Fan v R

The appellants, Yunke Sun and Chao Fan, appealed against a ruling by the District Court at Auckland under section 344A of the Crimes Act 1961. The ruling had declined to order that their highly incriminating statements to the Police were inadmissible. The statements related to their involvement in the possession, sale and conspiracy to sell pseudoephedrine for the manufacture of methamphetamine. The appellants alleged that the Police had indicated to them, through their lawyer, that if they cooperated and made statements they would face summary rather than indictable charges and that a much lesser sentence than would otherwise be imposed would follow. They argued that as a consequence of this representation, their statements should be excluded on the ground that they were unreliable in terms of section 28 of the Evidence Act 2006 and should in any event be excluded on the ground that they were improperly obtained in terms of section 30 of the Evidence Act. The Court of Appeal considered whether the statements should be excluded on the ground of unfairness, finding that the Police had not been at fault in any way. It held that there remained a general common law discretion to exclude evidence where its admission would be unfair. However, the Court concluded that the statements should not be excluded. The appeal was dismissed.