Former Lawyers Reveal New Zealand Mosque Shooter’s Initial Intention to Admit Guilt, Appeal Court Hears

In a significant courtroom revelation, the former lawyer of Brenton Tarrant, the man responsible for New Zealand’s most lethal mass shooting, stated that Tarrant was actually gratified to be labeled as a terrorist. This disclosure emerged during a hearing to determine whether Tarrant is mentally competent to retract his previous admissions of guilt.

Tarrant, 35, received a life sentence without parole after confessing to charges of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder for the horrific 2019 attack on two mosques in Christchurch. The massacre, which claimed 51 lives, targeted Muslim worshipers, including children, during their Friday prayers. Now, Tarrant, an Australian, is attempting to withdraw his guilty pleas, claiming that the solitary confinement and harsh conditions in prison have impaired his mental health and judgment.

The New Zealand Court of Appeal in Wellington is currently deliberating over Tarrant’s appeal in a five-day hearing. Should the three-judge panel decide to nullify his guilty pleas, the case would proceed to trial once more.

The court is closely examining Tarrant’s sudden change of heart. Initially, Tarrant pleaded not guilty to the charges but later reversed his plea before the trial could commence. In the appeals court, Tarrant argued that he was compelled to admit guilt due to “nervous exhaustion,” a result of his prolonged isolation, constant surveillance, restricted access to reading materials, and minimal interaction with the outside world.

Tarrant first pleaded not guilty to the charges he faced, then reversed his position before his trial was due to begin. He told the appeals court Monday that he felt forced into his admissions by “nervous exhaustion” brought on by constant solitary confinement, surveillance by prison staff, lack of access to reading materials and almost no contact with the outside world.

Lawyers who represented him during the period when he entered both sets of pleas told the court Tuesday that they had laid a complaint about his prison conditions early in his confinement. Prison officials were dismissive of his grievances, the lawyers said.

They said, however, that restrictions on Tarrant eased later and they didn’t think his environment had harmed his ability to make decisions. Tarrant said Monday that he had masked symptoms of serious mental illness in an effort not to appear weak or to reflect poorly on others who held his racist views.

Crown lawyers suggested to Tarrant on Monday that he had many opportunities to raise concerns about his mental health and or request a postponement of his trial. No witness has so far agreed with Tarrant that his conditions were so onerous and his mental state so poor that he wasn’t fit to plead guilty.

Shooter was told a political trial wasn’t possible

One issue at the heart of the case is whether Tarrant always intended to admit the charges or planned to contest them. Tarrant said Monday that he had meant to defend himself at a trial, while his lawyers said Tuesday that they were sure he intended to plead guilty due to the overwhelming evidence against him, which included his Facebook livestream of the massacre and a racist manifesto he posted online before the attack.

Shane Tait, who previously acted for Tarrant, said his client had wanted to argue during a trial that he had been defending New Zealand — a country he migrated to with a view to committing the attack — from immigrants. Tait assured Tarrant that such a defense wasn’t available under New Zealand law, he told the court.

“Brenton, what am I going to tell the jury if we go to trial?” Tait said he had asked Tarrant. His client had responded, “Don’t worry, it won’t get that far,” Tait said.

Both Tait and Tarrant’s other then-lawyer Jonathan Hudson said it was important to their client that he be convicted on the terrorism charge and he refused to allow his lawyers to attempt to negotiate it away in exchange for guilty pleas to the murder and attempted murder charges.

“He wanted to be described as a terrorist,” Hudson said.

The appeal outcome is due later

Bids to appeal convictions or sentences in New Zealand must be made within 20 working days. Tarrant was two years late in seeking an appeal, filing documents in 2022.

He told the court Monday that his bid had been late because he hadn’t had access to the information required to make it.

The judges are expected to release their decision at a later date. If they reject Tarrant’s attempt to have his guilty pleas discarded, a later hearing will focus on his bid to appeal his sentence.

The hearing was the first time that Tarrant, who appeared by video conference from prison, had been seen or heard from in court for years. He appeared pale and thin, with a shaved head and black-framed glasses.

Some of those bereaved or injured by his violence watched a live feed of proceedings from a courtroom in Christchurch, telling reporters afterward of their exasperation and anger that he was allowed to keep revisiting his case in court.

“There’s definitely no remorse at all,” said Rashid Omar, whose son Tariq Omar was murdered, adding that the proceedings appeared to be a game to Tarrant.

“We are very, very strong,” Omar said. “We’re not going to be bullied by him.”