Te Rata has been arrested for displaying gang insignia<\/a>.<\/p>\nIn April 2025, Te Rata was stopped around 3.30am riding his motorcycle in central Lower Hutt while wearing his Mongrel Mob patch.<\/p>\n
He was uncooperative and verbally aggressive towards police, tried to pull away from the officer, refused a breath test or to give a blood sample and didn\u2019t have a motorcycle licence.<\/p>\n
In explanation, he said he had been stopped after returning from visiting the home of a friend who\u2019d recently died.<\/p>\n
\u201cI have known the man all my life and for a substantial part of my life. He had encouraged me to get off methamphetamine and go to the gym instead.<\/p>\n
\u201cI was really upset when he passed away. I had gone to his home because I wanted to be close to him. I had deliberately worn my patch because, in wearing that patch, it made me feel emotionally closer to him.\u201d<\/p>\n
Te Rata was convicted and discharged for displaying gang insignia in public, but the judge ordered his gang patch be returned to him saying the public display of it involved no public disorder, threats or violence.<\/p>\n
\u201cAt best, some lowish-level angst between a motorist and a police officer occurred,\u201d Judge Bruce Davidson\u2019s decision said. <\/p>\n
Gang insignia or a sports jersey?<\/p>\n
In these latest charges, police argued Te Rata\u2019s jersey was Mongrel Mob insignia because it was produced for the gang\u2019s annual \u201cClash of the Regions\u201d tournament. <\/p>\n
The summary of facts said the jersey \u201chad a direct affiliation to the gang\u201d. <\/p>\n
But Te Rata\u2019s lawyer Chris Nicholls said the rugby league jersey didn\u2019t meet the statutory definition of prohibited gang insignia, and his client wasn\u2019t knowingly displaying gang insignia. <\/p>\n
As part of the defence, Nicholls sought evidence from rugby league historian Ryan Bodman, who identified the Bulldogs as a common rugby league name and their emblems were routinely displayed on their jerseys. Te Rata had also played for the team.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe style of jersey worn by Mr Te Rata is typical of rugby league jerseys in New Zealand,\u201d Bodman\u2019s statement said. <\/p>\n
In police disclosure to the defence, senior constable Maurice Partridge, whose role is to monitor and liaise with gangs and gang members in the Wellington Police district, said the shirt was consistent with gang insignia that denotes membership to, or affiliation to, the Mongrel Mob gang. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe words \u2018Lower Hutt\u2019 seen on the front of the shirt relate to the Lower North region of the Mongrel Mob. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe words \u2018Bulldog\u2019 after the words \u2018Lower Hutt\u2019 seen on the front of the shirt relate to the Mongrel Mob Bulldog that is often on their patches and other items of clothing or regalia, which correlates to the term Mongrel in the gang\u2019s name. <\/p>\n
Partridge concluded that the words and badges on the shirt, in his opinion, signified that the shirt showed affiliation or membership of the Mongrel Mob.<\/p>\n
But, despite the statement, no evidence was offered up by police at a hearing in the Hutt Valley District Court last Monday.<\/p>\n
Instead, police asked to withdraw a charge of displaying gang insignia, which was granted by judge Nicola Wills.<\/p>\n
Outside court, Nicholls told NZME police had pushed the limits \u201cway too far\u201d because it was clearly a rugby league jersey. <\/p>\n
He said his client was deliberately targeted by the police\u2019s Gang Disruption Unit. <\/p>\n
\u201cIf I was wearing that rugby league jersey down the street no one would have batted an eyelid,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
![\"Syd]()
Syd Te Rata with his lawyers, Chris Nicholls (left) and Jack Cammock-Nicholls (right), at McEwan Park in Petone, where Te Rata wore the jersey at the gang’s annual “Clash of the Regions” tournament. <\/p>\n
Nicholls said the decision to withdraw the charge was a victory for common sense, saying a member of the public wouldn\u2019t recognise it as gang insignia.<\/p>\n
\u201cCommon sense also said it was a rugby league jersey; anyone who knew anything about rugby league would think it was a rugby league jersey. <\/p>\n
\u201cAnd anyone who saw anyone wearing it would think it\u2019s a league jersey and not gang insignia. <\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s what made the prosecution so stupid, it was straight-out bullying and oppressive conduct by the Gang Disruption Unit.\u201d <\/p>\n
Nicholls junior, Jack Cammock-Nicholls, told NZME the charge required that insignia be commonly displayed and recognised as gang insignia.<\/p>\n
But Cammock-Nicholls said Te Rata frequently wore the jersey and considered it part of his wardrobe and day-to-day wear.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a case of pretty extreme prosecution, where the police are taking the law to the most oppressive extent possible,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Inconsistent with the Bill of Rights; High Court <\/p>\n
The outcome in Te Rata\u2019s case follows a recent High Court decision which found the prohibition of the display of gang insignia was inconsistent with the NZ Bill of Rights.<\/p>\n
The ruling, released last month, related to a gang member, whose name is suppressed, who was convicted and discharged after he was seen on CCTV wearing an embroidered cap outside a restaurant in the Wellington region that belonged to a family member who was a gang member. <\/p>\n
