He claims he was repeatedly punched and kicked about the head and upper body, his glasses smashed, and that he needed concussion treatment and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the attack.
However, the CEO says it was he who was attacked by the pensioner and that “there’s the possibility that I suffered injuries”.
Both men were charged with fighting in a public place, while the CEO was also charged with dangerous driving.
But at a hearing yesterday in the North Shore District Court, police withdrew the fighting charge against the CEO and replaced it with a charge of assault with intent to injure.
The new and more serious charge carries a maximum penalty of three years in jail.
The CEO was supposed to have gone on trial yesterday and the pensioner was set to be called as a police witness to give evidence about the alleged attack.
However, police prosecutor Jay Choi asked for an adjournment, saying there had been “new discoveries that changed the landscape of the prosecution case”.
She did not detail the new developments in court and police yesterday would not be drawn on why the charge had been upgraded.
The CEO’s defence lawyer, Guyon Foley, told the court he had only just received notification of the new charge against his client.
“I was sent an email at 8am this morning on the day of the trial, which in my respectful submission is too late.”
Foley said the trial date had been set last year and he “firmly opposed” any further adjournment.
Foley criticised the prosecution for failing to provide adequate disclosure, saying it had been “a bit of a mess”.
He had been trying to obtain audio of a 16-minute 111 call his client made to police on the day of the incident but the recording was yet to be provided.
Foley asked Judge Anna Fitzgibbon to set a deadline and clear instructions for police to complete the necessary disclosure requirements to prevent further “stumbling”.
“We’re not asking for special treatment ... but for the prosecutor to perform her duty.”
The judge told Foley: “I appreciate you are frustrated by this”, but she agreed the case should be adjourned until next month.
The Herald argued that suppression orders preventing the CEO being identified should lapse, given the importance of open justice and public interest in the case.
However, the judge ordered that interim suppression should continue until the man’s next appearance, to give police and the defence time to make submissions on whether he should be publicly named.
“The right to transparency and open justice is an important principle, however given the change in circumstances, I am not prepared to deal with this today,” the judge said.
Police indicated they would oppose further suppression orders, as will NZME.
The spokesman for the pensioner’s family, Matt Blomfield, said being charged with fighting in public when the then 73-year-old was defending himself against a much younger person was “deeply distressing for him and his loved ones”.
“He strongly denies any allegation of wrongdoing and suffered serious bruising and grazes to his body, broken teeth, and ... ongoing headaches and dizziness as a result of the alleged assault.
“His hearing aids and glasses were also damaged during the alleged assault.”
Lane Nichols is a senior journalist and Auckland desk editor for the New Zealand Herald with more than 20 years’ experience in the industry.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
