Watson has always denied killing the pair after a New Year’s party at Furneaux Lodge, but was convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 2000. He remains in a Christchurch jail, having been denied parole four times.
In June 2020, Watson’s case was sent back to the Court of Appeal by the Governor-General, following advice from retired High Court judge Sir Graham Panckhurst.
Panckhurst pointed to concerns with DNA testing of two crucial hairs, which the police and Crown said came from Hope and were found on Watson’s yacht.
In May 2022, the Court of Appeal ruled Watson could also challenge vital eyewitness identification evidence during his appeal.
This related to identification by water taxi driver Guy Wallace of Watson being the mystery man he delivered to a yacht moored off Furneaux Lodge, along with Hope and Smart.
Scott Watson, who has spent nearly 25 years in prison for a crime he insists he didn’t commit.
Wallace initially didn’t pick out Watson as the mystery man when shown photos of him, but later, when a new photo of Watson caught mid-blink was included in a police photo montage, Wallace said Watson resembled the mystery man because of his hooded eyes.
However, Wallace later said he had been tricked into identifying Watson, and after his trial, insisted Watson wasn’t the mystery man he saw with Hope and Smart. Wallace died by suicide in March 2021.
Following the decision to include this new ground of appeal, Watson’s hearing was delayed until May this year.
However, after an application by Watson’s legal team, the Court of Appeal has now further adjourned the week-long hearing until June, 2024 – four years after Watson’s case was sent back to the Court.
One of Watson’s lawyers, Nick Chisnall, KC, said preparing the necessary material for the appeal was “a massive task”.
“We are, of course, aware of the length of time it’s taken to bring the case to a hearing,” Chisnall said.
“However, Mr Watson only gets one opportunity to do this, and it needs to be done right, and it’s important that we have the best evidence available.”
Chisnall said part of the reason for the delay was the need to consult with international experts regarding both the DNA testing and the witness identification evidence.
Finding another five-day window in the Court of Appeal’s schedule had meant the case being pushed out until next year.
The adjournment in Watson’s case comes at the same time as the appeal in another of the country’s most controversial murder convictions has also been further postponed.
David Tamihere was convicted of murdering Swedish backpackers Heidi Paakkonen and Urban Hoglin in 1989.
He served 20 years in prison, but always insisted he didn’t kill the couple.
In April 2020, Tamihere was granted a further appeal after a crucial witness at his trial was found to have lied about Tamihere confessing to the crime.
Jailhouse snitch Roberto Conchie Harris was subsequently convicted on eight charges of perjury for his testimony at Tamihere’s trial, undermining the Crown argument that Tamihere was guilty.
However, the Crown then sought to re-test numerous items of evidence from the case, using updated DNA techniques, which delayed Tamihere’s appeal being heard.
This testing, some of which has been conducted in America, was still ongoing this year.
Due to concerns the DNA testing would not be completed by the time of Tamihere’s appeal in July, and a view that more than one day was needed to hear the arguments, the Court of Appeal has now adjourned the hearing until November 28 and 29 this year."
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.”
------------------------------------------------------------------
