony about the threat to kill a woman.

[Patrick]

Scott Watson was found Guilty by Detective Inspector Robert Pope on January 8 1998 '

Well bugger me. There I was thinking it was a jury that convicted him, beyond reasonable doubt.


Scott had 46 convictions, including one at age 16 for common assault, fined $240 and costs That was his only "violence offence"

I call bull shit. I know the cop he headbutted in the face for starters.

[maxlev]

I call bull shit. I know the cop he headbutted in the face for starters.

Do you know the cop from New Plymouth who gave evidence at the trial?

Said he saw a ketch heading north when he was out fishing , with blond haired girl and 2 blokes, when they waved to the ketch they didn't wave back, when they got too close the ketch changed course.

I watched him read this out in court, he had his head down and spoke just loud enough to be heard. It made me wonder if the policeman was railroaded out of the force for saying in court what he saw, as it was not the story Pope was giving us.

[dangerous]

Do you know the cop from New Plymouth who gave evidence at the trial?

Said he saw a ketch heading north when he was out fishing , with blond haired girl and 2 blokes, when they waved to the ketch they didn't wave back, when they got too close the ketch changed course.

I watched him read this out in court, he had his head down and spoke just loud enough to be heard. It made me wonder if the policeman was railroaded out of the force for saying in court what he saw, as it was not the story Pope was giving us.

Now... the Ketch was seen in the channel 'x' hours after it was seen in the straight (suposidly dumping the bodys)
Watsons father proved this could not be the case as he took the Blade to point 'a' and sailed as fast as the Blade can go, with the current and tide... and was still hours out from getting to point 'b'
The Blade was never... in the straight.

[maxlev]

There were multiple sightings of a ketch matching the decription.
In the outer Sounds.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sounds-murders/news/article.cfm?c_id=622&objectid=11221

Cape Jackson on the 1st and New Plymouth a couple of days later.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sounds-murders/news/article.cfm?c_id=622&objectid=12970

[Littleman]

One of the more intelligent posts on the subject.

Why should the young obey the law that is not kept by its enforcers? Or indeed anyone.


Intellligent?

Really?

Just break the law, thats KB logic for you.

[dangerous]

Intellligent?

Really?

Just break the law, thats KB logic for you. woshhhhhhhhhh... right over ya head, 'break it down' they are not supporting nor agreeing with what they posted but forwarding information that has relivant and acuate infomation.

[freedom-wedge]

You're joking, right? "Much eveidence pointing at him???" Like what????? Blame the dead guy. It worked.



Another crack up. Prosecution has to supply everything involving the case, whether it is going to be used in the hearing or not. From that, they can make up alibis, stories to suit, whatever... on the day in court.

The defendant doesn't have to supply a thing before any hearing, no intended defence, nothing...... Who does the system favour? Sure aint the prosecution.....

I,m not a D Bain fan for the record, the investigation was a crack up, leading to the situation we have now. And the defence are the only ones who tell stories aye bubba ?. The prosection Have to present their case fully because they have every advantage when building it against a defendant. The system should favour no side but a system always favours its own and in our country this is a growning trend. The implementation of the search and seizure bill will outweigh any advantage an innocent person may have in court in the future. Read about it make up your own mind and dont read with one eye aye.

It is to a fair degree as I speak and should always be that a person can unhindered, present a case for their own innocence and be judged in that manner, but for how long ?.

[Patrick]

Do you know the cop from New Plymouth who gave evidence at the trial?

Nope - happened before I arrived from Auckland. Without a name.........

I watched him read this out in court, he had his head down and spoke just loud enough to be heard. It made me wonder if the policeman was railroaded out of the force for saying in court what he saw, as it was not the story Pope was giving us.

I doubt it. If he left, perhaps it was more about how he couldn't use his big person voice?


I,m not a D Bain fan for the record, the investigation was a crack up, leading to the situation we have now. And the defence are the only ones who tell stories aye bubba ?.

In my experience, hell yeah....

The prosection Have to present their case fully because they have every advantage when building it against a defendant. The system should favour no side but a system always favours its own and in our country this is a growning trend.

I call Bullshit. Advantage? Someone breaks the law, they get in the shit. Simple. I don't have a problem with presenting the case fully, coz it is all there. The defence doesn't have to supply anything. Look at the Bill Of Rights - for the criminals - say nothing, and then come up with some crap at the hearing, where there is no chance to refute the fictional "alibi" or whatever crap they then come up with. Unlike Britain, where they tell the scrotes, to speak up now if they have a defence, or it won't be admissable in court later (or summit like that...). The victims rights are far more important, but they have bugger all.

The implementation of the search and seizure bill will outweigh any advantage an innocent person may have in court in the future. Read about it make up your own mind and dont read with one eye aye.

But if they are innocent, why would they end up in court?

It is to a fair degree as I speak and should always be that a person can unhindered, present a case for their own innocence and be judged in that manner, but for how long ?.

Nothing has, or is, changing here. The sky, actually, is not falling.

[Littleman]

woshhhhhhhhhh... right over ya head, 'break it down' they are not supporting nor agreeing with what they posted but forwarding information that has relivant and acuate infomation.

Them, like you seem to join the dots in a way that supports their agenda.

As illogical as it is.

[Toaster]

One of the more intelligent posts on the subject.

Why should the young obey the law that is not kept by its enforcers? Or indeed anyone.

I guess you would say that..... :blink:

It would have to be one of the most stupid posts I have seen yet.

[Toaster]

Ever met him?i have and whether he did it or not i couldnt give a shit,best place for the piece of shite is locked up believe me,ive often chuckled at the posts in this thread from people that have never met the bloke,if they had ive no doubt they would agree,right or wrongly imprisoned is the best place for him,and the rest of NZ,hes a fuckup.

Yep, the guy had an extensive background in badness and was as guilty as sin of those murders. There was so much utterly compelling forensic evidence against him it would have been impossible to say otherwise.

[Patrick]

Yep, the guy had an extensive background in badness and was as guilty as sin of those murders. There was so much utterly compelling forensic evidence against him it would have been impossible to say otherwise.

Just like BAIN?

Get Karam onto it.

Blame the dead fella and call it murder (of her by him) and suicide (by jumping into the tide weighted down).

SOLVED!!!

[Toaster]

Just like BAIN?

Get Karam onto it.

Blame the dead fella and call it murder (of her by him) and suicide (by jumping into the tide weighted down).

SOLVED!!!

Yes of course!!!

Poor Watson finding all their blood on his boat and trying to merely clean up the mess and forgetting to tell the police about it. Must be innocent.

[dangerous]

Poor Watson finding all their blood on his boat and trying to merely clean up the mess and forgetting to tell the police about it. Must be innocent.There was no blood and his sister gave him a hand to repaint... she saw the condition of the boat before it was started... just like it was her kids that scratched the 'polystyrene' under the hatch (suposed the missing did it trying to escape... farking joke.

[MSTRS]

There was so much utterly compelling forensic evidence against him....

Really? Where is it? And what? I vaguely recall talk of a single hair that might have belonged to the girl...But I don't remember it being confirmed.

[candor]

Rest of post based on assumption its fairly evident Watson is proved innocent or innocent of sole involvement... (I do think he knows something or saw something... but has been intimidated into not pushing his case forward on that basis)

You can't just lock up people for being perves or freaks much as the idea appeals. The stitch up was so well orchestrated by cops and legal qualified devos one might ask who in the drug trade (and at what level) was being protected. Especialy if Olivia was raped... we know Watsons Judge (may he rot in hell) has opined in rape trials that knives must not be seen as prejudicial but could be used to encourage valid legal consent so its not like he'd care about truth and justice.... prevailing.

Well I'd ask who was being protected anyway, just in the knowledge of local context and that even the CHCH drug biz from the 70's forward was well invested in by young lawyers seeking high return on investment, who these days be liberals sitting pretty under lamby wigs or MPs.

My first port of inquiry would be checking central characters ie cops and lawyers for asset swelling around the time of the trial. Hard to check as NZ a last place where accounts could be opened no ID and Muldoon sert up bonus bonds to sweep in the black economy (attracting foreign launderers and drug moneys). I'm just saying use Occams; Judge Herons and many others rather calculated "we're gonna getcha" behaviour is pretty hard to explain as just being motivated by any normal legal training.... good detective work would seek to identify or eliminate motives for aberrant courtroom activity by Judges / prossies. Watson - the fall guy for some untouchables?

If so another question to explore is who (that acted suspiciously in stitching up Watson) has pissed off out of the country to a high life overseas and below the radar. Unfortunately for Watson things often only emerge with time. Its sad the prolly well heeled killers and accessories afterthe fact got away laughing - most of all for the victims.
I'm told by reliable people they offered to give affadavits regarding Olivia selling pot but investigators declined it as red herrings. It could be key - why not follow this avenue - WHY. I'd say because it is known by case officianados who did it or that Watson didn't and that info never mattered. Our underbelly has many not so secret secrets.

Remember the Hunter book is more concerned to get an inquiry to cirruption generally than is a Jo Karam type personality driven crusade. My theory is the local bent cop and affiliated legal eagle got a message saying "Dear bizzo associate, some unexpected visitors rubbed up our bumboys the wrong way and met with an accident, please assist so as not to disturb operations as I'm sure you would not want to get dragged into this mess - as IF in we go down so do you, yours truly, your drug haulage partners". Look for the white collar psychopaths not the blue collar local f-wit.

[candor]

Libel laws for one thing, would be my guess.

Plus keeping your powder dry......

powder sparking

[maxlev]

The following letter was sent to the three judges of the Court of Appeal, there has been neither acknowledgment or response of any sort. See if you can figure out why.

