Youth Court Decisions How to Use Full list of key titles CYPFA section Date

Police v B (5 August 1991) YC, Otahuhu, Harvey DCJ

Name: Police v B
Unreported
File number:
Date: 5 August 1991
Court: Youth Court
Location: Otahuhu
Judge: Harvey DCJ
CYPFA: s2(2); s215
Charge: Burglary
Key Title: Jurisdiction of the Youth Court - Age; Admissibility of statements; Evidence

Summary: Ruling as to admissibility of evidence on grounds of failure to comply with s215 CYPFA. Whether provisions of s215 et seq apply to a 17 year old who is in the Youth Court by virtue of s2(2) CYPFA; whether provisions of s2(2) apply to s215; whether s215 should apply to persons over 17 on the basis of fairness. B (16 at time of offending but now 17) admitted committing multiple burglaries to two Police officers; Police say admissions given voluntarily but B argued they were not and that he had been threatened with arrest and refusal of bail if he did not co-operate; Police evidence preferred. Breach of Rule 4 and Rule 7 of Judges’ Rules; voluntariness and unfairness also argued. Held: Section 2(2) does not extend all the youth justice procedures to a suspect over the age of 17 who was under 17 at the time of the offences; s2(2) enables the YC to have jurisdiction in these circumstances but it does not go so far as to apply the provisions of s215 et seq to this group of offenders; cf. s215(1)(a)-(f). B was only a few days over 17 but CYPFA allows no "grey area" as to the age where YC jurisdiction applies and similarly there is no grey area as to the application of s215. That a person was a few days over 17 could be taken into account in the overall appraisal of the issue of fairness if admissibility challenged.

Decision: Evidence admissible.