Revealed: The five senior officers at the heart of the McSkimming ‘cover-up’

Wednesday, 12 November 2025

The IPCA’s damning report reveals how warnings about Jevon McSkimming were repeatedly ignored by police. These are the five senior officers whose decisions - or failures to act - allowed one of the country’s worst integrity scandals to unfold. Paula Penfold reports.

A small circle of senior police officers knew of serious allegations involving one of their own, Jevon McSkimming and responded with “inaction”.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority’s (IPCA) investigation, released on Tuesday, sets out in meticulous detail how those at the top of the organisation were warned again and again, yet failed to confront the problem.

They were dealing with the aftermath of McSkimming having begun a relationship with a 21-year-old woman he’d met through a sporting club when he was 40. He later arranged for her to be employed in a casual civilian role with police.

When the relationship ended, she (known as Ms Z in the IPCA report) began making complaints - including allegations of sex crimes - through various channels about McSkimming.

In the end, not only were Ms Z’s complaints ignored, police prosecuted her under the Harmful Digital Communications Act, over the emails she’d been sending. Charges were withdrawn this week.

While an eventual investigation into Ms Z’s complaints, Operation Jefferson, did not find enough evidence to charge McSkimming, in the process police found material on his work devices that ultimately led to his prosecution and guilty pleas for possessing objectionable material relating to bestiality and child exploitation.

The IPCA is still reviewing the adequacy of Operation Jefferson and will report on that “as soon as possible”.

In its first report, published on Tuesday, on whether police responded adequately to Ms Z’s complaints, the IPCA found “commendable integrity and moral courage” among some officers.

It also found “serious failings” by multiple senior officers, including the then-Commissioner himself, who either accepted McSkimming’s account at face value or failed to ask the most basic questions.

These are the five most senior police officers - the people whose decisions, omissions, and misplaced trust allowed one of the country’s worst policing integrity scandals to unfold, described by one officer to the IPCA as looking like “a cover-up”. Police Commissioner Richard Chambers also believes that’s the case.

Some were named in the IPCA report, some were not. Only one of them still works for police. Stuff has independently verified the names of the officers.

Officer B - Superintendent Chris Page

In early 2024 Chris Page, known in the IPCA report as Officer B, was the acting Assistant Commissioner of Investigations. He remains with police as Director of the International Services Group (ISG).

In February that year, he was given, by Deputy Commissioner Tania Kura, a copy of a report from the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC), which Kura had asked to look into the communications of Ms Z.

Ms Z had been sending multiple emails making allegations of a sexual nature against McSkimming.

The FTAC report highlighted allegations of potential criminal offending and breaches of the police Code of Conduct by McSkimming, “in addition to the serious and harassing nature of the emails themselves”.

Page requested a transfer of the emails from FTAC to Wellington District, which would undertake an investigation. Officers recall Page giving an assurance that not only would Ms Z be investigated as the sender of the emails, but that there would also be an investigation into the wrongdoing she alleged.

Instead, the IPCA found, “the FTAC’s work on the matter was used solely as the foundation for a criminal investigation into Ms Z,” and there were no inquiries, including trying to contact Ms Z before she was charged, to establish the veracity of the allegations she had made. Its recommendation that the police National Integrity Unit and IPCA be informed, was not acted on.

Page told the IPCA he did not recall FTAC’s recommendation that there were allegations of potential criminal behaviour and breaches of police policy that ought to be referred for investigation. He also said Kura, his superior, had received the FTAC report and he would have expected her to take any action required as a result of it.

The IPCA rejected that and found Page was aware of the FTAC recommendations that February but “took no steps at that time to ensure they were acted on”.

It did accept that Kura’s instructions to Page were likely focused on the investigation into Ms Z’s alleged harassment, but that as an experienced investigator, and acting Assistant Commissioner of Investigations, Page had an independent duty to ensure appropriate action was taken to investigate alleged criminal behaviour and other misconduct by a senior officer.

“His omission to do so cannot be excused by the fact that his superior reporting officer had an equivalent duty to act,” and found he was in a position to ensure there were two parallel but independent investigations - one into harassment by Ms Z and one into complaints made against McSkimming.

“This did not occur.”

The IPCA also found that Page inserted into the Summary of Facts for Ms Z’s prosecution that the allegations she had made were false, “without any evidence to support that other than Deputy Commissioner McSkimming’s untested assertions”.

It found that “inexplicable”.

It also found that Page directed that diversion (the withdrawal of charges on the basis of an agreed course of action) only be offered if Ms Z admitted guilt, which Page said was merely conveying McSkimming’s wishes, and it was up to the Crown to make the appropriate decision. The IPCA found it was wrong for him to have insisted on the admission of guilt, when he was aware that by that stage there was an investigation underway into that very question: whether the allegations were false.

