Kerre Woodham: Is it time to take a look at our right to silence?

Far North Police say they're being met with a wall of silence nearly two months on from a hit and run that killed an 18 year old dirt bike rider. Jahkani Hamilton was found dead about 10pm between Kaikohe and Moerewa on May 1st. Police say an associate of his was found seriously injured nearby – he'd also been knocked off a dirt bike. Police are being stymied by witnesses and their supporters choosing to say nothing and actively resisting the investigation. They say the silence is hugely frustrating for the police investigators and for the boy's grieving whānau, and that their investigations are being hindered.  

Doesn't this bring to mind the vile Kahui household who closed ranks over the murders of the twins who had the great misfortune to be born into that family? Rationally, intellectually, I know that people have the right to remain silent. Intellectually, they should have the right to remain silent – it's a legal foundation stone. But my heart and my gut says that when somebody, especially a child, has been murdered, lock up any and all of the people withholding information and keep them in a urine-soaked cell until such time as one of the gutless cowards coughs. You can hold two opposing thoughts at the same time. Defence lawyer Steven Lack was on Early Edition this morning. He said it might be infuriating for people who want to see justice for the victims, but the right to silence exists for a reason. 

“It's designed to curb state power from compelling people in the community to provide answers and there will be investigations where there is public outcry about that because it hampers investigations, but in large part it operates to protect citizens.” 

He's right. You can't torture people into coughing up the truth because they will tell you anything —anything you want to hear, not necessarily the truth— to stop you hurting them. And generally, countries around the world accept that torture compelling people to speak doesn't get you the truth. But I think as a country we are sick and tired of people closing ranks, staying shtum, and letting the brutal, callous murder of an innocent go unpunished. Somebody's guilty. There were only so many people within a house. I mean, we've seen it time and time again – the Kahuis are probably the most egregious example and the one seared into the public consciousness. But you know one of those unholy lot were responsible for the utterly brutal murders of these children. You know somebody drove into the 18 year old boy and killed him and seriously injured his mate. There were witnesses in this case. To actively hinder an investigation, to refuse to divulge information allows the death to go unpunished and the guilty to walk free.  

I know Blackstone's ratio says that it's better that nine guilty men go unpunished than one innocent man is jailed. I'm not entirely sure. That was a philosophy from 1760 – does it still work in the year 2026? Yes, the right to silence is enshrined in our Bill of Rights, but rights are not absolute. They are subject to reasonable limits prescribed by law, provided those limits can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. They're designed to protect us, that the State cannot compel us to talk. I think most of us would be quite happy to talk if we saw a crime being committed. If we knew that somebody had been murdered, even if it was a member of our family. We have seen family members do the right thing and dob in a child who has committed murder because that is wrong.  

The right to silence may well be a legal right but the right to live a life without being murdered surely trumps that? The right to be free and unimpeded and not have your life snuffed out by a violent, callous, evil human surely trumps the right to silence. Is it time to have another look at this? I mean, really. There are ways of modifying it. There are ways of still allowing people their legal rights without necessarily putting them in the cone of silence and protecting them. I'm just so sick of it. Anybody who's lived long enough will have seen it time and time and time again. I hate to think how many murderers there are walking amongst us because nobody had the courage within that family, within the household, to do the right thing and it's going to happen again. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Carrywood and Morning's podcast from News Talks.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
Head Be Far North police say they're being met with
a wall of silence nearly two months on from a
hidden run that killed an eighteen year old dirt bike rider.
Jaikarne Hamilton was found dead about ten past eleven between
Kaikohe and Moureua late on May the fifth. Police say

(00:32):
an associate of his was found seriously injured nearby. He
had also been knocked off a dirt bike. Police are
being stymied by witnesses and their supporters choosing to say
nothing and actively resisting the investigation. They say the silence

(00:53):
is hugely frustrating for the police investigators and for the
boy's grieving Farno, and that their investigations are being hindered.
Doesn't this bring to mind the vile Cahoe household who
closed ranks over the murders of the twins who had
the great misfortune to be born into that family. Rationally, intellectually,

(01:20):
I know that people have the right to remain silent.
Intellectually they should have the right to remain silent. It's
a legal foundation stone. But my heart and my gut
says that when somebody, especially a child, has been murdered,

(01:41):
lock up any and all of the people withholding information
and keep them in a urine soaked sell until such
time as one of the gutless cowards coughs. You can
hold two opposing thoughts at the same time. Defense lawyer
Stepennlak was on early edition this morning. He said it
might be infuriating for people who want to see justice

(02:03):
for the victims, but the right to say violence exists
for a reason.

Speaker 3 (02:08):
It's designed to curb state power from compelling people in
the community to provide answers. And there will be investigations
where there is public outcry about that because it hampers investigations,
but in large part it operates to protect citizens.

Speaker 2 (02:22):
It was defense Lily Stephen that talking on Earlieredition this morning,
and he's right, But I mean, you can't torture people
into saying you're coughing up the truth, because they will
tell you anything anything you want to hear, not necessarily
the truth, to stop you hurting them. And generally countries

(02:47):
around the world accept that that torture compelling people to
speak doesn't get you the truth. But I think as
a country we are sick and tired of people closing
ranks stangstrom and letting the brutal, callous murder of an

(03:14):
innocent go unpunished. Somebody's guilty. There were only so many
people within a house, so I mean, we've seen it
time and time again. The Kahuis are probably the most
egregious example, and the ones see it into the public consciousness.
But you know, one of those unholy lot were responsible

(03:37):
for them utterly brutal murders of these children. You know,
somebody drove into the eighteen year old boy and killed
him and seriously injured his mate. There were witnesses in
this case. To actively hinder an investigation, to refuse to

(04:01):
divulge information allows the death to go unpunished and the
guilty to walk free. I know Blackstone's ratio says that
it's better that nine guilty men go unpunished than one
innocent man is jailed. I'm not entirely sure. I mean,
that was a that was a philosophy from seventeen sixty.

(04:28):
Does it still work in the year twenty twenty six?
You know, yes, the right to silence is enshrined in
our Bill of Rights, but rights are not absolute. They
are subject to reasonable limits prescribed by law, provided those
limits can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

(04:53):
So they're designed to protect us that the state cannot
compel us to talk. I think most of us would
be quite happy to talk if we saw a crime
ban committed, if we knew that somebody had been murdered,
even if it was a member of our family. We
have seen family members do the right thing and dobb

(05:16):
in a child who has committed murder because that is wrong.
You know, the right to silence may well be a
legal right. The right to live a life without being murdered,
surely trumps that. The right to be free and unimpeded

(05:39):
and not have your life snuffed out by a violent, callous,
evil human surely trumps the right to silence. Is a
time to have another look at this, I mean, really,
there are ways of modifying it. There are ways of
There are ways of still allowing people their legal rights

(06:04):
without necessarily putting them in the cone of silence and
protecting them. I'm just so sick of it. Anybody who's
lived long enough will have seen it time and time
and time again. I hate to think how many murderers

(06:25):
there are walking amongst us because nobody had the courage
within that family, within the household to do the right thing.
And it's going to happen again.

Speaker 1 (06:36):
For more from carry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.