TVNZ episode sparks row

Press, 25 January 1989, Page 4

TVNZ episode sparks row

PA Wellington The police officer handling the Maureen McKinnel murder inquiry in Invercargill has denied using the news media to “flush out” one of the suspects in the case.

Miss McKinnel was strangled in her Arrowtown home on Boxing Day, 1987. Last week’s “Midweek with Holmes” television programme profiled a Wellington man who, police say, is their main suspect in the case. The programme detailed the man’s criminal record as well as many personal facts about him. This was denounced by the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties as being a trial by the news media.

Detective Sergeant Brian Hewett, who is handling the case, said it was Television New Zealand that initiated the programme. The police had only been involved to ensure accuracy. “They’d done some pretty good investigative journalism and already had a certain amount of information. They were going to do the programme regardless, so we agreed (to be involved in

the programme) to make sure it was'based on the facts.” Detective Hewett said the man in question was. still his “favourite” suspect, but he emphasised that the man was only a suspect, not necessarily the offender. Although the police had a lot of evidence against the man, some of which had not been publicised, he did not feel it was enough to lay charges. The chances of that happening were about 50/ 50. A key piece of evi-

dence in the case is a pubic hair found on the man. Forensic tests have not proven it to be Miss McKinnel’s, but Detective Hewett was hopeful DNAtesting of the hair might still be possible. The president of the New Zealand Law Society has joined critics of the “Midweek” programme that publicised details of the police case against the man. Mr Graham Cowley said the society, although

it supported police use of the news media to help solve crime, drew the line at any attempts to try someone through the media. “Any suggestion of a person’s guilt or otherwise in a television item, a newspaper article, or a magazine, runs the risk of preventing a fair trial, if and when a case comes before the courts,” Mr Cowley said. “The usual protections, and the manner in which evidence is presented and

the weight that is given to it, are not always present in a media presentation. ” As no charges had been laid, the programme was not subjudice, but Mr Cowley said the society would be concerned at any moves to deal with cases in the news media where there had not been sufficient evidence to lay charges. This, he said, would only stir public emotion and prejudice a fair trial.