The identities of three men previously charged over the murder of Upper Hutt woman Lois Tolley in 2016 will remain secret for the foreseeable future.
Lois Tolley was murdered in her Upper Hutt home more than five years ago but the case against three people previously charged with the crime fell apart last year. Photo: RNZ / Supplied / NZ Police
At an online sitting of the High Court in Wellington this morning, Justice Simon France ordered permanent name suppression for the former defendants.
Their long-awaited trial for the execution-style killing of Tolley, a 30-year-old chef, was due to start on 8 February, but the case against them fell apart last year.
Earlier this month, the judge withdrew all charges but left the way open for police to re-charge them in future if new evidence emerged.
At today's hearing, Justice France noted there was no opposition to the applications for permanent name suppression.
However, those orders could be reviewed by a judge if charges were laid against any of them in future in the same matter, he said.
"So that would be the one limit I would impose.
"You can always revisit court orders anyway, but I will just make this clear that's the intended limit in the unlikely event that this happens."
Closed-circuit television captured four men entering Tolley's home on 9 December, 2016, with a machete and shotgun - but it was nearly three years before the first man was charged.
Police had alleged two of the defendants entered Tolley's flat, while the third waited outside.
A number of media organisations had applied for access to judgements and court documents, which had been suppressed until the final resolution of the matter.
Justice France has sealed the court file because it includes material "that could impact in the future on a fair trial, could impact in the present on the privacy of persons previously charged who now no longer face charges and who have privacy interests in an interest in pursuing their lives".
That means access to the file must be sought from a judge.
One of the defendants' lawyers also asked that certain paragraphs in the file be permanently suppressed to protect her client from reprisals should that information be made public, and the judge agreed.
However, he intends to release some of his substantive judgements to "satisfy public interest".
Another hearing has been set for three weeks' time to hear arguments over what information in those judgements can be made public without identifying those involved, putting them at risk and scuppering the chance of a fair trial in future.
More than five years on, Tolley's family are still waiting for answers about what happened to her.