Imagine this: A documentary crew, granted exclusive access to a high-profile police investigation, meticulously chronicles every step of the search for a fugitive and his children. But here's where it gets controversial: The police retained the right to preview and edit the documentary before it aired.
This is the reality of 'The Marokopa Project,' a feature-length documentary following the hunt for Tom Phillips and his children. The filmmakers, NHNZ Productions from Dunedin, spent over a year with the police, capturing the intricacies of the investigation. The access agreement, obtained by RNZ under the Official Information Act, reveals the details of this unique partnership.
Following Phillips' death in a shootout with police, the documentary's behind-the-scenes look at the investigation has come under scrutiny. The agreement, signed in March, gave the filmmakers unparalleled access to evidence, briefings, and operations.
In exchange for this exclusive access, the police maintained significant control over the final product. The documentary's proposal outlined a focus on:
- Footage following staff involved in Operation Curly and associated operations.
- Interviews with key investigation and district staff.
- Interviews with specialist police officers.
- Footage of police visits to the Marokopa community and local stakeholders (subject to permissions).
- Footage during aerial operations.
- Additional footage, audio recordings, and still images held by the police.
- Recordings or transcripts of interviews.
- Access to stills, CCTV, and trail camera footage used as evidence (subject to permissions).
And this is the part most people miss: The contract gave the police the right to demand edits or removals based on security, sensitivity, privacy, and court orders. They also held veto power over any replays or altered versions and could terminate filming access at any time. Grounds for termination included breaches of the agreement, such as disobeying police directions.
The filmmakers were also restricted from using any recorded material for other purposes without police authorization. Furthermore, they couldn't use photos of the children, except those already in the media, without permission from their legal guardian and the police. These provisions are particularly significant given the existing suppression orders from the Family Court.
The agreement also stipulated that the producers' employees, agents, and contractors had to be vetted by the police. The producer also signed off on liability limited to $1 million for the documentary. The contract was signed on March 20, 2025, by the police and NHNZ Worldwide, in partnership with London-based Grain Media Ltd. The documentary is expected to be broadcast in 2027, pending court proceedings.
What do you think? Does this level of police control over a documentary raise concerns about freedom of the press and potential bias? Do you think this is a fair trade-off for exclusive access? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
