On Morning Report [audio] this morning, Police Commissioner Howard Broad was asked the obvious question: why didn't he try and prosecute the Urewera 17 under the Crimes Act, for something like conspiracy to murder? His answer is revealing:
Those options were not available to us... The offences under other legislation had not been committed. So conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to do those other sorts of things, those offences had not been [committed?] at all.(Emphasis added)
So, despite the lurid claims leaked to the media about plots to kill political figures, there was no conspiracy to do so. Given the low bar for conspiracy - essentially it requires proving an agreement between the parties (which need not be explicit) to carry out a crime - what this means is that the police had, at best, a few dumbarses mouthing off, with no plan, agreement, or intent to do anything.
In the face of this admission, the police's position looks even more untenable. Rather than being the victims of an incoherant law, they were trying to persecute people for actions which were simply not criminal under any ordinary understanding of the term (of course, as Ross Meurant pointed out, the police don't have an ordinary understanding. Instead, they have an insular and judgemental one, which classifies people as criminals on the basis of race, fashion, or political affiliation, then looks for something to charge them with).
Meanwhile, Broad also also spoke of a legal duty to maintain the secrecy of evidence collected under the interception warrant regime. Perhaps someone should be looking at which police officers breached this legal duty by systematic leaks intended to undermine the judicial process and smear the accused?
