TV show prejudices upcoming trial: Rewa lawyer

Media coverage of Teina Pora’s wrongful conviction and imprisonment for the murder of Susan Burdett, including a telemovie, has potentially contaminated a third trial for Malcolm Rewa, says his lawyer.

Rewa, a serial rapist who was sentenced to preventative detention for raping Burdett and 24 other women, has again been charged with the Auckland woman’s murder.

A third trial has been scheduled for next year, however, yesterday in the High Court at Auckland, Rewa’s lawyer Paul Chambers argued too much time has passed and “the prejudicial qualities” of past media publications would prevent a fair trial for his client.

Chambers is asking Justice Geoffrey Venning, the Chief High Court Judge, to dismiss the charge and apply a permanent stay of proceedings.

“There is sufficient prejudice, sufficient hostility, sufficient time to make a fair trial impossible for the defendant,” Chambers argued.

Rewa maintains he did not murder Burdett.

Chambers said a dramatised 90-minute television film about Pora’s case, In Dark Places, which played on TVNZ 1 last Sunday, added to the prejudicial publicity of the wellknown case.

In Dark Places has been entered as evidence in the proceedings, with Justice Venning having seen the film along with more than 240,000 other people, South Pacific Pictures says.

The film, Chambers told the court, depicts Rewa hiding in a closet before Burdett’s murder. A similar rape is foreshadowed later in the movie.

“Nothing is portrayed for balance,” Chambers said. “With the release of the film, Mr Rewa cannot get a fair trial.”

Crown prosecutor Gareth Kayes said “publicity alone is certainly not going to win the day for [Rewa]”.

The film, Kayes said, carried an artistic licence and focused on Pora rather than Rewa. He added the movie would be taken down from TVNZ’s online platform in 10 days’ time — six months before the trial.

Police have yet to talk to all potential Crown witnesses, but have spoken to some of the “key witnesses”, Kayes said.

He said the Crown had “strong, compelling evidence that the accused is guilty”. He said there was no specific prejudice caused from the passing of time since the killing.