26 August 2007
Sir Ivor Richardson
cc Dame Sian Elias, Chief Justice
Dear Sir Ivor
Re: The Appeal in R v Watson, 1999.
I am the author and publisher of Trial By Trickery, a book on the justice system and its treatment of Scott Watson. I enclose a copy. I also enclose a DVD copy of the television documentary Murder On The Blade?, which was broadcast on Television One on 7 November 2003.
I write in respect of your part in declining Watson’s appeal in 1999.
While there are many matters I would draw your attention to, I refer you in particular to chapters Six and Eight of the book and to Part Three of the Film. The book chapters relate to ‘The Two Trip Theory’ and to Watson’s appeal, and the film segment to identification issues.
I remind you first that in your judgment you stated:
In summing up, the trial Judge clearly treated the Wallace evidence as visual identifications of the appellant not only on the water taxi but also on earlier occasions at the Lodge. It therefore becomes apparent that the Crown, defence, and the trial Judge all regarded (Guy) Wallace as having made a visual identification of the appellant. It is beyond question that the case against him depended substantially on the correctness of those identifications, because if they were incorrect the Crown case was seriously undermined .
I ask that you then consider the following passage in Part Three of the film, where eyewitness Guy Wallace makes the following answers, in person, to questions posed by the film:
NARRATOR: If someone had pointed, not at the photograph in Montage B but at Watson himself in court and then asked Guy Wallace if this was the mystery man what would he have said?
WALLACE “I would have said obviously not”
NARRATOR Why?
WALLACE “Because he is not the mystery man..”
NARRATOR Was Scott Watson the man in the water taxi that night or not?
WALLACE “Definitely not.”
You will find elsewhere, in both film and book, a discussion of identification issues and the retraction by Wallace and other key eyewitness of their testimony at trial on the grounds that they were misled by what is essentially a trick photograph.

Secondly, please note the following passage in your judgment:
The two trip theory must have been a possible Crown contention from the outset, and certainly became so as matters developed in the way the defence anticipated they might. Mr Antunovic submitted that the so-called late acknowledgement by the Crown on this point impacted adversely on the defence. It was suggested that more extensive cross-examination of the witnesses who were on board the "Mina Cornelia" and the "Bianco" as to the timing of the appellant’s return with Mr Anderson would have been undertaken. Similarly as regards the witnesses to the Perkins incident ashore, and the absence of evidence as to how the appellant may have returned to the shore. But an examination of the transcript shows that there was extensive cross-examination on those issues.
Your final statement above, ‘… an examination of the transcript shows that there was extensive cross-examination on those issues..’ is incorrect. There is no such cross examination at all. In particular, the question of a return by Watson to shore is entirely absent from the transcript of the trial. It is to be found only in the final address to the jury by the Crown Prosecutor, and there only in the words the prosecutor spoke on the second and final day of that address. An examination of the transcript shows in fact that Watson was convicted on a murder scenario of which neither he nor the jury had been aware until that moment.
Scott Watson’s conviction, by your own judgment, has been ‘seriously undermined’ by Guy Wallace on nationwide television. Even more importantly, he was convicted after being kept unaware, throughout his whole trial, of what he was alleged to have done. For that reason only, he had not mounted a defence against it. The book shows that in fact evidence was available which readily absolves him. Instead, he was tried and convicted on a secret charge. I’m sure you will agree that there can be no greater evil in any justice system than this.
I’m also sure you will find Watson’s continued imprisonment unacceptable in view of these and other issues raised in book and film, and that you will take immediate steps to have Scott Watson treated with the justice he has so far been denied.
I look forward to your response to this letter and its information to you. The letter has also been sent to your colleagues who sat with you in R v Watson, Gault J and Henry J, and has also been copied along with the book and film to the Chief Justice, Dame Sian Elias. It will be posted on the website trialbytrickery.com along with any response you care to make.
Yours Faithfully,
Keith Hunter

[dangerous]

Farking good post, worth a quote



Rest of post based on assumption its fairly evident Watson is proved innocent or innocent of sole involvement... (I do think he knows something or saw something... but has been intimidated into not pushing his case forward on that basis)

You can't just lock up people for being perves or freaks much as the idea appeals. The stitch up was so well orchestrated by cops and legal qualified devos one might ask who in the drug trade (and at what level) was being protected. Especialy if Olivia was raped... we know Watsons Judge (may he rot in hell) has opined in rape trials that knives must not be seen as prejudicial but could be used to encourage valid legal consent so its not like he'd care about truth and justice.... prevailing.

Well I'd ask who was being protected anyway, just in the knowledge of local context and that even the CHCH drug biz from the 70's forward was well invested in by young lawyers seeking high return on investment, who these days be liberals sitting pretty under lamby wigs or MPs.

My first port of inquiry would be checking central characters ie cops and lawyers for asset swelling around the time of the trial. Hard to check as NZ a last place where accounts could be opened no ID and Muldoon sert up bonus bonds to sweep in the black economy (attracting foreign launderers and drug moneys). I'm just saying use Occams; Judge Herons and many others rather calculated "we're gonna getcha" behaviour is pretty hard to explain as just being motivated by any normal legal training.... good detective work would seek to identify or eliminate motives for aberrant courtroom activity by Judges / prossies. Watson - the fall guy for some untouchables?

If so another question to explore is who (that acted suspiciously in stitching up Watson) has pissed off out of the country to a high life overseas and below the radar. Unfortunately for Watson things often only emerge with time. Its sad the prolly well heeled killers and accessories afterthe fact got away laughing - most of all for the victims.
I'm told by reliable people they offered to give affadavits regarding Olivia selling pot but investigators declined it as red herrings. It could be key - why not follow this avenue - WHY. I'd say because it is known by case officianados who did it or that Watson didn't and that info never mattered. Our underbelly has many not so secret secrets.

Remember the Hunter book is more concerned to get an inquiry to cirruption generally than is a Jo Karam type personality driven crusade. My theory is the local bent cop and affiliated legal eagle got a message saying "Dear bizzo associate, some unexpected visitors rubbed up our bumboys the wrong way and met with an accident, please assist so as not to disturb operations as I'm sure you would not want to get dragged into this mess - as IF in we go down so do you, yours truly, your drug haulage partners". Look for the white collar psychopaths not the blue collar local f-wit.

[Indoo]

Hehe, thats actually quite funny and well done, nice piss take on the conspiracy loonies.

[dangerous]

Hehe, thats actually quite funny and well done, nice piss take on the conspiracy loonies.

open your eyes...



life and infact the world is based around a conspiracy, money that dosnt exist, greed and human nature.

[freedom-wedge]

I doubt it. If he left, perhaps it was more about how he couldn't use his big person voice?



Nothing has, or is, changing here. The sky, actually, is not falling.

I think you have youre head in the sand man, Or youre biased for some reason, its ok though your not alone and there has tobe two sides at least

[Swoop]

Muldoon sert up bonus bonds to sweep in the black economy (attracting foreign launderers and drug moneys).
He certainly did well. I'd hate to think how much of that investment is drug money.

[Toaster]

Really? Where is it? And what? I vaguely recall talk of a single hair that might have belonged to the girl...But I don't remember it being confirmed.

Anyone like to explain the presence of two human dna samples taken from the boat that were not his? The significant amount of human blood residue found, the blood on the matresses that wasnt his, the nail finger marks that wasnt his either........... nothing happened there obviously, just another innocent boatie... yeah right.

[98tls]

Anyone like to explain the presence of two human dna samples taken from the boat that were not his? The significant amount of human blood residue found, the blood on the matresses that wasnt his, the nail finger marks that wasnt his either........... nothing happened there obviously, just another innocent boatie... yeah right. All that aside,no doubt the fucker didnt wave,reason enough to bang him up for the duration methinks.:angry:Should ave just strung him up and be done with it,save a little room in cyberspace at least.

[Rogue Rider]

Okay, well, for what its worth this is my take on the case. If he's behind bars, he must have done something to be there. If he is innocent why hasn't a royal commission of inquiry been launched.
If he is innocent, the truth will come out, hopefully lol. Either way, I knew watson, he wasn't a nice fellow.....
The thing that intrigues me is all the conflicting accounts of witnesses that seem to agree with each other and not the police....... Odd but not unfounded.
Bain case, well, the whole family were messed up, I wouldn't have blamed David blowin away his old man for what he did to the family, however I think David most likely came home to it at the end. Maybe we will never know, but David didn't deserve to be locked up on the evidence the police had. The case wouldn't have stuck for todays standards.

[98tls]

End of the day Watson/Bain blah blah blah will all matter little in a decade or so,wait until the "unsmackable' generation come to the fore with nothing but replays of some Playstation game in there heads combined with getting there own way since kindy,should be a riot.:killingme

[maxlev]

Anyone like to explain the presence of two human dna samples taken from the boat that were not his? The significant amount of human blood residue found, the blood on the matresses that wasnt his, the nail finger marks that wasnt his either........... nothing happened there obviously, just another innocent boatie... yeah right.

Where do you get your info from?

The only blood found on Blade belonged to Scott Watson, he cut his foot on some glass.

The 6 inch & 10 inch hairs were not found in the initial inspection of hairs from the tiger blanket.
They were only found later, on the day some sample hairs were taken from the missing girls bedroom.
There was a slit in one of the sample bags, the ESR lab tech, when questioned about this in court, could not rule out contamination.

The facts were exposed 7 years ago, and remain to this day unchallenged.
What has been happening for the last 7 years is the system stalling as they are unable to accept an innocent man was convicted.

