David Tamihere case goes to the Supreme Court
Photo:
RNZ
Lawyers for double convicted murderer David Tamihere are in the country's highest court today, questioning whether his convictions should have been quashed.
It is the latest chapter for Tamihere, who was convicted in December 1990 of murdering Swedish tourists Sven Urban Höglin, 23 and Heidi Birgitta Paakkonen, 21.
They disappeared while tramping in dense bush in the Coromandel Peninsula the previous year.
Tamihere served more than 20 years of a life sentence in prison before being released on parole in 2010.
He has always denied even meeting the pair and there have been lingering questions around the convictions.
In 2020 the then-Governor-General, on advice from former Justice Minister Andrew Little, granted Tamihere a rare Royal Prerogative of Mercy.
The case was referred back to the Court of Appeal to rule on whether there may have been a miscarriage of justice.
That court, in July last year, found there was - but upheld Tamihere's murder convictions because there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt he murdered the tourists.
This, in turn, was appealed to the Supreme Court which is hearing the case now.
The Supreme Court is normally based in Wellington but five Supreme Court judges will hear the case at the largest courtroom at the High Court in Auckland.
It is the final appeal court in the country and only hears appeals if it earlier grants leave for this.
That leave was issued just before Christmas and the case will centre on one approved question of whether the Court of Appeal was right to not exercise its jurisdiction under the Crimes Act to quash Tamihere's two murder convictions.
When they granted leave, Supreme Court judges indicated particular interest in hearing submissions on whether Tamihere's trial was unfair, and if there was a fundamental error.
They are also interested in hearing if the Court of Appeal was right to uphold the convictions.
The judges are Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann, Justice Williams, Justice Glazebrook, Justice France and Justice Kós.
Tamihere will be represented by his long-time lawyer, Murray Gibson as well as James Carruthers.
The case is set down for three days.
Arguments were made in the Court of Appeal that evidence from a jail-house snitch should never have been put to the jury at trial.
Tamihere's lawyer James Carruthers said the false evidence undermined the Crown's case.
The evidence was from "Witness C", Roberto Conchie Harris, revealed in 2018 as a secret informant.
Harris said Tamihere confessed to the murders, but was privately prosecuted in 2017 and found guilty of eight counts of perjury over his evidence.
The Crown case at the original trial was that Tamihere was living in the bush when he murdered the couple near Crosbies Clearing north of Thames.
It partly relied on Harris' evidence that Tamihere disclosed he had almost been "sprung" by "a couple" while he was in the bush with Paakkonen.
That account tended to back up evidence from two trampers who identified Tamihere as a man they encountered at Crosbies Clearing with a young woman.
Harris also said Tamihere confessed to sexually abusing both tourists, before murdering them and dumping their bodies at sea.
But Höglin's remains were found by pig hungers near Whangamatā two years after he was charged, more than 70km from where the Crown said the murders happened.
Tamihere's lawyer argued that made it impossible for Tamihere to have disposed of the body the same afternoon he was allegedly seen with Paakkonen by the trampers.
Höglin was still wearing the watch police claimed Tamihere had stolen and given to his son.
The three Court of Appeal judges found Harris' evidence in the trial may have affected the jury's verdicts and so amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
But they said this did not justify setting aside Tamihere's convictions.
Their almost 90-page long ruling said other evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt it was Tamihere who murdered Höglin and Paakkonen.
This included evidence that was not heard by the jury in the first trial but heard at the appeal.
Their ruling highlighted:
"It cannot be known exactly what happened to Ms Paakkonen, but the Court found the evidence consistent with a sequence of events in which the couple encountered Mr Tamihere at Wentworth, where Mr Höglin was killed and Ms Paakkonen was abducted and taken to Tararu Creek Road in the couple's car," the judges concluded.
"We accept that it remains impossible to know the couple's precise movements after they were seen in Thames on 7 April and why they were killed. But we do not accept that it is impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Tamihere killed them."
Tamihere's lawyer Murray Gibson said after the ruling that Tamihere no longer had much faith in the justice system.
Police welcomed last year's Court of Appeal ruling and called it "hugely validating" for the staff who worked on the case.
