Latest News
Double murderer Mark Lundy up for second chance at parole
Convicted murderer Mark Lundy will find out tomorrow if he will be released from jail – 23 years after he bludgeoned his wife and seven-year-old daughter to death.
Lundy, who maintains his innocence, has served 21 years behind bars for the double homicide of his wife Christine and daughter Amber at their Palmerston North home in 2000.
On Thursday, he will appear before the Parole Board to see if he is eligible for release. The hearing comes after he first appeared last August and told board members he was an innocent man.
The board declined his release on the basis it had considerable concern about the lack of a safety plan for his life outside prison walls.
Part of that plan, Lundy told the board, was to make boutique pōhutukawa clocks that he could sell for around $200 after discovering an affinity for woodworking as an inmate.
He would also like to start attending services at an Anglican church, do carpentry with a charity and be able to visit the graves of his family.
Last year his lawyer, Julie-Anne Kincade KC, said Lundy would not be a risk to the community because he had exhibited good behaviour behind bars, had no previous history of violence, a low statistical risk of re-offending score, a low future risk of violence score and letters of support from friends and family.
The board asked Lundy whether he had completed a safety plan. He said it was difficult to put together a safety plan for how to rejoin society as an offender when he had not done anything wrong.
“If I had committed the offence, I would’ve pled guilty and I would’ve been out a long time ago,” he said, adding that he could have been eligible for parole five to eight years ago.
“But I have vehemently denied the offending because I did not do it … and there is nothing I can say to alleviate that for you.”
The board said this was a moot point as him being granted parole would have depended on the decisions of earlier parole boards.
At his last hearing, Lundy told the board he wanted to return to Manawatū to visit the graves of his family.
“I would like to go to the cemetery to see my parents and my girls, but that would be purely at the approval of my probation officer,” he said.
Lundy’s case manager told the board they had not worked on a safety plan for his release because he was still in “denial” about the murders.
The board said people often do their own safety plans, alleging Lundy would have seen other people’s plans over the years.
Lundy said he had never read one.
(From left); Christine Lundy, Mark Lundy and Amber Lundy, pictured on September 1, 2000. Photo: SUPPLIED
“I know they have them and those people all have triggers for their offending. I have not offended, so there are no triggers for me… that I’m aware of,” he said.
“So, to the best of my knowledge, a safety plan is based around those triggers and how to avoid them. So I could not work out how to actually do a safety plan as such.”
Conviction and appeal
It has been 21 years since Mark Lundy took his case to the Court of Appeal, with the hope it would overturn his conviction of murdering his wife and daughter.
The Crown argued he travelled home from a business trip to Petone and back in one evening to murder his family.
Lundy was convicted in March 2002. After an unsuccessful appeal in August of that year, his non-parole period increased from 17 to 20 years.
Another appeal to the Privy Council in 2013 predicated on the time of the victims’ deaths, the presence of organic tissue on Lundy’s shirt and the time Christine’s computer was turned off resulted in his convictions being overturned for a second trial.
The retrial in 2015 expanded the window for the time of death to 14 hours, with the Crown alleging Lundy may have returned to Palmerston North early in the morning to murder his family.
Evidence that placed the killings in the early evening was used in the Crown’s case this time. This included the barely digested McDonald’s meals in the victims’ stomachs and the testimony of a self-described psychic who said she saw a fat person in a blond curly wig running away from the area at 7pm on that Tuesday night.
Lundy was found guilty of both murders once more, and he returned to prison.
An appeal of his second conviction was launched to the Court of Appeal in October 2017, but was dismissed a year later. A concurrent appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed at the end of that same year.
Te Kāhui Tātari Ture – also known as the Criminal Cases Review Commission – is investigating an application for a review of the case, after which it will decide whether to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal.
* This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald.
VIA RNZ
The chief executive of the Parliamentary Service is confident there will be enough room to accommodate the increased number of MPs and their staff coming into Parliament.
On current numbers, up to 131 MPs could be sitting in the Chamber following the election, brought on by a record overhang result.
Clerk of the House of Representatives Dr David Wilson told the Spinoff that currently the debating chamber had enough chairs to seat 124 MPs – including the Speaker of the House – and work was being done to accommodate more by altering the seating arrangement.
In a statement, Parliamentary Service chief executive Rafael Gonzalez-Montero said planning for a larger Parliament had been going for “some time”.
“Now that the election results have confirmed an increase to the number of members we are looking at several options.
“We are confident we will be able to accommodate all members within the Chamber.”
VNP / Phil Smith
Gonzalez-Montero said office accommodation for members and their staff would be “stretched” for a short time, but the new Members’ Building was only a few months away from “practical completion”.
That building – located behind Parliament – was due to be ready to occupy in April next year and had capacity to accommodate around 30 backbench MPs.
“All members should be in fit-for-purpose accommodation from that point,” Gonzalez-Montero said.
Following the 2023 election, 123 MPs sat in the Chamber – a record number at the time. That decreased to 122 following the resignation of National MP Judith Collins.
Collins held the seat of Papakura and stepped down in May and Parliament voted against holding a by-election because it was too close to the election.
The election result also meant high-ranking National Party MPs like Chris Bishop, Paul Goldsmith, Nicola Willis and Gerry Brownlee – Speaker of the House and an MP for 30 years – would likely not make it back into Parliament.
Only resigning or retiring MPs were permitted to give a valedictory speech meaning none of them would get the chance to give a valedictory statement.
Asked if their would be special allowances for valedictories, Wilson said in a statement that normally only MPs were allowed to speak in the House but the House could suspend its own rules or temporarily alter them.
“It could do so to allow former members to address the House.”
Wilson said no such arrangements could be made until the next Parliament opened and members sworn in.
rnz
Police say person who fired gun at officers still at large
New Zealand sides named for RLWC finals
Parliamentary Service working on extra chairs and offices for increased number of MPs
-
Latest News2 months ago‘Chilling’: Business groups speak out against National’s supermarket break-up plan
-
NZ News2 months agoTom Phillips report: The missed opportunities to find the children
-
Latest News2 months agoCars bearing Chinese police markings stir unease in Auckland
-
Politics2 months agoNational vows to try to split Pak’nSave and New World
-
Fiji News2 months agoPlans to have new Constitution by Dec 24th 2026
-
NZ News2 months agoCop who stole $68,000 can now be named as champion Muay Thai fighter Haimona Tamati-Te Paki
-
Politics2 months agoMBIE confirms botched biometric projects costs blown out to $50.7 million
-
Latest News2 months agoFive Karangahape Road venues lose their liquor licences after police intervention