PerthNorg

Belmont councillor not guilty of perjury

Yesterday the Perth District Court found that the City of Belmont councillor, Janet Powell, had not perjured herself when giving evidence in a violence restraining order hearing almost two years ago.

Councillor Brenda Martin, new to Belmont Council at the time, applied for a violence restraining order(VRO) when a former-councillor who lived across the road from her, pursued her aggressively in a manner she found intimidating.

Ms Powell told the Magistrate's Court at the VRO hearing for Brenda Martin, that the same former councillor had previously assaulted her & grabbed her by the throat when she was also new to council. She added that the man had to be pulled away from her and physically restrained by two people.

The District Court decision came after a nerve-wracking year-long wait, and a week-long trial, during which evidence was heard from eye-witnesses to the assault.

The trial highlighted budget concerns at the DPP which over the last few years have been a focus for the media spotlight, detailing staff shortages and poorly-researched cases.

All evidence presented to the District Court had previously been supplied at length to the Cannington CIB, who proceeded with the charges despite overwhelming evidence that Powell had not perjured herself when she spoke of the assault.

The basis of the Cannington Detectives' case, that came about as a result of Janet Powell testifying when Martin required a Violence Restraining Order against the same man, flies in the face of government initiatives of 'zero tolerance' to violence against women.

In summary, barrister Tom Percy told the court how the DPP's QC Ian Marshall had started with a 'Magnificent 7(witnesses),' but had ended up with the '3 stooges,' as the prosecution's case against Powell rapidly disintegrated.