Crown to request retrial if court quashes Tamihere's murder convictions
Tamihere's appeal in the High Court at Auckland has concluded, with a panel of judges reserving their decision.
His lawyers were appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions for murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen.
Crown lawyer Rebecca Thomson said their case at trial was that the only reasonable conclusion to draw from the facts was Tamihere's guilt, indicating they would seek a retrial if the appeal was upheld.
"If the court were minded to allow this appeal, the Crown does seek a retrial," she said.
ADVERTISEMENT
"There clearly is a case here to answer, it's a decision for another day by different decision makers, whether or not the interests of justice would warrant a further prosecution, but it's clearly not a case where a directed acquittal would be appropriate."
Given their chance to respond, defence lawyer Murray Gibson pointed out the Crown did not seek a retrial in their written submissions, instead advising the Court and counsel of it on Wednesday morning.
He also said three principal witnesses had passed away in the time since the trial.
"With great respect to the Crown submissions today, that must, in counsels submissions make a retrial almost untenable, if not untenable," Gibson said.
Gibson agreed with Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelmann that it would also mean prejudice to the defence 35 years later in having to meet a new case.
The hearing concluded with the Chief Justice thanking Murray Gibson for his service in law, noting it was his final appearance in court.
Gibson confirmed with RNZ he was retiring outside of court.
ADVERTISEMENT
"It's appropriate that on behalf of the judiciary, I thank you for your service to the profession and to the law," Helen Winkelmann said.
Earlier in the day, the Court heard from the Crown that despite its irregularities, Tamihere's trial was fair.
A Crown lawyer said the irregularities in the trial of convicted double murder David Tamihere did not mean it was unfair.
The last day of Tamihere's Supreme Court appeal is underway in the High Court at Auckland on Wednesday morning.
His lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions for murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen.
The couple disappeared while tramping in dense bush in the Coromandel Peninsula in 1989.
The Crown resumed its submissions today, with lawyer Rebecca Thomson building up their argument Tamihere must have committed the murders.
ADVERTISEMENT
Five Supreme Court judges hearing arguments on whether the Court of Appeal in an earlier ruling was right to not quash his convictions. (Source: 1News)
She took the five-judge panel through irregularities of Tamihere's original trial.
"There were some," Thomson said.
"But none of them reach the standard of it being an unfair trial."
Thomson said it was a series of very lucky breaks that led to Tamihere's capture by police.
Supreme Court judge Sir Stephen Kós questioned the way the Crown characterised Tamihere's actions, including if he stole the couple's car, something he had previously admitted.
"It's idiocy on either account isn't it?" he said.
ADVERTISEMENT
"Either he's an idiotic murderer who drives around in the victims' car, when the victims, or at least one of them, hasn't been adequately concealed, so that's pretty stupid.
"Or he's an idiotic car thief, as opposed to an idiotic murderer, who drives the car around the very area the people are likely to emerge from the bush and make a complaint."
Tamihere served more than 20 years of a life sentence in prison before being released on parole in 2010.
He denies even meeting the couple, and questions have lingered regarding his convictions.
In 2020, the then Governor General granted Tamihere a rare Royal Prerogative of Mercy, on advice from former Justice Minister Andrew Little.
The case was referred to the Court of Appeal to rule on whether there might have been a miscarriage of justice.
It found, in July last year, there was — but upheld Tamihere's murder convictions because there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt he murdered the tourists.
This is what the Supreme Court has been hearing submissions on for the past two days.
rnz.co.nz
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
7 hours ago
- 1News
Crown to request retrial if court quashes Tamihere's murder convictions
The Crown says it will request a retrial if the Supreme Court quashes David Tamihere's double murder convictions. Tamihere's appeal in the High Court at Auckland has concluded, with a panel of judges reserving their decision. His lawyers were appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions for murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen. Crown lawyer Rebecca Thomson said their case at trial was that the only reasonable conclusion to draw from the facts was Tamihere's guilt, indicating they would seek a retrial if the appeal was upheld. "If the court were minded to allow this appeal, the Crown does seek a retrial," she said. ADVERTISEMENT "There clearly is a case here to answer, it's a decision for another day by different decision makers, whether or not the interests of justice would warrant a further prosecution, but it's clearly not a case where a directed acquittal would be appropriate." Given their chance to respond, defence lawyer Murray Gibson pointed out the Crown did not seek a retrial in their written submissions, instead advising the Court and counsel of it on Wednesday morning. He also said three principal witnesses had passed away in the time since the trial. "With great respect to the Crown submissions today, that must, in counsels submissions make a retrial almost untenable, if not untenable," Gibson said. Gibson agreed with Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelmann that it would also mean prejudice to the defence 35 years later in having to meet a new case. The hearing concluded with the Chief Justice thanking Murray Gibson for his service in law, noting it was his final appearance in court. Gibson confirmed with RNZ he was retiring outside of court. ADVERTISEMENT "It's appropriate that on behalf of the judiciary, I thank you for your service to the profession and to the