NZ Public Interest Project says it will investigate 'mistakes' in justice system

Trustee Jarrod Gilbert says the new NZ Public Interest Project will investigate mistakes in the justice system and intends to look at case of Timothy Taylor, jailed for the murder of Lisa Blakie.
 
NZPIP is also working with the Council of Trade Unions on a criminal prosecutions of the forestry industry over its safety record and will consider civil action on behalf of Christchurch earthquake victims.
 
Mr Gilbert says an estimate by Sir Thomas Thorpe that around 20 people in jail at any time are innocent is “conservative.”
 
He believes the New Zealand justice system isn’t broken but “we do have is some very significant problems that must be addressed."

RAW DATA: TV3/The Nation transcript: Lisa Owen interviews NZ Public Interest Project trustee Dr Jarrod Gilbert
 
Lisa Owen: Good morning.
Jarrod Gilbert: Good morning, Lisa.
Can you tell me what is the Public Interest Project?
Look, it’s a group of people who have identified some cases initially that have sparked their interest in the criminal justice system or this element of it and identified that there’s a significant gap here, that there are some systemic issues that do need solving, and a body like this will go some way to solving that. Now, this is not a brand-new idea. Sir Thomas Thorp, of course, called for this as early as 2005 after, in the late ’90s, examining the Peter Ellis case and numerous others. So, I mean, look, there is a gap here. It is very important, and so the government have consistently failed to step up and produce a body such as this, so we’ve put our hand up to do that.
So how many people - innocent people - do you think there are in our jails?
Look, the short answer to that is we don’t actually know, and that’s frightening. We know the cases that come to our attention and explode into the public consciousness, of course, but international experience - if we can compare, perhaps, to the UK - Sir Thomas Thorp concluded that at any one time - and he did this 10 years ago - he concluded that there would be around 20 people in jail at any one time who were innocent. And I think if you asked him, he might say that that was a conservative estimate. Now, of course what this also precludes is the fact that there are people that leave jail and have the stigma of these convictions hanging over them often for the rest of their lives. So whilst the numbers may sound small, they’re extremely significant, and it’s difficult to ignore that, particularly when you humanise it, when you meet some of the people who are innocent.
Doesn’t that call into question our whole justice system, though? Is it broken? Is that what you’re saying?
No, look, I think that Western democratic justice generally is something we should be very, very proud of. Ever since the Enlightenment, the philosophical underpinnings of our system are extremely good, and the New Zealand justice system is very good too. I don’t think anyone would claim that we’ve got big fractures or that this thing is somehow broken. What we do have is some very significant problems that must be addressed. Now, I actually spoke to a conference of High, Supreme and Court of Appeal Judges recently, and, I tell you, I couldn’t be more impressed with the judiciary. The separation of status is so firm there. The intelligence among them and their commitment to justice is very, very high. But I think very few of them would say that there aren’t cases that have slipped through the net that a body like this will identify, and in doing so, not just assist those individuals, which clearly is very, very important, but also uphold the integrity of a very good justice system.
You said there that you are stepping into the breach, basically, because the government has been asked to set up an independent body and hasn’t acted. But the Justice Minister has basically said that the system is capable of dealing with these cases. You know, David Bain is a free man now. Teina Pora is free. She says that a self-initiated review group is no substitute for an impartial judicial-level review and that your group or the people involved in it are not impartial. So, basically, you’re not needed, and you’re the wrong people to be doing it.
Yeah, look, I think we can all probably agree that the best way to remove intelligence from a debate is to include a politician. Look, it’s very easy to say the system is working. Teina Pora spent 20 years in prison before the system worked for him. You know, I’d like the minister to sit down and tell him that there’s no problem. Furthermore, we know that criminal case reviews in the UK and Scotland have proven very, very successful, so there is a gap there. We know that here, and we know that internationally. Now, as to whether or not we’re the right people to do it, I mean, we’ve got some very- I mean, I feel privileged to be among the people that we’ve got. Some highly skilled academics and legal minds and investigators in there. Quite an incredible team. If those people aren’t the people to do it, I’m sure as hell not sure who are.
So, in practical terms, can you explain to me how are you going to choose the cases that you get involved in?
