Palmerston North Police Station Audit Update 01

[@userbrentcarter]

Thanks for the update, Keep up the good work mate.

[@carolvankerkhoff5132]

Thanks for the update. Love your work.

[@kiwicameraman]

That is definitely the behaviour of the nz police, it shouldn't be!! But unfortunately it is Surprised u got their name's Keep up the good work

[@IamtheBirmingham6]

Great work ,get these tyrant officers sacked ASAP

[@terrybull7546]

i have learnt so much more on my rights from your videos

[@flexhunter6462]

Good follow up brother that carpark footage makes it very clear how intensional it was that they don't like the public

[@Horizon344]

Unprofessional conduct in the uniform by these coppers. The fella (who's old enough to know better as to how to behave) at 3:43 probably asked that because he knew he'd broken procedure & "does he have the evidence" was going thru his mind as to how much trouble he might be in for it.

[@RoamingHeathen]

Exactly: such a rapid change of attitudes in a few seconds. Explodes immaturely and then quickly realised he’s being recorded breaking policy and being a Grade A douche.

[@IamJigle]

Good video as always - I do have one question. You state that it is police policy for officers to identify themselves - however, I haven't been able to locate any source or document concerning this. The Policing Act 2008 section 96 (6) states "Despite subsections (1) and (2), if any question arises as to the right of any constable to hold or execute his or her office,- (a) common reputation is evidence of that right; and (b) it is not necessary to produce evidence of the constable’s identity and authority." I am unable to find any sort of policy online that specifically states that a police officer must identify themselves upon request.

[@TestAffect123]

The police do have to evidence their authority during vehicle stops, or when on a road. They have to give their QID number at the least or they could just be a stripper or a carjacker.

[@IamJigle]

@@TestAffect123 i dont think there is a law or policy that specifically states that they have to give their QID during a vehicle stop. As above common reputation is evidence of that right - driving a marked patrol car, in an NZ police uniform, stops you with lights and sirens. - I doubt any court in NZ would allow you to get off a "Failed to remain stopped" or "failed to stop" charge simply because you thought that a carjacker was stopping you or an officer refused your request for their QID. I am genuinely curious where the idea that Police have to identify upon request of someone comes from because I would like to reference the source if ever I need to. So far no Kiwi has been able to provide me with a source. The only evidence of this I have found is in the Policing Act that I have referenced above. The only legal times I have seen that police have to identify by name, ranks and station are in warrantless searches under Search and Surveillance act 2012

[@TestAffect123]

@@IamJigleLand Transport Act 1998 'Part 9 Enforcement of responsibilities General enforcement powers 113 Enforcement officers may enforce transport legislation (1) An enforcement officer in uniform or in possession of a warrant or other evidence of his or her authority as an enforcement officer may enforce the provisions of-...' Anytime a Police Officer starts ordering or making demands, they need to EVIDENCE their authority, or how do you not know that that person is not just a carjacker or a home invader. If a carjacker was dressed like a carjacker & is behaving as a carjacker, & is refusing to self identify, then you'd have to be very stupid to just give your vehicle to a carjacker. Your insurer might even accuse you of giving your vehicle to a carjacker on purpose, just to claim on your insurance. A court of law, will look at the circumstances. If the police approached on foot, without a police car or sirens, dressed in dark clothing with dark masks on, it would be reasonable for any normal person to conclude that a person dressed as a carjacker bellowing unlawful demands like 'open your door!' is a carjacker & not the police. And if it was the police refusing to self-identify, in such circumstances, they are therefore making no effort to 'evidence' their authority. On the contrary, if any police officer is making unlawful demands AND refusing to self identify AND is not in proper uniform, they can't expect a reasonable person to believe that they are the real police. A court would look at the contextual evidence. Eg, No police vehicle, no proper uniform, refusal to self identify, unlawful demand = gross misconduct..

[@TestAffect123]

@@IamJigle also, when a cop is bellowing unlawful demands, & refusing to self identify, it's BECAUSE they know they are being unlawful. If they were being lawful, they would have no issue with self identifying. Too often, the cops are doing unlawful search & seizures. They go on illegal fishing trips. They figure that if they find nothing, well you don't have their name anyway. If they do find something, the lawyer can say what was found is inadmissible evidence now, but most judges will probably rule that there was probable cause, even if there wasn't. The bigger issue, is when the police find nothing, & had not been dressed or behaving as police. They are then motivated to fabricate a probable cause or a lesser crime. Anyone is a walking target these days to be set up by the police, but some including police auditors/watchers will get set up more often, & should consider filming live streams, or being able to switch quickly to livestream. I know of someone who had all their recording gear taken by the police, & they were unable to get back for months...