They said they remained determined to find answers for the tourists' families.
While Höglin's body was found in 1991 the location of his fiancé's body remained "one key piece missing from this puzzle", police said.
They appealed for Tamihere to "do the right thing".
There is no obligation for Tamihere to appear at the Supreme Court hearing.
April 1989
- Heidi Birgitta Paakkonen and Sven Urban Höglin are last seen in Thames. Tamihere was on the run from police and living rough in the bush after pleading guilty to raping a woman three years earlier.
May 1989
- David Tamihere is arrested over an earlier rape. That same day, the couple are reported missing.
December 1990
- Tamihere is convicted of murdering the couple and sentenced to life imprisonment.
1991
- Höglin's body is found near Whangamatā.
1992
- The Court of Appeal rejects Tamihere's appeal.
1994
- Tamihere is denied leave to appeal to the Privy Council.
1995
- Witness C - later revealed as Roberto Conchie Harris - swears an affidavit retracting his evidence.
1996
- Harris retracts his retraction.
2010
- Tamihere is released on parole.
2016
- A private prosecution alleges Harris lied at Tamihere's trial.
2017
- Harris is sentenced after being found guilty of perjury and not guilty of perverting the course of justice.
2017
- Harris appeals the perjury convictions and sentence and fights to keep his identity hidden.
2018
- Harris drops his appeal against the perjury convictions.
2018
- The High Court revokes suppression order for Witness B, another prison informant.
2020
- Justice Minister Andrew Little announces Tamihere's case is going back to the Court of Appeal after a Royal Prerogative of Mercy is granted.
November 2023
- The Court of Appeal hears Tamihere's case.
July 2024
-
The Court of Appeal declines
to quash Tamihere's convictions.
December 2024
- The Supreme Court grants leave for the case to be heard there.
August 2025
- The case heads to the Supreme Court sitting in Auckland.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
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
Abel Wira on trial for manslaughter after dogs kill landlord Neville Thomson
By Shannon Pitman, Open Justice Journalist of Abel Wira is accused of the manslaughter of Neville Thomson who was mauled by dogs in Panguru. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf A concerned woman listened over the phone as her partner shouted at a pack of growling dogs - then the line went silent. Shirley Orchard then sent Neville Thomson a message, desperate to know what was happening. "I hear a pack of mutts going off and you disappear, you have left me here wondering if you have been mauled, let me guess. Are you out of it just forgot me or bleeding to death?" she said in her text message. She never got a reply. Three hours later, it was confirmed Thomson had been mauled to death by 23 dogs belonging to his boarder. Abel Wira, 61, is now on trial at the High Court at Whangārei on charges of manslaughter and owning a dog that caused injury or death to the man he called a brother. Crown lawyer Danica Soich opened the case to the jury on Monday, outlining the details of what happened at Thomson's property in Panguru on August 4, 2022. Neville Thomson died from blood loss in August 2022. Photo: Supplied The court heard on Monday that Wira had been living in a caravan at Thomson's 2ha property with his dogs. Soich said Wira was known to often lock his dogs in a truck or barricade them in his caravan with a block of wood. A few weeks earlier, Wira had crashed his vehicle into a paddock. On the day Thomson died he organised for a neighbour to help pull the vehicle out. Wira left the property, leaving Thomson at home to look after his dogs. The court heard the dogs had a history of aggression, rushing at neighbours, attacking local cattle and even Wira had previously needed medical attention for dog bites. About 9.56am, Thomson was on the phone with his partner and told her the dogs had not been fed in two days. He said he had offered Wira his truck to go and get dog food but this had been declined. Over the phone, Orchard heard dogs growling and barking and Thomson saying "get out of here you f***ing dogs". Thomson reportedly moved away from the phone and for the next 10 minutes she listened to growling, barking, shouting and then silence. "Mr Thomson does not come back to the call," Soich told the jury. Orchard made several attempts to call back and texted her partner, confused by what had just happened. Meanwhile, Wira had travelled to Broadwood to pick up dog biscuits and other items and returned to the Panguru property around 11am. At 11.30am, the Crown said he sent a private Facebook message to his friend. "I need help bro please my dogs have attacked my bro and he's gone please bro." The court heard Wira was sighted leaving Panguru about 1pm and not long after he waved down police in Ahipara. "Wira told police Neville Thomson was dead and had been