Government employee found guilty of possessing mosque shooting videos
RNZ / Nate McKinnon
A government employee has been found guilty of possessing live stream videos from the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings.
The man appeared before Judge David Robinson for a judge alone trial in the Dunedin District Court on Monday, charged with possessing an objectionable publication.
He has interim suppression of his name and occupation.
The man argued that he had the videos for work purposes but did not believe they had saved on his personal phone.
Today, Judge Robinson said the man's explanations were unconvincing and it was entirely implausible that he was unaware that they were objectionable.
He said the charge was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
No conviction was entered.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
35 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Neighbours question fatal police shooting that left woman dead, partner critically injured
Police at the scene of the fatal shooting at Clyde Road in Bryndwr, Christchurch on Thursday morning. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns Warning: This story contains details of suicide and family violence. "What the f**k have you done?" The distressed scream of the woman rang out across the tight-knit Christchurch neighbourhood. Then a gunshot followed. On Friday morning, neighbours recounted the harrowing scenes and sounds of a late-night police shooting in Bryndwr that left the woman dead and her partner critically injured. Officers were called to the Kāinga Ora property about 11pm on Wednesday after a report of family harm. A caller to 111 reported a man at the Clyde Road house had a knife and was threatening his partner and himself. The person making the call was not at the address. Soon after, police fired at the man and then the woman, who they say ignored an appeal to put down the hunting knife. Sarah Thompson, who lives nearby, told RNZ she was struggling to understand how someone who was the apparent victim of family harm could end up killed by the very police officers called to help her. "She was distressed," she said. "After that first shot, she was distressed. It was 'what the f**k have you done' and then boom - another shot." Thompson had many unanswered questions. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns "I don't understand why they went in there with weapons for a domestic violence callout," she said. "She came running out of the house - she is a victim - who do you ring when you've got domestic violence going on?" Thompson also questioned the lack of support for people who were traumatised by the tragedy. "I can't believe that not one of them [police] have come to support any of us as neighbours," she said. "Those gunshots were loud as f**k. Her screams were loud as f**k. After all that chaos, their dogs for ages were uncontrollably barking. That's all I can hear - the boom, her screaming, then the other boom and then the dogs going crazy. No-one has been over to us." Kino Hunt, another neighbour, laid flowers on Friday morning at the driveway to the home. Hunt had spent time with the woman who was killed and frequently saw the couple walking their dogs. She was angry more was not done to de-escalate the situation. "They're going in with guns, that's not right. Just ring me, I'll come and de-escalate it. At least she would have lived," Hunt said. She too was concerned the shooting could discourage family violence victims from calling police, as they would fear a similar response. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns Hunt also lacked confidence in police to investigate what happened. "I think they're trying to justify their wrongdoing - because that's not how you help people," she said. Wayne Hood lived right next door to the couple. "When we moved in she helped us get our power on at our house," he said. "It's all pretty upsetting. They were just a normal couple, just having problems like every other normal couple. They were good neighbours." The couple's problems were known around the neighbourhood, where people reported regular and loud fighting. On Thursday, friends told RNZ there were issues with addiction and mental health. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns Hood said the pair kept to themselves. "They came over and apologised to us for arguing and stuff. It's just normal," he said. Police said the man was in a critical but stable condition in hospital after surgery. Canterbury district commander superintendent Tony Hill said police were still examining the scene. "In the coming days, a post-mortem is expected to be carried out on the woman who died at the scene," he said. "Cordons and a scene guard will remain in place at the property while the scene examination is completed. Incidents such as this are complex and a range of investigations are already underway. As such, we are limited in the detail we can provide at this stage." RNZ has asked police whether the armed offenders squad or negotiations team were requested or deployed, along with a detailed timeline of how the shooting unfolded on Wednesday. Police have so far refused to release further details. If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
39 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Woman killed by police in Christchurch named as Te Arohanui Pohio
The scene of the shooting on Friday morning where police cordons have now been lifted. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns The woman shot dead by an officer after police responded to a report of family harm in Christchurch was 53-year-old Te Arohanui Pohio. Police were called to the Kāinga Ora property on Clyde Road in the suburb of Bryndwr on Wednesday night. The woman's partner was wounded by police and remains in a critical but stable condition in hospital. Police say the man came out of the house with a hunting knife and was shot after which the woman picked up the knife and began approaching police. Canterbury District Commander Superintendent Tony Hill during a press conference about the shooting. Photo: RNZ / Nathan Mckinnon Canterbury District Commander Superintendent Tony Hill said the man had surgery on Thursday afternoon. A scene examination was continuing with a post-mortem of the woman expected in the coming days. Cordons have been lifted but police guards remain at the scene of the Clyde Road property on Friday. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns "Incidents such as this are complex and a range of investigations are already underway," Hill said. "As such, we are limited in the detail we can provide at this stage. "Police are supporting the family of both the man and woman, as well as our own people." Officers involved in critical incidents such as fatal shootings were provided full welfare and wellness support, he said. Flowers at the scene of the shooting. Photo: RNZ / Adam Burns