[@meihanabriggs4992]

Yes thank you for this

[@sdinnz]

One of your best!

[@jamesm2075]

Thanks for the update mate

[@TestAffect123]

Hi Kiwifreedom, because it took me almost 6 months to get the Police Comms Event Chronology, despite requesting it every month for 6 months, I have learnt that 5 police units attended a scene. 4 police units were from Palmerston North, but 1 was from Feilding. 4 Police units had chosen to NOT approach me. It was the Feilding Police unit that had chosen to travel from Feilding, & then spend about 20 minutes observing me doing nothing, just like 4 Palmerston North police units had observed me doing nothing, but had chosen to NOT approach. These Feilding police cops had refused to identify & had approached on foot in dark clothing with dark masks on. These Feilding police had chosen to travel, despite 4 Palmerston Police units being on the scene, who could not find any crimes in progress. How usual is it for a cop car to come from ANOTHER area, when there are no crimes in progress, & when there are 4 resident police units already available & on the scene? Is it usual for cops to just self-assign themselves to a job they have heard on the radio, outside of their own neighbouring area? The Police Comms Event chronology is titled 'Protection Order Breach', where a female alleged a protection order breach, but the police were unable to locate any such offender, despite arriving just 3 minutes & 18 seconds of the call. They did give the female a lift to Highbury, & this all took about 4 hours, or rather they were still in Highbury 4 hours plus later.. I have her address, & the number plate of someone they did do a search of, but that appears to be the wrong person. Police went fishing... I don't have a protection order on anyone, or against me etc. I am going to make contact with both these people, the person that alleged the protection order breach, & the person that was investigated AFTER I was so rudely approached etc, with the police refusing to self identify or tell me what their 'something' was, that they wanted to talk about. But I don't actually look like a man anyway, which is the description of who they were s'pose to be looking for... The Police Comms Chronology is titled Protection Order Breach. Yes, I will film, when I approach these potential witnesses. The police gave me their information, so they must want me to approach them, to find out what was going on etc. But yes, I would be annoyed if my private information was given out. I feel I should tell these people that their private information has been given out etc etc

[@TestAffect123]

I believe that the Police Prosecutor or the OIC never intended to give me the repeatedly requested Police Comms Event chronology that clears me of their false charges, but because I was requesting a dismissal at Court, given repeated Disclosure Act failures, that the Judge probably told the police that they had to give me, or he would have to dismiss. The police still did not supply the disclosure in the legislatory required 5 working days before the hearing, so the judge should have dismissed. I had no time during the hearing to decipher the codes & abbreviations in 6 pages of coded jargon. That aside, the police did not redact the police comms event chronology document to protect the privacy of others, because they had never intended giving me the disclosure that clears me of the charges in the first place. Filing at the High Court now, & have already filed private prosecutions at the court counter against the police...

[@TestAffect123]

The other damning thing, is that for 50 minutes, the intimidating aggressive Feilding Police chose to not 'effect' any unlawful arrest themselves. A Sergeant from Palmerston North arrived to effect their unlawful arrest. But this was the SAME Sergeant who had observed me himself, but had chosen to not approach earlier. Why it took him so long to arrive as the 'Supervisor', when the police station is only 2 minutes away, is concerning. Why were these police officers swapping out their areas for? Why didn't the Feilding Police effect their own unlawful arrest? Because they knew they were doing an unlawful fishing expedition, & thought I would eventually agree to it. They found nothing, but extensively damaged my property. The Feilding police had a duty to self identify when yelling unlawful demands at me. They had decided that as they were from Feilding, that I could have requested their identities till kingdom come from the Palmerston North Police station to no avail, upon them finding nothing. That had been their calculated gamble. Problem is when people behave like, & dress like carjackers on foot, then a reasonable person must conclude that they are non identifying carjackers.

