Why Police Commissioner Richard Chambers is the problem and should resign.
- Grant McLachlan
- May 27
- 15 min read
Instead of investigating complaints that a police station was operated by unvetted and unsupervised volunteers, Police Commissioner Richard Chambers instead abused police resources to dig dirt on the complainant to use as an excuse to discredit the complainant and dismiss the complaint.
I sent this email to the Commissioner, calling for him to resign.
He did not respond.
From: Grant McLachlan <grant@klaut.media>
Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2025 8:22 am
Subject: Complaint
Dear Commissioner,
I take exception to your 1 May 2022 email to Superintendent Naila Hassan in response to my request to close the Mahurangi Police Station. Your inappropriate actions triggered an escalation in inappropriate activity by other police officers down your chain of command.
My request to close the Mahurangi Police Station was due to unvetted and unsupervised volunteers running the police station for years. Instead, you abused your access to the National Intelligence Application in order to dig dirt on me and use that as an excuse to encourage your subordinates to dismiss the substance of my complaint.
Over two years later, the Mahurangi Police Station was closed due to unvetted and unsupervised volunteers running the police station for years. In other words, my request to close the police station was justified.
But your email to Naila Hassan said:
Sunday, 1 May, 2022 2:28pm
To: Naila Hassan
See attached. I will discuss with [Deputy Commissioner] Glenn [Dunbier] tomorrow but wondering if you have any information in relation to this situation? I note that Mclachlan is currently on active charges for Assault with Intent, MAF and Theft in relation to a situation in September 2021 and dealt with by Warkworth Police staff. A quick read of the NIA file record suggests compelling evidence in support of the charges. McLachlan is due back in Court 11 May.
Your actions were wrong at so many levels. You used personal information about me for purposes other than what was intended, you discriminated against me, you treated me like I was guilty before I was proven innocent, and you failed to act impartially, apolitically, or professionally.
“Compelling evidence”
Based on your email, you gave the impression that you read sufficient information about me before concluding that the evidence collected by Constable Jacqueline Fairbrass was “compelling.” You, however, failed to recognise that the police statements, notes, and evidence all contradicted each other and fell well short of the standard expected of a police officer.
The evidence against me was not “compelling” or even relevant to my complaint. The Mahurangi Police Station, however, was closed days after I was acquitted.
I had, however, compelling evidence for my defence. I filmed the incident. That’s right. I filmed the complainant attack me with her camera and break my nose, which required surgery. Medical evidence showed that the shape of damage to my nose matched the shape of the camera that appeared in my footage.
The attacker was the mother of a police officer who works metres away from you in your headquarters. Based on the evidence she gave in court, she relied on her connections to prefer her version of events.
I was falsely accused of attacking and robbing Lorraine Margaret Martin. She is the mother of Sergeant David Robert Martin. Her husband was Ross Wilkins Martin, who was a public relations executive for the firm Allan Fenwick McCully that ran campaigns for the National Party since Mark Mitchell’s grandfather Frank Gill was Police Minister.
I published an article on 17 September 2021 exposing the misconduct of the co-ordinator of volunteers at the Mahurangi Police Station, Diane Taylor, and former Act Party deputy leader, Beth Houlbrooke. The following day, evidence shows that Lorraine Martin visited Diane Taylor in breach of the lockdown rules, followed me, I filmed her attack me, and she fled the scene to Diane Taylor’s home.
I told witnesses that Lorraine Martin had attacked me twice. Witnesses gave evidence that they tried to return the camera twice but Lorraine Martin refused. A witness then returned the camera to another vigilante, June Turner. This demonstrates that witnesses believed my version of events.
An associate of Diane Taylor, retired spindoctor Paul Shanahan, then approached witnesses and pitched the false narrative that I had attacked Lorraine Martin. During the 111 call, Diane Taylor could be heard in the background telling Lorraine Martin what to say. While Lorraine Martin was still under oath and being cross examined, she tried to pass a “secret note” to the Crown Prosecutor prepared by someone else. Lorraine Martin’s “support” person, Lois McPherson, was then caught whispering answers to Lorraine Martin while she was being cross-examined. While under cross-examination, Lorraine Martin even claimed that others wrote submissions on her behalf to the council calling for dogs to be destroyed for being in breach of dog rules. There were even Police photographs taken at different times showing different damage to the camera that Lorraine Martin falsely claimed that I caused.