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Supreme Court finds wrong legal test used to lock up autistic man for nearly 20 years
Excerpts from letters Jay has written "to the judge" about wanting to be home with him Mum. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly The Supreme Court has found the wrong legal test has been used to lock up an autistic man for nearly 20 years, but he will not walk free just yet. It has ordered the Family Court to urgently re-examine whether the man, only known as Jay, should remain detained, according to a just-released decision issued a year after the Supreme Court heard his case. Four of the five Supreme Court Justices said the Family Court must relook at Jay's right to liberty, weighing the seriousness of his original offence, his rehabilitation prospects and current risk. The majority found he could have been moved into the community earlier, and a failure to do so had negatively affected him, but he cannot be released immediately without proper support. The Family Court must now decide Jay's future using the Supreme Court's new guidance. Human rights lawyer Tony Ellis, who represented Jay's mother, described the ruling as a "significant win" and a "major step forward for disability rights". Photos from Jay's childhood. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Jay, now in his 40s, has been detained in a secure facility under the Intellectual Disability Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation Act since 2006 after he broke four of his neighbours' windows in 2004. Has since been assessed by multiple experts as being too dangerous to release and his care order has been extended 11 times. Jay has spent the past five years almost entirely in seclusion at the Mason Clinic in Auckland. A Family Court judge last year described his current living situation "untenable" after he became so distressed by construction noise next door he stuffed paper into his ears , requiring doctors to remove it. The construction across the road from the Mason Clinic in Auckland that caused Jay to become distressed. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly The man's mother brought his case to the Supreme Court in August last year in a bid to get his compulsory care order quashed, claiming he is being arbitrarily detained and his human rights breached. Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann and Justices Ellen France, Joe Williams and Forrest Miller found the Family Court's approach to detaining Jay was incorrect, and concluded that a decision to detain someone under the Act but be consistent with Bill of Rights Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Justice Stephen Kós disagreed, ruling he would have dismissed the appeal as Jay's continued detention was justified in order to protect public safety under existing law. "This is a tragic case. But granting the relief sought - J's immediate release into the community - can only lead to further tragedy," he wrote in the 131-page decision that outlines each judge's conclusions. Justices France and Miller said the court must set a new proportionality test weighting liberty against safety. "Eventually the risk of harm will be outweighed where the initial offending is comparatively minor; the person has been a care recipient for an extended period; and/or where the prospects of progress in the immediate future are minimal." They said there was evidence there had been opportunities for Jay to be cared for in the community at an earlier point in time and that failure to release him from care has adversely affected him and contributed to the complexity of his current position. However, they concluded it wasn't for the Supreme Court to direct Jay to be released immediately, and further care orders may be required to allow the necessary steps to be taken before he could be released into the community. Chief Justice Winkelmann said the nature and seriousness of Jay's original offending ought to be a significant factor when assessing whether to detain him, saying previous tests applied by lower courts were discriminatory. Justice Williams favoured a care-centred test focusing on dignity and quality of life and while he agreed the Family Court should look at Jay's case again with fresh consideration, it was not guaranteed he would be released. Jay's mother is "pleased" with the outcome but is still digesting the decision and its implications for her son. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Lawyer Tony Ellis says the ruling is "very much a win". "It's a significant win emphasising the rights of the disabled. "This is a complex judgment that's difficult even for lawyers to understand but it essentially says the Court of Appeal got it wrong and the Family Court has to urgently have a fresh look at Jay's case. "After eight years of trying to get him released, in my view, he's now going to have to be released because four out of five judges take the view that his continued detention would be unlawful. "Previously, the decision was you could lock somebody up for repeated periods. That was the law and now it's no longer the law, that was the wrong approach. "So anyone locked up on extended compulsory care orders will be entitled to have their decision revisited as a result of this case. That's a major step forward and a really important decision under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities." Jay's mother was "pleased" with the outcome but still digesting the decision and its implications for her son, he said.