[@kiwifreedom]

Yes its a good thing to get the as much documentation as you can, it's obvious why they are hiding it you will probably get off now, you need to get the call to police as well to see what they had to go on at the start. Its typical Police BS hiding stuff like that, its a personal hate of mine, look at that guy this week who locked up for 30 plus years because police hid evidence. Disgusting.

[@letsgo9901]

Police are not suppose to ask for ID & NOT I D themselves.

[@KRISHOLYONENZ]

Good work brother how do I get in touch on how to get video footage if you know what I mean cell footage does it matter if the have destroyed the station?

[@kiwifreedom]

Do an OIA request for the footage, just be aware I think its only kept for 30 days before its deleted, best to make contact with the station hierarchy and tell them you are making a complaint and want the footage held.

[@totaldomination3732]

Tamati seems to have a lot to hide, imo

[@darrylkennedy2125]

Hey they're going the same way as the Yanks are. Do as I say not as I do. When they're regularly armed look out. Just tell em to Foxtrot Oscar.

please go and audit the Marton Council as they are very unprofessional

[@wimokaharawira8443]

Good work mate

[@jaceNZ75]

No Doubt😎 You're probably right👍

[@hoodyhoori]

outstanding my man

[@brucew13]

Good work, when's your next audit?

[@glennwilliams4769]

You know the police, hurry up and wait when you want something different when they want something

[@tjnz]

Great job, there needs to be more kiwi auditor, so many people in this country think they have power

[@351clevelandmodifiedmotor4]

1:09 exactly , the officers behavior is childish , and even a bit dangerous, what if they ran your foot over? they get away with it? most probably, and the actions were done to a person not breaking any law but documenting the response from police when exercising the RIGHT to film in PUBLIC,

[@viktoriavandenbongard4376]

Great work!!! Love you filming. Would I be able to share, this to my private group. I'm in New Zealand 🇳🇿. Go live tonight. Pm Please . As we going live tonight

[@kiwifreedom]

ok hope supply credit or link to channel, all the best

[@waydemorris1451]

Awesome work outing the short tempered bullies that shouldn't have badges.

[@totaldomination3732]

How easily they lie.

[@MrSpliffy3]

Another great audit. As per

[@longseafirerybell2030]

That Aos member is a cause for concern, she could pull the trigger without a second thought. 🤔Hmm if anyone is accidentally shot by barham please use this footage as a reference to her behavior..

[@flowerlittle1017]

Ive been wanting to know.... if you were a ex cop, where is the brotherhood ? I thought cops had each other for life ?

[@jimmymcjimjim5610]

I thought this was going to be kiwi as compared to the american channels but sgt brooke was a grumpy aggressive bugger lol

[@ralphwatt8752]

Police need a make over of Integrity

[@d4dan734]

Police training required

[@robfreeman5894]

Pigs always get away with it

[@nootu10]

Thought you used to be a cop? You should know your QID has nothing to do with the position you hold (AOS, SGT, PST). The chick ain’t AOS. Not sure where you got that info from.

[@thanatoes537]

Bruh you're being suspicious as hell taking pictures of a police station. And of course the dude got annoyed when u pressed him into questions when u don't answer any yourself.

[@kiwifreedom]

And whats the problem with that?, its lawful, I can take pictures all day long of the police station anyone can its the law!! No way will I answer any question from police unless the law says I have to, lawyers will always tell you never talk to police, Police have to identify!! Just because I didn't do what you would dosn't mean I can't its a free country you want to give your rights that is your prerogative, just don't expect me to. Have a good one.

[@johnnysol978]

Colonial aftermath in NZ

[@hanzjensen2154]

You can really get to see the professional ones compared to the entitled. Very interesting video’s

[@royalenfieldracer7806]

IPCA is not fit for purpose.

[@alanbaxter8100]

Violent thugs on the loose

[@bomb1129]

They don't even no who he is ha ha

[@jantadema2966]

Why are you wearing a mask

[@kiwifreedom]

Do I have to?, Do I have the right to dress a I please?, Do I have to dress to your standards?, oh I'm paranoid about covid probably wear a mask for the rest of my life, get over it.

[@deficator750]

because covid

[@liamsanford5727]

Cop seemed like a reasonable bloke, not that hard to give him your name and have a chat like any other normal person.

[@kiwifreedom]

If you wanna do that, that's your choice, by law I don't have to so I won't, simple as that get over it.

[@MrMarcol29]

ACAC