Christchurch Shooter Attempts to Vacate Guilty Plea, Claims Prison Conditions Impaired Rationality
The Australian man convicted of murdering 51 people in the 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks is attempting to overturn his guilty plea, arguing that harsh prison conditions at the time rendered him incapable of making rational decisions. Brenton Tarrant, currently serving a life sentence without parole, began presenting his case to the New Zealand Court of Appeal on Monday, February 9th, 2026.
Tarrant pleaded guilty in 2020 to 51 charges of murder, 40 counts of attempted murder, and one charge of committing a terrorist act. He now claims he was coerced into admitting guilt due to the “torturous and inhumane” conditions of his solitary confinement, including limited reading material and minimal contact with other prisoners. He testified that his mental health deteriorated significantly while incarcerated, leaving him in a state of “nervous exhaustion” and uncertainty about his beliefs.
The court is examining whether Tarrant was truly capable of making a rational decision when he entered his guilty pleas. Justice Christine French, president of the New Zealand Court of Appeal, stated that the primary issue before the court is “whether at the time he entered those guilty pleas, he was unable to make a rational decision due to his prison conditions.” The hearing is scheduled to last five days.
Prison Conditions Under Scrutiny
Details of Tarrant’s confinement at Auckland Prison at Paremoremo have emerged during the appeal hearing. The defense has focused on the intensity of the surveillance he was subjected to, alleging a constant and intrusive monitoring regime. Evidence presented revealed that Tarrant was kept in solitary confinement for a prolonged period, from October 2019 to September 2020, and was under continuous camera surveillance, with only a small blind spot under a table in his cell.
Corrections staff were frequently stationed directly outside his cell for observation. Physical checks were conducted every 15 minutes, day and night, with guards opening a flap on the cell door. Even at night, guards reportedly shone a torch into the cell to check on Tarrant. The defense argued that the constant opening and closing of the flap disturbed the prisoner, though a Corrections official testified that fabric was used to “soften the noise.”
Tarrant was denied access to a radio, a common privilege for other prisoners, which would have allowed him to listen to news or music. Officials justified this restriction by stating that access to news could “potentially elevate the prisoner’s risk to others around him including staff.” He was also reportedly given minimal opportunities for meaningful activity, with activity sheets listing items like “towel,” “jandals,” and “soap” rather than engaging pursuits.
The Crown disputes the claim that Tarrant’s mental health was significantly impaired, pointing to assessments conducted at the time that indicated he was fit to enter pleas.
Lawyers Recall Interactions with the Terrorist
Tarrant also testified that his previous legal counsel refused to pursue the defense he desired, leading him to feel compelled to plead guilty under duress. His former lawyers, Jonathan Hudson and Shane Tait, were called as witnesses for the Crown and presented a different account of events.
Both Hudson and Tait testified that Tarrant expressed a desire to plead guilty throughout their representation, though they noted that he was not always clear about the timing. Hudson recalled an “extremely unusual response” from Tarrant when informed that one of the charges had been upgraded from attempted murder to murder. He also stated that Tarrant was “pleased” when a charge of engaging in a terrorist act was added, and that “he wanted to be described as a terrorist.”
The lawyers stated that they advised Tarrant that he had no viable legal defense, and that any attempt to argue otherwise would be unsuccessful. Tait testified that Tarrant appeared to be seeking a guilty plea that suited his “agenda.”
Hudson testified that Tarrant also inquired about the possibility of arguing that another shooter was present at the mosque, a defense that Hudson deemed “not available to him” given the extensive video evidence of the attack captured on Tarrant’s GoPro camera.
The hearing is expected to continue for the remainder of the week. If the Court of Appeal allows Tarrant to vacate his guilty pleas, a full trial will be held, years after the original massacre.