law," Helen Winkelmann said. Earlier in the day, the Court heard from the Crown that despite its irregularities, Tamihere's trial was fair. A Crown lawyer said the irregularities in the trial of convicted double murder David Tamihere did not mean it was unfair. The last day of Tamihere's Supreme Court appeal is underway in the High Court at Auckland on Wednesday morning. His lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions for murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen. The couple disappeared while tramping in dense bush in the Coromandel Peninsula in 1989. The Crown resumed its submissions today, with lawyer Rebecca Thomson building up their argument Tamihere must have committed the murders. ADVERTISEMENT Five Supreme Court judges hearing arguments on whether the Court of Appeal in an earlier ruling was right to not quash his convictions. (Source: 1News) She took the five-judge panel through irregularities of Tamihere's original trial. "There were some," Thomson said. "But none of them reach the standard of it being an unfair trial." Thomson said it was a series of very lucky breaks that led to Tamihere's capture by police. Supreme Court judge Sir Stephen Kós questioned the way the Crown characterised Tamihere's actions, including if he stole the couple's car, something he had previously admitted. "It's idiocy on either account isn't it?" he said. ADVERTISEMENT "Either he's an idiotic murderer who drives around in the victims' car, when the victims, or at least one of them, hasn't been adequately concealed, so that's pretty stupid. "Or he's an idiotic car thief, as opposed to an idiotic murderer, who drives the car around the very area the people are likely to emerge from the bush and make a complaint." Tamihere served more than 20 years of a life sentence in prison before being released on parole in 2010. He denies even meeting the couple, and questions have lingered regarding his convictions. In 2020, the then Governor General granted Tamihere a rare Royal Prerogative of Mercy, on advice from former Justice Minister Andrew Little. The case was referred to the Court of Appeal to rule on whether there might have been a miscarriage of justice. It found, in July last year, there was — but upheld Tamihere's murder convictions because there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt he murdered the tourists. This is what the Supreme Court has been hearing submissions on for the past two days.
RNZ News
21 hours ago
- RNZ News
Murderer to testify at trial of another murder-accused man
Police at the scene of the couple's death in Ellerslie, November 2023.. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi A man who admitted murdering an Auckland couple in their Ellerslie home in 2023 will testify at the trial of another man also accused of the murder. Lok Fung Lorrence Li has pleaded not guilty to murdering husband and wife Fuk-Fu Joseph Kwok and Mei Han Chong, and conspiring to kill a third person, his former landlord. His trial in May was aborted on the first day after co-defendant Shu Man Poon pleaded guilty to killing the couple. Justice Matthew Downs confirmed in the High Court at Auckland this morning that Poon would testify on behalf of the Crown. The new trial date for Li is yet to be set. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
1News
a day ago
- 1News
New hearing for 1997 murder a 'brave step', lawyer says
A man who was convicted of fatally stabbing a fellow homeless man then mutilating his ears will have his case heard by the Court of Appeal — 27 years after he was jailed. Warning: This article includes details of graphic violence and sexual assault. Lon Reti was found guilty of murdering Leslie Edmonds at a squatters' house in central Christchurch in 1997. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and remains in prison. But a three-year investigation by the Criminal Cases Review Commission has found evidence related to Reti's personal history and mental health was not put before the court. The CCRC released its decision today, saying the information was relevant to Reti's partial defence of provocation. ADVERTISEMENT 1News understood the jury was not told Reti was abused while in state care. At his trial in 1998, Reti argued he didn't intend to stab Edmonds and was acting in self-defence, provoked by Edmonds making sexual advances. A police cordon around the scene. (Source: 1News) The judgment from Reti's failed Court of Appeal bid in 1999 outlined what happened. "In the morning, according to the appellant, he awoke to find the victim engaged in performing oral sex on him. The appellant made a number of requests for the victim to leave the house. "The victim persisted with these sexual overtures and the appellant punched him. When this did not dissuade the victim from his approaches, the appellant stabbed him a number of times in the chest and throat. He then cut off the victim's ears and put them in his pocket." In 2009, the then National government abolished the partial defence of provocation, limiting its use to the sentencing stage. ADVERTISEMENT But the Criminal Cases Review Commission found serious concerns about whether the partial defence of provocation was fully and fairly considered during the trial, and has referred the conviction back to the Court of Appeal. This is the Commission's fifth referral to an appeals court since it was established in 2020. "We don't decide guilt or innocence, that's the role of the courts. We have a duty to act, when we uncover information that could have made a real difference to the outcome. Our power of investigation and referral is an important safeguard in the justice system,' said Chief Commissioner Denis Clifford. Reti's lawyer Kerry Cook said the CCRC's referral could be seen as a "brave step" because of the nature of the incident and the involvement of the now-repealed partial defence of provocation. "However, this referral merely reflects the independence and integrity of the CCRC, which is an organisation devoted to justice. Despite the nature of any crime or any admitted acts, every New Zealander is entitled to justice — and that is all that Mr Reti seeks from this referral." Crown Law was approached for comment but declined because the matter was now back before the courts.
