Accusations of lying were at the forefront during a four-hour-long cross-examination of a former law firm partner accused of inappropriately touching young summer clerks at an office party
A former Russell McVeagh partner accused of misconduct has denied lying about groping summer clerks - but conceded his testimony may not be based on clear information from the night but a natural human tendency to present himself in the most favourable way.
The former partner is before the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal regarding seven charges of “misconduct or (alternatively) unsatisfactory conduct”.
The first five charges relate to his behaviour towards four summer clerks at an out-of-office Christmas function which took place in Wellington, while one involves consensual events with a fifth summer clerk (not testifying to the tribunal) at a “team” Christmas party held at the lawyer’s home.
In an at times tense cross-examination which spanned more than four hours, the man repeatedly faced - and denied - accusations he was lying about the events in question.
Standards committee representative Dale La Hood called into question the partner’s “unreserved” apology to the summer clerks, saying that could not be the case given he did not fully accept their version of events.
“I’m fully apologising for everything that they felt and experienced. I cannot apologise for something, for the aspects that I do not think happened or that may have been misinterpreted,” the man said in response.
“I accept entirely how they felt and that my actions made them feel that way, but what I’m reserving, if you like, is that that was not my intention.”
But La Hood, citing the partner’s admittedly high level of intoxication by the end of the night, said he could not rebut the testimony given against him.
“The reality ... is you’re in no position to dispute anything that these four women and [a male summer clerk] said about how you behaved at the Christmas party, are you? That’s a reality.”
But even putting aside intent, the man said he would “like to say yes” but could not entirely accept the testimony about his physical actions given by the clerks, citing how long they said some of the contact had lasted.
He denied he was lying in his evidence as part of an effort to win the case, saying it had been instilled in him from his early days as a lawyer that “your duty to the court is absolute”.
“I didn’t apply that to my private life. It was a mess, chaotic, untruthful, unfaithful, but I’m not, I’m not lying to this tribunal. They are my recollections as best as I can give them.”
At one point, tribunal member Paul Heath QC asked the partner whether it was possible his memories of the night were reconstructed not on clear recollections but people’s “human nature” to think of themselves in the best possible light.
“I accept that risk, I accept that piecing together the jigsaw puzzle I’ve done it in the most favourable way,” the man responded.
“I have heard the clerks. I totally accept they’re genuine. I totally accept their feelings and other than one or two elements, I totally accept their version of events...
“What I am sure as I can possibly be is that I was not intending to be a sexual menace, I was just wanting everyone to have fun - and I regret it - in just a completely stupid, idiotic, drunken way.”
The man agreed with La Hood’s proposition that it was “difficult to resist” a finding of unsatisfactory conduct regarding his tracing of a wine stain on the second complainant’s shirt, as well as his consensual activity with the fifth summer clerk at his home - but would not accept that those two events alone would cumulatively amount to a more serious charge of misconduct.
In relation to the consensual activity with the fifth summer clerk, the partner said the power imbalance between the pair had not been on his mind at the time, although he now accepted that was among the reasons she may have been attracted to him.
“You’re not suggesting you’re the victim here are you? Seriously?” La Hood asked. “I’m simply saying how it was,” the man responded.
But he would not concede the behaviour amounted to disgraceful and disorderly conduct in the eyes of his profession, saying: “I felt ... like there had been an attempt to get me drunk, I had given evidence [the clerk] was pouring drinks, strong drinks, she was the one topping up and she came after me and I still know I shouldn’t have done it.”
“You’re not suggesting you’re the victim here are you? Seriously?” La Hood asked. “I’m simply saying how it was,” the man responded.
The partner said he rejected “entirely” suggestions of a misogynistic culture and constant sexual references within his team, saying such claims had never been raised in exit interviews or ‘360 degree’ reviews where staff were allowed to provide anonymous feedback about partners.
“How I would describe it is much more of a clique ... we knew each other well, we had our own set of in-jokes, we had our own ways of referring to people.”
He recalled innuendo about “going all night” at work, along with a joke or two, in relation to actor Michael Douglas’ claim he had contracted throat cancer from performing oral sex on women, that “if you were going to get cancer that might be a good way to get it” - but he denied ever making sexual jokes about or ignoring women within his team.
Pressed by La Hood, the partner conceded that his staff may have been reluctant to fully disclose the cultural concerns given their 360 review comments, while anonymised, would eventually be presented to him and the other partners.
The man confirmed that he would have felt aggrieved if he had been forced to leave Russell McVeagh over his consensual activity with the fifth summer clerk, given previous behaviour by other partners.
But he denied that he had groped the other clerks because he thought nobody would really care, or that he was untouchable.
“I’m aware of these other things that have happened and the partners have remained - so it was more about a fairness of treatment after the event, not a licence to do those sorts of things.”
Asked by tribunal chairwoman Judge Dale Clarkson whether he had ever considered himself to have been “scapegoated” over the incidents, the partner said those thoughts had crossed his mind.
While he took responsibility for his own mismanagement and misuse of alcohol, he had received very little support from the other Russell McVeagh partners in Auckland and Wellington, and had “zero” professional or personal mentoring from those senior than him.
Where to get help:
National Rape Crisis helpline: 0800 88 33 00
Safe to Talk national helpline 0800 044 334 or www.safetotalk.nz
Women's Refuge (For women and children) - 0800 733 843.
Shine (For men and women) - free call 0508-744-633 between 9am and 11pm.
1737, Need to talk? Free call or text 1737 any time for mental health support from a trained counsellor
What's Up – 0800 942 8787 (for 5–18 year olds). Phone counselling is available Monday to Friday, midday–11pm and weekends, 3pm–11pm. Online chat is available 7pm–10pm daily.
Kidsline – 0800 54 37 54 for people up to 18 years old. Open 24/7.
Youthline – 0800 376 633, free text 234, email talk@youthline.co.nz, or find online chat and other support options here.
If you or someone else is in immediate danger call 111.
