![\"Evelyn](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/4LUYWEY_copyright_image_288986.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\nEvelyn and Greg Pike hold a photo of their son Nicholas, who was killed on 18 March, 2002.
\nPhoto: RNZ \/ Jimmy Ellingham\n<\/p>\n
Convicted murderer in case where body never found maintains innocence
\nStephen Hudson admits other violent offending but not 2002 killing of Nicholas Pike
\nHudson declined parole, but made no application for freedom anyway
\nCriminal Cases Review Commission decision expected shortly.<\/p>\n
A man convicted of killing a drugs associate in a remote location off the central North Island’s Desert Road could soon learn if his last-ditch bid to declare his innocence is accepted.<\/p>\n
After a jury trial in 2009, Stephen Thomas Hudson was convicted of killing Nicholas Pike, of Palmerston North, seven years earlier, and he was sentenced to a minimum jail term of 15 years.<\/p>\n
Pike’s body has never been found.<\/p>\n
According to evidence at Hudson’s trial, the pair were in a car in March 2002 with a woman, who was let out on the side of the road. Hudson and Pike drove down a side road, before Hudson returned alone.<\/p>\n
However, Hudson, 55, maintains his innocence and at his trial called evidence that gave him an alibi at the time of Pike’s killing – that he was with family in Masterton.<\/p>\n
Hudson took his case all the way to the Supreme Court, which 15 years ago dismissed his appeal, and has since applied for the Criminal Cases Review Commission to investigate.<\/p>\n
Hudson became eligible for parole this year and saw the Parole Board in February, but did not seek an early release.<\/p>\n
However, a report from the meeting, released to RNZ, said a decision from the commission could come out soon.<\/p>\n
Hudson’s lawyer at the parole hearing, Kerry Cook, said the commission had given several dates over the past year about when it would release its ruling.<\/p>\n
“Most recently he was told that there would be an outcome in around June 2026,” the board decision said.<\/p>\n
“If the [commission] find that there has been a substantial miscarriage of justice in Mr Hudson’s case, it would be referred back to the Court of Appeal and that will take some time.”<\/p>\n
Cook told RNZ this week that the June date was indicative rather than firm, while the commission said Hudson’s case remained under investigation and it couldn’t comment further.<\/p>\n
No body, no release – victim’s father<\/p>\n
Pike’s father Greg Pike remains convinced of Hudson’s guilt and said he and his wife Evelyn hoped the commission would rule accordingly.<\/p>\n
“We are at the stage where we don’t want to pay any attention to Hudson. He’s messed us around for 20 years,” Greg Pike said.<\/p>\n
“Whatever happens, happens.”<\/p>\n
The Pikes were given a chance to speak at Hudson’s parole hearing, but instead wrote a letter in opposition to his release.<\/p>\n
They’ve been given the same invitation to attend ahead of Hudson’s next hearing in July, but weren’t interested, Greg Pike said.<\/p>\n
He said if Hudson didn’t say where his son’s body was then he shouldn’t be released from prison.<\/p>\n
“I’ve got no issue with him staying in jail.”<\/p>\n
Lengthy criminal history<\/p>\n
Hudson’s been in jail since 2003, after he was convicted of other violent crimes, which he admits.<\/p>\n
The Parole Board said he had a criminal history that spanned nine pages.<\/p>\n
However, Cook told the parole hearing about concern that the application to overturn his murder conviction was stopping him from attending the special treatment unit for violent offenders.<\/p>\n
“Mr Cook said that Mr Hudson should be entitled to access the same rehabilitation opportunities as others, despite him engaging in a process that is available to him, namely an application to the [commission],” the board report said.<\/p>\n
“If Mr Hudson is not allowed to do the [violence programme], and if he is successful with the [commission], there is a high probability that he will be released without any treatment for his violence propensity.”<\/p>\n
Hudson has a low-medium security classification in prison, and a prison officer gave a good report about him to the board.<\/p>\n
His previous high security classification was a barrier from him doing the violence programme.<\/p>\n
Hudson has been the subject of several matters of prison misconduct. “These cover a range of concerning behaviour, including staff assaults, possession of contraband and other matters.”<\/p>\n
He admitted to the board that he continued to use cannabis behind bars.<\/p>\n
He also said some of the misconducts against him were over protests about prison conditions, and that boredom was a risk.<\/p>\n
A psychologist assessed him as being a high risk of committing further crimes, including violence.<\/p>\n
The board said he remained a risk to society.<\/p>\n
It asked for a further psychological report before his next hearing, which would examine the possibility of Hudson doing the violence programme relating to the crimes he admits.<\/p>\n
“Whatever happens with the [commission], it does seem likely that Mr Hudson will never accept responsibility for the murder,” the board said.<\/p>\n
“The pathway forward could [be] that he completes the [violence programme] based on those serious violent offences that he does accept, and then participates in some one-to-one treatment with a psychologist from a denier’s perspective in relation to the murder.”<\/p>\n
Evidence circumstantial – Hudson<\/p>\n
Nicholas Pike was a small player in the Palmerston North drugs world. Although an associate of Hudson, a violent offender, he was scared of him.<\/p>\n
Hudson suspected – correctly – that Pike was a police informant and was also said to be jealous of him due to Pike’s friendship with a woman.<\/p>\n
Hudson thought Pike was a liability in a drugs operation, and that Pike owed him money, Crown evidence from his trial suggested.<\/p>\n
The pair were together for some time before Pike’s disappearance, and Hudson was typically armed with a gun during that time.<\/p>\n
In a submission to the Law Commission about proposed legislative changes in 2023, Hudson said the evidence to convict him was circumstantial and that “incentivised witnesses” played a part.<\/p>\n
“The Crown’s case was that I was smart enough to kill Nick without leaving a single trace of forensic evidence, but stupid enough to confess to multiple individuals different stories, but then never to two people at the same time…” Hudson wrote.<\/p>\n
He said no witnesses came forward linking him to the murder until press reports made a link.<\/p>\n