Severance of charges — mode of giving evidence — DVD interview — giving evidence by CCTV — application for copy of DVD interview — Evidence Act 2006, ss 105 & 107. The defendant faced charges of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, and threatening to do grievous bodily harm. The charges arose from two incidents and the complainant in each case was the defendant's former partner, with whom she had a young son. The son was present during the first incident, when the defendant was alleged to have stabbed the complainant in the neck with a tent peg. The son was interviewed at the scene by a police constable and again at the offices of Oranga Tamariki 11 days later, the second interview being recorded on DVD. In this pretrial matter the Crown sought an order that at trial the DVD would serve as the son's evidence in chief, with the son to then undergo re-examination and cross-examination on CCTV, while in another room at the Court. The defendant opposed the DVD of the interview being played as evidence, arguing that the father had coached the son prior to the second interview. The Court rejected the defendant's argument, finding that to allow the DVD to be played as evidence would reduce the son's stress at having to give evidence against his mother. If the son had indeed been coached, the defendant would have the opportunity to expose this in cross-examination. The Court granted the order that the Crown sought. The defendant also applied for a copy of the DVD interview to be made available for counsel for the defence to view in his own office and on his own time-frame. The Court found that given the DVD was 29 minutes long and some of it involved preliminary chat aimed at letting the son settle into the interview, to allow the defence counsel to view the DVD at the Crown Solicitor's office or the police station would be adequate. The Court declined the application for a copy of the DVD to be made available to the defence. Judgment Date: 23 August 2018. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *