Inadmissibility of evidence — duties of a nominated person — explanation of young person's rights — delay — Evidence Act 2006, s 30 — Children Young Persons and their Families Act 1989, ss 208, 215, 215A, 218, 221, 222, 224 — Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 23 — R v Z [2008] NZCA 246 — Riley Campbell v R [2014] NZCA 376. This was an application by the Police to have the DVD of an evidential interview admitted as evidence in a trial where the young person was facing charges of aggravated robbery and burglary. The young person's nominated person was her mother, however a failed attempt to contact the mother was inadequate in the circumstances. Having regard to the young person's age, the inadequate discharge of the duties of a nominated person by the JP present and the time of the interview, the requirement to explain the young person's rights in a manner and language appropriate to their age and level of understanding was not met. There was a significant breach of the young person's rights incapable of saving under the reasonable compliance grounds in s 224. The application was declined and the interview ruled inadmissible. Judgment Date: 25 May 2017. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *