A man accused of arson has been awarded $15,000 in compensation for spending nine and a half months in custody after police identified an alternative suspect.

Altogether, Auckland man Edmond Te Raupo Apanui was in prison on remand for more than two years before the charge against him was dropped.

The compensation relates to 286 days he remained locked up after police were given information that allegedly implicated his former flatmate in the blaze.

The District Court originally awarded Apanui $34,240 for the time he spent in jail plus court costs, after what a judge called a “significant procedural failure” by police.

However, police appealed against the higher award and the amount he will get has been reduced to $15,000 by the Court of Appeal.

The first fire

Apanui’s troubles began when a fire broke out at his home in West Auckland on November 23, 2020.

The next day he was arrested and charged with arson endangering life. He was remanded in custody.

The case against him was based in part on the evidence of his flatmate, who said he had been in the bath when the fire started.

Apanui denied starting the fire. He pleaded not guilty on December 21, 2020.

The detective constable in charge of the case took hand swabs from Apanui and his flatmate but delayed sending them to the Institute of Environmental Research (ESR) for eight months.

No accelerants were found on the swabs, but the ESR report noted that they might have evaporated from the swabs because of the delay.

After the fire, the flatmate moved to a boarding house in another part of West Auckland that was owned by the same landlord.

On February 16, 2022 – when Apanui had been in custody for 15 months – a fire broke out in the flatmate’s room at the boarding house. It caused considerable damage to the building.

The landlord realised that the flatmate had been at both fires and told a fire investigation officer, who in turn mentioned it in a “casual conversation” to the detective investigating the first fire.

Neither officer recorded the conversation at Henderson police station, which probably took place on the day of the second fire or soon afterwards.

The detective investigating the first fire took no action.

On May 19, 2022, a fire investigation report concluded it was not possible to determine whether the second fire had been deliberately lit, and the police investigation into that fire was closed.

Intelligence system reveals connection

However, in October 2022, another detective searching with the flatmate’s name on the police intelligence system again discovered he had been at the scene of both fires.

He told the detective constable assigned to Apanui’s case, who gained formal access to the second fire investigation file on November 17, 2022.

The detective constable then told Apanui’s lawyers about the flatmate.

Court documents show that, on November 25, 2022, the Crown advised the District Court that it would offer no evidence against Apanui.

On November 28, 2022 – two years and five days after he was arrested – the arson charge against Apanui was formally dismissed.

It is understood that the flatmate has not been charged in connection with either fire.

Apanui made a compensation claim to the Auckland District Court, where Judge Peter Winter found that police should have been aware that the flatmate was allegedly a suspect 286 days – about nine and a half months – before Apanui was released.

The judge said the police had acknowledged that a “significant procedural failure” had occurred.

“I see no reasonable excuse for that procedural failure and therefore the Commissioner of Police should be liable for a costs order ... for the custodial detention suffered by Mr Apanui over that period,” Judge Winter said.

$100 a day in compensation

He awarded Apanui $28,600 – representing $100 a day for the time he spent in custody after the second fire.

With court costs added, the total package came to $34,240.

However, the police disputed the compensation amount in the Court of Appeal, arguing that orders for costs in the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 were intended to “curb the culture of procedural non-compliance”, not to compensate people affected.

The Court of Appeal justices said the judge had made an “error of principle” by setting the award by reference to the time Apanui had remained in custody after the detective constable had been told about the flatmate.

After considering other cases, the Court of Appeal said that an award of more than $34,000 was “excessive”.

“We agree that an award in the order of $15,000 is more appropriate to the seriousness of the police failures,” the Court of Appeal decision said.

No court costs were ordered in the Court of Appeal decision because Apanui’s lawyers were acting on a pro bono basis, charging no fees.

Ric Stevens spent many years working for the former New Zealand Press Association news agency, including as a political reporter at Parliament, before holding senior positions at various daily newspapers. He joined NZME’s Open Justice team in 2022 and is based in Hawke’s Bay. His writing in the crime and justice sphere is informed by four years of front-line experience as a probation officer.