Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 6 to Minister 
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 6 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:528] 
6.  
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Does she agree with her colleague the Minister for Social Development and Employment that the Southern Police District commander used “bozo-ish” language when saying that there was a prima facie case against the Hon David Benson-Pope; if not why not? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Acting Minister of Police) 
: 
 The Minister states that she has read the media release issued on 23 November 2005 by the southern district commander at the time he decided the police would not prosecute. The Minister is satisfied with the language Superintendent Fraser used. Mr Benson-Pope has told her that it was wrong to use the language he used and that he regretted it. The Minister has conveyed Mr Benson-Pope’s regrets to Superintendent Fraser. 
Simon Power 
: What exactly does she consider “bozo-ish” about the police report that found a prima facie case against Mr Benson-Pope including the aggravating factors of Mr Benson-Pope’s position of authority and his complete denial of the charges or does she perhaps not consider any of that to be “bozo-ish” at all? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I have a copy of the press statement that Superintendent Fraser made and I have to say that the reasons he has given for not prosecuting appear to me to be totally sensible. There is nothing— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Answer the question. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I am answering the question if members want to listen instead of interrupting. Superintendent Fraser states for example that the alleged events happened more than 22 years ago and the victims were not motivated to lay complaints with the police for many years. He states that if the person at the centre of the inquiry did not have a high current public profile it was unlikely that the matter would have surfaced in the way it did in 2005. I agree with the superintendent. 
Simon Power 
: Is the Minister concerned that Mr Benson-Pope through representatives speaking on his behalf has accused the police of leaking information on two occasions both of which accusations have not been true and what action will she be taking about those accusations against police in her ministry? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: On behalf of the Minister of Police I say there is no evidence of the police leaking any of that information and therefore it is not appropriate to blame the police. That view has been conveyed. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Is this the same Superintendent Fraser who 12 days ago in this House the National Party implied was lying when he said he was subject to no external pressure in the decision he had arrived at; if so has the Acting Minister had any indication that an apology has been made by the National Party to Superintendent Fraser? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I am appalled that any member of this House including one who has had experience in the area of justice and been a Minister of Justice would without foundation claim that a superintendent of police is lying. I would invite any member who has the courage to make such a defamatory statement to make it outside the House where legal action would certainly be taken against him. I think that the member’s comments were absolutely deplorable and a smear against that superintendent who has a fine record in the police force. 
Simon Power 
: Will the police be taking any action against Mr Benson-Pope for releasing details of the police file to the media prior to the papers being made public by the police or is the Minister happy for that “bozo-ish” behaviour to be overlooked simply because he is a Cabinet colleague? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I doubt whether the police would take any action for that although that is a decision for them. The reason they would not take that action is that no offence was committed. 
Simon Power 
: Whose definition is correct: the one in Butterworth’s  
New Zealand Law Dictionary 
 which considers a prima facie case to be “when the evidence in his or her favour is sufficiently strong for his or her opponent to be called on to answer” or Mr Benson-Pope’s definition which is “simply that someone has laid a complaint”; and is the Minister concerned that perhaps Mr Benson-Pope does not quite realise how close he came to being taken to court over the prima facie case of assault that was found? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The member has just made an assumption that he is in absolutely no position to make. The words “prima facie” of course are Latin for “at first view” which gives the member the impression of what a prima facie case is. It is evidence that is sufficient to raise a presumption of fact or to establish the fact in question unless rebutted. Can I add to that Professor Henaghan’s comments that the existence of a prima facie case did not necessarily mean a prosecution was cut and dried but it did mean that the police had enough to start a prosecution if they chose. I think those are accurate definitions of “prima facie”.