Petition Closed

A demand for A Royal Commission of Inquiry into the conviction of Scott Watson.

This petition had 1,274 supporters


Petition to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry, to inquire into the circumstances of the conviction of Scott Watson in 1999 for the Murder of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope, in particular the conduct of the Police investigation team as well as the Crown Prosecutors.                                                  

We reject outright the claim of Kristy McDonald Q C in her 2011 report responding to Watson's application for the Royal Prerogative of Mercy, that she saw no risk of a miscarriage of justice having taken place. We find that statement plainly ludicrous in view of the fact that since Scott's conviction, virtually all of the main planks of evidence that he was convicted on have collapsed. Examples of that are; The two main identification witnesses for the Crown, Wallace and McNeilly, have retracted their evidence, stating that they were tricked by the police into making a wrongful identification of Watson. One of the two jailhouse informants, secret witness A, retracted his evidence a year after the trial, saying he made up his story of Watson confessing to him, under police pressure. New evidence by Guy Wallace, as seen in the documentary "Murder on the Blade" puts the location of the mystery ketch in Endeavor Inlet in a position different to that claimed in court, near Scott Watson's boat, but consistent with other witnesses, outside the area covered by the police photograph, and a long way from where Blade was rafted. It also seems highly suspicious that the evidence of the Erie Bay caretaker, which was pivotal to the Crown case, changed from Watson arriving at Erie Bay between 10.00 and 12.00 on New Years day, to arriving shortly after 5.00 pm, while the caretaker was under extreme pressure from the police over an impending drug conviction. After altering his evidence in favour of the Crown case, the caretaker's drug charges were downgraded, and he received only a suspended sentence, instead of up to four years imprisonment which he mite have received had the original charges been laid.     

      The only two remaining strands of evidence against Watson are extremely dubious, the first being the evidence of secret witness B, a violent recidivist offender, who appears to have been let off serious assault charges and rewarded with a car and a cellphone by police in exchange for his supposed evidence that Watson confessed to him in prison. The other piece of evidence, a long blonde hair, purportedly from Olivia Hope, said to have been on a "tiger blanket" on Watson's boat, was never actually sighted on the boat at all. The first time it was seen by anyone, was several weeks after the boat was searched, in the E S R laboratory, and only after sample hairs from Olivia Hope were brought in and examined by the same technician, on the same table, contained in a bag with a mysterious cut in it which has never been explained. It is because of these concerns, and many others regarding the conduct of the police and prosecutors in the case of Scott Watson, that we feel the only way to resolve these concerns is to have a Royal Commission of Inquiry, as was held into the Arthur Thomas case, and which found, in that case, serious misconduct to have taken place, in the form of planted evidence.


Today: Brenda is counting on you

Brenda Raymond needs your help with “New Zealand minister of Justice: A demand for A Royal Commission of Inquiry into the conviction of Scott Watson.”. Join Brenda and 1,273 supporters today.