Tuesday, January 11, 2022

Arthur Taylor: New Zealand: (Notorious criminal, dubbed 'the Jailhouse Lawyer' for his work in exposing Roberto Conchie Harris, a secret Crown witness against David Tamihere, who was convicted of the murder of Swedish tourists Heidi Paakkonen and Sven Urban Hoglin in 1989.)...The life and crimes of jailhouse lawyer Arthur Taylor are as complicated as the man himself - a man who is now author of "Prison Break: The extraordinary life and crimes of New Zealand’s most infamous escapee," as reviewed in stuff.co by Damien Grant...Which brings me to what I believe is Taylor’s most important legacy; the perjury case against Roberto Conchie Harris. Harris, as some readers may recall, was a secret Crown witness against David Tamihere, who was convicted of the murder of Swedish tourists Heidi Paakkonen and Sven Urban Hoglin in 1989. Harris claimed, as did two others, that Tamihere confessed while he was on remand. At least in the case of Harris, it subsequently emerged, Tamihere did no such thing. Despite clear evidence that Harris had lied in court against a man facing a double murder charge, the police did nothing. At this point, along comes Taylor, who picked up the case and successfully took a private criminal prosecution, and did so while incarcerated. Harris was sentenced to eight years and seven months for perjury. He died in prison last year. The use of jailhouse informants is an illegitimate prosecution technique, and Taylor’s efforts demonstrated just how unreliable they are. I understand their use has largely been abandoned. The failure of the police to confront their own failings in the Harris case was disgraceful and Taylor deserves recognition for securing this conviction and demonstrating how important it is that we retain the unique regime of private criminal prosecutions."


CONFIDENTIAL, OFTEN JAILHOUSE INFORMANTS:  Confidential, often jailhouse informants, have probably been around for as long as there have been jails and inmates willing to trade information for a favor or two — including more privileges, a shorter sentence or dropping of charges. They commonly turn up in investigations which are not going anywhere - as in ‘no DNA'.   “Incentivized informants” is the legal term of art, but too often they also have “a strong incentive to lie,” said Michelle Feldman, state campaigns director for the Innocence Project. That explains why, according to the project’s figures, 16 percent of DNA exonerations involved false testimony by informants. Broader studies of wrongful convictions put the figure as high as 46 percent. Innocent people have spent decades in prison while the guilty remained free, and often the victims of those informants never see justice either — a lose-lose-lose for the criminal justice system.
Boston Globe Editorial:  February 15, 2020.
-------------------------------------------------------

COMMENTARY: "The life and crimes of Arthur Taylor are as complicated as the man himself," by Columnist Damien Grant, published by Stuff.co on January 9, 2022.

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In a tyranny, Taylor would have been sent to a gulag and forgotten. He wasn’t. The willingness of those holding judicial warrants to set aside the wishes of the state where someone with the low standing of Taylor was able to cogently argue their case, is the most impressive aspect of Taylor’s story. The judiciary, not Taylor, are the heroes of his book. Taylor is a remarkable individual. Brilliant, flawed, and incredibly tenacious. He says, at the end of his book “I regret the s... I’ve done, and try to make up for it by bending over the other way, to try and right the scales.” Maybe he believes this. I do not. Yet his legacy is important, even if he doesn’t really understand why."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

GIST: "  "In his autobiography; Prison Break: The extraordinary life and crimes of New Zealand’s most infamous escapee, Arthur William Taylor goes to a lot of effort to discredit himself as a human being.


He succeeds.


Like this columnist, Taylor has spent time in prison. However, Taylor did serious time, 38 years in all. I was merely a day-tripper by comparison. Yet, like Taylor, my early 20s have been lost in a haze of criminality and selective memory.


Taylor continued, however, in his chosen career. He graduated from petty crimes to organising bank robberies and became this country’s most proficient escapee. 


Reading his book, it becomes clear that he is enormously proud of both his crimes and escapes. The highlight, in one respect, was the burning down of the Stratford Court House.


In June 1988 Taylor was facing some minor burglary charges. The night before the case was to be processed the court in Stratford burnt down. This, and the associated destruction of some original paperwork, gave Taylor a procedural advantage in the criminal case.


