R v L HC Auckland Cri-2007-004-856

[2008] NZHC 1221

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2007-004-000856

THE QUEEN

v

L

Hearing:         4 August 2008

Appearances: Ms T Robertson for Crown

Mr J Soondram (on behalf of Mr N Tupou) for Accused

Judgment:      4 August 2008

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J [on application for adjournment of trial]

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Auckland
Counsel:
Mr N Tupou, Auckland

Mr J Soondram, Auckland

R V L HC AK CRI-2007-004-000856  4 August 2008

[1]      Mr L   is due to stand trial on 11 August 2008 on several charges relating to alleged sexual misconduct with young persons.    The proceeding has already been the subject of a trial at which the jury was unable to agree on all but one of the charges.    To that extent therefore the trial can be seen as one in which guilt or innocence might be viewed as being finely in the balance.

[2]      Mr L   now seeks an adjournment in order to enable him to engage expert psychological assistance.   The need for such assistance arises because Mr L   made various admissions when he was interviewed by the police regarding the events that have given rise to the charges.   He now says that he did not intend to convey to the police the notion that he was accepting the allegations that were being put to him. He believes that psychological evidence may be able to assist him to establish, or at least raise a reasonable doubt, that the admissions were voluntary and intended.

[3]      Given the importance of the admissions to the Crown case I have no doubt that the issue of their truthfulness will be a significant factor at the trial.    For that reason Mr L   needs to be given the opportunity to challenge their veracity to the extent that he can.

[4]      I have therefore reluctantly come to the view that I have little option but to vacate the fixture presently scheduled for 11 August.   My reluctance to do so flows from the fact that the complainants will now face a further delay before they give evidence again.    That, however, is to be balanced against the prospect that they might have to give evidence for a third time in the event that I was to refuse the application for an  adjournment and that  decision  was  subsequently found  to  be wrong.

[5]      I therefore vacate the fixture currently scheduled for 11 August 2008.     I direct that the Registrar is to allocate the proceeding a further fixture of five days duration commencing on 1 December 2008.    I am satisfied from what I have been told that this will provide sufficient time to enable all outstanding issues to be canvassed by both sides and for the matter to be readied for trial.

[6]      I propose, however, to monitor the situation closely in the coming months.   I have advised counsel today that when Mr L   surrenders to his bail on 11 August, he will need to be in a position to advise the Court of arrangements that he has made to live in Auckland for some time to come.   He needs to do this so that he can be readily available to the psychologist for the purposes of interview.    He will also need to remain in Auckland until such time as any psychologist engaged by the Crown has interviewed him.

[7]      I would be grateful if counsel could liaise between now and 11 August to agree, if possible, on the terms of bail from that point on.

[8]      I anticipate also that I will ask for the proceeding to be placed regularly in criminal callovers so that I can be assured that matters are proceeding according to the proposed timetable.

Lang J