KEY POINTS:
Sounds murder author Keith Hunter has made a fresh assault on the legal system on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the disappearance of Olivia Hope and Ben Smart.
In an exclusive Herald on Sunday article today, Hunter says recent public examination of the police case has
revealed gaps in the inquiry - and scrutiny should now be extended to the trial which led to the double murder conviction against Scott Watson.
Watson is serving a minimum 17 years in jail after a three-month trial in which he was accused of murdering Hope, 17, and Smart, 21, in the Marlborough Sounds on New Year's Day, 1998.
But Hunter's claims have been rejected by Queen's Counsel Paul Davison in letters to Hunter, who has examined the case in his book, Trial by Trickery.
In one letter, Davison writes: "I am satisfied that the prosecution case was conducted with integrity and accuracy, and in accordance with the proper standards of professional conduct.
"Your claims to the contrary are a disgrace, and the trial by trickery allegation is arrant nonsense."
The development comes as political interest in the case grows, with National's justice spokesman Simon Power telling the Herald on Sunday he had read Hunter's book and followed recent coverage closely.
He said it was too early to publicly express a view, but "it certainly has my interest".
Hunter says in today's article that the Watson case shows that "cracks" in New Zealand's "adversarial combat system" became a "chasm", "by the justice system's determination to achieve a conviction".
"Victim throughout was Watson, the handiest suspect ... the one in the wrong place at the wrong time."
Hunter today examines an aspect of the case which is seen as key in Watson's conviction - the "two trips" scenario, which he claims the prosecution had sprung on the defence in his closing statement, denying Watson the chance to defend himself.
The "two trips" scenario is a crucial peg of the Crown's case, as it negates the defence claim Watson returned to his yacht at 2am that morning.
It reinforces the prosecution insistence that it was Watson who took Hope and Smart back to his yacht at 4am, when the murders were carried out.
Hunter writes: "During the three months [of the trial], the 'two trips' scenario had never been suggested and not one witness had been asked about it. The evidence is clear that the new scenario was false."
But Davison, in a letter published on Hunter's website, says any suggestion that the scenario was "sprung on the defence" during the closing was "utter nonsense".
In a detailed rebuttal to Hunter's claims, Davison wrote that the prosecution case was always that Watson had returned to his yacht at 4am - and that prosecution evidence also raised the possibility of a 2am trip.
"While there was no direct evidence of Mr Watson making a [return] trip ashore, there was other evidence from which the jury could conclude that he could well have made such a return trip."
That included witnesses who had identified Watson as still being on land between 3am and 3.45am.
Davison wrote that an analysis of the evidence made the possibility of two trips by Watson "self evident", and "plain and obvious".
"There is no basis whatsoever for your claim that the prosecution 'tricked' the Watson defence."
There is growing interest in the case in Parliament besides that of Simon Power, after Hunter sent his book to all members of Parliament.
Green MP Nandor Tanczos has been vocal about the case, not commenting on guilt or innocence, but saying answers are needed to "serious questions about the conduct of the police investigation and the trial".
Act Party leader Rodney Hide has been vocal: "I don't think for a second that Scott Watson is guilty of the murders of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope".
