Mock TV trial ‘hard on jurors

A mock trial of convicted double murderer Mark Lundy on TV3 last night is unfair on real-life jurors in the case, says the president of the New Zealand Bar Association.

Jim Farmer, whose association represents barristers practising outside law firms, said the TV trial was misleading and short of the full story.

Lundy was convicted of bludgeoning to death his wife, Christine, and their 7-year-old daughter, Amber, in their Palmerston North home in August 2000. He is serving a 20-year non-parole jail term.

The documentary, Inside New Zealand, What's Your Verdict? - Mark Lundy, assembled 12 people and presented them with evidence for and against Lundy. Only three thought he was guilty.

"This does nothing to engender confidence in the judicial system and in the decisions made by juries and judges," Mr Farmer said.

The mock jury did not have the benefit of hearing the trial witnesses - including Lundy himself - give their evidence live.

Part of the process of deciding guilt or otherwise was for jurors to assess evidence by watching the demeanour and body language of witnesses, Mr Farmer said.

"The evidence alone does not give the full story. If you do get a different result, I think it is reflecting very unfairly on the jury who did decide that actual case under those different conditions."

The TV programme would be of no use to any legal avenues Lundy was pursuing with his supporters.

"But it will serve to whip up a degree of dissatisfaction with the public, because the conclusion viewers will be asked to draw is that he suffered an injustice in the courts."

The mock trial show was presented by Wellington criminal defence lawyer Greg King, who has represented two other men who claim to have been wrongly convicted of double murders - John Barlow and Scott Watson.

"This was really an expose of jury dynamics ... the Lundy case is simply the vehicle in which this is being explored," Mr King told National Radio yesterday.

"This isn't about trying to prove Lundy's innocence ... it is about how a group of people come together and work when they're faced with difficult decisions."

Mr King declined to give his own opinion on Lundy's guilt and said he was non-partisan.

One of the "jurors" in the mock trial show, made by Gibson Group, said she answered an advertisement last year for people to be in a mock trial experiment.

The 29-year-old, who did not want to be named, said the mock trial was filmed over one day last October in a Wellington motel. She was one of the three who thought Lundy was guilty.

The 12 people selected, who were not paid and "of a good ethnic mix", had no idea the trial was the Lundy case until it began.

"It was six weeks of evidence distilled into one day and we were seated around a table the whole time while they presented us with the facts," she said.

The atmosphere was very serious, although the mock jury had none of the real-life pressures of the actual Lundy jurors, she said.

"I take my hat off to them. It wasn't an open-and-shut case and we were asked to reach a verdict based on reasonable doubt."

The woman said seeing witnesses' live body language would have made a difference.

Christine Lundy's brother, Glen Weggery, said last week the family still believed the right man was in jail, but was upset the issue had been rehashed. It is understood Lundy did not want the documentary to go ahead.

- NZPA