May 02, 2013

Crown disputes medical claims over officer's thefts

By David Clarkson. A hearing may be needed to decide whether a policeman?s cash thefts were caused by his medical condition.

The long-serving officer ? he is no longer in the force ? has been granted continued interim name suppression after a scheduled sentencing was abandoned today for another psychiatric report and more legal argument.

July 31 has been set for the sentencing, but the defence counsel Pip Hall and Crown prosecutor Cathy Bell will decide in the meantime whether a hearing is necessary.

Mr Hall has commissioned a further psychiatric report on the 63-year-old?s health problems, and their bearing on his offending and their relevance to a likely application for permanent name suppression. That report will not be ready until next week.

Christchurch District Court Judge Phillip Moran referred to reports already before the court pointing to clinical depression and excessive consumption of prescribed medications.

The man has admitted a representative charge of theft by a person in a special relationship by accepting payments from 12 people ? money that was legitimately handed to the police ? and then not dealing with the cash ?in accordance with the requirements of the Commissioner of Police?. The offending involved cash totalling $2750.

The names of the people he received money from have already been suppressed, and the nature of his job with the police cannot be published because of the suppression order.

Miss Bell said the Crown did not accept that the man?s medical condition was a cause of the offending, and also did not accept that the money had been thrown away with other paperwork.

She said medical reports on his condition had ?gone too far? in concluding from recent examinations that he suffered from these ailments at the time of the offending in 2009 and 2010.

The psychiatric report next week may address issues that continue to concern the Crown but if not, a date will be set for a disputed facts hearing where witnesses will be called. Medical evidence is likely, and the Crown is also talking about calling evidence from the man?s police colleagues about his performance at the time. It may also call evidence from cleaners at the police station about whether the cash was actually ?binned?.

The man had said to the police that he offended because he was stressed.