The plot was obviously to portray Lorraine Martin as a frail “little old lady” involved in an unprovoked attack a much larger and younger male stranger. After she was shown my footage of her charging at me in jeans, played her 111 call where she described herself as “quite fit”, and asked to explain her connections with Diane Taylor, she became aggressive and confrontational.
Lorraine Martin lied repeatedly about not knowing me. In Constable Fairbrass’ notes of her first meeting with Lorraine Martin, there was no description of the alleged attacker at all. In the 111 call moments earlier, however, Lorraine Martin mentions me by name four times and called me a “real troublemaker.” Years prior, she and Diane Taylor even wrote letters to the editor opposing local campaigns I fronted.
In fact, the first time my name appears in Fairbrass’ notes was when she met Paul Shanahan at his home. Based on evidence, Paul Shanahan claimed that he witnessed two vicious attacks more than three minutes apart and only approached Lorraine Martin after I left the scene. Paul Shanahan then spent five minutes with Lorraine Martin and the witnesses where he pitched his narrative that I had attacked Lorraine Martin. He continued to spread this false narrative. Immediately after Fairbrass’ visit, Shanahan posted on his Neighbourhood Support WhatsApp group:
I guess you are wondering why the police visited.
I witnessed that nutty journalist who decked an elderly lady down at the beach.
It was Grant McLachlan.
There was an old lady who took a photo of his photo dog off a leash. He took exception and decked her.
At the time, Paul Shanahan and Diane Taylor were committee members of the ratepayers’ association, who were trying to defraud Auckland Council of $6000. I published an article about it and other articles describing dirty politics involving the two. The following day, Lorraine Martin attacked me.
Other “independent” witnesses lied, even contradicting their police statements in court. The group of much larger and tougher people described a vicious attack lasting several minutes where they didn’t intervene. The group were breaching most lockdown rules. Constable Fairbrass then wrote the statement of the largest and toughest of the group (who was known to Police) before she even contacted him. Fairbrass then drove a considerable distance from the crime scene during an Alert Level Four Lockdown to get that witness to sign it.
By the end of the trial, the witnesses all lied about either not knowing me, Lorraine Martin, or each other. They all conspired to bring a false accusation. Lorraine Martin gave seven different versions of events and the witnesses just as many. How is that “compelling”?
Malicious prosecution
The investigation and prosecution was malicious. Constable Fairbrass had tunnel vision, only referring to Lorraine Martin as the “victim” in her notes, statements, and even in court until the judge corrected her. Court evidence records that she then referred to Lorraine Martin as the “complaintant (sic).”
Despite me providing Fairbrass with multiple potential lines of inquiry pointing to connections between witnesses and their motives, Fairbrass never entertained the possibility that Lorraine Martin and witnesses had conspired to bring a false accusation. Fairbrass fashioned her notes and witness statements to fit with the template that I attacked a little old lady stranger in an unprovoked attack witnessed by strangers.
What is telling is that, when Fairbrass discovered that Lorraine Martin had a history of making false allegations with the council, Fairbrass told my lawyer that she never exchanged information with the council. This contradicts this video of Animal Management Officer Merushe Arts where Arts claimed that she was “working with the Police”: https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-the-corrupt-dog-ranger
Fairbrass was then promoted to Detective [in the Waitemata District’s Adult Sexual Assault Team, based at Rosedale.]
The police prosecutor, former Detective Inspector and IPCA investigator Jim Gallagher, was crooked. According to evidence obtained, when Fairbrass and Gallagher discovered that Lorraine Martin’s 111 call contradicted her police statement, they delayed the release of it. When they discovered that Lorraine Martin had caused the damage to her own camera and lied about the value of it, Fairbrass and Gallagher delayed the release of that photographic evidence until days before the trial. They didn’t even produce the camera as an exhibit.
