KEY POINTS:
A historic sex abuse trial scheduled to begin in the High Court at Christchurch yesterday has been granted a permanent stay because of the four years it has taken to get before a jury.
The stay was granted on Tuesday by Justice Graham Panckhurst and the jury panel
was stood down.
The reasons and the detailed suppression orders were issued in a written decision late yesterday.
The accused man, now aged 68, has suppression of name, address and identifying particulars. He has been living in Australia.
His defence counsel, Pip Hall, said in Monday's legal argument that the delay of more than four years since the man was told of the investigation in 2003 was "gross".
Justice Panckhurst said: "I am satisfied that the accused has suffered considerable personal detriments over and above those to be expected had his case been tried within a reasonable period.
"Are these detriments sufficient to justify the remedy of a stay? I consider that they are, once the case is assessed in general."
The man was employed at a Christchurch school, where he was accused of indecencies with schoolboys from 1967 to the 1970s. The complainants alleged touching had taken place.
Justice Panckhurst noted that the complainants had received not inconsiderable sums as compensation from the man's employer.
The man had lived, and worked, with the charges hanging over him for more than four years. His health had been affected and he was now on medication for hypertension.
In anticipation of the start of the trial he recently retired from a nursing position in Australia. This early retirement meant that a long service payment was lost.
With the trial pending, the accused considered he could not apply for Australian residency, which may affect his pension entitlements in retirement.
He stated: "The uncertainty surrounding these factors has made it impossible to plan rationally for retirement."
His statement also referred to the cost of legal representation which has been considerable.
Justice Panckhurst also referred to difficulties caused by the non-availability of a witness, who was ill in Australia, and the need for another to give evidence at the trial by video-link because she was not willing to travel from Australia.
"Viewing matters in the round, I am in no doubt that a stay of prosecution is the only appropriate and proportionate remedy in this instance."
THE CASE
* The man was employed at a Christchurch school from 1967 to the 1970s.
* He was accused of committing indecencies on schoolboys, who have been paid compensation.
* A judge has stayed the case - meaning it will not go ahead - because of the length of time it has taken to get to court.
- NZPA
