Banks conviction overturned, retrial ordered

John Banks' conviction for filing a false electoral return has been overturned by the Appeal Court and a new trial ordered (see the judgment attached)

The electoral form in question was related to Mr Banks’ 2010 Auckland mayoralty campaign and his conviction hinged on whether he knew Kim Dotcom and Sky City had made donations to his campaign and that the donations would be anonymous.

In August Mr Banks was sentenced to two months' community detention for knowingly filing the false return by Justice Ed Wylie in the High Court at Auckland.

Justice Wylie had said Mr Dotcom and his wife Mona had been credible witnesses regarding an alleged discussion about the donations at a lunch with Mr Banks.

The appeal against the conviction was heard at the Court of Appeal in October, with Justices Ellen France, John Wild and Forrest Miller reserving their decision.

The retrial will hear the evidence from two new witnesses – American businessmen David Schaeffer and Jeffery Karnes – who were at the lunch and say there was no discussion about the donation between Messrs Banks and Dotcom.

The Court of Appeal said in a statement that it had decided to admit the evidence.

"Although it was not fresh evidence, the court was satisfied that if the evidence has been before [High Court judge] Justice Wylie, the outcome may have been different” and that it was in the interests of justice for the evidence to be admitted.

Its decision did not mean it regarded Mr and Ms Dotcom as unreliable witnesses, the Court of Appeal said. "It merely establishes that the evidence should be reconsidered at a new trial."

“It’s important to recognise that this was always related to events from before his involvement with ACT,” the party's new leader David Seymour says of the ex-Act MP leader's legal woes. “Nonetheless, on a personal level, we’re thrilled for him.”

Asked whether he thinks Mr Banks’ conviction harmed ACT’s 2014 election performance by association anyway, Mr Seymour says that “some people might conclude that but what I do know is that speculating about the past is not going to help me build ACT in the future.”

Mr Seymour acknowledges Mr Banks’ trail and conviction was problematic for ACT’s image, though he’s doubtful it had much effect come polling day.

“One thing I found on the doorsteps of Epsom is that he’s a very polarising figure,” Mr Seymour says, “and so the events of the trial just meant that people who loved John Banks felt even stronger for him and people who were less charitable managed to find even less charity for him.

“The trial didn’t really shift people’s view of John.”

Mr Banks is holding a press on conference at 3pm.

RAW DATA: Judgment (PDF)