Tourism New Zealand campaign gets green light, a faster way to detect cancer may have been found and New Zealanders going overseas has shown its first sign of slowing down.
The trial was adjourned as the chief executive, a key witness, was overseas.
Both men deny charges of fighting in public; the chief executive also faces a dangerous driving charge.
A Ponsonby chief executive charged over an alleged road rage attack involving a sight-impaired pensioner and a $430,000 supercar is travelling abroad and unavailable to give evidence — delaying his co-accused’s trial.
The wealthy businessman, in his 30s, was supposed to be the Crown’s key witness yesterday whenthe elderly man who is jointly charged with fighting in public arrived for his day in court.
But it emerged the chief executive was travelling overseas, meaning the 74-year-old’s judge-alone trial could not proceed.
The court action stems from an incident in August last year on the Northern Motorway involving the two men.
The pensioner claims he was tailgated by the younger man’s luxury vehicle before being attacked when he pulled over on Highgate Parkway near Silverdale.
He claims he was repeatedly punched and kicked about the head and upper body, his glasses smashed, and that he continues to undergo concussion treatment and suffers PTSD as a result of the attack.
However, the chief executive 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 chief executive — who has interim name suppression — was also charged with dangerous driving.
He will defend the charges at trial later this year. The pensioner and his family were in court yesterday for the start of his scheduled trial.
After it emerged the chief executive was not in the country, the older man’s lawyer, Sam Teppett, asked the court to throw out the case.
The pensioner suffered a likely torn hamstring, scrapes, bruises and suspected concussion after an alleged road rage incident involving a high-performance sports car near Silverdale.
Teppett argued that while the chief executive had been interviewed by police about the altercation, there was no formal witness statement and no evidence to prove the charge against his client.
“No transcript of the interview has been provided [to the defence], which is another failure of the police in terms of providing disclosure.”
Teppett said the prosecution was required to show it had enough evidence to support the basis of a charge.
The court could dismiss a charge if it was satisfied there was no case to answer, Teppett said.
Barrister Sam Teppett says there is insufficient evidence to prove the case against his pensioner client.
“There is not sufficient evidence for the prosecution to prove their case.”
However, police prosecutor Sergeant James Gallagher said it was “premature” to dismiss the pensioner’s charge “at this stage”.
Providing a transcript of the interview was “a courtesy, not a requirement”.
He instead sought an adjournment until the chief executive was back in the country and available to give evidence in person.
While the chief executive was unavailable yesterday, his interview did constitute a formal statement forthe trial, Gallagher said.
“Mr [suppressed] was going to be called to give evidence about what happened that day.
“Mr [suppressed] is not available today. He’s overseas.”
A Justice of the Peace granted the adjournment until the trial could proceed later this year.
The Ponsonby CEO has interim name suppression until his trial later this year at North Shore District Court.
An order was also made suppressing the chief executive’s name until his trial.
The chief executive — who claims he is not that wealthy, has a mortgage on his $2 million home and finance on his car — has argued he would suffer extreme hardship if he was identified in connection with the case.
He claims his business would suffer adverse financial consequences and lose international supply contracts.
In November, a judge told the man the case was of “prurient” public interest because of the expensive vehicle he was driving that day.
“The public who cannot afford such vehicles inevitably have a rather prurient interest in seeing people who have such vehicles” brought before the courts.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
