R v Kata CA428/05

In the case of R v Kata, the appellant, who is suffering from leukaemia, appealed against a pre-trial ruling that inculpatory videotaped statements made to the police were admissible at the trial, subject to some editing. The appellant was charged with attempted murder and causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The legal issue that the Court of Appeal was required to decide was whether the appellant understood that a lawyer was a person with legal skills or court skills who could help him. The Court found that the appellant did understand the concept of a lawyer and that his waiver of the right to consult a lawyer was valid.

The Court of Appeal concluded that the Judge had undertaken a principled and careful assessment of the evidence, and reached a conclusion which was clearly open to him on the evidence before him. The Judge had before him evidence from Detective Constable Honan, Senior Constable Ng Wun, Mr Seaton, and Dr Fernando. The Judge found that Mr Kata had a reasonable comprehension of formal English, but that in any event his rights had been explained to him by the detective in an informal way. The Judge also found that there was no coercion, that Mr Kata was not intimidated by the environment, and not afraid. The Judge concluded that Mr Kata understood at the time of his interview with the police that he did not have to make a statement, that the statement could be used against him, that he was entitled to contact a lawyer immediately and use a lawyer, and that he understood that a lawyer was a person with legal skills or court skills who could help him.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, but granted leave to appeal. The Court also made an order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on Internet or other publicly accessible database until final disposition of trial. Publication in Law Report or Law Digest was permitted.