Rob Nicol: Rugby Players' Association CEO on the discharge without conviction of Sevu Reece

There’s confidence All Black Sevu Reece was not given special treatment after charges against him ended in a discharge without conviction. 

The 27-year-old Crusader crashed a car into a garage door after being asked to leave the post-Christchurch Cup Day party last year. 

Reece initially pleaded not guilty before admitting a reduced charge of wilful damage yesterday. 

Rugby Players' Association chief executive Rob Nicol told Mike Hosking we have to trust the judicial system. 

He says anyone with a high profile is held to account when police are involved, as there's pressure on officers to get it right. 

Reece was granted a discharge without conviction in 2018 after he admitted a single charge of common assault following an incident involving his then-partner.  

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
No, you would have seen sever rees yesterday of cause.
Very apologetic, having been discharged without conviction following a post
Cup Day party. He was initially facing a couple of
charges of intentional damage taking a card dishonestly without claim.
One charge was dropped. In New Zealand, Planers Association boss
Rob Nichols with this morning.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
Good body of mine.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
I think it's important to point out, isn't it. In
this case the judge said anyone would have been treated
the same way, so he didn't get a special deal
because of who he is.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
Yeah, and look, at some point we've all got to
step back and trust judicial system. But it is interesting
whether it's a rugby player or another person with a
high profile, as they're involved in an incident that ultimately
needs police tour intervene. You know, there's an intensity and
scrutiny on the police to get it right. So that
tends to mean that they're definitely how to account and
put before the courts when they do go before the courts.

(00:49):
Because of the attention, we find the courts are pretty
good about name suppression. To allow people to gather themselves,
get me good advice, take stock of the situation and
then as the process goes on, as a very high
threshold put against people with profile, and for them to
get a discharge without conviction, they have to demonstrate a
lot to the court, probably more than a normal person.
But that's part of the package.

Speaker 1 (01:11):
Do you argue with these guys that if they ever
end up in the situation he did, that you don't
chase down name suppression in other words, try to hide
from it. Is there an instruction there or not?

Speaker 2 (01:20):
There's no instruction. I mean, it's very much about the
individual person getting their own legal advice. But by and
large our approach to be perfectly honest is normally heavy
stuffed up here or not, because if you did our
expectation as you own it, and in owning it, yes,
you've got to get your advice and initial name suppression,

(01:42):
which the courts are pretty good at granting, just because
of the media scrutiny not just on the person of
profile that's involved, but also on the victim or complainants
in these situations. You know, often when these things come
before the courts, everyone needs a bit of time to
gather themselves, and having the whole country in some cases
the world aware of it doesn't help anyone. So the
courts are pretty good about that side of it. But

(02:04):
we're very much about if you didn't do it, and
you're going to defend, then fair call. But if you
did do it, you know the way in which you
approach it, the way you own the situation, the way
you demonstrate to everyone, including the victims and complaints, that
you have recognized your stuffed up and you take positive steps.
And if the court sees that, that tends to help.
But it doesn't matter whether you're a personal profile or not.

(02:26):
But I tell you what, discharge without conviction. But you're
still all over the TV, You're all over the media.
I don't think there's a person in the country that
won't know what's taking place here and that that brings
a level of accountability on their actions. You know, Sevu's
stopped drinking, he's taken a lot of steps and shown
actually really good growth over the last year and a half.

(02:47):
So whilst they have a lot of empathy for the
victims in the situation, it's also actually a good thing
for him in terms of the steps he's taken. And
I guess that's what we want from a judicial system, right.

Speaker 1 (02:57):
I think so Okay, I appreciate it. Rob Nickol out
of the Plaza says yes.

Speaker 2 (03:00):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
News Talks at B from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio