6 December 2019
By email: [email address]
Tēnā koe Mr Francis
Official Information Act Request
Our Ref: OIA353/1
Further to your recent requests for information, you have made three further
requests for information, which we have treated as requests under the Official
Information Act 1982 (OIA):
According to records held by Crown Law, including information held in the
minds of officials, did the Solicitor General, Una Jagose, inform the
Supreme Court on 14 November 2019 that memory research “wasn’t
science”? Did she subsequently qualify her statement – following
expressions of surprise from the bench – to say that memory research
didn’t provide the same certainty as DNA? Please provide me with a copy
of her comments.
In 2018, at about how many trials involving alleged sexual offending against
children was DNA evidence presented to the court?
Please supply me with the details (including titles and authors’ names) of
research papers regarding child suggestibility or memory that are held by
Crown Law. Please supply details of research papers regarding child
suggestibility or memory which have been accessed by Crown Law since
Peter Ellis’ legal counsel indicated his intention to appeal earlier this year.
All Supreme Court hearings are transcribed, and the transcripts are published on the
Courts of New Zealand website. This request is therefore refused on the basis the
information is, or will soon be, publicly available: OIA, s 18(d).
Crown Law does not keep records of this kind. The request is therefore refused on
the basis the information sought does not exist: OIA, s 18(e).
Level 3 Justice Centre 19 Aitken Street PO Box 2858 DX SP20208 Wel ington 6140 New Zealand
Ph: +64 4 472 1719 Fax: +64 4 473 3482
Crown Law maintains its own library. We will hold a number of different research
papers which may touch on this issue, it is not practicable to provide the details you
have requested. This request is therefore refused on the basis it would require
substantial collation or research: OIA, s 18(f). In accordance with s 18A of the OIA
I have considered whether fixing a charge (to be paid by you) or extending the time
for this response would enable the information to be provided and I have concluded
it would not. Part of the reason for that conclusion is that information about the
material considered by counsel in connection with the Ellis matter would likely be
subject to legal professional privilege and therefore would be withheld in any event.
In accordance with s 19 of the OIA I advise you have a right, by way of complaint to
the Ombudsman under s 28(3) of the OIA, to seek an investigation and review of
Crown Counsel & Team Manager, Criminal Team