“It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the weight [Page] placed on the victim [McSkimming’s] view was as a result of the victim’s status as a senior police officer.”

Page was also asked by another superior, Assistant Commissioner A, who we’ll come to, to do the first draft of the terms of reference for the investigation into whether Ms Z’s complaints had merit - Operation Herb.

The IPCA found he accepted McSkimming’s narrative and implicitly accepted that the allegations contained in the emails were false.

“It demonstrated Officer B’s mindset from the outset of his involvement in this matter: that Deputy Commissioner McSkimming was the only victim, and that there was nothing else to investigate.”

Page declined to comment on the IPCA’s findings against him.

Stuff understands he is one of the police staff referred to on Tuesday by Commissioner Richard Chambers as being subject to an employment investigation over the McSkimming scandal.

Stuff understands three such investigations are underway. The identity of the other two staff is not known.

Assistant Commissioner A - Paul Basham

In April 2024, when allegations of sexual assault by McSkimming came in on police’s 105 line, Basham had begun in the role of Assistant Commissioner of Investigations.

Basham was the decision-maker who ultimately formally closed Operation Herb, the investigation being run by Officer D - Detective Inspector Nicola Reeves- into whether there was truth to Ms Z’s claims about McSkimming. His ongoing involvement was in overseeing the prosecution of Ms Z.

The IPCA found that Basham, among others, “saw the need to approach this investigation differently from any other adult sexual assault preliminary investigation”.

He asked Page to draft the terms of reference. Page told the IPCA that Basham and Kura urged caution in the way the terms of reference were framed: “Jevon’s a very senior person in the Police and … if these complaints are made and then what happens is there’s no validity to that complaint, someone’s career is really on the line because someone made a complaint, but there’s no substance. So it was about having the right care.”

The IPCA found it “striking” that the terms of reference “did not direct [Reeves] to speak to Ms Z”.

Under a heading “Approach”, the prosecution against her was referred to, along with the “highly emotive and accusatory” nature of her emails, before setting out steps that it should take, which did not include talking to Ms Z - only to consider whether there was a “need to speak with Ms Z’s parents”.

A later version tweaked that to read, “Consider whether there is a need to speak directly with Ms Z and/or her parents” but there was still no actual direction to do so.

Basham told the IPCA it was not fair for it to rely on the draft terms of reference. The Authority countered that the draft reference demonstrated officers’ state of mind in approaching the investigation.

The terms of reference also included a number of unconfirmed statements including that Ms Z had begun a “mutually consensual sexual relationship' with McSkimming, which Ms Z had never stated, and that McSkimming ended the relationship when she became “too controlling” - Ms Z stated she had ended the relationship.

The heading of the terms of reference was, “Review of material associated to Jevon McSkimming complaint”. There was no reference to the intent to investigate the veracity of Ms Z’s allegations.

The terms of reference directed by Kura and drafted by Basham were “in no way consistent” with police adult sexual assault policy and procedures. “They were framed as a subset of Ms Z’s prosecution, in which Deputy Commissioner McSkimming was the victim and Ms Z the perpetrator.”

It found responsibility for the final terms of reference sat with Basham as the decision-maker.

Basham also directed Reeves to report to him, which the IPCA understood was unusual in the context of a criminal investigation.

Reeves told the IPCA she “really got the sense that [Basham’s] focus was on getting this out of the way so [McSkimming[ could apply for the Commissioner’s role without this hanging over his head”.

(McSkimming was ultimately in a two-horse race with Richard Chambers to become the new Commissioner, after the departure of Andrew Coster.)

The IPCA found Basham prematurely “closed down” the investigation led by Reeves, and the timing - two days after Ms Z had indicated she might make a further complaint - effectively ended any meaningful inquiry.

In September, Basham announced his retirement from police after 40 years of service.

By deadline, Basham had not responded to Stuff’s request for comment.

Deputy Commissioner People, Leadership and Culture - Chris de Wattignar

Known in the IPCA report as Deputy Commissioner PLC, de Wattignar was also the member of the police executive with responsibility for Police Integrity and Conduct, putting him in, as the IPCA described it, “a position to advocate at the highest level”.

He was also the boss of the Director of Integrity and Conduct, Officer M, who Stuff understands is Detective Superintendent Kylie Shaare. The IPCA found she had made “commendable efforts” to raise her concerns about how the McSkimming allegations were being handled.

De Wattignar told her he had spoken with Kura and the situation did not seem to be “as it was relayed” - that police had investigated the complainant, Ms Z, who had been charged under the Harmful Digital Communications Act over emails she’d been sending about McSkimming.