While Fairbrass and Gallagher obstructed the release of that evidence, they upgraded the charges against me to one where the starting point of sentencing was imprisonment. They then had the audacity to plea bargain with me, where they offered to drop the most serious charges in exchange for me pleading guilty to the most minor charge: male assaults female.
So, we have several incidents where Fairbrass and Gallagher deliberately obstructed the disclosure of evidence important to my defence. They then conducted a malicious prosecution.
“The Police will believe me!”
I had the presence of mind to film Lorraine Martin attack me because it was the sixth of nine attempts by the same group to falsely accuse me of various offences. During and following the incident, I was warned by several police officers and lawyers to not share my footage of Lorraine Martin attacking me due to her police connections. That speaks volumes.
I had every reason to follow that advice. During the third and fourth stitch-up attempts, the former deputy leader of the Act Party, Beth Houlbrooke, tried to provoke confrontations with me so to get her mates at the Warkworth Police to throw me in the cells for the weekend. During her second botched attempt, the bar manager threatened her with trespass. In response, over a dozen witnesses recalled her shout:
“The Police will believe me! I’m Beth Houlbrooke!”
I applied for a harassment order. Instead of defending the order, Houlbrooke sent an email on 21 July 2021 to Mahurangi Police Station Community Constable, Senior Constable Hamish Buick, and Warkworth Officer in Charge, Sergeant Mark Stallworthy. In that email was attached a 1994 newspaper clipping of another incident where I was falsely accused and a dossier prepared by David Seymour’s Senior Advisor [and campaign manager], Stuart Wilson.
All nine stitch-up attempts followed the same modus operandi as what was described in Beth Houlbrooke’s email.
I was not aware of Beth Houlbrooke’s email for over a year. In that time, I withdrew my harassment order and lodged a police complaint of criminal harassment describing eight of the nine incidents, excluding the incident involving Lorraine Martin. That criminal harassment complaint was handled by Senior Constable Hamish Buick, which strangely disappeared from your computer systems.
“Smile and Wave”
After Houlbrooke’s botched stitch-up attempts, attention was turned to targeting my dog. During my daily walk, there were three attempts in three weeks to unleash my dog during an Alert Level 4 lockdown. According to her evidence, Lorraine Martin received an unsolicited visit from Auckland Council Animal Management Officer Merushe Arts who led Lorraine Martin to believe that if my dog was caught off leash three times it would be destroyed.
I filmed all three attempts by Lorraine Martin and her group to unleash my dog while it was briefly tied to a fence. Former politician June Turner was involved in all three of those attempts, Lorraine Martin was involved with the second, and Lois McPherson was involved in the first and third attempts. For the first attempt, June Turner fled the scene to Lois McPherson’s, lodged a complaint, I received a fine from the council, and the fine was waived when I produced damning evidence of the incident. Following the second attempt, I was charged for attacking and robbing Lorraine Martin. During the third attempt, I filmed June Turner, Lois McPherson and seven other vigilantes attempting to interfere with my dog.
There were two more stitch-up attempts involving Beth Houlbrooke and the neighbour of Sergeant Mark Stallworthy, Jenny Bartlett, who ran Neighbourhood Support and Beth Houlbrooke’s community Facebook groups. I lodged a police complaint of criminal harassment. My lawyer lodged a police complaint alleging that witnesses and their associates were perverting the course of justice. I then sent a request to the Police Commissioner to close the Mahurangi Police Station.
After you sent your email down the chain of command, the complaint ended up with Senior Constable Hamish Buick who was in charge of the Mahurangi Police Station. He was told to deal with my complaint as he saw fit. He rang me and acted in a completely unacceptable manner. He laughed at me, told me that the police wouldn’t take any of my complaints seriously, and suggested that I “smile and wave” at the Neighbourhood Support volunteers who were harassing me. It was made abundantly clear that the Police were actively encouraging members of the public to criminally harass me.
