A Blenheim man who murdered his wife with a hatchet more than a decade ago has lost another bid for release from prison.
John Frederick Ericson was convicted of his wife's murder in April 2000 and sentenced to life in prison after admitting the charge.
In July 1999 he struck his wife Sandra in the back of the head 22 times with a hatchet while she slept.
He phoned police after the attack and admitted killing his wife, but later claimed he had no memory of it.
Ericson has been denied parole multiple times and in 2010 asked for a royal pardon.
On February 17 he appeared in the High Court at Wellington and applied for release from prison, arguing he was being held illegally because not all evidence was released to his defence team before he made his plea.
Justice Denis Clifford declined the application on the day, and a written decision outlining the reasons was released on Monday.
Ericson's application was based on habeas corpus which is a legal action through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention because of a lack of sufficient cause or evidence.
Ericson made the application because he believed the Crown had not provided full disclosure to him and his defence counsel before he pleaded guilty.
He outlined four statements and reports which he had obtained after his conviction which were two statements to police, a report by a clinical psychologist and blood tests taken while he was detained at Sunnyside Hospital after the killing.
Withholding the documents was a basis to challenge the guilty plea and conviction, Ericson argued.
All the documents relate to what Ericson believed showed the effects of medication he had taken the day he killed his wife.
Justice Clifford denied the application because it was a challenge to his conviction, not his unlawful detention. While this application was declined, Justice Clifford told Ericson he could apply to the Court of Appeal to appeal the conviction on the grounds of non-disclosure.
The decision says Ericson raised other issues during the application which did not relate to the non-disclosure, including the destruction of blood taken from him without him being given the chance to have the blood analysed.
The axe which the Crown believed was used in the killing had also been destroyed.
- The Marlborough Express SIMON WONG
No comments:
Post a Comment