Crown prosecutors lied, Appeal Court created a new lie and to keep it under wraps, a NZ Judge on secondment to the Privy Council, made the decision that the PC will not look into this case.

[Rogue Rider]

The facts were exposed 7 years ago, and remain to this day unchallenged.
What has been happening for the last 7 years is the system stalling as they are unable to accept an innocent man was convicted.

Crown prosecutors lied, Appeal Court created a new lie and to keep it under wraps, a NZ Judge on secondment to the Privy Council, made the decision that the PC will not look into this case.[/QUOTE]

Just read some of the data coallated on this case. The more you look into this, the more hypothetical and irrational it is. There is alot of mis handling in this case for sure. PC should have most certainly ran this one for the credibility of the justice system. It is very interesting. Sounds like the possibility of evidence planting is possible.

[dangerous]

Where do you get your info from?

The only blood found on Blade belonged to Scott Watson, he cut his foot on some glass.

The 6 inch & 10 inch hairs were not found in the initial inspection of hairs from the tiger blanket.
They were only found later, on the day some sample hairs were taken from the missing girls bedroom.
There was a slit in one of the sample bags, the ESR lab tech, when questioned about this in court, could not rule out contamination.

The facts were exposed 7 years ago, and remain to this day unchallenged.
What has been happening for the last 7 years is the system stalling as they are unable to accept an innocent man was convicted.

Crown prosecutors lied, Appeal Court created a new lie and to keep it under wraps, a NZ Judge on secondment to the Privy Council, made the decision that the PC will not look into this case.

He gets the info from the media and then findes it easier (lazier) to believe, as it is human nature to blame and ridicule, I spose for the most it puts there mind at rest.

What you post is very good, Ill just add the finger nail scratch marks... they were on polystyrene and watsons sister said her kids did it, hell polly and kids is a magnet.

[DougieNZ]

Yes of course!!!

Poor Watson finding all their blood on his boat and trying to merely clean up the mess and forgetting to tell the police about it. Must be innocent.

Yeah - and only 46 convictions including threatening to kill 3 people. He MUST be innocent. Release him immediately! :yeah:

Interesting isn't it. IN court the evidence is heard by a jury and they make their decision on the evidence. OUT of court we can make all sorts of unsubstantiated allegations that have never been tested in court - purjury, evidence tampering, corruption etc etc. We can say whatever we like without having to ever answer for it or have our opinions challenged. And we then talk about injustice!

I'm sticking with the jury on this one...

[MSTRS]

Hairs that weren't there first time round...interesting.
.22 casing, anyone?

[SS90]

I have to go with the 46 convictions on this (man, that is alot)........ he clearly has a criminal mind, and I just feel he has got what is coming to him...... the only shame is that if he IS innocent, then there is a killer out there that has got away with murder........ but if that is the case, why has this person stopped killing?, it just seems unlikely.

Clearly I could not be a juror on this case!:rolleyes:

[MSTRS]

...why has this person stopped killing?...

And you know this - how?
Watson is/was no saint. But there are just too many things about this case that point to it not being him. Juries convict on what they are presented with. And I think we all know how that works. Now, there is a mountain of evidence available, and some very telling stuff not presented at trial (and let's say - not very flattering of the police investigation). Would the same, or any, jury convict if they had ALL what is available to consider?

[maxlev]

Prosecution claimed Blade was seen in Cook Straight 4:30pm (E174.24 S 41.15)
and 35 minutes later at Erie Bay (11nm),

Defence told the court the trip was impossible due to the laws of physics for a displacement boat (HS = 1.34 x √LWL).

Scott reckons he travelled 13 nm on his trip to Erie Bay, Crown reckon 34 nm (8.5 hours at 4 knots)

Do any of the bent pig worshipers believe Blade can exceed (HS = 1.34 x √LWL) by a multitude of 4?

[Indoo]

Crown prosecutors lied, Appeal Court created a new lie and to keep it under wraps, a NZ Judge on secondment to the Privy Council, made the decision that the PC will not look into this case.

Man those drug smugglers sure got lucky eh. Snuck into the bay without being seen, made it ashore without anyone seeing them, kidnapped and murdered two teenagers just for kicks(cos thats what drug smugglers not wanting to bring attention to themselves and all), then made off overseas again without anyone seeing them.

The corrupt local cops who were paid off by the dealers to make it all go away also got lucky and by a huge coincidence there was a guy perfectly fitting the whole pychopath model on shore who again in a perfect coincidence had set himself up to be framed for murder and like every other innocent man wrongly accused would cover up and extensively clean a non-existent crime scene, lie to the Police and and refuse to answer questions in court.

The local cops must have then arranged for a large team of corrupt detectives to come in from around the country who inturn got in another large team of corrupt crown prosecutors who found themselves a corrupt Judge and later orcheastrated another team of corrupt Judges to sit on the court of appeal and to finish off this huge mass conspiracy even mangaged to plant a corrupt Judge on the privy council.

Sounds far more likely than the boring alternative.

[dangerous]

Prosecution claimed Blade was seen in Cook Straight 4:30pm (E174.24 S 41.15)
and 35 minutes later at Erie Bay (11nm),

Defence told the court the trip was impossible due to the laws of physics for a displacement boat (HS = 1.34 x √LWL).

Scott reckons he travelled 13 nm on his trip to Erie Bay, Crown reckon 34 nm (8.5 hours at 4 knots)

Do any of the bent pig worshipers believe Blade can exceed (HS = 1.34 x √LWL) by a multitude of 4?
correct and as I said Watsons Dad took the Blade from the Straight to the bay at full speed with the tide and wind and could not possibly do it in such a time, hours out.



Man those drug smugglers sure got lucky eh. Snuck into the bay without being seen, made it ashore without anyone seeing them, kidnapped and murdered two teenagers just for kicks...

Sounds far more likely than the boring alternative.

'Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit' and whos to say anyone was murdered? maybe they were inticed as teenagers to a new world, could be living it up in the Bahamas or running a drug syndicate into Oz, or maybe they are at the botom of the ocean.


And you know this - how?
Watson is/was no saint. But there are just too many things about this case that point to it not being him. Juries convict on what they are presented with. And I think we all know how that works. Now, there is a mountain of evidence available, and some very telling stuff not presented at trial (and let's say - not very flattering of the police investigation). Would the same, or any, jury convict if they had ALL what is available to consider?
yip, well said

[Toaster]

He gets the info from the media and then findes it easier (lazier) to believe, as it is human nature to blame and ridicule, I spose for the most it puts there mind at rest.

What you post is very good, Ill just add the finger nail scratch marks... they were on polystyrene and watsons sister said her kids did it, hell polly and kids is a magnet.

So you can mind read now? I am an ex cop - I take anything I hear with a grain of salt. FACTS and nothing else. Beyond reasonable doubt and open tested trial.

If you kids are that worried about it why havent you put your money where your mouths are like Karam did and taken it to the supreme court?

[Patrick]

.... Even more importantly, he was convicted after being kept unaware, throughout his whole trial, of what he was alleged to have done. For that reason only, he had not mounted a defence against it. The book shows that in fact evidence was available which readily absolves him. Instead, he was tried and convicted on a secret charge.

I love these two bits the best... a murder trial and he didn't know what he was alleged to have done and it was a secret charge.... :stupid::rofl::killingme

I didn't think he was that dumb... Looks like he was...... Disclosure has been around waaaaaaaay before these two were killed.


I think you have youre head in the sand man, Or youre biased for some reason, its ok though your not alone and there has tobe two sides at least

Two sides for sure. He wouldn't give his. Try reading what I had said earlier.... Prosecution HAS to give out their side, the Defence DOES NOT. Two sides? Nah...... BIased? Now you're taking the piss.....


....Bain case, well, the whole family were messed up, I wouldn't have blamed David blowin away his old man for what he did to the family,...

Yep.... blame the dead man and accuse him of all things nasty, without a shred of evidence.....


Yeah - and only 46 convictions including threatening to kill 3 people. He MUST be innocent. Release him immediately! :yeah:

Interesting isn't it. IN court the evidence is heard by a jury and they make their decision on the evidence. OUT of court we can make all sorts of unsubstantiated allegations that have never been tested in court - purjury, evidence tampering, corruption etc etc. We can say whatever we like without having to ever answer for it or have our opinions challenged. And we then talk about injustice!

I'm sticking with the jury on this one...

Hell yeah.....


Prosecution claimed Blade was seen in Cook Straight 4:30pm (E174.24 S 41.15)
and 35 minutes later at Erie Bay (11nm),

Defence told the court the trip was impossible due to the laws of physics for a displacement boat (HS = 1.34 x √LWL).

Scott reckons he travelled 13 nm on his trip to Erie Bay, Crown reckon 34 nm (8.5 hours at 4 knots)

Do any of the bent pig worshipers believe Blade can exceed (HS = 1.34 x √LWL) by a multitude of 4?

Yep. He was sailing downhill....... with a tail wind......


Man those drug smugglers sure got lucky eh. Snuck into the bay without being seen, made it ashore without anyone seeing them, kidnapped and murdered two teenagers just for kicks(cos thats what drug smugglers not wanting to bring attention to themselves and all), then made off overseas again without anyone seeing them.

The corrupt local cops who were paid off by the dealers to make it all go away also got lucky and by a huge coincidence there was a guy perfectly fitting the whole pychopath model on shore who again in a perfect coincidence had set himself up to be framed for murder and like every other innocent man wrongly accused would cover up and extensively clean a non-existent crime scene, lie to the Police and and refuse to answer questions in court.

