Convicted murderer Mark Lundy makes plea to be released

Mark Lundy before the verdict. Photo: RNZ / Sharon Lundy

By Jimmy Ellingham of RNZ

Mark Lundy is scheduled to appear before the Parole Board on Thursday - the third time he has been able to plead his case for release from prison for the August 2000 murders of his wife and daughter in Palmerston North.

The 66-year-old has served more than 23 years in jail since he was arrested for the murders in early 2001.

But he has maintained his innocence, insisting he did not kill his wife Christine, 38, and daughter Amber, 9, in the family home.

Lundy was found guilty at a trial in Palmerston North in 2002 and, again, after the Privy Council quashed his convictions, at a retrial in Wellington in 2015.

He was on bail for about 18 months between late 2013 and the retrial guilty verdicts, when his life sentence and minimum 20-year term were reimposed.

Thursday's hearing will take place at Tongariro Prison near Tūrangi. If the board reaches a decision, it will be made public tomorrow.

Not-guilty stance a hurdle

Lundy became eligible for parole in August 2022, when he first unsuccessfully sought release from jail. He last went before the board in May 2023.

At that hearing, Lundy maintaining his innocence was problematic for board members.

Board convenor Sir Ron Young asked how it could assess Lundy's motivation behind the offending, and any risk, if it was not admitted and no rehabilitative work was done.

Lundy accepted the board must work on the basis he was guilty, but he said he was not - something he repeated constantly throughout when questioned by the board.

"All I can say is I do not have high risk of reoffending because I haven't offended."

He and the board discussed his "safety plan" - a document prisoners seeking parole use to identify risks stemming from their offending that might arise when they are released, and how they handle them.

Lundy said its main purpose was to ensure he would not be recalled to jail if granted parole.

"As you're aware I will go to my death bed still saying that I did not kill my family. I cannot lie in that respect, so primarily the plan is to stop me from being recalled."

He had not prepared a safety plan for his August 2022 hearing, saying nothing would trigger him to reoffend because he was not guilty.

After both hearings, the board decided Lundy remained an undue risk to the public.

Young told Lundy the board had to assume he was guilty.

"What we have here is you convicted of a murder where there was a high degree of planning. It was planned not only to have an alibi, but also at the scene to try and effectively mislead the police into thinking something else had happened."

Board member Dr Philip Brinded asked Lundy what he thought happened to his wife and daughter.

Lundy said there was several possible scenarios. Although there was subjective evidence, there was no physical evidence to support them.

Lundy's lawyer, Julie-Ann Kincade, KC, said psychologists found he was a low risk of reoffending, he had a low security rating in prison and there were comprehensive plans covering his release.

Two guilty verdicts

Lundy's 2002 convictions were based on a Crown case that gave him slightly under three hours to return from a business trip in Wellington in rush hour traffic on August 29, 2000, kill Christine and Amber, and return to the capital by about 8.30pm.

The Crown argued Lundy had sex with a prostitute about midnight to create an alibi.

It said Lundy was motivated by claiming his wife's insurance money - the pair had upped their cover - because of financial troubles.

As well as running a kitchenware business, Lundy had bought Hawke's Bay land to develop a vineyard, but was failing to meet payment deadlines.

The Crown and defence have disputed that his business was in financial difficulty.

The Crown in 2002 fixed the early time of death on stomach content analysis of Christine and Amber.

And it argued Lundy had tried to make the home invasion look like a burglary gone wrong by taking a jewellery box.

The 2015 retrial heard different timings - that the murders happened later in the night, after the encounter with the prostitute.

At both trials, Lundy was linked to the scene by specks of what the Crown said was brain tissue found on his polo shirt.

At the first trial, the Crown called as a witness Texan pathologist Dr Rodney Miller, who used a then-new technique called immunohistochemistry to identify the tissue as human.

The Privy Council, in 2013, ruled there was reason to doubt the technique's accuracy.

At the retrial, the scientific evidence was based on analysis of messenger RNA, although the Court of Appeal later ruled this inadmissible.

The defence said the matter could be central nervous tissue from meat, as Lundy was the cook in the house.

The presence of Christine's DNA on the same area of shirt sealed Lundy's fate.

"No husband should have his wife's brain on their shirt," Crown prosecutor Philip Morgan, KC, told the retrial.

After the retrial, Lundy again appealed his convictions, but in 2019 the Supreme Court ruled that they stood.

Lundy has a group of supporters, known as FACTUAL (For Amber and Christine, Truth Uncovered about Lundy).

After the last parole hearing the group issued a statement, saying it was disappointing the board decided his refusal to admit guilt meant Lundy must stay in jail.