Supreme Court reserves first decision

Justices of the Supreme Court have reserved their decision over whether to allow a man convicted of drugging and sexually assaulting women to appeal against his convictions.

The court, which now replaces the Privy Council as the last avenue for appeals for New Zealand cases, was told Pourshad Marco Arvand, 36, had not had a fair trial.

Arvand was convicted in the High Court at Rotorua after being found guilty last March of 20 charges that included stupefying, sexually violating, indecently assaulting and kidnapping Asian women.

The Court of Appeal last October dismissed all but one of seven grounds of appeal lodged.

It upheld one appeal involving a young Japanese woman who did not return to New Zealand for the trial and whose evidence at depositions was unclear because of problems with a translator.

The appeal court also reduced his sentence from 17 to 13 years' jail.

Yesterday defence lawyer Bill Lawson argued Arvand's right to a fair trial had been affected by Justice Potter's decision to allow Crown evidence given to the defence only three days before it started.

Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias and Justice Tipping were told that "extremely complex technical information" about the drug valium was given to the defence just before the trial.

Justice Tipping said the short notice "seemed extreme".

Crown lawyer John Pike accepted the notice was very short but said no different position would have been reached if the defence had had longer.

Mr Lawson said other factors also made the trial unfair.

A witness statement which he said a police officer partly completed had been used at trial and also a witness statement that the Court of Appeal decided was inadmissible was used to back up another witness' statement.

Mr Pike said the case was an attempt to have a second Court of Appeal hearing. He said "repetition of glaringly similar fact evidence" overcame concerns about the witness' statement. Also the fact she was found by police in such a drugged state she could not dress herself added weight to her statement she did not consent.

The justices told the court they would take time to make their decision on whether to grant Arvand leave to appeal against the conviction.

If the application is successful it could be another eight weeks before it goes to a full hearing.

- NZPA