The High Court subsequently upheld the man\u2019s conviction for wearing gang insignia. Still, Justice Cheryl Gwyn\u2019s decision found that displaying gang patches in a public place is inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression under the Bill of Rights Act.<\/p>\n
The court\u2019s decision is consistent with the then Attorney-General Judith Collins\u2019 report to the House, advising that aspects of the bill were inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act when it was introduced in 2024.<\/p>\n
Nicholls, who was also involved in that case, said people\u2019s right to expression was a fundamental right of all New Zealanders. <\/p>\n
\u201cI feel quite strongly there is a need to safeguard and protect that right when it is unreasonably attacked and undermined as the gangs legislation does.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s basically the right to be free and to express who you are.<\/p>\n
\u201cPrevious generations have fought and died to protect these rights.\u201d<\/p>\n
As a result of Justice Gwyn\u2019s decision, the Attorney-General, Chris Bishop, must notify the House within six sitting days that a declaration has been made, once the judgement is final.<\/p>\n
A statement from Bishop\u2019s office said the period for the Attorney to bring the matter to the House was still ongoing and can only be made once the matter is final \u2013 either because no appeal has been filed or any appeal has been dealt with. <\/p>\n
Because parties have 20 working days to file an appeal, the decision was still in the appeal period. <\/p>\n
A select committee will consider the declaration and may make any recommendations to address the declaration, before reporting its findings back to the House. <\/p>\n
There is no statutory requirement for the government or the House to respond in any particular way to a declaration of inconsistency. <\/p>\n
At the time of the High Court\u2019s decision, the Police Minister Mark Mitchell was unapologetic, releasing a statement. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe Government will take some advice on the ruling; however, our position remains unchanged. The legislation will not be changing.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ve said right from the start this legislation will affect and limit the rights of gang members. <\/p>\n
\u201cParliament considered the Bill of Rights Act and the Attorney-General\u2019s report when passing this legislation, however, chose to prioritise the right for Kiwis to live without fear and intimidation in their communities.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is tough legislation. That is the point. Gang members make up less than one quarter of 1% of the New Zealand adult population, yet are linked to about 18% of serious violent crime. We make no apologies for getting tough on law and order,\u201d it said. <\/p>\n
IPCA complaint <\/p>\n
As a result of Te Rata\u2019s latest case, Nicholls has lodged a complaint with the Independent Police Conduct Authority over Police Commissioner Richard Chambers\u2019 refusal to accept a witness summons. <\/p>\n
Nicholls said the summons was drafted after police refused to release information under the Official Information Act, seeking policy directions the commissioner gave frontline staff about how to enforce the new Gangs Act.<\/p>\n
But in a statement from police, its chief of staff, Cassandra Anderson, said Nicholls applied for a warrant compelling the commissioner to appear as a witness in a case challenging the gang patch legislation, only to advise the police three days later that the commissioner was no longer required. <\/p>\n
Police also responded to an Official Information Act request from Nicholls, releasing 300 pages of disclosure. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe commissioner was not copied into or aware of the correspondence with Mr Nicholls,\u201d Anderson\u2019s statement said. <\/p>\n
\u201cPolice is not aware of what Mr Nicholls is now complaining about.\u201d<\/p>\n
Catherine Hutton is an Open Justice reporter, based in Wellington. She has worked as a journalist at the Waikato Times and RNZ. Most recently she was a media adviser at the Ministry of Justice.<\/p>\n
Join the NZ Herald\u2019s Open Justice team for Case by Case<\/a>, a video and podcast series examining the disputes and decisions making headlines across New Zealand. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Now Te Rata\u2019s lawyer has described the prosecution as \u201cstupid\u201d, \u201cstraight out bullying\u201d and \u201coppressive conduct\u201d by police.…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":570977,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[74,1863,9260,21181,32294,1342,71,1328,36644,20439,14731,1329,4280,3234,111,43,139,69,1523,26897,22126,675,281490,6327,13655,26895,8690,49370,52,133389],"class_list":["post-570976","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-new-zealand","tag-after","tag-back","tag-captured","tag-cctv","tag-charge","tag-five","tag-from","tag-gang","tag-insignia","tag-jersey","tag-league","tag-member","tag-mongrel","tag-months","tag-new-zealand","tag-news","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-over","tag-patch","tag-petrol","tag-police","tag-rata","tag-rugby","tag-station","tag-syd","tag-te","tag-wearing","tag-wellington","tag-withdrawn"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/570976","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=570976"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/570976\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/570977"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=570976"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=570976"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=570976"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}