29 July 2015

MEDIA RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION

Jeremy George Edward McLaughlin v The Queen

(CA752/2013) ([2015] NZCA 339)

PRESS SUMMARY

This summary is provided to assist in the understanding of the Court’s judgment. It does not comprise part of the reasons for that judgment. The full judgment with reasons is the only authoritative document. The full text of the judgment and reasons can be found at Judicial Decisions of Public Interest:

http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/from/decisions/judgments.html

The Court of Appeal (Justice Randerson, Justice French and Justice Cooper) has dismissed an appeal against conviction by Jeremy McLaughlin, who was found guilty of murdering 13 year old Jade Bayliss at her home in Christchurch in 2011.

In a decision released today, the Court of Appeal rejected each of Mr McLaughlin’s grounds for challenging his conviction. First, Mr McLaughlin challenged the use of expert evidence about how his DNA got under Jade’s fingernails. The Court decided that this evidence was properly used by the prosecutor and explained to the jury by the Judge. The jury was entitled to use this scientific evidence as one factor in coming to its decision that Mr McLaughlin was the murderer.

The appeal also challenged warnings that the Judge gave to the jury to assist them when considering what to make of Mr McLaughlin’s lies in a police interview and his refusal to give the police further information. The Court of Appeal decided that any mistake made by the trial Judge did not lead to a miscarriage of justice, because the other evidence the Crown had against Mr McLaughlin was overwhelming. That evidence included extensive CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts of Mr McLaughlin’s movements on the day in question, his admissions that he had been at the Bayliss property twice on the day Jade was murdered (the first time to steal items and the second to set the house on fire) and the existence of only a very narrow window of opportunity for anyone else to have committed the murder.

Finally, Mr McLaughlin argued that the Judge’s summing-up of the case to the jury at the end of trial was unfair. The Court of Appeal disagreed, saying that the summing-up was fairly balanced and that it summarised Mr McLaughlin’s main defences for the jury.

[Full judgment: JeremyGeorgeEdwardMcLaughlinvTheQueenCA7522013.pdf]

© Scoop Media