GREGORY DAVID PASK AND THE KING

[2024] NZHC 3037

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND BLENHEIM REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WAIHARAKEKE ROHE

CRI-2024-406-5

[2024] NZHC 3037

BETWEEN

GREGORY DAVID PASK

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing:

24 September 2024

Appearances:

M Zintl for Appellant by VMR

J M Webber for Respondent by VMR

Judgment:

17 October 2024

JUDGMENT OF GRICE J

(Appeal against sentence)

[1]    Mr Pask was sentenced to 15 years and nine months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of 10 years1 on charges of sexual violation by unlawful section connection (x 20),2 doing an indecent act on a child under 12 years (x 20),3 knowingly making objectionable publications (x 17),4 and knowingly possessing objectionable publications (x 3).5

1      R v Pask [2024] NZDC 8616 [sentencing notes].

2      Crimes Act 1961, ss 128(1)(b) and 128B; maximum penalty 20 years’ imprisonment.

3      Section 132(3); maximum penalty 10 years’ imprisonment.

4      Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, s 124(1); maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.

5      Section 131A(1); maximum penalty 10 years’ imprisonment or $50,000 fine.

PASK v R [2024] NZHC 3037 [17 October 2024]

[2]    Mr Pask appeals the sentence on the basis that it is manifestly excessive. He challenges the starting point for the sexual violation, indecent assault and making objectionable publications offending, as well as the uplift for the possessing objectionable publications offending. He also says a discount should have been allowed for remorse, and challenges the imposition and length of the MPI.

Background

[3]    The offending occurred over an almost eight-year period, from December 2015 to September 2023. The police identified 144 occasions of “contact” offending, including 60 occasions of sexual violation and 84 occasions of performing indecent acts.

[4]    Mr Pask’s “contact” offending was committed against five known female complainants when they were aged between five and 11 years. Of the five known complainants, three attended the gymnastics club where Mr Pask coached, one was a friend of a gymnastic complainant and one was related to Mr Pask.6 He also committed contact offending against an unknown number of unknown children, who were also female. Mr Pask refused to cooperate with the police in identifying the unknown children.

[5]    The Judge in his sentencing notes set out the detail of the offending based on the summary of facts.7 The offending occurred while the children  were staying at  Mr Pask’s house or were travelling with him for gymnastics competitions. In summary, Mr Pask touched and rubbed the children’s genitalia in similar ways, but this differed from child to child. He rubbed their genitalia both over and under underwear, rubbed their clitoris, digitally penetrated their genitalia and performed oral sex on their genitalia. Mr Pask touched various children’s buttocks as well as parted their buttocks to expose their anuses and digitally penetrated their anuses.

6      When interviewed by the police, Mr Pask voluntarily disclosed the offending against the complainant…