Aaron Farmer

Giles Brown at The Press reports:

The mother of a Christchurch man wrongly imprisoned for rape says her anger at the injustice will never fade.

The Ministry of Justice said yesterday it would pay Aaron Farmer $351,575 compensation for spending two years and three months in prison after his conviction in April 2005.

Farmer, 41, who has been diagnosed with autism and other disorders, was released in June 2007 after the Court of Appeal found that his trial lawyer did not present a potential alibi witness.

Although a retrial was ordered, a new method of DNA testing excluded Farmer as a suspect before it could go ahead.

Associate Justice Minister Nathan Guy unreservedly apologised to Farmer yesterday.

“New Zealanders on the whole enjoy a fair and effective criminal justice system. However, the system is not infallible,” he said.

This is a scary case. An innocent man got sent to jail on such flimsy evidence. Even without the DNA evidence, he should never have been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

I suggest people read the report by Hon Robert Fisher QC. It is only 20 pages, but damning. He says:

In summary, it has to be said that even before turning to the various obstalces to the Crown’s case, the positive evidence upon which it relied was remarkably thin. It relied upon nothing more than a visual identification by the Complainant of a kind that is notoriously unreliable and some rather unremarkable coincidences.

Fisher also notes six inconsistencies between the rapist and Farmer. Plus the notoriously unreliable visual identification had the victim say she was only “90% sure it was him”. When did 90% sure become beyond reasonable doubt?

Generally the test for compensation is that on balance of probabilities the person is innocent. Inthis case, Fisher has concluded that Farmer is “innocent beyond reasonable doubt”. This makes it all the more a worry that he was ever found guilty between reasonable doubt.