This site is an archived version of Indymedia prior to 5th November 2012. The current site is at

Court report - Day 10 - Feb 27, 2012


This morning started with closed chambers - e.g. no public - in order that the crown could argue for name, image and any identifying details about the witness for the day. They won.

The witness is a NZ soldier who was flown from a theatre of war far far away specially to give evidence in this trial. We can be sure he wasn't flown over on Jetstar.

His evidence consisted of going through the video surveillance footage from the January, June, September and October wananga. In the video clips he was shown, he identified things that he deemed 'military' - for example the use of hand signals, or the use of patrolling techniques. He was shown specific clips by the prosecution. He did not watch the footage in its entirity.

His evidence was evenhanded, going so far as to 'cross examine' himself - pointing out the many things which were totally inconsistent with military techniques, and alluded to the footage which had no military context whatsoever.

His evidence took most of the day.

He was cross examined late in the afternoon by all 4 defence lawyers. He was asked a range of questions including was he aware of the sitaution of the NZSAS training rich businessmen from Direct Capital - and what he knew about this incident, he was asked about his time in East Timor, about the struggle of the East Timorese against the Indonesian army, about meeting Jose Ramos Horta, and how the struggle for independence was a struggle for people who had maintained their own identity through 400 years of colonisation. He was asked extensively about VIP protection training, asked about his knowledge of the use of this training, how much money could be earned working for a private security firm in overseas conflicts.

He said that he thought the video surveillance showed 'very rudimentary training' and that the people were 'dreaming' if they thought they were going to get work doing VIP protection with the skills they had.

He went on to say that it was impossible to know what the purpose or intent of the training was, and he couldn't deduce that just from the footage.

His evidence concluded with a few questions about the quality of the video footage, and he was very quick to point out that he could not draw firm conclusions from many things because there simply wasn't enough information.

After he finished, another cop, John Matheson, took the stand again. He bored the entire room describing photos of spent cartridge shells. His evidence continues tomorrow.


Are the defendants really

Are the defendants really saying that they were training for VIP work overseas or is that the crown?

Because if it's the former then how do you expect people on here to be sympathetic toward anyone who wantsto go to places like Iraq to run security so rich American imperalists can exploit the indigenous populations protected by people who sold their morality for money?

It would also be horribly ironic.

I believe there may be

I believe there may be different groups involved but the Crown is just lumping them all in together cos they happened to be in the same area.