The local cops must have then arranged for a large team of corrupt detectives to come in from around the country who inturn got in another large team of corrupt crown prosecutors who found themselves a corrupt Judge and later orcheastrated another team of corrupt Judges to sit on the court of appeal and to finish off this huge mass conspiracy even mangaged to plant a corrupt Judge on the privy council.

Sounds far more likely than the boring alternative.

ROFL........... Man, did they ALL get lucky. I think we could/should throw in an alien invasion/abduction into the mix somehow....

[Coldrider]

Man those drug smugglers sure got lucky eh. Snuck into the bay without being seen, made it ashore without anyone seeing them, kidnapped and murdered two teenagers just for kicks(cos thats what drug smugglers not wanting to bring attention to themselves and all), then made off overseas again without anyone seeing them.

The corrupt local cops who were paid off by the dealers to make it all go away also got lucky and by a huge coincidence there was a guy perfectly fitting the whole pychopath model on shore who again in a perfect coincidence had set himself up to be framed for murder and like every other innocent man wrongly accused would cover up and extensively clean a non-existent crime scene, lie to the Police and and refuse to answer questions in court.

The local cops must have then arranged for a large team of corrupt detectives to come in from around the country who inturn got in another large team of corrupt crown prosecutors who found themselves a corrupt Judge and later orcheastrated another team of corrupt Judges to sit on the court of appeal and to finish off this huge mass conspiracy even mangaged to plant a corrupt Judge on the privy council.

Sounds far more likely than the boring alternative.The case should have been conducted from Alexandra Police Station.

[scumdog]

Scott reckons he travelled 13 nm on his trip to Erie Bay, Crown reckon 34 nm (8.5 hours at 4 knots)


'reckon' - is that some newer and more accurate form of measurement ????:shifty:

[dangerous]

So you can mind read now? I am an ex cop - I take anything I hear with a grain of salt. FACTS and nothing else. Beyond reasonable doubt and open tested trial.

If you kids are that worried about it why havent you put your money where your mouths are like Karam did and taken it to the supreme court?
settle pettle... "us kids" are just a bunch a motorcyclists nattering about an off topic subject bouncing our thoughts off each other, 'money and mouth' thats as silly as convicting some one with no bodys.

Ex cop, makes sence you are trained to look at every thing and every one suspisiously, to find blame and convict and you always will, Im not that green mate, Im in the loop one way or the other to.
My post you quoted, wasnt nessarly aimed at you but at the black and white minded PC dogooder group that have little knowledge of facts.

[MSTRS]

... Beyond reasonable doubt and open tested trial....

And that's the crux of it, right there. "Open and tested trial"
Is there such a thing?
When the prosecutor wants a conviction. And defence doesn't.
Both will try whatever they can to achieve their aim. And it's up to the jury to believe one of them.
If the prosecutor doesn't like some bit of evidence, because it doesn't support his contentions, then he won't present it. Therefore the defence can't test it.
Trials consist of evidence, not facts.
There is a difference.

[Swoop]

And that's the crux of it, right there. "Open and tested trial"
Is there such a thing?
When the prosecutor wants a conviction. And defence doesn't.
With the crown having the "bottomless bucket" of taxpayers money, to hire whoever they desire to front for them ("experts" from around the world) while the defendant is not so lucky.

[marty]

And that's the crux of it, right there. "Open and tested trial"
Is there such a thing?
When the prosecutor wants a conviction. And defence doesn't.
Both will try whatever they can to achieve their aim. And it's up to the jury to believe one of them.
If the prosecutor doesn't like some bit of evidence, because it doesn't support his contentions, then he won't present it. Therefore the defence can't test it.
Trials consist of evidence, not facts.
There is a difference.

so how did the bain defence even bring in the suggestion that bain senior did it? it's unlikely the prosecution bought it up, bain didn't give evidence, yet they still managed to get it in.

trials consist of stories, that may or may not contain evidence - not facts

[MSTRS]

trials consist of stories, that may or may not contain evidence - not facts

That's what I meant....

[marty]

Ahh but what you said first leaves the lasting impression...

[Coldrider]

trials consist of stories, that may or may not contain evidence - not factsIs that why the Bain house was so quick to be burned to the ground, so stories would prevail over evidence.

[Berries]

Is that why the Bain house was so quick to be burned to the ground, so stories would prevail over evidence.
The father did it. They kept that quiet.

[marty]

yeah would be interesting to know who drove that. any possible evidence against david was destroyed, leaving the way open for conjecture and stories about dad to be able to be told with no chance of disproving or challenging them

[scumdog]

If the prosecutor doesn't like some bit of evidence, because it doesn't support his contentions, then he won't present it. Therefore the defence can't test it.


The defence will have had disclosure of all prosecution evidence.

The defence therefore can bring up any 'evidence they think will weaken the prosecution case.

[MSTRS]

I guess you'd be bound to believe in the 'honest integrity' of the prosecution...
The rest of us, I'm sure, will go on believing that the defense doesn't get everything the prosecution has, except that which will be used.
If stuff comes out after a trial, that the police knew about, but discounted, yet the defense didn't use it either, then the defense either didn't get the info or were poor at their job (unlikely in a high profile case with defense the likes of Ablett-Kerr, etc)

[scumdog]

I guess you'd be bound to believe in the 'honest integrity' of the prosecution...
The rest of us, I'm sure, will go on believing that the defense doesn't get everything the prosecution has, except that which will be used.
If stuff comes out after a trial, that the police knew about, but discounted, yet the defense didn't use it either, then the defense either didn't get the info or were poor at their job (unlikely in a high profile case with defense the likes of Ablett-Kerr, etc)

In MY experience it's a 'one-way' street with disclosure.

Defence get EVERYTHING from prosecutions that is even remotely related to the case (that Prosecutions MAY use).

On the other hand Prosecutions get NO information from Defence on how they propose to defend the charge.

Leave out any potential prosecution eveidence when making disclosure? - there's a good chance the charge could be dismissed, in any event it would weaken the the prosecution case.

My 2-cents worth, but then what do I know...

[MSTRS]

My 2-cents worth, but then what do I know...

Indeed. It's a big club...

[Patrick]

Can I join? I might be a founding member even....

[Coldrider]

Indeed. It's a big club...indeed, including those that fund the prosecution.

[maxlev]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/ministry-of-justice/news/article.cfm?o_id=122&objectid=10721187

it's just a matter of time before the proffessional liars get covered in shit

enough of the cowardly stalling tactics
bring it on

[scissorhands]

I'm wondering if Watson was a very high functioning autistic, like Aaron Farmer, who is lower functioning.

If so, this is happening way to much. The police must impute autism when interviewing suspects, and gauging their reactions to questioning.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I'm wondering if Watson was a very high functioning autistic, like Aaron Farmer, who is lower functioning.

If so, this is happening way to much. The police must impute autism when interviewing suspects, and gauging their reactions to questioning.

that or he's a murdering sociopath.

[MSTRS]

By description, people on the autistism spectrum ARE sociopaths...

[Ronin]

By description, people on the autistism spectrum ARE sociopaths...

Or are sociopaths Autistic?

[MSTRS]

Could be...
To be a sociopath, one only needs to be 'a bit of a loner, doesn't relate well with others, doesn't understand emotions...' that sort of thing. Sound familiar?

[scissorhands]

Auties are much lower represented in general crime. The only area is losing it and assault(meltdown) due to built up frustration with the neurotypical world and bullying

The difference between a sociopath and an autistic is the sociopath has 'theory of mind' and can understand another and manipulate them whereas an autistic may have no empathy but understanding others and learning how to manipulate them is near impossible, as is getting a girlfriend/boyfriend.

Sociopaths generally have extremely good interpersonal skills and use them in inappropriate ways. A real estate agent, a gold digger, a salesman is much closer to a sociopath.

regarding high functioning and low functioning aspergians
1. People with AS usually have high moral standards.
2. People with AS think independently and usually don't give in to peer pressure to do stupid things.
3. People with AS can frequently become amongst the top in the world in the field of their interest.
4. People with AS usually have excellent analytical skills as adults.
5. People with AS are usually dependable and honest.
6. People with AS are usually good at thinking "outside of the box"

But they come across as creepy, hence Farmer and possibly Watson being falsely accused of murder by people who are trained and should fucken well know better:yes:

[oldrider]

Wrong man wrong place at the (for police) right place and the right time!

Smells more like scapegoat all the time, well, to me anyway! (Too many doubts on Watson's side of the ledger)

[gsxr]

Wrong man wrong place at the (for police) right place and the right time!

Smells more like scapegoat all the time, well, to me anyway! (Too many doubts on Watson's side of the ledger)
How many bonus points do i get for a thread dredge

[oldrider]

How many bonus points do i get for a thread dredge

10 out of 10 if you are Scott Watson! - At least he is not endangering anybody on the road over Easter! :ride: - I guess that's important! :mellow:

[dangerous]

10 out of 10 if you are Scott Watson! - At least he is not endangering anybody on the road over Easter! :ride: - I guess that's important! :mellow:yeah but... theres a fuck lot of others that will be, be to lkate ta lockem up after they kill...

[R650R]

did anyone read wisharts new book....????

[neels]

did anyone read wisharts new book....????
You mean the one that contradicts what he wrote in his previous book? Don't think I'll bother.

Must be time for a conspiracy theory about someone getting to the conspiracy theorist....

[gsxr]

did anyone read wisharts new book....????

I did. Well to be honest I skim read it.
I didnt buy it. I was lent a copy by a friend that had highlighted all the anomalies contained in it and added my own highlights.
When I went to return the book my friend didnt want it back and to file it in the appropriate place.
So it was collected on Tuesday with my household rubbish.

