Kronfield v Police - [2018] NZHC 793

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME AND IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT/VICTIM.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2017-412-28 [2018] NZHC 793

BETWEEN
MARGARET DENISE KRONFELD

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 24 April 2018

Counsel:

A G Speed and E M Gresson for Appellant R P Bates for Respondent

Judgment:

24 April 2018

JUDGMENT OF NICHOLAS DAVIDSON J

Appeal

[1] Ms Kronfeld was sentenced by Judge Crosbie to 120 hours community work on one charge of criminal harassment, three charges of intentionally accessing a computer system, one charge of sending fictitious messages and one charge of making a telephone call without speech with the intention of causing offence.1

1 Police v Kronfeld [2017] NZDC 14371.

KRONFELD v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 793 [24 April 2018]

[2] The sentencing followed a Judge alone trial in which Ms Kronfeld was found guilty on the charges of criminal harassment and intentionally accessing a computer system, having already pleaded guilty to the other charges.

[3] An appeal was brought against conviction in respect of the charges that went to trial, and against the sentence of community work. The conviction appeal was heard on 7 November 2017 and judgment issued on 7 February 2018.2 The appeal was allowed in part, setting aside the conviction for criminal harassment while upholding the other charges.

[4] The harassment conviction was set aside on what is, essentially, a technicality. This judgment reflects the partially successful appeal against conviction, and to address any other issues raised in Ms Kronfeld’s appeal against sentence.

The offending

[5] Ms Kronfeld’s offending was recorded in detail in the judgment of 7 February 2018 and in Judge Crosbie’s reserved judgment of 3 April 2017.3

[6] For a period of about three years, Ms Kronfeld engaged in an affair with the complainant’s husband (Mr X). When it came to an end, Ms Kronfeld commenced a campaign of harassment against the complainant, which the Judge characterised as a “premeditated, persistent, vile barrage and attack”.

[7] The Court has in evidence dozens of email messages sent by Ms Kronfeld to the complainant under false names and email addresses over the course of about 10 weeks, which she admitted.

[8] The harassment charge (conviction now quashed) related to five of these emails. The content of the emails was offensive and sinister, as were the other emails the subject of charges.

2 Kronfeld v Police [2018] NZHC 66.
3 Police v Kronfeld [2017] NZDC 6769.

[9] The charges of accessing a computer system involved the complainant’s private email account accessed on two occasions, and on one occasion the parent portal of the school which her children attend, without authorisation. On one occasion, she accessed the account to retrieve the login details for the portal and on the other it was to get information about the complainant later used to create false identities for messages sent.

[10] For the four months following the end of the relationship, Ms…

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 Kronfield v Police

Details

AGLC: Kronfield v Police [2018] NZHC 793
Case: [2018] NZHC 793
Decision Date: 24 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Margaret Denise Kronfeld appealed against her conviction and sentence for various charges including criminal harassment, accessing a computer system, sending fictitious messages, and making a nuisance phone call. The case was heard by the High Court of New Zealand, Dunedin Registry. The main legal issue was whether the appeal against the conviction and sentence was justified. The court assessed the seriousness of the offending, the impact on the complainant, and the appellant's remorse and contrition. The appeal against the conviction for criminal harassment was successful due to a technicality, but the other convictions were upheld.

The court concluded that the original sentence of 120 hours community work was appropriate but required a reduction due to the successful appeal against the harassment charge and the appellant's genuine remorse. The court replaced the original sentence with one of 70 hours community work, with costs and witness expenses. The appellant was ordered to report to Community Probation within 72 hours of the judgment.

Orders