Latest news with #DavidTamihere
RNZ News
12 hours ago
- RNZ News
Crown to request retrial if court quashes David Tamihere's murder convictions
Crown prosecutors Fergus Sinclair and Rebecca Thomson. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone 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 trail 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. "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. "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. Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelman sits alongside other Chief Justices. Photo: POOL/Stuff 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. "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." Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen were killed in the Coromandel in 1989. Photo: Supplied 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. More to come
RNZ News
15 hours ago
- RNZ News
Swedish backpacker case: Flaws don't mean Tamihere conviction unfair
Crown prosecutors Fergus Sinclair and Rebecca Thomson. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone A Crown lawyer says the irregularities in the trial of convicted double murder David Tamihere do 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. Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelman sits alongside other Chief Justices. Photo: POOL/Stuff 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. "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." Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen were killed in the Coromandel in 1989. Photo: Supplied 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. More to come
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Supreme Court judges grill Crown in David Tamihere appeal
David Tamihere. Photo: RNZ Supreme Court judges have grilled the Crown case in double convicted murderer David Tamihere's appeal in the High Court at Auckland. Tamihere was convicted in December 1990 of murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen. His lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions. Crown lawyers began there submissions on Tuesday, with lawyer Fergus Sinclair giving the panel of judges background about Tamihere's movements through the bush around the Coromandel Peninsula, and the discovery of Höglin's body. Crown prosecutors Fergus Sinclair and Rebecca Thomson. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone 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. "We know Mr Tamihere's last two trips involved spending time in the Wentworth Valley, and on trip one, spending days on that Eastern side," Sinclair said. "Multiple witnesses established that." Evidence had been presented at trial that two trampers identified Tamihere as a man they encountered at Crosbies Clearing with a young woman. Sinclair said Tamihere partly acknowledged and partly fictionalised trips he had taken around the area at trial, to conceal that he had been near to where Höglin's body was found. "Trip one, he said, North from Thames, has spent a long time around the Coromandel area, but he didn't," he said. "He went South, then East into the Wentworth, back the same way after more than a week." The second trip, Sinclair said, Tamihere claimed to have again gone North from Thames to the 309 Road, then down the main road almost to Thames, but swerved up Tararu Creek Road to where the couple's car was to steal it, but this too was wrong, instead claiming Tamihere had gone South and back to the Wentworth Valley. "It's not possible to forget that your last two journeys were to an entirely different part of the region," Sinclair said. "So much time spent in a completely different place, in the opposite direction." Sinclair referenced the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal. "Mr Tamihere lied to conceal his presence in the Wentworth Valley, and did so because he knew police might find evidence there," he said. "The only evidence is the body, the only reasonable conclusion is that Mr Tamihere knew about the body." Chief Justice Dame Helen Winkelman sits alongside other Chief Justices. Photo: POOL/Stuff Sinclair faced scrutiny from the judges regarding whether claims Tamihere had lied had been put to him at trial. "It's a fundamental issue with the Crown's case," Chief Justice dame Helen Winkelmann said. "You're taking us and saying 'Mr Tamihere lied'. Statements are made contextually, lies, as juries are instructed, must be assessed contextually, if it's said to be a lie it must be put to the witness that it's a lie, it must be part of the case that it's a lie... "What are we to make of the fact that these things that you are now saying are lies, were to a greater or lesser extent not pursued at trial?" she asked. Sinclair said this was the fresh evidence exercise. "The issue is, does it disclose a miscarriage, and it is the Crown responding to a defence theory," he said. "The body is found, we now see more things, does it give rise to a miscarriage that is the issue." More scrutiny was put on the Crown's case by Justice Sir Joe Williams, who said their case came down to whether or not Tamihere had lied. "His lie, you say, is the thing that binds all of this together, Crown stands or falls on that lie," he said. "Without it you lose." David Tamihere's lawyers, James Carruthers (L) and Murray Gibson (R). Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Earlier on Tuesday, Tamihere's lawyer James Carruthers asked the question if his trial would have turned out differently if a fundamental error had not occurred. He quoted a case which said questions needed to be asked on what course a trial would have taken, if errors had not been made. "It's interesting to ask here what the course of the trial might have been like had it not started off in completely the wrong direction," Carruthers said. "And as we can see from the Crown's amended case, it would have taken on an entirely different complexion." 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 hearing continues on Wednesday. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
David Tamihere's appeal lawyers point to other cases which feature unfair trial, fundamental error
David Tamihere's lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice, but upheld his convictions. Photo: RNZ A lawyer for convicted double murderer David Tamihere has asked if his trial would have turned out differently if a fundamental error had not occurred. Tamihere was convicted in December 1990 of murdering Swedish tourists Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen. His lawyers are appealing an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that found a miscarriage of justice but upheld his convictions. In the High Court at Auckland on Tuesday morning, Tamihere's lawyer James Carruthers took the panel of Supreme Court judges through five other cases which featured an unfair trial or fundamental error - something they argued featured in Tamihere's case. He quoted a case which said questions needed to be asked on what course a trial would have taken, if errors had not been made. "It's interesting to ask here what the course of the trial might have been like had it not started off in completely the wrong direction," Carruthers said. "And as we can see from the Crown's amended case, it would have taken on an entirely different complexion." He was asked by Justice Sir Joe Williams if taking that approach was right. "What I struggle with in these, is that it's just another way of putting that the proposition that it could've made a difference, which is to say the proviso has no place here," he said. "It comes to the same point doesn't it? Because your putting counter-factuals to suggest that it might've made a difference, but if it might have made a difference then the proviso has no place." On Monday, Tamihere's long-time lawyer Murray Gibson laid out their case for appeal . "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." 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. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 days 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.