According to emails released to 1News, Senior Constable Hamish Buick and Inspector Matt Laurenson lied. The Mahurangi Police Station wasn’t “an important and well used facility” and Buick allowed unvetted volunteers to operate the police station without his direct supervision for years.
These lies all came to light when Inspector Matt Laurenson and Sergeant Mark Stallworthy were away. Those relieving them – Waitematā North Relieving Area Commander Senior Sergeant Roger Small and Warkworth Relieving Sergeant Dan McDermott – were:
“aghast mate that this has been going on and we didn’t know about it.”
In addition to the fact that unvetted and unsupervised volunteers ran the police station for years, I provided examples of how those volunteers abused their access to the police station. Diane Taylor falsely claimed that she “worked for the police”, which is an offence, and that she had the support of police and volunteers who operated like a vigilante network. She told many people of this, including one incident where she assaulted someone and had an associate nearby to support a false accusation. Sergeant Dan McDermott even stated in an email:
Diane Taylor made it very clear that she does not volunteer for Neighbourhood Support and that she is a volunteer for the Police. I advised her that this was not the case, and Police did not have any volunteers at the station.
Diane Taylor said that they would continue to have volunteers.
Stallworthy and Buick led Diane Taylor to believe that she not only worked for the police but could rely on her police connections to avoid consequences for her behaviour.
Stallworthy and Buick also relied on their connections. It is a mutually beneficial arrangement. Stallworthy publicly supports the National Party and Mark Mitchell. Buick trades on his occupation and treated like a celebrity.
The evening after Buick dismissed my complaint, he attended an event held in his honour organised by politicians at the Warkworth Town Hall. See for yourself:
Beth Houlbrooke and National Party operatives all relied on their connections with local police and here they were hugging, patting, and drinking with them, even gloating that the Police were dishonest and abused access to Police resources.
How is this acceptable when your predecessors expected police to act impartially, apolitically, and professionally?
Damage
Your actions were damaging. It damaged me, you, and the reputation of the Police.
According to Section 25(c) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, I have the “right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.” By describing the evidence against me as “compelling”, you stigmatised me and sabotaged my complaint.
My complaint was about the actions of your police and volunteers operating out of one of your police stations. It was not about my actions. According to Principle 10 of the Privacy Act 2020, you cannot use personal information obtained about me for one purpose to be used for any other purpose. You did not have reasonable grounds to use my personal information to perform any of your functions.
Let’s not overlook that Diane Taylor and Jenny Bartlett went around assaulting and harassing people and pretending to be police employees. They, including Beth Houlbrooke and Lorraine Martin, relied on their police connections to favour their false allegations.
My complaint turned out to be justified, yet you dismissed my complaint due to irrelevant considerations which turned out to be false allegations.
Hypocrisy
Police illegitimately accessed sensitive files:
You announced a review to prevent the misuse of police technology:
In politics, the worst crime is hypocrisy. You are a hypocrite. You accessed my personal information and misused that information. Furthermore, the police officers that lied to you and me then gloated on YouTube that they abuse their access to police technology.
What you did was so wrong that you have irreparably harmed the reputation of the Police. You didn’t lead by example. You set such a poor example that it influenced misconduct in your lower ranks.
At a time where you, and your Minister, are cracking down on gangs, you are acting like one. You were complicit with a group of officers and politicians who abused their positions and actively conspired to bring false accusations. By legal definition, that makes you an “organised criminal group” – in other words, a gang.
Overwhelming evidence
The evidence against you and your officers isn’t “compelling.” It’s overwhelming. I could write a book about it. In fact, I have: https://www.klaut.media/unleashed
For every accusation I have made in this email, I have also published articles containing the evidence supporting it:
Warkworth’s celebrity crooked cop culture (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/warkworth-s-celebrity-crooked-cop-culture);
The farcical prosecution (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/photo-evidence-thwarts-farcical-prosecution);
The fabricated evidence (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-the-expensive-camera);
The perjury (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/unleashed-paul-shanahan-s-perjury);
The perverting of the course of justice (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-how-lois-mcpherson-and-lorraine-martin-perverted-the-course-of-justice);
The malice (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-the-corrupt-dog-ranger);
The motive (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/how-a-right-wing-racket-unleashed-on-me);
The conspiracy to make a false accusation (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-who-turned-the-keasts); and
The corrupt and incompetent investigation (https://www.klaut.media/single-post/r-v-mclachlan-what-was-constable-fairbrass-thinking).
