Judge grills new deputy over court timekeeping

By RUTH BERRY political reporter

New National deputy leader Nick Smith was grilled by a judge yesterday for trying to blame the district court for his failure to turn up to a case he was taking against Child, Youth and Family.

In a major embarrassment for the new deputy, he was forced to admit that a press statement he had issued in April claiming the court had advised him to turn up at a different time was incorrect and he had got the time wrong.

He also failed in his application to get the court to rehear the private prosecution which he launched against CYF chief executive Jackie Pivac in July last year and has been campaigning on since.

Judge Geoffrey Ellis also challenged Dr Smith about inconsistencies in affidavits presented by Dr Smith and his secretary, Rebecca Barclay.

The MP blamed "confusion" within his office on the mix-ups - but only managed to sow further confusion with some of his answers.

Dr Smith issued the statement to defend himself against another by Social Services and Employment Minister Steve Maharey who accused him of "failing to front in his own political charade".

Dr Smith was to appear in the court on April 16 to try to have Ms Pivac charged, through a private prosecution, with failing to ensure a 14-year-old Nelson youth in CYF care attended school.

Dr Smith was at an earlier court fixture when the 10am time was set.

His press release said "My office was advised by the district court by telephone this morning that the case was to be heard at 10.30am, so I arrived at that time. I was then told the case had been called at 10am.

"A court official apologised if there had been confusion, and invited me to apply for a rehearing which I will be doing."

Judge Ellis asked how this could be the case when "I have a sworn statement that says exactly the opposite".

That statement was from Ms Barclay saying, while she had phoned the court to check the time, she had not heard back from the court at all. Dr Smith agreed the court had not called back and "the press statement was incorrect that I issued at the time".

Judge Ellis asked why Ms Barclay's affidavit said Dr Smith's diary said the hearing was at 10am and Dr Smith's affidavit said it was at 10.30am.

Dr Smith said his secretary had changed the diary entry to 10.30 after misinterpreting a question from him.

He hadn't looked at the diary until after the change, which explained the different times in the affidavits.

Judge Ellis said: "I'm struggling to understand how the confusion arose. You had correctly entered it at 10am. That entrance has been there for more than a month. Half an hour before you suggest it's a different time. Why?"

"Somehow I had mistaken it in my head for 10.30," Dr Smith said.

Dr Smith said when he saw the 10.30 entry he assumed his secretary had had the time confirmed by the court, and issued the press release on that basis.

Dr Smith did not tell the court why Ms Barclay tried to check the time, if she had mistakenly believed, as asserted, his question was a statement of fact.

He later said he had told Ms Barclay:"I'm pretty sure it's 10.30, but check with the court".

The affidavits had been written weeks after the missed hearing, he said.

Judge Ellis said the judge at the April hearing was entitled to throw out the case if the informant failed to show and he had no jurisdiction to overturn that decision.