More Top Stories


Bigger and busier 2023: PM

31 December 2022

Other Sports

Double gold for Darts

21 January 2023


Covid-19 cases stable: TMO

10 January 2023


Population policy endorsed

10 January 2023


PM Brown vows to change law

23 January 2023

Rugby league

Moana target 2025 World Cup

11 November 2022


We’re halfway there!

16 November 2022


From the river to the ocean

18 November 2022

This is unsatisfactory: Chief Justice Keane

Wednesday 25 January 2023 | Written by Al Williams | Published in Court, National


This is unsatisfactory: Chief Justice Keane
Chief Justice Patrick Keane.

The case against a woman of obtaining by false pretense which stretches back nearly five years, has been described as unsatisfactory by her lawyer.

As Ngamau Wichman-Tou’s name was read out in the High Court on Friday, lawyer Norman George said the matter came up for sentencing in January last year before he asked to have the charges dismissed in March 2022.

He said there was no evidence of fraud and Crown Law had been sympathetic for the charges to be withdrawn.

“That was the beginning of a marathon adjournment.”

“It is $6000, not $600,000, this can’t go on.

“It is getting close to miscarriage of justice; I submit Crown withdraw the charges or if be dismissed.”  

Chief Justice Patrick Keane told Crown lawyer Jamie Crawford the matter was unsatisfactory.

Crawford earlier said the prosecution was still awaiting records from New Zealand.

“We are going through financial intelligence units here and in New Zealand.”

Crawford told CJ Keane she was now in his hands.

He said it appeared approaches from Cook Islands and New Zealand had been fruitless.

He asked for a memorandum to be filed, as to what had been done.

“If we don’t get into it, it raises more acutely what Mr George has been talking about.”

George said he was unhappy with the matter and would be seeking costs.

The matter was adjourned to February 24.


Chunillal Taripo on 26/01/2023

How stupid and absurd can lawyers get. Mrs. WICHMAN totally lied and recieved $6000 on false pretenses and kept the victim in the dark for two years lying about a vehicle that never actually existed. She falsified documents to make it look like she had receipts, using local vehicle sellers names. The reason behind the long time of her case coming to court is because she has played the system and changed her plea to drag things on. I am totally shocked that a leading lawyer would seek to justify her for theft. So what if it was $6000, justice needs to be done and seen working. What on earth is a lawyer a lawyer if he no longer accepts that the court system is for justice to be done.

Leave a Reply