I Believe You Too, Louise


I think by now most of us know about the suppressed evidence in the Louise Nicholas rape trial. Yesterday a group of Wellington women distributed 1200 leaflets exposing the suppressed information. One of the them was Grace Millar, from the UNITE union.

I don’t often agree with socialists like Grace Millar, however I admire her and her friend’s bravery in openly flouting a court suppression order.

This case perfectly illustrates the need to allow “patterns based evidence” to be admitted in court.

Had the jury known the factors that have been exposed by the Wellington women and several Blogs, I think the outcome of the trial could have been much different.

Hats off to Louise Nicholas, a very brave woman indeed. Truth will out!

Share:

Author: Admin

Related Articles

6 thoughts on “I Believe You Too, Louise

  1. I don’t know about this Trevor. Has that earlier already run its full course? In that case I agree, and it could have changed the outcome (but given her flatmate’s evidence, perhaps not).

    But if appeals are still running, I don’t believe such patterns-based evidence should be introduced.

  2. You have got to be joking Trevor. Flout a court order? Surely respect for the law is a given. Without it, anything goes, any crime could be committed in the interests of “we will eventually be proved right” (the excuse green protesters use repeatedly) and in the interests of the “greater good”.

    including your neighbours wallett

  3. Fair call anonymous. I should have made it clearer I was supporting Grace Millars views and bravery not her tactics. That is why I did not link to any of the Blogs that posted the relevant info. That said, I think a huge injustice has been done in this case because some very relevant info was denied to the jury. The law, in this case is an ass and should be changed.

  4. Trevor you have touched on an interesting point re “patterns based evidence” I am a teacher and patterns of behaviour either good or bad are good evaluation points to consider when one is making judgements for children’s reports. I’m sure the same would be true in other professions when personal reports are needed. Without knowledge of such information evaluations lack depth and poor decisions can result. By evaluating patterns of behaviour and reporting those to significant others it is hoped to reward the good and curb the bad, educationally speaking. By not reporting bad behaviour patterns how can change be initiated?

  5. Of course patterns based evidence should have been allowed in this case. As a taxpayer I resent that 12 million $ was spent on a prosecution that was bound to fail becasue of two things

    ;

    of course pattern behaviour evidence should be allowed in court, otherwise expensive investigations such as this one 12 million $ will go on being wasted.

    The prosecution pulled its punches because of the clout of Asst Comm. Rickards outweighing the necessity to reveal that his mates had not been as careful as he had been at evading prosecution.

    That together with allowing the flatmate’s evidence, to be admitted without pointing out that she had protested publicly that..”that her words had been changed by Rex Miller” and were not what she actually said. This sort of cutting and pasting of evidence is unfortunately very common and frequently used by police when presenting evidence.

    The witness has a piece of paper waved at them in Court that they vaguely recognise and are asked ‘is this your signature?’to which they say ‘yes’ and it becomes fact!!

    In a case like this where crdibility of witnesses is so important it would be good if the Crown and the Defence aren’t both on the same side.

  6. This case perfectly illustrates the need to allow “patterns based evidence” to be admitted in court

    I don’t think so. Unless the evidence for the alledged crime is sufficient for conviction, we should not convict because s/he MAY have done so based on previous accusations and/or convictions.

    Either the evidence is there or it isn’t. Just because someone did something 3 times before doesn’t mean he/she did it the fourth time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.