Tauvira v The Queen

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the appellants, Tauvira Tauvira and Paul Desmond Cloke, appeal against their convictions for injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The Court dismisses Mr Tauvira's appeal and grants Mr Cloke an extension of time to appeal, but declines his application to adduce fresh evidence on appeal. The Court also dismisses Mr Cloke's appeal against conviction.

The legal issues in this case revolve around the credibility, freshness, and cogency of the fresh evidence presented by Mr Fruean and Mr Cloke, which they sought to introduce on appeal. The Court finds that Mr Fruean's evidence is not credible due to his unconvincing explanation for his willingness to give evidence, as well as evidence of collusion between his gang and Mr Cloke's. The Court also finds that Mr Cloke's affirmation evidence is not credible, as it is self-serving and carefully calculated.

The Court concludes that the evidence is not fresh, as Mr Cloke must have been aware of the possible evidence that could be given by Mr Fruean at the time of the trial. Furthermore, the Court finds that the evidence is not cogent, as even if it had been heard by a jury, it would not have affected the guilty verdict against Mr Cloke. The extent of the observable interactions between Mr Cloke and the other four prisoners, other than the victim, clearly implicate Mr Cloke as a party to the assault, regardless of whether Mr Fruean acted alone or in self-defence.

As a result, Mr Tauvira's appeal against conviction is dismissed, Mr Cloke is granted an extension of time to appeal, his application to adduce fresh evidence on appeal is declined, and his appeal against conviction is dismissed.