R v Ford CA466/05

In the case of R v Ford, the appellant, James Triple M Ford, was convicted by the District Court at Wellington of possessing a .22 rifle and ammunition without lawful, proper, and sufficient purpose, contrary to the Arms Act 1983. Ford was subsequently sentenced to two years and three months of imprisonment. This appeal concerns both the conviction and sentence. The appeal against the conviction hinges on whether the trial was compromised due to the disclosure of certain material to the jury, which was related to other charges that Ford was discharged from. The sentence appeal is based on the argument that the sentence imposed was excessive.

The Court of Appeal, presided over by O'Regan, Panckhurst, and Potter JJ, considered the dramatic events of the trial and the impact they had on the jury. The trial began with nine counts related to events from December 21 to December 25, 2004. However, during the trial, two key witnesses refused to testify, including the primary complainant, Mr. Wade. After the jury was discharged from counts 1 to 7, counsel for Ford argued that the trial had irreparably prejudiced the jury against Ford in relation to counts 8 and 9. The Crown argued that the evidence was separate and discrete, and that a strong warning given by the trial judge was sufficient to ensure a fair trial.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial events were indeed dramatic and had the potential to unfairly influence the jury. While the warning given by the trial judge was emphatic, the Court was of the opinion that the risk of a miscarriage of justice was too high given the nature of the evidence presented and the refusal of key witnesses to testify. Consequently, the appeal against conviction was allowed, and a retrial was ordered. The sentence appeal was not considered due to the retrial.