Court-changes call

Press, 19 December 1979, Page 6

Court-changes call

PA _ Auckland A “freeing-up of the contest” between courtroom adversaries could help to prevent a repetition of the Arthur Allan Thomas saga, according to the Labour spokesman on justice, Mr D. R, Lange. Defence counsel did not know what the prosecutor was going to present or indeed what the prosecutor had abandoned in the presentation of evidence, said Mr Lange yesterday. Sometimes defence counsel had to make a split-second decision about a matter arising from a witness’s evi-dence-in-chief, which, if he was wrong, could mean that his client would go to jail. A way out of the quandary I was a temporary adjourn-! ment allowing the defence to study signicant new evidence.!

i Mr Lange said that, at pre-: |sent, the defence could call! I for an adjournment, but the! I dynamics of the trial pro-! cedure were such as to dis-' courage the move. A lawyer j could be accused of using: delaying tactics and similar! ploys. Justice might be better) served if the defence could) call a halt and if provision| were made for the easier re-' call of witnesses. “There is a possibility in court processes for something less than the whole truth’s being told by witnesses,” said Mr Lange.’ That did not mean that witnesses lied or attempted to mislead, but simply that they were human. Mr Lange said that he wel-j corned the pardon granted to!: Mr Thomas. Another trial was! not possible, nor was it likely':

■(that anybody else would be I prosecuted for the murder of ■■Jeanette and Harvey Crewe. ! “I think this is a proper 'use of pardon,” Mr Lange |said. ;! However, he was conIcerned that the Thomas saga iwould now be part of what Ihe described as the court [law of New Zealand. ) It was, he said, a matter (of regret that it had taken a ■ double murder to alert people to the existence of an imbalance in the court system. The strength of the prosecution was considerably greater than that of the defence. Mr Lange said that the legal aid system was antiquated and poorly funded, land could produce some- ■ thing less than adequate representation for a defendant. I Tlie system, he asserted, needed a substantial review.