Well, the cases will come to us, so people will, as they do for the Criminal Cases Review Commissions internationally and other types of projects like this around the world. So they’ll come to us, and we will assess them, assess them on their merits, and if they’ve got merits, we will look to pursue those particular cases. You know, what’s been found internationally, of course, is that when a body like this starts up, so many cases tend to come out of the woodwork. The problem that we’ve got with the system now is that to get someone to get a second chance or to clear someone’s name, the hurdles are so significant. What you really rely on is a sort of white knight, someone to come out and really assist somebody. Now, Tim McKinnel, of course, was crucial to that in the Teina Pora case. Without Tim McKinnel, Teina Pora would still be-
So which cases specifically are you going to champion, then? You talk about the Pora case where he did have people who were prepared to fight for him. So is there a list of cases that you’re going to work on in the first instance?
Well, Michael October’s is the one case. Tim McKinnel, by the way, is actually on our team. He realised how hard it was to do it by himself and has recognised the importance of a group like this, which I think is important. But, look, for my money, the reason why I came here, and one of the reasons why this group was formed, and it’s the case that we’re certainly taking up is the case of Michael October. He’s been convicted of rape and murder - a crime that I think is one of the most egregious examples the country’s ever seen, and I would defy anybody to look at the evidence of that case and conclude that he’s guilty. Well, he’s carrying a very terrible stigma around for that particular crime. And, of course, there are others.
I understand that you're going to— or interested in the case of Timothy Taylor, who was jailed for murdering Timaru woman Lisa Blakie. She was the woman who was hitchhiking in 2000, I think it was, and her body was found near the Arthur's Pass highway. So is that a case that you want to get involved in?
Yes, look, the people supporting Taylor came to us to get us to investigate it, and we certainly will have a look at the case. It hasn't been put before the team yet, but it certainly will be. Now, that's always been a slightly troubling case, actually, for the fact that there was a boulder that was placed on her body, which was too large for one person to shift. But much more interestingly is that there appears to be some new evidence that's been brought forward now. When her body was found, there was a pubic hair found on it. It was never identified who that pubic hair belonged to, and it's quite possible there's a very strong lead indicating that we may be able to track that person down.
I'm wondering — what happens if, during a course of an investigation, your project discovers, well, actually, on the balance of the evidence, this person probably is guilty. Are you going to abandon cases like that quietly? Or are you going to tell us what exactly you found?
Look, I think we'll... I guess we'll wait until we come to that hurdle. But, look, if we reach the conclusion that either a person is guilty or on the balance on probabilities that the case just doesn't stack up, there's no way we will champion it. We're not here to, um, to get guilty people free by any means. We're here to find examples of injustice and right those. That's what we're about.
But they're not just criminal cases that you're interested, is it? I mean, you talk about injustice there. You are interested in civil too?
Yes, absolutely, and in fact, Nigel Hampton QC is one of the trustees being working with the CTU — um, the Council of Trade Unions — looking at our prosecuting, actually, the forestry industry, around the terrible safety record that they have there and the numerous deaths that happen in that industry. Um, that's making use of students at the University of Canterbury, and in fact, we're modelling the NZ PIP — the Public Interest Project — on what Nigel's been doing, actually. So, of course, I think we'll look at any cases that we think have slipped through the cracks; that have perhaps been investigated and for whatever reason haven't been picked up, or have reached the wrong conclusions. So it's just a bit of a safety net, really. This shouldn't be seen as a threat. It's a, um... It's a really important, um, piece of... You know, a small but important piece of a jigsaw puzzle of the criminal justice system.
Uh, are you looking at Christchurch, then?
Um, solely located in Christchurch?
Possibly doing something for earthquake victims?
Oh, well, um, well, again, we've got Duncan Webb, a partner from the Lane Neave law firm here, who's pursued a lot of cases around earthquake issues. And, look, I think that highlights a really important issue that, often, these criminal cases, we tend to be dealing with people from certain elements of society. Um, certain lower socioeconomic groups. What we're fighting with the earthquakes, of course, is that, um, people from the middle classes are coming against, sort of, bureaucratic structures and finding enormous frustration. And, you know, you can say all you like, but, you know, look, they're obstructed. There are processes in place to solve these issues, but when you come up against them and you're beating your head against the wall or you're sitting in a jail cell or a broken house, as is the case in Christchurch, you find that the system doesn't occasionally work particularly well at all, and it does require assistance, and that's the very assistance that we hope to provide.
All right. Thank you very much for joining me this morning. That's Dr Jarrod Gilbert from the New Zealand Public Interest Project. Thank you, and we will watch their progress with interest.