[gsxr]

Ian Wisharts pre release claims to have identified the ketch are FALSE He proved nothing.
His claims to have solved a case the justice system believe they solved in 1999 are also FALSE.
His own cherry picking of copy and pasted partial witness statements and his own opinion have only led to more questions that require answers.
Interested in the opinions of anyone else that has read Elementary moreso than those that just have a general opinion .
Thanks

[gsxr]

So I take none of you read fiction .
Now we have the latest events which I find disturbing to say the least

Call me cynical . In fact call me anything you like and i wont sue you .
But when you look at it LOGICALLY to me something is amiss here.
Scotts last parole hearing went against him . Next one is in July
In the interim Ian Wishart whom I previously held in high regard has done a 180 degree back flip from his previous book . What concerns me more about Elementary is not the hasty release of it nor the copy and paste cherry picked statements with Ians own opinion interspersed..
7 initial chapters of a book devoted to degrading and demoralizing the Watson family must surely have had some outside influence and not entirely the views of the author.
Then the cynic in me has to ask the obvious question as to why NZ on Air has granted ! million for a doco /drama 16 plus years later.
One then has to ask the question of why whatever will be portrayed in this Doco /Drama could not simply be contained in a simple news article.
One really does have to question why 1 million has been granted for the production.
I am convinced in my mind it is being produced to cover arses . I may be wrong.
If I am wrong then surely that money would be better spent on a court of appeal or a retrial .
! million is a lot of money for one or a few people to express their opinion.

[dangerous]

I am convinced in my mind it is being produced to cover arses


that has been the case since day one... the question is whos arses?

[gsxr]

that has been the case since day one... the question is whos arses?
One of the arses is the arse of the head detective not only in this case but also the Lisa Blakie case.
If anyone cares to research it they will find 3 common denominators in both cases

[oldrider]

Wishart talks fast and writes books some of which I have bought and read - I have resolved not to buy any more due to too much reading for very little information!

Don't know much about Scott Watson except there seems much circumstantial or "suggested" evidence presented for conviction beyond reasonable doubt!

The OP of this thread will be pleased that it has been dredged up again because he was convinced that Watson was stitched up!

Do some of you hear him (Skyryder) calling in the night? - Sounds a bit creepy! :confused: But if you do, say hi to Bernie from me! :bye:

[Black Knight]

I am a boatie with about 40 years on water experience,in that time I have seen heaps of badly behaved "Scott Watsons" at New Years boatie venues around the country-the Elephant House at Kawau Island, when it was operational, being possibly the worst,but there are/were many others.I followed this case from Day one,in fact I was in the Tutakaka marina when the police report on Olivia was mistakenly released to the public,made interesting reading and I was not surprised it was withdrawn pronto.
With the experience/knowledge I have I would definitely not found SW guilty had I been a jury member..What was needed was a couple of boatie folk on that jury.
When the verdict was given I was on holiday in Port Douglas and neighbours were a vet and his detective wife also holidaying.She could not believe the verdict and clearly stated that the police had no case.
My 2c worth.

[dangerous]

Do some of you hear him (Skyryder) calling in the night? - Sounds a bit creepy! :confused: But if you do, say hi to Bernie from me! :bye:ahh last time I cought up with him he was not well, he may have pulled through and he may not have...

[mada]

Rumour has it he had murdered someone else... cops knew but couldn't prove it. Pinned this on him instead.

[gsxr]

Rumour has it he had murdered someone else... cops knew but couldn't prove it. Pinned this on him instead.
Call it a rumour if you wish.
The police investigated the disappearance of Nancy Frey and concluded Scott Watson was not involved.

Many theories exist as to how the popular American disappeared from the island about 18 years ago, among them a persistent but apparently baseless one, that her disappearance was linked to the Scott Watson Case.
Just another red herring in the case against Scott Watson to sway public opinion .
Cleared of any involvment but the rumour remains in some peoples minds

[oldrider]

When I was a kid murder was a rare rare thing - nowadays it is way more regular than a Warriors win FFS! :rolleyes:

[gsxr]

When I was a kid murder was a rare rare thing - nowadays it is way more regular than a Warriors win FFS! :rolleyes:
The problem I have with this case is there is no evidence of a murder.
It has to be reasonably concluded or assumed however that is the case..
BUT There is no evidence whatsoever linking Scott Watson whatsoever to the disappearance of Ben and Olivia. In fact there is more evidence from witness statements that prove Scott never even met them .

[Berries]

When I was a kid murder was a rare rare thing - nowadays it is way more regular than a Warriors win FFS!
To be fair, the numbers are probably the same it is just that with the printing press and the new fangled wireless device you can now read and hear about things in the next village these days. And beyond to the next town!

[gsxr]

To be fair, the numbers are probably the same it is just that with the printing press and the new fangled wireless device you can now read and hear about things in the next village these days. And beyond to the next town!
The rate leapt to an average of 21 murders per million people annually from 1985 to 1992, but has dropped steadily ever since.

Last year's rate was 12.1 murders per million people. That was 2010.
2015 was 10.8 per million population
The rate should be 0 % per million.
With the added stress and drugs P in particular I would have assumed it would have been higher but looking at the statistics that appears not to be the case .

[oldrider]

When I was a kid murder was a rare rare thing - nowadays it is way more regular than a Warriors win FFS! :rolleyes:

Yikes - how did I not consider WW2 Korea and Vietnam - now we have the phony war on terror - murder has always been rife some of it has simply been "legal"! :facepalm:

[mada]

The rate leapt to an average of 21 murders per million people annually from 1985 to 1992, but has dropped steadily ever since.

Last year's rate was 12.1 murders per million people. That was 2010.
2015 was 10.8 per million population
The rate should be 0 % per million.
With the added stress and drugs P in particular I would have assumed it would have been higher but looking at the statistics that appears not to be the case .


I think that violence and intent to do grievous harm are actually higher than before... however with advances in medical technology they are able to save more people, preventing "homicide" and "murder".

Just look at how many nutbars we have shooting and pulling guns on the cops these days.

[gsxr]

I have just spent the last 2 hours going through basic information I have available to me without relying on the gospel according to IW nor the facts from KH. I just wanted to take a fresh look at the case in general with no persuasion from anyone. Several things stand out to me. Many witnesses on the night/morning in question compiled an identikit picture of the so far unindentified mystery man. That identikit picture should have immediately eliminated Scott from the investigation.The statements from the 3 witnesses aboard the Niad that picked Ben and Olivia up from Tamarack and dropped the MM and Ben and Olivia to a 2 masted ketch eliminates Scott. The statements from the 2 vessels Blade was moored to that he boarded Blade alone eliminates Scott.The fact 52 witnesses were able to do an identikit picture of the unidentified ketch surely must exist / or did despite Pope dismissing it existed

[Daffyd]

As I said earlier, "There's NO evidence that they are, in fact, dead".

[gsxr]

As I said earlier, "There's NO evidence that they are, in fact, dead".

Nothing I have found apart from the jury verdict that links Scott in any way to the disappearance.

[Woodman]

I remember when this happened and later on there was a letter to the editor in the Nelson Mail from some concened citizens from Marahau stating that they had all contacted the Police saying that they saw the mystery ketch moored at Marahau a few days after new years. There concerns were that the police didn't get back to any of them for any further questioning.

[husaberg]

Nothing I have found apart from the jury verdict that links Scott in any way to the disappearance.

Other than DNA of course............
Also the 176 separate scratch marks have were found on the underside of Scotts boat’s hatch cover that a forensic scientist testified were fingernail scratches, that's a massive co-incidence.
It was just I guess a massive co-incidentally Scott on the day after the disappearance decided to suddenly and uncharacteristically become a very clean and tidy person Ie that same day to go and get some paint, then he just happened to repaint his boat.
Also co-incidentally going as far to ask his sister for help to thoroughly clean the boat (even down to his tape cases.)
So it was not at all odd that there was no fingerprints at all, found on the boat (even in places police would normally expect to find them.)
Or then there is Watson’s clothing, Just because the clothing, that the police and everyone else present at the lodge on New years eve, says he wore ,went mysteriously missing, that's not odd at all. Well, that's is just a bit of plain bad luck.
Just as just because out of the 1,612 people interviewed also present in the Marlborough Sounds on that same New Year’s Eve, Its only Scott Watson’s movements are not accounted for over the critical period that the pair went missing.
Its also just plain bad luck and an amazing co-incidence that just before the murder, Scott talked to three people about killing people, especially women.
Its odd that Scotts account of his movements on New Year's Day, 1998 Are totally at odds with the evidence provided by multiple separate witnesses.
All up, he must be just one unlucky bugger, for a dude that's innocent.:innocent:

[gsxr]

[QUOTE=husaberg;1130958808]Other than DNA of course............
Also the 176 separate scratch marks have were found on the underside of Scotts boat’s hatch cover that a forensic scientist testified were fingernail scratches, that's a massive co-incidence.
It was just I guess a massive co-incidentally Scott on the day after the disappearance decided to suddenly and uncharacteristically become a very clean and tidy person Ie that same day to go and get some paint, then he just happened to repaint his boat.
Also co-incidentally going as far to ask his sister for help to thoroughly clean the boat (even down to his tape cases.)
So it was not at all odd that there was no fingerprints at all, found on the boat (even in places police would normally expect to find them.)
Or then there is Watson’s clothing, Just because the clothing, that the police and everyone else present at the lodge on New years eve, says he wore ,went mysteriously missing, that's not odd at all. Well, that's is just a bit of plain bad luck.
Just as just because out of the 1,612 people interviewed also present in the Marlborough Sounds on that same New Year’s Eve, Its only Scott Watson’s movements are not accounted for over the critical period that the pair went missing.
Its also just plain bad luck and an amazing co-incidence that just before the murder, Scott talked to three people about killing people, especially women.
Its odd that Scotts account of his movements on New Year's Day, 1998 Are totally at odds with the evidence provided by multiple separate witnesses.
All up, he must be just one unlucky bugger, for a dude that's innocent.:innocent:[/QUOT