eaten by dogs," Soich told jurors. "He explained it had been two hours since he found Mr Thomson and he was driving to Kaitāia police station as he did not have a phone." Throughout this time, Orchard was texting neighbours to check on Thomson and requested a police welfare check at 1.33pm. "Sure enough, when they arrived they saw the defendant's dogs locked in a [Toyota] Hilux. The dogs were behaving aggressively and trying to get out," Soich said. "There were muddy drag marks leading from the front porch to the kitchen. "They found his body lying in the kitchen wrapped up in a blanket. Neville Thomson showed no signs of life." The dogs had blood on their fur and were reportedly locked in a truck, barking, attacking each other and almost breaking windows. Thomson died at the scene from blood loss. Six adults and 17 puppies were found at the property. Two had to be shot on site because of their aggressive behaviour. When Wira was interviewed he said it was normal practice to lock his dogs in a caravan using a white shoelace and a log of wood across the door. It is the Crown's case that regardless of whether Wira was present or not, his departure from providing a reasonable standard of care for the dogs led to Thomson's death. "Mr Wira's dogs were clearly dangerous," Soich said. "You'll be asked to bring your knowledge of human and canine behaviour. For everything he knew about these dogs - a log placed against a caravan door, was a major failure." Defence lawyer Connor Taylor acknowledged Thomson's death was horrific, but a terrible accident. "Can it be proven that it was culpable homicide?" Taylor put to the jury. "It's not the situation you would often read about. "What happened that day, how they got out, or why they got out, we will never know. "What we do know is this. It was tragic, it was unforeseeable but it does not make Mr Wira guilty of his murder." The trial is expected to last two weeks before Justice Andrew Becroft. * This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
David Tamihere attemps to clear name in Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has begun hearing from lawyers for convicted double murderer David Tamihere as he once again attempts to clear his name. The Five Supreme Court judges are hearing arguments in the High Court at Auckland on whether an earlier Court of Appeal ruling was right to not quash his convictions. Tamihere denies killing Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen, having served 20 years of a life sentence. His lawyers have argued this trial went off the rails, and was fundamentally defective. Finn Blackwell reports. To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
RNZ News
10 hours ago
- RNZ News
David Tamihere's trial was 'fundamentally defective', lawyers argue
David Tamihere. Photo: RNZ The lawyer for convicted double murderer David Tamihere has described his trial as fundamentally defective, as the Supreme Court hears his appeal at the High Court in Auckland on Monday. Five Supreme Court judges are hearing arguments on whether the Court of Appeal in an earlier ruling was right to not quash his convictions. Tamihere has always denied killing Swedish tourists Urban Höglin (23) and Heidi Paakkonen (21), and served 20 years of a life sentence . His lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice, but upheld his convictions. In court on Monday morning, Tamihere's lawyer Murray Gibson outlined the three grounds of his submissions. "Multiple breaches of fair trial rights relating to the evidence of principal Crown witnesses, fundamental error in that the Crown no longer subscribes to the case advanced at trial or evidence on which the jury were invited to find the defendant culpable of the homicide," he said. "Thirdly, relates to the constitutional role of the jury." Monday morning was spent with Tamihere's lawyers giving a summary of their case, but deviated briefly to examine a map of the area Höglin and Paakkonen were said to have been exploring at the time of their disappearance in 1989 , and where crews searched for them afterward. Part of the Crown evidence in the original 1990 trial was false, coming from a prison informant later convicted of perjury. Gibson referenced this when addressing the panel of judges. Swedish tourists Urban Höglin (23) and Heidi Paakkonen (21). Photo: Supplied "The Crown retreated from the theory put forward at trial, and advanced two subsequent explanations. It drew on evidence and propositions that have since been discredited." This meant when the jury came to consider Tamihere's guilt, it did so within a discarded framework, Gibson said. "This must be, in council's submission, a sign of a fundamentally defective trial." Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelmann said it was extremely tempting to try and work out what happened to the tourists. "But that's certainly not the task of this court." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
