\u201cWe\u2019re fortunate to have this system of justice, and we need to preserve it as best we can,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Alan Hall was exonerated by the Supreme Court three decades after he was found guilty of murder. Photo \/ Greg Bowker<\/p>\n
The defendants have opted not to have a jury trial. Justice Ian Gault will instead decide the outcome at the end of the hearing, which is expected to last roughly two weeks. <\/p>\n
Hall spent 17 years in prison for the October 1985 murder of Arthur Easton inside the victim\u2019s Papakura, South Auckland home. Hall remained subject to lifetime parole conditions until the Supreme Court overturned the conviction in 2022. He later received $4.9 million in compensation, the largest payout in the nation\u2019s history. <\/p>\n
Billington described the 1986 trial as having only one issue: the identification of the assailant. Witness Ronald Turner had initially told police he\u2019d seen someone running near the scene of the homicide who was about 6 feet (1.82m) tall and M\u0101ori. Hall is 5 feet 7 inches and P\u0101keh\u0101. <\/p>\n
Two elderly former police officers are on trial in the High Court at Auckland accused of perverting the course of justice during the 1986 murder trial of Alan Hall. Photo \/ Dean Purcell<\/p>\n
The witness\u2019 description, which was repeated at least two other times, was never disclosed to the defence, the judge or the jury, Billington said. He noted that Hall\u2019s trial lawyer had been Peter Williams, described as one of the most pre-eminent defence lawyers of his time. The prosecutor asked Justice Gault to imagine what Williams would have been able to do with the vital disclosure. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s irrelevant whether the defendants truly thought Hall was guilty, Billington said, accusing the defendants of knowing the information they providing to the court was \u201ctotally and utterly misleading\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cWhat could destroy the police and Crown case was not disclosed,\u201d he added. \u201cMr Hall should not have been charged, let alone tried.\u201d<\/p>\n
Crown prosecutor John Billington, KC. Photo \/ Dean Purcell<\/p>\n
The misrepresentations would continue when Hall fought his conviction through the Court of Appeal and lost, the prosecutor said. <\/p>\n
But defence lawyer David Jones, KC, who represents the older of the two defendants, dismissed the Crown\u2019s opening statement to the judge as \u201chyperbolic\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cNo rational, objective view of the evidence could support such a contention\u201d that the lack of disclosure \u201cdestroyed\u201d the right to a fair trial, he said. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s debatable that the witness statement was relevant at all, he said, noting that the witness saw someone running in the same neighbourhood but not directly from the crime scene. Meanwhile, he noted, two items of Hall\u2019s had been left at the crime scene and Hall had given five different explanations for why that was so. <\/p>\n
\u201cThere is no hidden agenda anywhere,\u201d Jones said, noting that it was no secret that two other witnesses \u2013 both of whom actually grappled with the killer \u2013 initially said the man was M\u0101ori. \u201cThat was clearly in the public domain.\u201d<\/p>\n
Defence lawyer David Jones, KC. Photo \/ Dean Purcell<\/p>\n
Jones accused the Crown of \u201creverse engineering\u201d a prosecution based on the Supreme Court decision \u2013 resulting in \u201ca very emotive and non-contextual and lopsided approach\u201d \u2013 rather than more fairly viewing the case as it would have been seen in the 1980s, without the benefit of hindsight. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe is a person who has decades of experience as a police officer, is highly respected,\u201d Jones said of his client. <\/p>\n
By design, defence opening statements at the start of a trial are generally less extensive than what the Crown has to say. Defence lawyer Paul Wicks, KC, who is representing the younger of the two defendants, said it would be repetitive if he also spoke but endorsed everything the fellow defence lawyer said. <\/p>\n
The trial is set to continue tomorrow. <\/p>\n