Kahui case: 25k reward offered

TVNZ One News 25 July 2012 
Family First is offering a $25,000 reward for any new information that leads to a conviction in the case of the Kahui twins’ deaths. Coroner Garry Evans says he is satisfied that the traumatic brain injuries suffered by three-month-old boys Chris and Cru Kahui were incurred during the afternoon-evening of June 12, 2006, while they were in the “sole custody, care and control of their father” Chris Kahui at the Mangere house where they lived. Chris Kahui was acquitted of the twins’ murders in 2008. The National Director of Family First Bob McCoskrie said it is hoped the reward will be enough incentive for somebody to break their silence. McCoskrie said somebody must know what happened. “This should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet,” he said. “New Zealanders want answers to this case – who killed the twins, why did the prosecution fail, and what were the contributing factors to these murders that need to be tackled to avoid similar cases in the future?” He said a reward will be a small price to pay for justice to be served for Chris and Cru. Kahui’s defence claimed that the twins’ mother Macsyna King was responsible for the deaths, but she denied this at his trial and at the coroner’s inquest last year. Evans said in his report released today that the allegation that King was responsible for the infliction of the twins’ fatal injuries “lies unsupported by the evidence and is without substance in fact”. 
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/kahui-case-25k-reward-offered-4985743 

MORE DETAILS http://familyfirst.org.nz/issues/kahui-case-reward/ 
(Offer originally made in 2010)

Share

2 comments for “Kahui case: 25k reward offered

  1. 25 July 2012 at 12:00 am

    This strikes me as an exceedingly poor idea.

    I encourage you to read this Fairfax article:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/465145

    and this piece by Steven Price in response:
    http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=119

    In the Foreman case, the defence was able to use the promised reward to completely discredit the prosecution witness, leading to an acquittal. Steven (an expert in media law and contempt of court) argues that the reward itself was a contempt of court. I tend to agree. A reward for information leading to an arrest *may* be less problematic, but a reward for a conviction is a really really bad idea. I strongly urge you to reconsider.

    That said, I would note that there is zero prospect of Chris Kahui being tried again for the murder under any circumstance (short of Parliament passing a retrospective law change allowing it), so this probably isn’t all that likely to actually come up.

  2. Bob
    25 July 2012 at 3:15 am

    You’ve quoted just one case – and a problematic case at that, in a number of ways

    Yet the police have offered rewards a number of times

    This reward was discussed with the police prior to being publicized

    Although, by the way, it’s not a new offer. Was originally made in 2010

    Media have just reminded people of it 🙂

Comments are closed.