The IPCA said the implication was there was no need for police integrity staff or the IPCA to be involved, because there was no investigation into McSkimming.

Officer M pushed back on that.

“I do have some concerns with the clarification that this is only an investigation into the complainant.”

She said she couldn’t see that police had ever conducted an investigation, following adult sexual abuse complaint guidelines, into the multiple and ongoing complaints being raised by Ms Z; that she hadn’t been treated like “any other victim”.

De Wattingar told the IPCA that when Officer M first raised her concerns with him, he approached Coster for background.

“The understanding I was given was that it was an old matter that had been dealt with and there were no complaints from the young lady but to speak to Tania [Kura]”, who he said advised “there appears to be nothing untoward as far as Jevon McSkimming goes but the female is being charged”.

He did not raise Officer M’s concerns with either Coster or Kura because, “It felt like something that was underway, had started and was going through some sort of process that wasn’t … the usual professional conduct process,” and he trusted there was a reason why the police executive was running that separate process.

The IPCA said de Wattingar failed in his obligation to exercise independent judgment and take any necessary action to ensure the police executive was acting in an appropriate way.

De Wattingar accepted he should have made more comprehensive notes of the concerns he raised with Kura and the questions he asked, and that he could have followed up those conversations in writing.

He also said even when concerns were raised with him, he could reverse decisions already made by others.

The IPCA found his perception of his limited role showed the inadequate status and independence of Police Integrity and Conduct, and de Wattingar’s failing lay in relying on Coster and Kura’s assurances without asking questions himself, despite Officer M’s continued concerns.

De Wattignar left police in July amid a restructure of the police upper echelons and now works for the Civil Aviation Authority.

Asked for his response to the IPCA’s findings against him, de Wattignar told Stuff: “ I accept the findings of the report, and have no further comment.”

Former Deputy Commissioner Tania Kura

The IPCA found Kura failed to make robust inquiries about a comment on a 2023 LinkedIn post which made specific sexual allegations against McSkimming, who told her the situation had been “going on for years”. She told the IPCA she too thought it had already been resolved and that she didn’t need to act because if there had been a need to, others who had already known about the allegations would already have done so.

“I actually thought that if there had been anything substantial in this [LinkedIn post] … the explanation is this is a woman scorned who continues to harass him in a way that is public. Her whole ambition has been to ensure that he never becomes the Commissioner of Police. So if all those people in the preceding years had never done anything about it, why would I then lift it up again because nothing had been done. That’s exactly how I looked at it to start with … I did not think it’s my responsibility then to go over old ground.”

The IPCA acknowledged Kura had only just begun in the role, and, having been through the same “robust process” as McSkimming to attain that role, assumed any concerns relating to his conduct would have been raised in that process.

But she ultimately accepted McSkimming's narrative of a “mutually consensual affair” followed by the “rantings and allegations of a woman scorned”.

The IPCA found she failed to undertake robust enquiries to establish what if any action had already been taken by police or the IPCA.

As she was the direct supervisor of the Director of Integrity and Conduct she was the police boss responsible for overseeing something as serious as the allegations made in the LinkedIn post.

It found she relied too readily on what McSkimming had said.

In July this year, Kura announced her retirement.

Stuff has been unable to reach her for comment.

Former Police Commissioner Andrew Coster

The IPCA found that then Police Commissioner Andrew Coster failed to disclose critical information about McSkimming’s relationship with Ms Z during the 2023 Public Service Commission vetting for the role of Deputy Commissioner, to which McSkimming was ultimately appointed. By that point, he knew Ms Z had been a police employee, that the relationship had ended badly, and that she was the source of ongoing allegations against McSkimming.

“We cannot escape the conclusion that his preconception of Deputy Commissioner McSkimming as a victim clouded his decision-making.

“While Commissioner Coster focused on the need to afford natural justice to [McSkimming], he did not sufficiently consider the injustice that would arise if there was indeed truth to Ms Z’s allegations.”

His “failure clearly fell below what a reasonable person would have expected of the Commissioner of Police,” the IPCA report said.

The IPCA also criticised his later attempt to influence the nature and extent of its own investigation, attempting to set parameters around what it should look at and how long it should take, and for inappropriately trying to influence the National Integrity Unit’s investigation into Ms Z’s complaint.

In response to questions from Stuff, a spokesperson for Coster said: “ As has been publicly noted by Ministers, this is now an employment conversation between the Public Service Commissioner and Andrew Coster. He will not be responding to media ahead of that process.”

After the release of the IPCA report on Tuesday, Coster was placed on leave from his role as chief executive of the Social Investment Agency.