A senior court official says it is "uncertain" whether the judge who granted Akshay Chand bail weeks before he killed Christie Marceau had access to an earlier decision from another judge who rejected his bid for release.
The inquest into the death of Christie opened today at the Auckland
District Court before Coroner Katharine Greig.
The 18-year-old was stabbed repeatedly by Chand in her North Shore home in November 2011 and died in her mother's arms.
He was on bail and facing charges of kidnapping, threatening and assaulting Christie when he killed her.
READ MORE:
Terrifying last moments at hands of insane killer
Christie Marceau's last plea
EXCLUSIVE: 'Justice for Christie' - long-awaited Marceau inquest set to start tomorrow
Christie Marceau inquest begins in Auckland with recap of her violent death
The inquest heard today from Carl Lewen who was the court services manager for the North Shore District Court at the time of Christie's death.
Lewen, a former police detective, explained to the inquest how court files were compiled and what happened to the information once it was submitted.
He then detailed specifically what was held on Chand's file - effectively what exact documents and information were available to Judge McNaughton when the bail decision was made in October 2011.
Chand had been denied bail twice by Judge Barbara Morris - after his first appearance on September 7 and again on September 9.
At the second appearance Judge Morris said:
"I do not consider it prudent or wise to grant bail until at least a full forensic report can be obtained," she said.
In the meantime, she hoped, Chand could "commence on the medication".
That medication was antidepressants.
"I am concerned too, notwithstanding the support of his family which is welcomed and comforting, that it is only a short distance away from the complainant's address," Judge Morris said.
"It may be with a declinature of bail that steps could be put in place for as rapid as possible electronic bail assessment at an address that would be well away from the complainant.
"Given Mr Chand's age of 18, I would ask, despite limited resources, for an electronic assessment to be made urgently.
"I would also order a psychiatric report on Mr Chand."
Lewen said Judge Morris' decision was recorded on the court file and her notes were transcribed and sent to the prison where Chand was being held in the custody of mental health services and police personnel involved in the EM bail considerations.
They should have also been added to his file via the court's central file management system.
However, he could not confirm that had happened before Judge McNaughton heard Chand's next bail application.
"I cannot state with certainty whether Judge Morris' transcribed decision of 9 September 2011 was on the court file prior to the bail decision that was made by Judge McNaughton on 5 October 2011," Lewen told the inquest.
"As Judge Morris' decision was not recorded as finalised on 5 October, I would assume that it was not.
"However, it would have been open to Judge McNaughton to ask for the draft decision, but I cannot comment on whether (he) did so.
"A request of this nature would not be recorded on the court file."
Lewen said there was "no record of a written application for bail (of any type) on the file.
"The transcripts of the hearings show that the question of bail was raised orally before Judge Morris on 7 September, but the application was only made by defence counsel, orally, on 9 September," he explained.
"At the subsequent hearings on (September 23 and 29 and October 5) defence counsel and the Court proceeded on the basis that bail was sought by the defendant and opposed by police.'
He further explained that there were "no express rules" requiring a judge to consider minutes made by another judge who presided over a defendant's earlier appearance.
"However a judge would be likely to peruse them," he said.
When Chand appeared before Judge McNaughton on September 23 Lewen said the forensic report ordered by Judge Morris was on the file, along with a handwritten letter from the accused kidnapper.
Judge McNaughton again declined bail for Chand saying it was "early days" and the youth had only just commenced a course of medical treatment in regards to his mental health.
"I think I would want to be satisfied that he was responding to the treatment and was reasonably stable before I even considered a bail application," he said, according to court transcripts provided to the inquest.
He ordered a further psychiatric report for the next hearing on September 29.
"If that is positive and the defendant is stable, the court could consider a bail application," Judge McNaughton said.
The court file was updated accordingly.
Chand's September 29 hearing was a simple pre-trial callover.
During that hearing Chand's lawyer Mary-Anne Lowe said a new bail application would be advanced.
On October 5 Chand was back in court for his fifth appearance.
By then further documents had been added to his court file, including a new letter from a forensic nurse and letter from Christie.
Lewen said neither document was date stamped by the court "or bear any marking of being received by a case manager".
"However both documents are referred to by Judge McNaughton in the transcribed record of the hearing," he said.
"On that basis I am confident they were on the paper-based court file when the prosecution was called."
The bail hearing was transcribed along with Judge McNaughton's decision to release Chand from custody.
Just 33 days later Chand was back in court, this time charged with the murder of Christie Marceau.
