The Police Complaints Authority yesterday started an inquiry into a murder charge made in 1988 against Ivan Curry, who is profoundly deaf.
The programme covered the police investigation and prosecution of Mr Curry.
In August 1988, Ivan Curry was arrested for the murder of his baby nephew at Waitotara near Wanganui. He was later released. The evidence against him was a four-page written confession.
The documentary said Mr Curry, who cannot read or write, found out a year after being remanded in prison that he had been charged with murder. It was a further year before he was released.
Mr Roberts said the authority would review the documentary as well as police and court records.
Aspects of the investigation could fall outside the jurisdiction of the authority — which is concerned only with police conduct, he said.
The investigation has been welcomed by the Association of the Deaf, which has asked for changes to police procedures.
There was no requirement for the police to bring in sign language interpreters in cases involving deaf people, said the president of the association, Jennifer Brain.
“We know of other deaf people who have had similar experiences to Ivan Curry and think use of New Zealand Sign Language is essential to stop this happening.”
The Palmerston North Police Commander, Assistant Commissioner Allan Galbraith, said yesterday the programme was biased against the police.
“In the hour-long programme I got the impression that there was only about three minutes from the police perspective and that was solely from an interview with Detective Senior Sergeant Scott [who headed the case],” Mr Galbraith said.
“The programme was intent on giving the police a kicking.”
Mr Galbraith said it would have been desirable for the police to have videotaped the interview with Mr Curry, but the system is still to be introduced to Wanganui.
Mr Keith Hunter, who wrote, produced and directed the documentary, said police criticism was “absolute nonsense.”
He said the criticism made it clear the police did not like the fact that the film raised questions about their handling of the case.
He said he did not believe it was bias to show the officer in charge contradicting the sworn evidence of a young constable in court, nor was it bias to show how a police sergeant ignored vital evidence from a key witness.
Mr Hunter said the police assertion that his documentary was “intent on giving the police a kicking” was wrong.
He had begun his research intending to do a story on the two-year remand of Curry without trial. But reading the court transcripts had alerted him to a far more frightening story.
The police were asked for interviews, but after a three-month delay only one policeman involved in the case would agree to be interviewed.
Mr Hunter said he welcomed news of an inquiry into the case but would like to be involved in the process to ensure there is no “whitewash.”
He said his research had revealed many more questions about the case than could be fitted into the hour-long documentary.
The Minister of Police, Mr Banks, said he had received a letter from the documentary producer and would take seriously the points raised in it.
“All the complaints against the police made in the letter will receive the closest scrutiny and no doubt in the near future Mr Justice Jeffries [the Police Complaints Authority] will reply to both the complainant and myself and make those public.”