Thousands have read my book and articles. I continue to film, record, and document every attempt to silence me.
It gets worse
Shortly after I was acquitted, I published the book. By the time of my trial, I had completed thirty of the thirty-two chapters. I had already written a history of police corruption and the failure of watchdogs to rein it in. I even interviewed an Australian corruption watchdog, who asked:
“If you come across a corrupt cop, do you dob him in or buy him a beer?”
Mark Mitchell answered that question for me. He ran a piss up for corrupt cops in his town hall and posted it on YouTube.
Subsequently, my lawyers and I have low expectations of the transparency within your organisation and the IPCA. Following my acquittal, we gave your officers and the IPCA ample opportunity to redeem yourselves.
I first laid a complaint of assault against Lorraine Martin with the Police. Attached to the complaint was evidence from the trial, including the evidence I was told to withhold from crooked Warkworth Police. My lawyer also attached a letter asking that Warkworth Police not be involved with the investigation. Months later, I received a fob-off letter from Warkworth Police Officer in Charge Sergeant Dan McDermott. He “reviewed” Fairbrass’ investigation rather than take into account the trial evidence.
I then laid a complaint with the IPCA against Fairbrass and former IPCA investigator Jim Gallagher. Six months later, I received an even briefer fob-off letter.
Immediately following my acquittal, my lawyer laid a complaint with Auckland Central Police against Lorraine Martin and Lois McPherson for perverting the course of justice multiple times during my trial. Attached to the complaint was the judicial minute describing their misconduct. My lawyer even alerted the Chief Justice and the Bar Association of the unprecedented misconduct at my trial. Months later, my lawyer discovered that somehow his complaint was gathering dust on Fairbrass’ desk. Fourteen months later, his complaint is now gathering dust on her colleague’s desk.
[Despite a judge providing evidence, the Police decided to not pursue a prosecution 20 months after the trial when the offences occurred.]
Meanwhile, the Police continue to obstruct the redaction of Beth Houlbrooke’s 21 July 2021 email to Stallworthy and Buick. My lawyers have raised this matter with the Privacy Commissioner.
We won’t deal with you or the IPCA anymore. Instead, we will expose and prosecute corrupt conduct directly.
Conclusion
You went to as much effort to investigate the substance of my complaint as your subordinates did to spell my surname correctly [which they didn't]. You didn’t act reasonably to form the opinion that there was “compelling” evidence on NIA, did you? It is more likely that you headed down to the canteen and had coffee with Lorraine Martin’s son.
Please take a moment to consider the warped situation you and your Police have created:
I filmed the mother of a cop break my nose with a weapon and your police charged me for breaking the weapon with my nose;
Your Police were quick to respond to obviously contradictory false accusations against me but slow to respond to my complaints that were supported with irrefutable evidence;
You, your officers, and the IPCA looked for any excuse, especially irrelevant considerations, to dismiss my complaints against those with connections to your organisations; and
Instead of protecting the public from vigilantes, you closed a police station to protect vigilantes from the public.
You and your officers are perceived as so corrupt that members of the public, especially politicians, were so confident that they could get away with serious crimes (that carry with it a punishment of up to fourteen years imprisonment) that they boasted about it. That speaks for itself.
Quoting from your colleague, Inspector Matt Laurenson, I have not used “expansive and exaggerated language.” I quoted evidence, including your own words and those who relied on their Police connections.
Your attitude is at the core of the problem. The only way that you can rectify this situation is if you removed yourself from it. You should resign.
Yours Incredulously,
Grant McLachlan
