R v Coade - [2024] NZHC 759

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF CONNECTED

PERSON(S) PURSUANT TO S 202 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2023-012-000808

[2024] NZHC 759

THE KING

v

CAROLE ANN COADE

Hearing: 22 February 2024

Appearances:

R D Smith for Crown

S A Saunderson-Warner for Defendant B S Rorrison for Applicant

Judgment:

22 February 2024

Reasons:

10 April 2024

JUDGMENT (REDACTED) OF PRESTON J

(Application for permanent name suppression (connected person))

This judgment was delivered by me on 10 April 2024 at pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar
Date……………

R v COADE [2024] NZHC 759 [10 April 2024]

Introduction

[1] Ms Coade pleaded guilty to one count of murder of her partner. She was sentenced on 22 February 2024.

[2] [Redacted] applied for an order permanently suppressing its name, as a person connected to the defendant.1 The school was Ms Coade’s employer at the time of the murder. Its application is supported by affidavits: of the principal of the school, [redacted] and [redacted] guidance counsellor [redacted].

[3] At the outset of Ms Coade’s sentencing hearing I dealt with this matter in a brief hearing. That hearing took place in open court but by consent in the absence of the defendant, who was represented by her counsel Ms Saunderson-Warner.

[4] The defendant adopted a neutral position on [redacted]’s application. The Crown did not file written submissions but Mr Smith in oral submissions did not oppose suppression of the name of the school. The Crown accepts that if permanent suppression was not granted there may be an impermissible or improper link drawn between the defendant’s offending, which has no connection with her employer, and the school. Further, counsel submitted that there is no public interest in publication of the school’s identity, in the circumstances.

[5] Ms Rorrison for the applicant confirmed that an associated application to suppress Ms Coade’s occupation as a teacher was not pursued.

[6] After hearing from counsel I was satisfied that the threshold in s 202 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 (CPA) is met on the application and affidavits filed in support and further that I should exercise my discretion to suppress the name of the school. I so ordered, with reasons to follow.

[7]These are my reasons.

1 Criminal Procedure Act 2011: s 202.

Principles – s 202

[8] [Redacted] applies for a permanent order under s 202 of the CPA2. That section provides:

202 Court may suppress identity of witnesses, victims, and connected persons

(1)A court that is hearing a proceeding in respect of an offence may make an order forbidding publication of the name, address, or occupation of any person who—

(a) is called as a witness; or

(b) is a victim of the offence; or

(c) is connected with the proceedings, or is connected with the person who is accused of, or convicted of, or acquitted of the offence.

(2)The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Coade

Details

AGLC: R v Coade [2024] NZHC 759
Case: [2024] NZHC 759
Decision Date: 22 February 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Coade, the defendant, Ms Coade, pleaded guilty to the murder of her partner and was sentenced on 22 February 2024. A school, which was Ms Coade’s employer at the time of the offence, applied for an order permanently suppressing its name, as a person connected to the defendant. The school’s application is supported by affidavits from the school principal and a guidance counsellor. The Crown did not oppose the suppression of the school’s identity, accepting that there may be an improper link drawn between Ms Coade’s offending and the school, which has no connection to the offence. The defendant adopted a neutral position on the application.

The legal issue before the court was whether the school’s identity should be permanently suppressed under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011. This section allows a court to make an order forbidding the publication of the name, address, or occupation of any person connected with the proceedings, if the publication would cause undue hardship. The court considered the evidence and submissions, including the potential for undue hardship to the school’s staff and students, as well as reputational damage, should the school’s identity be published. The court found that the school met the threshold for suppression, as there is no connection between Ms Coade’s offending and her employment at the school, and publication would cause undue hardship.

The court exercised its discretion to grant the permanent suppression order, noting that there is no public interest in publishing the school’s name. The court also directed that the affidavits and submissions in support of the application are not to be accessed except as permitted by a Judge.

The final order was that the applicant’s name and identifying details are permanently suppressed. The court further directed that the affidavits and submissions in support of the application are not to be accessed except as permitted by a Judge.

Orders