Defence puts Junior Area’s credibility under the microscope in final submissions in Slush case

Final submissions by the Crown and the Defence on the conspiracy case dubbed Operation Slush were heard by Justice Nicholson in the High Court on Monday and Tuesday this week.
Defence counsel, Tim Arnold pulled out all stops as he put the credibility of Junior Areai, the chief witness for the prosecution under the microscope.
Inconsistencies in Areai’s testimony during the trial were attacked in great detail. referring to transactions and time lines to discredit the witness and his version of events.
Arnold noted that the events were in 2002 and there had been an audit in 2003 into the activities and yet not one person from any Ministry had come forward with any misgivings even in hindsight about any activities relating to the then Minister (Norman George).
If there had been a conspiracy, why then did Areai not tell anyone during his own trial (in 2005) nor mention any refunds or sums of money he solicited from various businesses to either his first lawyer, Tepaitau nor his subsequent counsel, Samuel.
Instead, the first time anyone heard of the alleged conspiracy was after Areai had been convicted and for having been sent to prison. After receiving a legal bill for $30,000, he was so distressed, that he asked the warder to send for his friend George Pitt in his role as a spiritual advisor at the New Hope Church to come and visit him in prison.
On the visit, the witness made the serious allegations and acting upon the complaint, Pitt arranged for him to meet with the then Solicitor General and subsequently signed a sworn affidavit to that effect.
Arnold questioned Areai’s ‘amnesia’ on certain matters but the ability to have ‘astonishing recall’ at other times For instance, he said he remembered meeting the Minster at the Centra Motel and the family barbecue held at Papatoetoe but the dates he gave were inconsistent with other evidence from family witnesses who say they were with the Minister.
The family witnesses say they had ‘breakfast meetings’ with all of them there but Areai could not ‘remember’ them being there.
Arnold invited the court to follow the money trail: firstly the $3040 that turned out to be funeral money after the death of the Minister’s mother in 2002, but which the Crown originally alleged was a commission but eventually abandoned that claim.
Then there was the sum of $1000 handed over at a meeting of the Tumu Enua political party at Minister Vaevae Pare’s office which Areai claimed was from the Slush Fund. There was inconsistency in Areai saying he had given $2000 not $1000 to Paku but which on the evidence was still an open question on the evidence before the court.
Then there was the question of Ministerial expenses when taking overseas trips for government such as is ‘lengthy trip to Bali’ where he was given money for expenses.
Other examples are the money paid by a client called Mrs Hunt who paid legal fees of $3,500 paid in $50 notes while the sums banked were $100 notes, which Arnold attributed to mistake as to the denomination of notes.
Then there is a payment of $3000 which was said to have come from the Slush fund but which had been used to purchase safety gear by Areai om Focus and NZ Safety Ltd.
The Minister had made a Cabinet submission to lift the ban on capital expenditure in order to purchase equipment for the Atiu project and later for other islands including Aitutaki. If he were in a conspiracy why involve so many other parties in the transactions, such as Teina Bishop, MP in Aitutaki who was to obtain quotes for Aitutaki. Why leave a trail of correspondence when there were so many other interested parties in the outer islands including Roger Malcolm, Tautu Mayor, Tai Herman (Mayor) and Teina Bishop (MP) and then knowingly allow them to be served up with a ‘lesser machine’ and howl of protest – which is what happened?
He invited the court to consider the other view point that Area had professed faith and active involvement in church compared to the ‘audacity of his approach to NZ suppliers’ in soliciting money from companies dealing with government.
Nor did Areai disclose either of the Slush funds which was discovered by the Police with the help of the Serious Fraud Office in NZ. The witness could not recall name of Prime Minister under whom he served nor even what his pay had been. He had ‘amnesia’ about the Slush fund and money passed through them but could ‘roll with the punches during cross examination’ to a degree not seen before claimed Arnold.
He claims to have paid withdrawn $1000 on 4 October but could not remember where and when and whether the money was ‘not sure; if he paid on the same day or not
According to the witness, he did all the work and the Minister took all the money and had not taken a single dollar of the $8000 he had been convicted of taking at his own trial.

Herald Issue 463 10 June
- World famous activist assisting residents
- Budget will decide if residents prosecute Government over landfill
- Forestry project sucking Mangaia dry
- Budget 2010 – fiasco or disaster?