KEY POINTS:
A mentally disordered man convicted of rape after representing himself at trial has had his convictions set aside and a new trial ordered.
The appeal by Jason John Cumming, of Christchurch, was granted by the Supreme Court in a decision released today.
Cumming claimed there had been a miscarriage of justice during his High Court trial in 2002 because he defended himself.
During the trial he spent hours questioning the alleged victim, who collapsed at the end and needed medical treatment.
The cross-examination outraged victims' right advocates and the law since been changed so that a defendant can no longer personally cross-examine an alleged victim.
The woman, aged 16 at the time of the alleged abduction in October 2001, said Cumming had forced her to stay naked at his Riccarton flat, sexually violated her repeatedly, chained her, beat her, and burned her with a cigarette.
She escaped while they were out driving.
Cumming was found guilty of rape, sexual violation, abduction for sex, assault with a weapon and two of assaulting a female.
He was given preventive detention and a minimum non-parole period of 7-1/2 years.
Having fallen out with four lawyers early in the case, Cumming represented himself at the nine-day trial, at times causing the jury to laugh openly at him.
"Mr Cumming defended himself in a way that was extremely aberrant and self-damaging," the Supreme Court said.
When the jury realised Cumming was not being deliberately humorous, they became "greatly troubled" by the way he ran his defence, prompting them to send a note to the judge.
"Sir, How come this is a fair trial? At least some of us are seriously troubled to be asked to make decisions from such a lop-sided presentation, especially given the high stakes."
When summing up the judge responded to the note, telling the jury essentially that Cumming had the right to defend himself, that he had lawyers acting for him earlier and they must decide the case on the evidence.
Cumming had paranoid delusions, an intellectual disability, attention deficit disorder and was not on medication during the trial.
The Supreme Court said it was satisfied that throughout the trial, Cumming was severely mentally disordered.
He was therefore unfit to stand trial and there had been a substantial miscarriage of justice, it said.
It set aside his convictions and ordered a new trial.
Whether a retrial occurred may, however, be affected by inquiries into whether Cumming is fit to stand trial under current legislation.
- NZPA
