Legal Research
Cases
Harris v The King

Harris v The King

Case [2025] NZCA 292 2 July 2025

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA647/2024
[2025] NZCA 292

BETWEEN	CARLOS HARRIS Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

CA94/2025
BETWEEN	BERNADETTE RAWIRI Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	14 May 2025
Court:	Woolford, Jagose, and Powell JJ
Counsel:	E P Priest and S V Wood for Appellant in CA647/2024 S Thode and W T Main for Appellant in CA94/2025 K S Li and R N Benic for Respondent
Judgment:	2 July 2025 at 2:30 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appeals are dismissed.

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Powell J)

On the evening of 12 June 2023, the victim in this matter was kidnapped from her home by a group of armed men who also threatened her partner. Over the next 24 days she was held captive at three different addresses where she was threatened, assaulted and tortured in an attempt to extort cryptocurrency. Only when she escaped did what appears to be the longest kidnapping in New Zealand history come to an end.
Not all those responsible have been identified. Four have been charged, including the two appellants, Carlos Harris and Bernadette Rawiri. Both pleaded guilty to a single charge of kidnapping,[1] and both were sentenced by Judge Gibson as follows:
(a)In sentencing Mr Harris, Judge Gibson adopted a starting point of 13 years and six months’ imprisonment.[2] An allowance of 25 per cent was given for an early guilty plea and 15 per cent for Mr Harris’ personal and background factors.[3] The latter included “to [a] very limited extent”, the effect of Mr Harris’ imprisonment on his two children living with him.[4] The end sentence was eight years’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of four years.[5]
(b)In sentencing Ms Rawiri, Judge Gibson adopted a starting point of eight years and six months’ imprisonment on the kidnapping charge.[6] An uplift of one year was applied for a burglary committed subsequent to the kidnapping, with a reduction for totality of six months.[7] Allowances of 20 per cent were given for the guilty plea, five per cent for “some indications of discrete remorse”, and 10 per cent for personal background factors which had a “nexus to the offending”.[8] An uplift of two months was made to recognise that the offending occurred on bail, and a further two‑month uplift was applied to recognise previous convictions. This led to an end sentence of six years and two months’ imprisonment.[9] An MPI of 50 per cent was also imposed.[10]
[1]Crimes Act 1961, s 209. Maximum penalty: 14 years’ imprisonment.
[2]R v Harris [2024] NZDC 22607 [Harris sentencing notes] at [31].
[3]At [31].
[4]At [31].
[5]At [31] and [37].
[6]R v Rawiri [2025] NZDC 2872 [Rawiri sentencing notes] at [15].
[7]At [15]–[17]. Ms Rawiri was sentenced by Judge Gibson to six months’ imprisonment for the burglary, to be served concurrently with the kidnapping sentence.
[8]At [18]–[19].
[9]At [19].
[10]At [21].
Both now appeal their sentences on the grounds they were…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Harris v The King

Details

AGLC: Harris v The King [2025] NZCA 292
Case: [2025] NZCA 292
Decision Date: 2 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the appeals of Carlos Harris and Bernadette Rawiri against their kidnapping sentences were dismissed. The Court found that the sentences imposed by Judge Gibson were appropriate, considering the gravity of the offence and the roles of the appellants in the crime. The Court rejected arguments that the starting points and minimum periods of imprisonment were excessive. For Mr Harris, the Court found that his role as a principal offender, the premeditated nature of the kidnapping, and the significant violence inflicted on the victim justified a high starting point and a minimum period of imprisonment. For Ms Rawiri, the Court concluded that while her role was less than Mr Harris's, it was still significant and warranted a high starting point and a minimum period of imprisonment, given her active participation in the early stages of the kidnapping and her ongoing involvement. The Court emphasised the importance of deterring such serious crimes and the need to hold the offenders accountable for their actions.

Orders