Crown considers appeal in spybase case

Relevant offers

Crime

Suppression lapses for kidnap accused Cyclist shot, retaliates with rock New Zealand's 'biggest' P-lab busted Farm worker burst cow's eyeball with bar Gisborne stab victim named Illness delays Urewera trial Police bust nets 'substantial' cash, meth Urewera four trial: 'Gunfire' from camp Woman charged over Gisborne death Earthquake stress blamed for murder

The Crown is considering an appeal after three men who admitted vandalising a spybase walked free.

And though the trio were motivated by saving lives overseas, that was not the reason they got off, a legal source says.

Adrian Leason, 46, Peter Murnane, 69, and Sam Land, 26, were aquitted of burglary and intentional damage charges in Wellington District Court on Wednesday.

The trio freely admitted breaking into the Government Communications Security Bureau base at Waihopai in April 2008 and slashing the dome over a satellite.

During an eight-day trial their lawyers used a "claim of right" defence, where in the minds of the three men when they cut through the spybase fence and slashed the dome, they honestly believed they were acting lawfully. A jury found them not guilty in two hours.

Solicitor-General David Collins said yesterday the Crown was considering appealing against the decision.

During the trial, the Crown prosecutor reserved a point of law over how the judge would direct the jury regarding "claim of right" as a defence.

Crown law was expected to make a decision about the appeal in the next fortnight.

A legal source said though it was true Mr Leason, Father Murnane and Mr Land did want to save people overseas, that was not the reason they got off. "The Crown had to prove that they had no claim of right. It goes to their state of mind at the time. Having intent is not enough. The Crown had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they did not also believe that their actions were lawful, and they failed to do it."

Claim of right – which means a person honestly believed they were acting lawfully, even if they were ignorant or mistaken – is normally used in property cases.

- © Fairfax NZ News

Newest First

Oldest First

Hamid   #3   12:47 pm Mar 19 2010

@ Mike, you support violent actions as a means of getting something closed? I'm not sure why you live in this country, but I for one don't take the Rule of Law for granted. Also, have the decency to be specific about whatever it is you are talking about when you mention genocides, illegal wars and occupations. If it is Iraq and Afghanistan, they are two very different situations. I have been to Afghanistan-- there we have joined over 40 countries (even Arab countries) in routing a major threat. The difference between a army of occupiers and a army of liberators is that the latter work and train the Afghan people to rid themselves of an extremism they do not want.

mike   #2   10:51 am Mar 19 2010

The base contributes to genocide and illegal wars and occupations around the world and should be closed. I support these men’s actions and the juries decision.

Matt   #1   09:33 am Mar 19 2010

Next we will have pot-headed 'activists' blowing up Parliament or the SIS believing 'they were doing good'. That was a million dollars from OUR pocket. What a load of baloney, and to think these were priests etc!

Ad Feedback