Logistical issues in moving mosque shooting accused's trial

Logistical issues may be considered in the decision to move the March 15 accused gunman’s trial out of the city, says a high-profile Christchurch lawyer.

But the extra costs associated with moving the High Court trial won’t be a factor in the decision which will be made by Justice Cameron Mander, said Nigel Hampton QC.

“Justice isn’t a commodity, it can’t be bought or sold either way. That will not feature in the decision-making process regarding change of venue

. . . the requirements of justice would trump the cost aspect,” he said.

Earlier this month, defence lawyers for the accused shooter, Shane Tait and Jonathan Hudson, applied to change the venue of the trial.

The accused denies 51 charges of murder, 40 charges of attempted murder and a charge under the Terrorist Suppression Act for the attack at the two mosques on March 15.

Mr Tait and Mr Hudson have not publicly stated the reasons for the application.

By law, a trial must take place in the nearest court to where the alleged crime took place.

However, if the defence can prove there may be a risk of the accused not getting a fair or impartial trial, due to a reason such as adverse publicity, it can be argued that a change of venue should take place.

Mr Hampton believes the Crown prosecution may face logistical issues if the trial is moved out of Christchurch.

This will include organising the travel and accommodation of witnesses, who may be victims of the attack, first responders, police, Institute of Environmental Science and Research staff, surgeons and other medical staff.

“There is going to be a huge bevy of witnesses that are going to be juggled and that’s a factor that the Crown might say should come into the balance as well in weighing up whether to change the venue or not,” said Mr Hampton.

The defence could argue due to the publicity around the event, there may be some undue prejudices attached to or against the trial rights of the accused.

“Given the degree of publicity up and down the country, let alone the rest of the world, it’s a wee bit hard to see this would be objectively strong.

“If they want to resist it, Crown would suggest that in these high-profile cases that it doesn’t matter a damn whether it’s Invercargill or Whangarei, everyone in this country knows all about this particular event,” he said.

The trial is expected to start in May next year and could last six to 12 weeks. The start date may also be delayed by three or four weeks.

The change of venue will be argued on October 3.