![\"David](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/4NVVDWL_image_crop_56107.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\nDavid Tamihere in 2018.
\nPhoto: RNZ\n<\/p>\n
David Tamihere has had his convictions quashed, 36 years after he was found guilty of murdering two Swedish backpackers in the Coromandel.<\/p>\n
In a decision released on Tuesday, the Supreme Court directed a retrial but said it was up to the Crown to decide whether one should be held.<\/p>\n
The court found there was a fundamental error in Tamihere’s 1990 trial which made it unfair – and the Crown case had changed so “radically” since then that it had not actually been tested by a jury.<\/p>\n
Tamihere was convicted of the murder of Urban H\u00f6glin, 23, and Heidi Paakkonen, 21, in 1990. The couple was last seen in Thames in April 1989 and H\u00f6glin’s body was found in 1991 – 70 kilometres from where the prosecution first theorised he had been killed.<\/p>\n
In 2017, a key witness in crown case, prison informant Robert Conchie Harris was found guilty of perjury .<\/p>\n
Tamihere took the case to the Court of Appeal which in 2024 found there had been a miscarriage of justice because of Harris’s evidence but it did not quash its conviction because the court remained convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Tamihere was guilty.<\/p>\n
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court found the Court of Appeal did not have the right to make a call on Tamihere’s guilt after it had found the miscarriage of justice – that could only be made by a jury.<\/p>\n
Harris’s perjured evidence was highly prejudicial – and was linked to other parts of the prosecution case, it said.<\/p>\n
![\"Swedish](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/4LC5D1J_Urban_H_glin_and_Heidi_Paakkonen_png.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
\nSwedish tourists Urban H\u00f6glin and Heidi Paakkonen were killed in the Coromandel in 1989.
\nPhoto: Supplied\n<\/p>\n
Critically, there had also been a “radical recasting” of the crown’s theory about the murders since the 1990 trial – including a second likely crime scene, the court said.<\/p>\n
That was largely because of the discovery after the 1990 trial that H\u00f6glin had likely been killed close to where his body was found – 70 kilometres away from where the Crown first suspected he had been killed.<\/p>\n
That meant the Crown case now included new locations of interest over a much larger geographical area and over many hours, the court said.<\/p>\n
“The new Crown theory means other evidence needs to be seen in a new light and raises questions of credibility and reliability about that evidence. Testing of the new evidence is also required,” the decision said.<\/p>\n
That was the job of a jury, the court said.<\/p>\n
“We emphasise that there are simply too many questions on the Crown’s new theory of the case, which have not been tested, for an appellate court to reach a conclusion about guilt,” the court said.<\/p>\n
Today’s decision did not rule out a jury eventually finding Tamihere guilty, but that could only be decided in a retrial, the judges said.<\/p>\n
The background<\/p>\n
In a case that shocked the nation and went around the world, the young Swedes went missing after last being seen on the Coromandel Peninsula.<\/p>\n
The crown case relied on circumstantial evidence including two trampers who said they saw Tamihere with a woman resembling Paakkonen at a bush campsite north east of Thames.<\/p>\n
Tamihere had been living, mainly in the bush, for about three years after being on the run from the police for rape.<\/p>\n
He had admitted stealing the couple’s distinctive white Subaru and dumping or selling their possessions – but denied ever meeting them.<\/p>\n
The now discredited Harris, claimed Tamihere told him in jail he had killed and sexually assaulted the Swedes.<\/p>\n
Harris also claimed at trial that Tamihere had given H\u00f6glin’s watch to one of his sons.<\/p>\n
However, that watch was found on H\u00f6glin’s body when it was discovered after the trial.<\/p>\n
In 1992 Tamihere appealed the conviction but was not successful.<\/p>\n
After Harris was convicted of perjury, he sought a Royal Perogative of Mercy from the Governor General which set the series of appeals in motion that lead to Tuesday’s decision.<\/p>\n
The law in question<\/p>\n
Under the Crimes Act, if the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court rules there has been a miscarriage of justice, there is a proviso that allows them to let convictions stand if they are satisfied the defendant is still guilty beyond reasonable doubt.<\/p>\n
In its 2024 judgement, the Court of Appeal used that provison when it failed to quash Tamihere’s convictions.<\/p>\n
It found that even though Harris’s perjured evidence may have affected the jury’s decision in Tamihere’s original trial, there was still enough other evidence that the conviction should remain.<\/p>\n
Today’s decision overturns that, with the Supreme Court saying Harris’s evidence effectively made the trial unfair, and so the appeal court did not have the right to apply the proviso that kept the convictions.<\/p>\n
There were “some errors which are so serious that the proviso cannot save them,” the Supreme Court decision found.<\/p>\n
Where to now<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court has directed a retrial should occur but ultimately up to the Crown to decide it would seek one.<\/p>\n
The timeline<\/p>\n
April 1989 – Heidi Birgitta Paakkonen and Sven Urban H\u00f6glin are last seen in Thames. Tamihere was on the run from police and living rough in the bush after pleading guilty to raping a woman three years earlier.<\/p>\n
May 1989 – David Tamihere is arrested over an earlier rape. That same day, the couple are reported missing.<\/p>\n
December 1990 – Tamihere is convicted of murdering the couple and sentenced to life imprisonment.<\/p>\n
1991 – H\u00f6glin’s body is found near Whangamat\u0101.<\/p>\n
1992 – The Court of Appeal rejects Tamihere’s appeal.<\/p>\n
1994 – Tamihere is denied leave to appeal to the Privy Council.<\/p>\n
1995 – Witness C – later revealed as Roberto Conchie Harris – swears an affidavit retracting his evidence.<\/p>\n
1996 – Harris retracts his retraction.<\/p>\n
2010 – Tamihere is released on parole.<\/p>\n
2016 – A private prosecution alleges Harris lied at Tamihere’s trial.<\/p>\n
2017 – Harris is sentenced after being found guilty of perjury and not guilty of perverting the course of justice.<\/p>\n
2017 – Harris appeals the perjury convictions and sentence and fights to keep his identity hidden.<\/p>\n
2018 – Harris drops his appeal against the perjury convictions.<\/p>\n
2018 – The High Court revokes suppression order for Witness B, another prison informant.<\/p>\n
2020 – Justice Minister Andrew Little announces Tamihere’s case is going back to the Court of Appeal after a Royal Prerogative of Mercy is granted.<\/p>\n
November 2023 – The Court of Appeal hears Tamihere’s case.<\/p>\n
July 2024 – The Court of Appeal declines to quash Tamihere’s convictions.<\/p>\n
December 2024 – The Supreme Court grants leave for the case to be heard there.<\/p>\n
August 2025 – The case heads to the Supreme Court sitting in Auckland.<\/p>\n