Thank you for your well informed input.
If you had indeed followed the case and subsequent information you would have been aware of other facts and information that you are obviously unaware of in your above post.
The DNA from 2 hairs has been dismissed as evidence as they were cross contaminated in the lab.
The scratches on the hatch went to the edges of the hatch which could not have occurred if the hatch was closed . Add to that NO yacht locks the hatch from the outside. His clothes were accounted for so I dont know what information you are relying on there .
Blade was cleaned prior to NYE due to the storm encountered by Scott and his sister on their return trip from the North Island.
The mystery man has never been found nor the ketch that 52 people described . Add to that number the witnesses that contacted the police and told we arnt looking for a ketch and no statements were taken
Pope made sure the ketch disappeared off the radar

[husaberg]

[QUOTE=husaberg;1130958808]Other than DNA of course............
Also the 176 separate scratch marks have were found on the underside of Scotts boat’s hatch cover that a forensic scientist testified were fingernail scratches, that's a massive co-incidence.
It was just I guess a massive co-incidentally Scott on the day after the disappearance decided to suddenly and uncharacteristically become a very clean and tidy person Ie that same day to go and get some paint, then he just happened to repaint his boat.
Also co-incidentally going as far to ask his sister for help to thoroughly clean the boat (even down to his tape cases.)
So it was not at all odd that there was no fingerprints at all, found on the boat (even in places police would normally expect to find them.)
Or then there is Watson’s clothing, Just because the clothing, that the police and everyone else present at the lodge on New years eve, says he wore ,went mysteriously missing, that's not odd at all. Well, that's is just a bit of plain bad luck.
Just as just because out of the 1,612 people interviewed also present in the Marlborough Sounds on that same New Year’s Eve, Its only Scott Watson’s movements are not accounted for over the critical period that the pair went missing.
Its also just plain bad luck and an amazing co-incidence that just before the murder, Scott talked to three people about killing people, especially women.
Its odd that Scotts account of his movements on New Year's Day, 1998 Are totally at odds with the evidence provided by multiple separate witnesses.
All up, he must be just one unlucky bugger, for a dude that's innocent.:innocent:[/QUOT


Thank you for your well informed input.
If you had indeed followed the case and subsequent information you would have been aware of other facts and information that you are obviously unaware of in your above post.
The DNA from 2 hairs has been dismissed as evidence as they were cross contaminated in the lab.
The scratches on the hatch went to the edges of the hatch which could not have occurred if the hatch was closed . Add to that NO yacht locks the hatch from the outside. His clothes were accounted for so I dont know what information you are relying on there .
Blade was cleaned prior to NYE due to the storm encountered by Scott and his sister on their return trip from the North Island.
The mystery man has never been found nor the ketch that 52 people described . Add to that number the witnesses that contacted the police and told we arnt looking for a ketch and no statements were taken
Pope made sure the ketch disappeared off the radar

Facts
you meant the facts the privy council the court of appeals and the governor general on advice from a QC all considered when they turned down appeals from the defence?
I am Pretty sure they all know a bit more than you or I do.
Note the scratches were (according to the defence) first made by a screwdriver then later when they were proven by an expert witness from the ESR to be of human orgin they were then attempted to be explained away as having come from Scott's nieces.
Note the hatch can be both either locked or lashed down it is just not designed to be.
As for the scratches in the inaccessible location the ESR expert never said these were made by a human.
If the blade was indeed scrubbed clean right down to cassette cases being wiped clean prior to NYE by Scott and his sister. Please point me to his sisters testimony about this, surely she would have testified to this? After all Scott is her family she would have testified to this key piece of evidence.
As for the evidence being tainted or planted this was never proven as you incorrectly suggested it was. What the defence said must have happened that is what defences do try and create doubt
On New Year's Day Watson sailed the Blade to Erie Bay in Queen Charlotte Sound, where he stayed with an acquaintance and his two children. The man, told the court Watson arrived some time after 5pm. It was here he acquired the paint. The timing of this was confirmed by the children. Watson at trail claimed he had arrived there prior to 10am in the morning.

Throwing in the mystery Ketch as if its a fact is what is called a diversion tactic. As is insinuating the police fabricated or perverting evidence
At the trial while under oath, Wallace told prosecutor Paul Davison QC he was "pretty definite" that the man in the montage was the same person he had served at the bar at Furneaux Lodge and had later dropped off at a yacht.
It was not until 4 years he changed his mind.

I note you don't deny Scott had stated that he would like to kill someone preferably a woman in the days leading up to the murders, or his 48 previous convictions.
I fact he was even involved in a physical altercation at the part that night with a 17 year old male.
This began by Watson telling the 17 year old his sister, who had cancer, was going to die.
He later assaulted a blond woman out by the garden bar. A witness told police of seeing the woman crying, saying "Why did you hit me?" as Watson walked away.
Infact whitness testimony showed he had propositioned over 20 separate females that night, Oddly nearly all of them blonde.

[maxlev]

Inquiry doc # 20066, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretaker
I was doing bits and pieces around the house. I looked up and saw that Scott had arrived in his yacht. He had it anchored in the bay. I didn`t see it sail in. He came out of the blue, I can`t even tell you what time he came in. I would put the time about between 10 am and midday.

Inquiry doc # 20064, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
I think that around 1 pm on New Years Day we looked out of the kitchen window and saw that Scott had sailed into the bay.

Inquiry doc # 20082, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretakers son
Scott came this year around New Years Day. I think it was lunch time

200 - 250 cannabis plants found, Erie Bay Caretaker charged.

Inquiry doc # 20392, 23rd January, Erie Bay Caretaker
I would now put that time at around 3 pm

Inquiry doc # 10373, 23rd January, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
We had a barbecue lunch at about 12`ish. About half an hour after lunch we were all sitting at the table when we saw Scott coming in.

Inquiry doc # 20999, 10th March, Erie Bay Caretaker
I think that time was about 3 pm.

Inquiry doc # 20998, 10th March, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
The only change I would make is the time Scott arrived on New Years Day. We were inside watching the horse racing on TV. Scott arrived after the Auckland Cup. I don`t know what time that was.

Inquiry doc # 30948, 18th March, Erie Bay Caretaker
I remember now the time that Watson arrived at Erie Bay. It was after 5 pm I think.

[maxlev]

Crown case was that Watson dumped the bodies 5 nm out from Tory Channel entrance in Cook Strait at 4:26 pm.
Then motored to Erie Bay at 40 kph with a 20 hp 2 cylinder Yanmar diesel engine.

PM to me years ago from the owner of the yacht that was seen out in Cook Strait by the father & son witnesses on ferry.

Max,

In a post in 2008 at cruisersforum (yes, that long ago, I only just saw it) I notice you mention Dau Soko crossed the Cook Straits on 1/1/98.

"In fact there was only one yacht that crossed Cook Straight on this day, a yacht named Dau Soko, it arrived at Tory entrance approx 5pm but Police changed this to 2pm."

I was the owner of Dau Soko then, and indeed was interviewed by the police on my return to Wellington. We crossed with 5 people on board, and indeed we were at Tory Heads around 5 pm. The Aratika (I think) passed us to the north on her way out. I had also called on the radio to tell her to come out, as I had misjudged the time for us to enter the straights. The police took a statement, which I signed.

At that time Dau Solo was painted white, with a blue stripe down the side, with ports in the blue stripe. Dau Soko is a cutter, not a ketch, but the picture is uncanny.

I communicated all of this to Keith Hunter, when he was exploring the subject. It is interesting that no description of Dau Soko was provided, because to do so would have:

1. supported the defense that Blade was not there (we were asked if we had seen Blade, but as this was April, I answered "Yes, all over the newspapers, but I cannot remember seeing her then, we were all tired, and it was almost 4 months ago."
2. Undermined the identification of the "mystery yacht" and therefore undermined the defense. Dau Soko looked, other than the number of masts, just like the "mystery yacht".

Do I believe Scott Watson did this. Personally no. But that actually is quite irrelevant, and always has been. I do believe that the failure to identify and mention the location of Dau Soko on 1/1/98 was an error. But then, I cannot prove that either. If anything, it would have been in the prosecutions interests to produce a photo of Dau Soko to undermine the "mystery yacht" theory.

The entire situation was terrible. Yet, Dau Soko's crossing and time of arrivals supports and undermines all sides of the argument.

I wish I had known more at the time, such as the '2pm' / '5pm' error. In that case, possibly the Wakakura would not have been looking for human remains pushed overboard (actually my daughter and a friend asleep on the foredeck - but indistinguishable from bodies at that time of day).

So, you were right that Dau Soko was the only yacht there at that time, but I'm not certain that the fact really helps either side in this case.

Kind regards,
Dan

[husaberg]

Inquiry doc # 20066, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretaker
I was doing bits and pieces around the house. I looked up and saw that Scott had arrived in his yacht. He had it anchored in the bay. I didn`t see it sail in. He came out of the blue, I can`t even tell you what time he came in. I would put the time about between 10 am and midday.

