Published 16 June 2020
Pre-trial hearing — admissibility of evidence — visual identification — Evidence Act 2006, s 45 — Harney v Police [2011] NZSC 107. Two defendants faced a raft of charges, primarily related to an alleged home invasion. It was alleged the two men had gone to the address of the two complainants armed with guns, threatened them, demanded money, locked them in a car and assaulted one of them. This pre-trial hearing was to address issues of evidence. The primary issue was whether identification evidence of a complainant was admissible at the jury trial. One of the complainants had identified both defendants out of a photo montage provided by police. It was submitted that this procedure had been improperly conducted as it occurred once on 7 November and then again on 30 November. The defendants submitted this was improper. The Judge disagreed, finding there was no evidence of collusion in the intervening period and it was standard practice to allow witnesses to have breaks when looking at photo montages of possible offenders. The threshold of evidence against the defendants (which included the complainant's identification evidence, fingerprints linking them to her car and the discovery of weapons at their home) was sufficient to be put to the jury. The complainant's evidence was admissible. Judgment Date: 5 March 2019.
This website explains many of the things you might want to know if you are coming to the Youth Court, or just wondering how the Youth Court works.
Visit website›Ministry of Justice website with information on family issues including about going to court, forms and other times when you may need help.
Visit website›For information about courts and tribunals, including going to court, finding a court & collection of fines and reparation.
Visit website›On this site you will find information about our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court including recent decisions, daily lists and news.
Visit website›