R v Liu

[2015] NZHC 746

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2014-044-001376 [2015] NZHC 746

THE QUEEN

v

YUN QING LIU

Hearing:	30 March 2015
Appearances:	Kieran Raftery and Fiona Culliney for the Crown Michael Kan for the Defendant
Judgment:	17 April 2015

RESERVED JUDGMENT OF MOORE J [Re:  admissibility of evidence (2)]

This judgment was delivered by me on 17 April 2015 at 4:00 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/ Deputy Registrar

Date:

R v LIU [2015] NZHC 746 [17 April 2015]

Contents

Paragraph

Number

Introduction ..............................................................................................................[1] Background...............................................................................................................[5] Pot plant reconstruction

The evidence and relevance .................................................................................[27] Defence submissions ............................................................................................[36] Decision................................................................................................................[44]

Travel time reconstructions

Background and evidence ....................................................................................[46] Defence submissions ............................................................................................[51] Decision................................................................................................................[53]

16 November 2012 reconstruction and interviews Challenge..............................................................................................................[54] Background ..........................................................................................................[55] Defence submissions ............................................................................................[68] Crown submissions ..............................................................................................[70] Discussion ............................................................................................................[76]

Section 30 of the Evidence Act – the balancing exercise .....................................[87] The importance of the right breached, and seriousness of the intrusion ..............[90] The nature of the impropriety ..............................................................................[91] The nature and quality of the improperly obtained evidence...............................[94] Seriousness of the offence....................................................................................[95] Are there alternative remedies to exclusion? .......................................................[96] Was the impropriety necessary to avoid apprehended physical danger? .............[97] Was there any urgency in obtaining the evidence? ..............................................[98] Overall assessment ...............................................................................................[99]

Relevance of the “If I die …” statement made by Ms Chen

Background ........................................................................................................[102] Challenge............................................................................................................[108] Crown submissions ............................................................................................ [110] Defence submissions .......................................................................................... [115] Decision.............................................................................................................. [119] Result .....................................................................................................................[123]

Introduction

[1]      The defendant, Yun Qing Liu, also known as “Jack”, is charged with the murder  of  his  partner  Bin Chen.    The  Crown  alleges  that  the  defendant  killed Ms Chen  sometime  during  the  evening  of  Monday,  5  November  2012.    The defendant’s  trial  for  Ms Chen’s  murder  is  scheduled  to  commence  on  Monday,

4 May 2015.

[2]      Regrettably,  for  reasons  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  develop  here,  the multiplicity of pre-trial applications, their identification and prosecution, has resulted in a somewhat disjointed and prolonged process.  Furthermore, given the imminence of the trial date, there has been urgency in hearing and determining the outstanding evidential matters.

[3]      This judgment relates to the admissibility of four discrete aspects of the evidence which the Crown wishes to adduce at trial. These are:

(a)       the pot plant reconstruction; (b)           travel time reconstructions;

(c)       16 November 2012 interviews (reconstructions);

(d)      relevance of the “If I die …” statement made by Ms Chen to a friend.

[4]      I shall deal with each of these issues in the same order as they are noted above.

Background

[5]      A detailed description of the circumstances around Ms Chen’s disappearance

and the Police investigation which followed it is set out in my judgment of 16 April

2015 in relation to the first tranche of admissibility issues.1

1      R v Liu [2015] NZHC 732.

[6]      The Crown case is that…