Inquiry doc # 20064, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
I think that around 1 pm on New Years Day we looked out of the kitchen window and saw that Scott had sailed into the bay.

Inquiry doc # 20082, 14th January, Erie Bay Caretakers son
Scott came this year around New Years Day. I think it was lunch time

200 - 250 cannabis plants found, Erie Bay Caretaker charged.

Inquiry doc # 20392, 23rd January, Erie Bay Caretaker
I would now put that time at around 3 pm

Inquiry doc # 10373, 23rd January, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
We had a barbecue lunch at about 12`ish. About half an hour after lunch we were all sitting at the table when we saw Scott coming in.

Inquiry doc # 20999, 10th March, Erie Bay Caretaker
I think that time was about 3 pm.

Inquiry doc # 20998, 10th March, Erie Bay Caretakers daughter
The only change I would make is the time Scott arrived on New Years Day. We were inside watching the horse racing on TV. Scott arrived after the Auckland Cup. I don`t know what time that was.
Inquiry doc # 30948, 18th March, Erie Bay Caretaker
I remember now the time that Watson arrived at Erie Bay. It was after 5 pm I think.

The Sunday Star-Times, in an effort to clear up the timing issue, tried to contact the caretaker and found he died in a car crash in March 2003. The coroner was told that he had excess blood alcohol and the car was mechanically sound. His daughter, 14 at the time of the trial and now a teacher in Japan, told the Star-Times that it was she and her brother who had persuaded their father he had made a mistake about the timing. They were present that day, and based on their recollection of certain horse races televised that afternoon, they convinced their father his 10am estimate must have been wrong. "He had a terrible short-term memory," she explained. He had a candid relationship with his children they knew he used dope and never mentioned any "deal" with the police.

[maxlev]

I have read the new book Elementary. I regard it as very far fetched.

Book claims to have identified the mystery ketch as scow Alliance. A local well known boat. A witness the author holds in high regard (local charter boat operator) sees Watson painting his yacht at Waikawa Bay on Jan 1st. The author leaves out the part of this witnesses statement where he identifies seeing a boat he knows well, Alliance and another boat (mystery ketch) that is not a local boat. Author also leaves out his the sighting of this mystery ketch on Jan 2nd 10:30 am 5 kilometres away from where Alliance was known to have been at the time.

Author utilises statements of who he wants us to believe is Watson. These range from him being obese to having a wiry build. Unshaved with stubble even though the 31 st December 9:30 pm photo of Watson shows him clean shaved. One description of Watson even has him with grey curly hair.

The climax is (case solved) a yacht that might be Watsons, but described as up to 40 feet long at Shakespeare Bay. 2 items that were probably sails in sail bags but might be bodies, transported to shore 11:30 am in a dinghy by a maori fella and an older guy with grey hair.

At end of book is mention by an ex Op Tam cop of a confession of the murders from Watson to Erie Bay caretaker, with web link to the confession.
Why would an ex Op Tam cop keep this secret for 18 years? It would have been very useful at the Trial, the 2003 Appeal Court and Kristy McDonald`s 2011 report.

[Swoop]

I am a boatie with about 40 years on water experience...
Yup. Sadly there was insufficient input from the nautical community, who know how to identify different vessels.
The mid-strait sighting which was dismissed is another example of where you would believe a yachtie over a donut-muncher.

[gsxr]

Old cruiser.com forum comments

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f80/scotts-ketch-13976.html
Post # 5 is interesting

[dangerous]

Crown case was that Watson dumped the bodies 5 nm out from Tory Channel entrance in Cook Strait at 4:26 pm.
Then motored to Erie Bay at 40 kph with a 20 hp 2 cylinder Yanmar diesel engine.
and Scotts father did the same trip in the same boat after and proved it was in fact impossable to travel that distance in that time, there is no way the blade could have been out that far and back in the bay by the times given.
the scratchs on the hatch were from the neices and it was insulation, pollystyrene... not hard to damage by young girls

[husaberg]

and Scotts father did the same trip in the same boat after and proved it was in fact impossable to travel that distance in that time, there is no way the blade could have been out that far and back in the bay by the times given.
the scratchs on the hatch were from the neices and it was insulation, pollystyrene... not hard to damage by young girls

There was only one siting of the blade in Tory channel and only an approximate time was given.
I note The hatch inner cover was actually foam rubber as documented by the ESR and by the courts and the defence.
All that is being raised here was considered and available to both the defence and the prosecution at the trial the appeals.
Yet always the result has been in favour of Watsons Guilt.
I would suggest anyone read the report conducted by Kirsty Mcdonald QC on behalf of the Governor General to consider Watsons appeal for clemency it covers pretty much everything.

http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjUx9O1suDLAhXH3aYKHSsaBNMQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.govt.nz%2Fservices%2F miscarriages-of-justice%2Fscott-watson-application%2Fkristy-mcdonalds-final-report-march-2011&usg=AFQjCNFCfhyIiYcsoVf9ZfhDdMgM9j-lLA&bvm=bv.117868183,d.dGY

[gsxr]

There was only one siting of the blade in Tory channel and only an approximate time was given.
I note The hatch inner cover was actually foam rubber as documented by the ESR and by the courts and the defence.
All that is being raised here was considered and available to both the defence and the prosecution at the trial the appeals.
Yet always the result has been in favour of Watsons Guilt.
I would suggest anyone read the report conducted by Kirsty Mcdonald QC on behalf of the Governor General to consider Watsons appeal for clemency it covers pretty much everything.

http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjUx9O1suDLAhXH3aYKHSsaBNMQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.govt.nz%2Fservices%2F miscarriages-of-justice%2Fscott-watson-application%2Fkristy-mcdonalds-final-report-march-2011&usg=AFQjCNFCfhyIiYcsoVf9ZfhDdMgM9j-lLA&bvm=bv.117868183,d.dGY

And one would have to conclude the report is a complete whitewash to cover arses.
Then one has to question WHY ...........

[husaberg]

And one would have to conclude the report is a complete whitewash to cover arses.
Then one has to question WHY ...........

Why? because it appears you are utterly convinced that he must be innocent and thus any evidence to the contrary must therefor be fabricated.

[gsxr]

Why? because it appears you are utterly convinced that he must be innocent and thus any evidence to the contrary must therefor be fabricated.

Apart from the obvious which is Scott was convicted by a jury of his peers please point me to any evidence that Scott Watson even saw let alone met Ben and Olivia.

[husaberg]

Apart from the obvious which is Scott was convicted by a jury of his peers please point me to any evidence that Scott Watson even saw let alone met Ben and Olivia.

That is the obvious elephant in your room,
This I construe is why you have avoided my questions.
Unfortunately, it is you, rather than me need to disprove what has already been proven in court already, something that was also already proven in numerous appeals.
The burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt his guilt, This is something they already have done.
The path you are attempting to lead me down, is actually what you already have accused the police of, Starting with a presumption of guilt (or in this case innocence) rather than letting the provable facts lead to the obvious conclusion.
This is why you allude to planted evidence ,police corruption and legal whitewashing. You have to allude to this, as you have no actual evidence to back what you believe.

That aside. In real life police and prosecution have to put it all together using hypothesis without know all the details that the killer does.
They have to piece together all the details and witness testimony they can't be expected to get everything 100% right first time, with what they have to work with.
In real life things details witness recollections of events don't always fit 100% with what occurred.
It is the defences job to create any possible doubt to try and get the defendant off while at the same withholding evidence that might hurt the defence.

[gsxr]

That is the obvious elephant in your room,
This I construe is why you avoided my question.
Unfortunately it is you rather than me need to disprove what has already been proven in court already, something that was also proven in numerous appeals The burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, they already did.
The path you are attempting to lead me down is what you already have accused the police of, Starting with a presumption of guilt or in this case innocence rather than letting the provable facts lead to the obvious conclusion.

I am not attempting to lead you down any path. However there have been many cases in NZ where people have been wrongly convicted. FACT. I just happen to believe this is just one of the cases after researching it
Ian Wisharts latest book raises more questions than it answers.
3 witnesses aboard the Niad that picked Ben and Olivia up from Tamarack made statements they were dropped off to approx 40 ft wooden ketch.
Witnesses on the 2 other vessels Blade was rafted to made statements he arrived back alone.
John Mullen filling in for his son on the water taxi made a statement he dropped a man matching Scotts description back to his boat as the sole passenger .
52 people contributed to the artists impression of the mystery ketch to date unidentified. Were they all mistaken ??
Many more reported its existance but were informed the police were no longer looking for a ketch once Pope came on the scene.

[dangerous]

Why? because it appears you are utterly convinced that he must be innocent and thus any evidence to the contrary must therefor be fabricated.altho your question is not aimed at me here is my thoughts...
most importantly how the fuck can you convict a person of murder when there are no body's??? the boat the pair bordered from the water taxi required a ladder to grt on deck (the blade sits near to water level in comparison) any one in chch can see the boat in Puro harbor for them selves.
For all we know the larger boat they bordered headed for Aussie were they both 'live'

No altho I support watsons inersince I am open to the fact he may or may not have murdered
My old man lived in the sounds at the time, he knew watson he had stayed near by he had broken in and robed places near by in my Dads words hes a 'shit head' but doubts highly he is a murder.

A old riding buddy is watsons brother, he didnt associate with scott much there lived worlds apart, but he and his wife under no circumstances believe scott is guility to the point this web site they built up and run http://www.freescottwatson.org/

Theres way to much bull shit from the ground up to the top ranks... it does not line up nor make sense, I think there is a high chance of people being paid off and all I hope is as they reach their death beds they come clean.

