Mr Asia lawyer gives up long battle for name suppression

Edward Poulter Leary. Photo / Greg Bowker

A criminal defence lawyer struck off 20 years ago because of his links to the Mr Asia drug syndicate was charged with money laundering soon after being reinstated as a barrister.

Name suppression was lifted last night for Edward Poulter Leary, 65, his wife, Claudine, and associate Nicholas Henri Voerman, who were jointly charged with money-laundering in July 2008 in connection with an international drug ring.

The charge against the lawyer, better known as Eb, was thrown out after bugged conversations between his wife and Voerman referring to Mr Leary were ruled as inadmissible hearsay evidence.

Both Voerman and Claudine Leary pleaded guilty to the money-laundering charge in January.

Mr Leary's defence lawyer, Andrew Speed, fought to keep the names of both of the Learys secret, but suppression was lifted at 5pm yesterday after the couple decided against appealing to the Supreme Court.

In a statement, Mr Leary said he had always asserted his innocence and "at the first available opportunity a judge agreed as I was discharged without trial but with no suppression of name".

He said that, as a lawyer, the rules do not allow him to make further comment.

"However, on behalf of my wife, please remember she was fined because a judge accepted that she mistakenly acted without any personal benefit and out of misguided loyalty to help a long-standing female friend in domestic difficulties."

Name suppression was lifted after the Court of Appeal refused to hear an appeal against an earlier ruling by Justice Rebecca Ellis in the High Court at Auckland, dismissing the pair's appeal.

Justice Ellis said 81 people had been prepared to provide testimonials in support of Mr Leary's readmission in 2007 and, by doing so, put their own reputations on the line.

She quoted what Mr Leary's lawyer, Alan Galbraith, QC, told the High Court in support of his client's application to rejoin the bar.

"The eminence and responsible nature of those who gave testimonials was such that they would be cautious before putting pen to paper, careful in their assessment of the appellant [Mr Leary] and at pains to ensure what they said was accurate and not inflated."

Justice Ellis said: "There is a very real public interest in knowing about all aspects of the operation of the justice system and court process.

"There is a risk of undermining public confidence in the courts if secrecy surrounds those who are acquitted or discharged."

Mr Leary is best known as being the lawyer for Mr Asia syndicate kingpin Terry Clark in the 1980s. He was struck off the roll of legal practitioners in 1987 for indiscretions in association with Clark, including introducing the Mr Asia ringleader to another client who began dealing drugs with him.

But after a 20-year hiatus, Mr Leary was reinstated to the bar after his High Court appeal in 2007.

Six judges, 15 Queen's Counsel and a number of high-profile lawyers supported his application.

Until last night, Eb and Claudine Leary had had their names, occupations, relationship and the money-laundering charge suppressed since their arrest in July 2008 - even after Claudine Leary pleaded guilty and Mr Asia lawyer gives up battle for name suppression

was fined $10,000.

Voerman, 53, also pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 months' jail, to be served alongside a three-year jail term handed down in September after he admitted supplying Ecstasy as part of an international drug ring.

Voerman told the Herald last year that he was guilty but "Eb was totally innocent in this".

"The police have charged him because they didn't like him because of his Mr Asia link. They have a vendetta against him."

The trio were charged with money laundering after Auckland drug detectives began investigating the large-scale importing of Ecstasy between March and July 2008.

Bugged conversations between Voerman and his partner, Patricia Barnett, who was a friend of Claudine Leary, revealed he was worried about being caught by police after the arrest of one of his dealers.

He had removed any drugs and money from their apartment and said he left a "shitload of money" at the Learys' Princes Wharf apartment, after visiting the couple the night before.

He had left a blue bag there while having a couple of drinks.

In the conversation with his partner, Voerman said he needed to get back the money - which he referred to as around $160,000 - to "pay my bills".

He later rang Claudine Leary to ask: "Hey, have you still got some money at home?"

She replied, "No, nothing", and that her husband had "the lot".

When interviewed by the police, Mr Leary said he remembered Voerman visiting his apartment and leaving a bag behind, which he took to a safe in his office the next day for Voerman to pick up.

"It was so light I didn't think it had anything in it," he told the police in the statement.

Mr Speed later successfully argued that the Crown evidence against his client was inadmissible, and the charge was dismissed.

Crown prosecutor Brent Stanaway, brought up from Christchurch to avoid a conflict of interest, opposed the discharge when the case was heard in the Auckland District Court in January.

The argument turned on a legal point concerning the admissibility of hearsay evidence, because the bugged conversations between Voerman and Claudine Leary mentioned Mr Leary, but he was not involved in the conversations.

The Crown specifically relied on the intercepted evidence against Mr Leary on the basis of an exception to the hearsay rule, but Judge Colin Doherty discharged him.

But the judge refused to grant the Learys permanent name suppression, a decision they appealed against.