Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Work smarter with a Pro licence Learn More

Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 

Urewera Four Declined Leave To Appeal To Supreme Court


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 82/2012

SC 83/2012

SC 90/2012

SC 93/2012

[2013] NZSC 40
URS SIGNER EMILY FELICITY BAILEY TAME WAIRERE ITI TE RANGIKAIWHIRIA KEMARA
v
THE QUEEN
Court: William Young and Chambers JJ
Counsel: C W J Stevenson for Applicant Signer V C Nisbet for Applicant Bailey E R Fairbrother for Applicant Iti J N Bioletti for Applicant Kemara A R Burns and M J Inwood for Crown
Judgment: 23 April 2013


JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.

REASONS

[1] After a trial before a jury, Tame Iti, Te Rangikaiwhiria Kemara, Urs Signer and Emily Bailey were found guilty of charges of unlawful possession of firearms and restricted weapons (Molotov cocktails) contrary to s 45 of the Arms Act 1983. The charges arose in relation to military-style camps conducted on Tuhoe-owned lands in the Urewera Ranges in 2006–2007 and to a search on the termination of a police operation in mid-October 2007. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on a charge relating to all four applicants of participating in an organised criminal group contrary to s 98A of the Crimes Act 1961. After the trial, on the application of the Crown, a stay of proceedings was entered on that charge.

[2] The applicants appealed to the Court of Appeal. That Court dismissed their appeals.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

[3] All four now seek leave to appeal.

[...]

[17] We are not satisfied that it is necessary in the interests of justice for this Court to hear and determine the proposed appeals. None of the matters raised is, when properly analysed, of general or public importance. Nor do we consider a substantial miscarriage of justice may occur if we do not hear the appeals.


[Full judgment: SC_82_83_90_93_2013__Signer__Ors_v_R.pdf]

© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

InfoPages News Channels


 
 
 
 

Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.