COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVIII, Issue 23261, 24 July 1945, Page 4

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Establishment Within Sight Chief Justice Expresses Gratification ■ N.Z.P.AJ WELLINGTON. July 23. Gratification that what he had considered a blot on the administration of ..ustice in New Zealand lor many years was likely to be removed bv the establishment of a Court of Criminal Appeal was expressed by the Chief Justice* 'the Rt. Hon. Sir Michael Myers’ in his charge to the Grand Jury at the opening oi tne quarterly criminal sessions of the Supreme Court. At the turn of die* century, said his Honour, a man named Beck was charged m England with serious offences, lhe case depended largely on evidence of identity. Beck was convicted and sent to prison. Subsequently it was found that he was entirely innocent, 'lhe evidence of identity had been wrong. There was somewhat of an outcry and lhe Court of Criminal Appeal was established in 1907. In New Zcaiand in June. 1908. a year after the Court of Criminal Appeal was established in England, two men were charged with murder, convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. They were released in October. 1908. It transpired that they had been convicted on perjured evidence. The principal witness at the trial had been a youth who subsequently admit:ed he had kicked the victim to death. There was no Court of Criminal Appeal in New Zealand, and the two men were apparently not even “pardoned.” but wee simply given ? remission of th 1 unexpired nortion of the sentence imposed on them for an offence that they had not committed quite apart from the fact that the men had been convicted on perjured evidence. That was another incident in the ease which, in itself, if there had been a Court, of Criminal Appeal, would have enabled that Court to redress the mischief caused by the conviction either bv quashing it or by ordering the men a new trial. Only ( 3iintry Lagging Before the English Court >f Criminal Appeal Act, 1907, lhe Court of Crown Cases Reserved, as it was called, could deal only with matters of law which arose in a criminal trial, and that was substantially the position in New Zealand to this day. But. the Court of Criminal Appeal was empowered to set a verdict aside if there w-i.s on any ground a miscarriage of justice. In everv autonomous country under the British Crown, except New Zealand, a Court of criminal Appeal, according to the best of his information and belief, had been established. When he

was at the Bar he had advocated over and over again the establishment ot such a Court, but nothing had been done. Since he had been on the Bench he had expressed his views strongly. Now. at long last, after nearly 40 years, he was glad to notice tiiat apparently a Court of Criminal Appeal Bill was being introduced in Parliament. In some cases where lhe law in criminal cases had come before th.? Court ot Appeal as a Court of Crown Cases Reserved. the Court had come to the conclusion that errors had taken place which might have led to a miscarriage of justice, but it had no power to do anything except affirm the conviction. That, was not altogether correct, because in two or three cases the Court had ventured to suggest relief in another way. Where application was made for the mercy of the Crown, the Governor-General-in-Council, which meant the Executive Government, might direct that a new trial be held ; That, meant that the Executive Govi ernment was nut in 'he nosition of deciding something judicially. The Court of Appeal in some cases had considered it. was justified in practically recommending that there should be a new trial. That- was placing the Court in an invidious and embarrassing position. as the answer might be made that it was trenching on the functions of the Executive Government