In 2022, Pierre Rewi Anglem, now 45, was jailed for 12 years after he was convicted of possession of an offensive weapon, two charges of rape, four of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
A jury found him guilty of the charges but he appealed the convictions, claiming his lawyer Anne Stevens KC was incompetent, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
His appeal centred around his lawyer’s failure to investigate Robert Kaiwai, who he said was an important witness in the case.
Mr Kaiwai refused to give a formal statement to police, but said he was not at the victim’s house on the relevant date and did not know anything about the allegations.
In an affidavit sworn after the trial Mr Kaiwai claimed he was there on the night and saw the victim initiating sexual intimacy with Anglem.
The defendant’s appeal lawyer, Val Nisbet, said Mr Kaiwai’s evidence would have supported the defence case and if he had given evidence, more favourable verdicts would likely have been delivered.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeal released its decision to dismiss the appeal as the panel of judges were not persuaded Mrs Stevens made any serious error in advising Anglem.
Mrs Stevens told the court she was aware of the witness, but did not think he would help Anglem’s case as he was not there at the time of the alleged offending and his comments to police were not favourable to the defendant.
She was also troubled that Mr Kaiwai had not provided a formal statement to police.
Mrs Stevens recalled Anglem accepted her advice and agreed not to call Mr Kaiwai as a witness.
At trial in 2022, the jury heard that Anglem and Mr Kaiwai went to the victim’s house and consumed some drugs.
The victim knew Mr Kaiwai but had never met Anglem and did not know his name.
Anglem had recently cut off his electronic-monitoring ankle bracelet and there was a warrant for his arrest.
Mr Kaiwai eventually left and the woman and Anglem were left alone.
The defendant pulled out an extendable hammer, tossed it between his hands and demanded the woman perform a sex act on him.
She partially complied with his request, hoping it would make him "go away", but Anglem violently raped the woman.
The court of appeal decision said Mrs Stevens’ lines of questioning were consistent with the defendant’s instructions.
Mrs Stevens said she knew that Mr Kaiwai might give evidence about the victim initiating intimacy if he were to take the stand and his fresh affidavit would not have changed the advice she gave Anglem not to call him, she said.
While the panel of appeal judges accepted Anglem wanted Mrs Stevens to call Mr Kaiwai, they found he took her advice not to and ruled that did not amount to a miscarriage of justice.
The court also did not accept evidence in Mr Kaiwai’s new affidavit, also noting Mr Kaiwai had a conviction for perverting the course of justice in 2008 after he threatened a complainant who had complained of sexual violation by rape.
