Pre-trial — admissibility — possession of objectionable publication — adult pornography — child pornography — "no comment" answers — reserved judgment — ss 7, 8, 32 Evidence Act — Snell-Scasbrook v R [2015] NZCA 195, at [9]. Two pre-trial admissibility issues arose in the case of the defendant facing charges of unlawful possession of objectionable publications, namely child exploitation images. The two issues for the court were: 1. Should the adult pornography and a “small bondage kit” discovered in the defendant's possession be excluded as evidence in his trial for the charges of possession of objectionable publications, namely child exploitation images? 2. Should the defendant’s “no comment” answers, and the Police questions which the defendant responded to as such, be omitted from the DVD interview for the purposes of the trial? In relation to the first issue the court relied on Snell-Scasbrook and the Evidence Act, and these two documents support exclusion. The adult pornography was irrelevant to the charges and of no probative value. To include the adult pornography as evidence would result in unfairly prejudicing the defendant. Furthermore the court noted that "there is a distinct difference between the possession of adult pornography and the alleged possession of child exploitive images depicting under-aged girls in compromising positions or sexual activity". In relation to the second issue the court noted that "section 32 stipulates the fact-finder, trial judge or jury, is not to draw an inference of guilt from a defendant’s silence before trial. Given there are few occasions during a lengthy interview that [the defendant] said he had no comment I see no reason to exclude them as s 32 applies". Therefore the comments were admissible. Judgment Date: 19 February 2018