This building was erected in 1895. It had a Historic Places classification. It was restored at considerable cost. Whoever did this should be ashamed. Yet Taylor is so impressed with himself he cannot help but skite.


“Nobody has ever been convicted of lighting that fire. Later, Tireless Terry (a detective prosecuting Taylor) told reporters that a defendant wanting to get out of their case burned it to the ground. It’s anyone’s guess who he’s referring to.”


Taylor may believe readers will be impressed at the audacity of this action. Perhaps some were. I wasn’t. Unlike Taylor, I have never written about the events that brought me to serve 16 months in prison, save perhaps tangentially as a backdrop to a larger story or point.


There are a number of reasons for this, but one is I am not proud of them. I do not wish to relive or boast about what, looking back, was a grand adventure, but also a deeply shameful way to live.


People were hurt. Debts were accumulated that can never be settled. Spending time in prison does not square the ledger, as Taylor seems to think. Those affected by crime are rarely compensated by the thug who committed them being locked in a cage.


Maybe there is some solace in knowing that there were consequences, but that is not the same as being made whole. The damage done to our loved ones is incalculable, and the costs imposed upon the community ripples over generations.


The idea of seeking glory over and above the ill-gotten gains is abhorrent. Taylor sees himself as the centre of a Kipling adventure. A noble and loveable rogue. He isn’t. He comes across as unrepentant and a solipsist.


Yet it is wrong to dismiss the significance of his second act; a stunning run of largely self-represented litigation.


Unchecked, those with power will become accustomed to exercising it, and inevitability abuse their authority. When it comes to the state we must rely on the professionalism of those in office and when that fails; the courts.


Taylor took a number of cases, including a challenge to the ban of smoking in prison and the rights of prisoners to vote, as well as a half dozen less significant cases regarding his and other inmates’ rights and treatment.


In themselves, these will fade in relevance, but not the fact that they were taken. Reading his account, and trusting in its accuracy thanks to the involvement of Stuff journalist Kelly Dennett, it is clear that Corrections breached Taylor’s rights, violated the New Zealand Bill of Rights, and on occasion acted outside their legal authority.


His determined advocacy, and not always on his own account, forced the department to be held accountable. This is important, and not just for the limited number of cases but for making the wider point that those wielding authority can, and should, be held to a high standard when dealing with the marginalised and powerless.


Which brings me to what I believe is Taylor’s most important legacy; the perjury case against Roberto Conchie Harris.


Harris, as some readers may recall, was a secret Crown witness against David Tamihere, who was convicted of the murder of Swedish tourists Heidi Paakkonen and Sven Urban Hoglin in 1989.


Harris claimed, as did two others, that Tamihere confessed while he was on remand. At least in the case of Harris, it subsequently emerged, Tamihere did no such thing. Despite clear evidence that Harris had lied in court against a man facing a double murder charge, the police did nothing.


At this point, along comes Taylor, who picked up the case and successfully took a private criminal prosecution, and did so while incarcerated. Harris was sentenced to eight years and seven months for perjury. He died in prison last year.


The use of jailhouse informants is an illegitimate prosecution technique, and Taylor’s efforts demonstrated just how unreliable they are. I understand their use has largely been abandoned.


The failure of the police to confront their own failings in the Harris case was disgraceful and Taylor deserves recognition for securing this conviction and demonstrating how important it is that we retain the unique regime of private criminal prosecutions.


In a tyranny, Taylor would have been sent to a gulag and forgotten. He wasn’t. The willingness of those holding judicial warrants to set aside the wishes of the state where someone with the low standing of Taylor was able to cogently argue their case, is the most impressive aspect of Taylor’s story.


The judiciary, not Taylor, are the heroes of his book.


Taylor is a remarkable individual. Brilliant, flawed, and incredibly tenacious. He says, at the end of his book “I regret the s... I’ve done, and try to make up for it by bending over the other way, to try and right the scales.”


Maybe he believes this. I do not. Yet his legacy is important, even if he doesn’t really understand why."


The entire story can be read at:


https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300491392/the-life-and-crimes-of-arthur-taylor-are-as-complicated-as-the-man-himself

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:



FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;