You can not find some one guilty of murder with no bodys or proff of death.

[oldrider]

I am not attempting to lead you down any path.

No but husaberg will relentlessly try to steer you down his/her (whatever) own narrow path of normalcy and unquestioning compliance! :rolleyes:

[husaberg]

I am not attempting to lead you down any path. However there have been many cases in NZ where people have been wrongly convicted. FACT. I just happen to believe this is just one of the cases after researching it
Ian Wisharts latest book raises more questions than it answers.
3 witnesses aboard the Niad that picked Ben and Olivia up from Tamarack made statements they were dropped off to approx 40 ft wooden ketch.
Witnesses on the 2 other vessels Blade was rafted to made statements he arrived back alone.
John Mullen filling in for his son on the water taxi made a statement he dropped a man matching Scotts description back to his boat as the sole passenger .
52 people contributed to the artists impression of the mystery ketch to date unidentified. Were they all mistaken ??
Many more reported its existance but were informed the police were no longer looking for a ketch once Pope came on the scene.

Yet there are far more cases where people have been wrongly found innocent likely by a factor of ten.
All the cases that were found to be wrongly convicted were eventually proven by facts.
The Watson case has not, on the contrary the very same legal system has found Watsons murder convictions to be just. time and time again.
Three witness also gave vastly differing locations of the boat the water taxi driver in fact changed the definitive location 5 times.
Wallace said in court under oath that he was pretty definite that it was Watson, he later changed his mind.
John Mullians time frame of when he dropped off a lone Scott, while it may have happened, doesn't fit with when he was seen back at the lodge by multiple witnesses who actually knew him.
Unless of coarse he took two trips to the lodge which was a hypothesis raised by the prosecution.

Fact Scott is a diagnosed psychopath. On how many of his 50 convictions do you think he actually plead guilty.
Contrast this with Pope who as a policeman who spent his whole life under public scrutiny.
Its a long bow to draw that because people seen a boat that Scott must be innocent.



altho your question is not aimed at me here is my thoughts...
most importantly how the fuck can you convict a person of murder when there are no body's??? the boat the pair bordered from the water taxi required a ladder to grt on deck (the blade sits near to water level in comparison) any one in chch can see the boat in Puro harbor for them selves.
For all we know the larger boat they bordered headed for Aussie were they both 'live'

No altho I support watsons inersince I am open to the fact he may or may not have murdered
My old man lived in the sounds at the time, he knew watson he had stayed near by he had broken in and robed places near by in my Dads words hes a 'shit head' but doubts highly he is a murder.

A old riding buddy is watsons brother, he didnt associate with scott much there lived worlds apart, but he and his wife under no circumstances believe scott is guility to the point this web site they built up and run http://www.freescottwatson.org/

Theres way to much bull shit from the ground up to the top ranks... it does not line up nor make sense, I think there is a high chance of people being paid off and all I hope is as they reach their death beds they come clean.

You can not find some one guilty of murder with no bodys or proff of death.
Yet none of this actually proves he is innocent.
Multiple people have been convicted in absence of a body, including another one this year.
Are you suggesting that as long as a body is never found no one can be convicted of murder.
It would be pretty easy to prove the police were paid off of the police paid off people, its easy for you to say, but do you have any actual evidence to support it?

No but husaberg will relentlessly try to steer you down his/her (whatever) own narrow path of normalcy and unquestioning compliance! :rolleyes:
Golly that's funny this is from the guy that posts unsolicited Hitler era rants about Jew world domination all over KB

[maxlev]

altho your question is not aimed at me here is my thoughts...
most importantly how the fuck can you convict a person of murder when there are no body's??? the boat the pair bordered from the water taxi required a ladder to grt on deck (the blade sits near to water level in comparison) any one in chch can see the boat in Puro harbor for them selves.
For all we know the larger boat they bordered headed for Aussie were they both 'live'

.

This be how Morrisey described what he saw when he held on to a yacht while B&O & mystery man climbed aboard

“When I grabbed the railing I had to look up a distance of about a foot to see the deck. The side of the boat was white near the deck and I noticed that there was another colour, a darker colour underneath that. It was a stripe a bit wider than the top white bit. Underneath that was white again.
The darker colour stripe was a bit higher than the sides of the Naiad when it was next to the boat"

Watson`s little yacht has sod all free board and is much the same height as the pontoons on the Naiad.

[Crasherfromwayback]

The fact is, I believe Watson to be as guilty as fuck. But the OTHER fact is, I also believe he was as unlucky as fuck to go down for it. The whole case stinks. Another police balls up, just like Lundies.

[dangerous]

-Yet none of this actually proves he is innocent.
-Multiple people have been convicted in absence of a body, including another one this year.
-Are you suggesting that as long as a body is never found no one can be convicted of murder.
-It would be pretty easy to prove the police were paid off of the police paid off people, its easy for you to say, but do you have any actual evidence to support it?


- agree hence why I said may or may not have
- your point?
- well DUH... if there is no proof and the accused says hes/shes NOT GUILTY how the fuck can ya, if there is proof like a video and or the acussed says GUILITY then of farking coarse
- easy??? i doubt it top secret and all hush hush, no one pipes up and says "i paid em off" do they.

My concern is Im seen hassling the hus a berg here ... then he goes missing and asumed dead, people say HE DID IT (pointing at me) fark I was last to give ya shit... Im in jail and your in the barharmers doing laps on ya bucket.

[Katman]

My concern is Im seen hassling the hus a berg here ... then he goes missing and asumed dead, people say HE DID IT (pointing at me) fark I was last to give ya shit... Im in jail and your in the barharmers doing laps on ya bucket.

Fuck it.

You should give it a go anyway.

[husaberg]

altho your question is not aimed at me here is my thoughts...
most importantly how the fuck can you convict a person of murder when there are no body's??? Theres way to much bull shit from the ground up to the top ranks... it does not line up nor make sense, I think there is a high chance of people being paid off and all I hope is as they reach their death beds they come clean.

You can not find some one guilty of murder with no bodys or proff of death.


- agree hence why I said may or may not have
- your point?
- well DUH... if there is no proof and the accused says hes/shes NOT GUILTY how the fuck can ya, if there is proof like a video and or the acussed says GUILITY then of farking coarse
- easy??? i doubt it top secret and all hush hush, no one pipes up and says "i paid em off" do they.

My concern is Im seen hassling the hus a berg here ... then he goes missing and asumed dead, people say HE DID IT (pointing at me) fark I was last to give ya shit... Im in jail and your in the barharmers doing laps on ya bucket.

The absence of a body makes it harder to prove guilt yet, Scott was still was proven guilty. By a jury no less.
As I said another person was proven guilty this year without a body, or proper confession (note there was a secret witness confession) or pleading guilty. No videos
http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/73999039/opunake-father-david-roigard-murdered-son-to-cover-up-missing-money-court-told.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/76879267/David-Roigard-gets-life-term-for-killing-his-son
As for easy I don't think a massive cover up and planting evidence is that easy at all to many people would have to be in on it. The more that are in on it the less likely chance it has of remaining a secret
IMO far too much to loose to little to gain.
You are fairly safe, I don't think you have it in ya.
But if they found my dead body covered in Semen and Nazi memorabilia the finger would be pointed squarely at Katman.

[Kickaha]

-.. Im in jail and your in the barharmers doing laps on ya bucket.

He'd have to have one that goes first

[husaberg]

He'd have to have one that goes first

Just exactly how many pieces is that ugly peanut tanked Gn in at the moment.
I actually co-incidentally worked on the Afrillia today a little bit

[Kickaha]

Just exactly how many pieces is that ugly peanut tanked Gn in at the moment.
I actually co-incidentally worked on the Afrillia today a little bit

Forks are out and exhaust is off, 10 minutes and it's back up and running

[husaberg]

Forks are out and exhaust is off, 10 minutes and it's back up and running

So its totally f-ed then.:whistle:
Or are you just waiting for Paul JR to hook you up with a springer front end and a set of slash pipes for that bad boy.

[Banditbandit]

The fact is, I believe Watson to be as guilty as fuck. But the OTHER fact is, I also believe he was as unlucky as fuck to go down for it. The whole case stinks. Another police balls up, just like Lundies.

I'm more inclined to think it has not been proven.

I have no idea whether Watson did it or not, but the evidence I've seen does not prove it beyond reasonable doubt ..

A balls up - Like AA Thomas, Teina Pura, etc etc ..

[gsxr]

After Ian Wisharts attempt at investigative journalism and his threats of legal action against me for suggesting he was coerced to write in the the style he did. Namely 7 whole chapters degrading not only the Watson family who were NOT involved but also the key witness Guy Wallace. 7 fucking chapters to set the scene .He also defamed Keith Hunter.
Gutter journalism to the extreme. He has even outclassed the old Truth publications in that respect.
However Keith Hunter has responded and proved most of the remaining chapters are false.
Whilst the reverse painting etc contained in his replies are fiction he is merely pointing out the absurd cherry picked statements and conclusions contained within Elementary.
http://www.hunterproductions.co.nz/?page=news&article=news-txt#Wishart08

Avery good read

[dangerous]

After Ian Wisharts attempt at investigative journalism and his threats of legal action against me for suggesting he was coerced to write in the the style he did.

Avery good read

wow... sorry man so who are you to have been in such a position to do that?

and Ill read the link soon...

[Grumph]

wow... sorry man so who are you to have been in such a position to do that?

and Ill read the link soon...

Don't apologise D - it's another unsubstantiated claim....

One wonders how many other public forums are having old Scott watson threads revived in some sort of effort to revive the case.