Government sued for $5m over RSA killings

By BRIDGET CARTER

The husband of one of the victims of the RSA triple killing is suing the Government for $5 million over the murders committed by a killer on parole.

The case is being taken by Tai Hobson, whose wife, Mary, was murdered at the Panmure RSA two years ago by William Bell. Mr Hobson says the Crown's monitoring of Bell while on parole was negligent.

The claim, lodged in the High Court at Auckland, asks for $50,000 for general damages, $5 million for exemplary damages and costs.

Mr Hobson's lawyer, David Garrett, said last night that the negligence claim was being taken on the grounds that the Department of Corrections released Bell from prison on parole only months before the RSA murders.


Bell is now serving a 33-year non-parole prison term for the murder of Mary Hobson, Wayne Johnson and William Absolum at the Panmure RSA during December 2001.

Bell had earlier been paroled after serving a prison term for aggravated robbery.

The statement of claim says that the probation service failed to adequately respond when Bell breached various conditions of his parole at the time.

As a result of the breach of the department's duty, the statement said Tai Hobson had suffered loss and damage, including nervous shock, emotional distress and the love and affection of his wife, Mary Hobson.

The "outrageous" breaches of duty by the department warranted punishment and the award of exemplary damages, the statement said.

The move has gained support from the Sensible Sentencing Trust. National spokesman Garth McVicar said it was "ground-breaking stuff".

If successful it had the power to change the way the Community Probation Service, a division of the Department of Corrections, worked, he said.

"Bell should not have got parole. I hope this will mean a lot more monitoring of the offenders."

Auckland QC Stuart Grieve said it was impossible to express a definitive view, but the claimants would have to prove the department was extremely negligent to get exemplary damages. They would have to show that the negligent actions were almost deliberate.

"You can't just dismiss the claim, but the standards have to be very high."

The Privy Council had demonstrated the difficulties in the case involving Gisborne pathologist Dr Michael Bottrill, who misread cervical cancer slides.

A 35-year-old mother and cervical cancer survivor launched a seven-year legal battle against him for exemplary damages. While he was found by a High Court judge to be probably negligent, the judge found that his actions did not warrant exemplary damages, a decision backed by the Privy Council.

Diane Johnson, wife of Wayne Johnson, who was also killed by Bell, said that while she was still considering lodging a similar claim against the Crown, Mr Hobson had her full support.

"I will be supporting Tai all the way. There's been a lot of people who have been on parole and gone out there and committed crimes. We [who have had family members murdered] don't want these things happening again, the Crown needs to be sent a wake up call and that's what Tai is trying to do."

The preliminary case is expected to go before a court next month.