Is the Mr Big Sting: a powerful tool? Or an underhanded tactic? And can it bring justice?The story's twists and turns continue. The defence team appeal, arguing again that the Mr Big sting evidence was unreliable and should not have been used.This time the Court of Appeal agrees. The defence lawyers go back to court to argue that there's not enough evidence now to convict David.They win. The judge rules that David cannot be retried. He is free. The case is over.Where does that leave Mr Big?Should the law control Mr Big stings better? Is David Lyttle an innocent man tricked into telling a story that then he had to struggle for more than 10 years to escape? Or is he a murderer who crafted a story of innocence that eventually fooled the court?And should the police use stories like Mr Big to try to get to the truth about a murder?Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details
--------
43:43
The Verdict
The jury returns a verdict. Did they get it right?The prosecution and defence close their cases with the stories they have gradually been revealing through the trial.The prosecution lawyer emphasises David Lyttle's confession to the prison guards, his misleading statements about Brett's guns, the inadequately explained two-hour gap in his trip to the campsite. The defence say it's all just a story David made up and most of it can't be true. And some drug dealers who killed Brett have gotten away with murder.It's the job of the jurors to decide which side tells the most compelling story.They return a verdict.Did they get it right?Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details
--------
41:32
The Defence Challenge the Sting
Did the police push David Lyttle into a false confession? Or did they just give him an opportunity to tell the truth?David Lyttle's defence lawyer wants the Mr Big confession gone.He argues that is too unreliable - too obviously untrue - to be considered by the jury. What's more,the confession- and the whole case - should be thrown out because David Lyttle made it up in a desperate attempt to get into Mr Big's gang.The judge isn't so sure.Did the police push David Lyttle into a false confession? Or did they just give him an opportunity to tell the truth? Is it safe for the jury to rely on it?Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details
--------
40:19
The Jury Hears the Mr Big Sting
When the jury hear the Mr Big tapes, David's confession is held up to scrutiny.The jury hears the detail of David's confession. How he did it. Why he did it. Where it happened. And it turns out most of it is untrue. .Defence lawyers say the seeds of David's confession were planted in the initial interviews, when police told David how they thought he did it.The fakeness of David's "confession" hangs heavy.Then, another bombshell. Suddenly there seems a lot less reason to doubt this confession.Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details
--------
39:41
The Trial (Part Two)
As doubts on both sides mount, the Mr Big evidence becomes crucial to the Crown's case.David's story looks increasingly shaky. He can't immediately explain a two-hour gap on the morning he said he saw Brett. And he has repeatedly misled police during questioning.The Crown is telling a powerful story about David's guilt.But the defence story is starting to take shape too. It's surely enough to create reasonable doubt.The Mr Big sting becomes crucial. Does it dispel that doubt?Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details
The Mr Big sting is a powerful tool to get criminals to confess. It got David Lyttle to confess to the murder of his mate, Brett Hall. But is it fair? Is it just? Or does it lead to false convictions?
New Zealand