Laing v Police - [2020] NZHC 1875

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2020-412-000013

[2020] NZHC 1875

BETWEEN
KAREN ILYA LAING

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 27 July 2020

Appearances:

J A Westgate for the Appellant

C J Bernhardt for the Respondent

Judgment:

30 July 2020

JUDGMENT OF NATION J

Introduction

[1] The appellant, Karen Laing, pleaded guilty to two charges of threatening to kill and one charge of criminal harassment.1 Judge Phillips sentenced her to two years and three months’ imprisonment. Ms Laing appeals that sentence on the basis the starting points were excessive and the Judge gave insufficient credit for her Asperger’s Syndrome.

Facts

[2] The two victims in this case are the man who went on one date with Ms Laing (the victim) and his mother. Ms Laing met the victim through a dating app in 2016.

1 Threatening to kill carries a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment (Crimes Act 1961, s
306) and criminal harassment carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment (Harassment Act 1997, s 8).

LAING v POLICE [2020] NZHC 1875 [30 July 2020]

They went on one date together before the victim declined to see Ms Laing again. Ms Laing began to harass and threaten the victim, and was convicted of relevant charges, most recently in 2018. At the time of the present offending she was subject to release conditions not to possess, control or use a device capable of accessing the internet, as well as conditions not to contact the victims of her offending.

[3] Between 2 December 2018 and 8 March 2019, Ms Laing sent 297 unsolicited messages to the victim’s Facebook account, telephoned his workplace and left threatening and aggressive messages. Those communications form the basis of the charge of criminal harassment.

[4] Between 10 and 16 March 2019, Ms Laing sent 41 messages to the victim’s Facebook account, 21 of which included threats to murder him. An example of such a message is: “… my feelings are to murder you and I will enjoy it because I don’t like you Im going to get you for what you’ve done”.

[5] On 10 April 2019, Ms Laing called the unlisted number for the victim’s address. The victim’s father answered. Ms Laing identified herself before stating she was not a violent person but would hurt someone.

[6] Between 4 February and 29 May 2019, Ms Laing posted friend requests and threatening messages to the victim’s mother’s Facebook account. Those messages included statements such as “I need to kill people” and “… if I murder you stupid family Im not mad at all or bad … people like you need to fucking die”. On 29 May 2019, Ms Laing also sent threatening messages to the victim’s Facebook account, including: “… a snap and you wanted all that I should give you a murder and then I’ll fuck off”.

[7] Ms Laing was charged and bailed in regard to the above offences. While on bail,…

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 Laing v Police

Details

AGLC: Laing v Police [2020] NZHC 1875
Case: [2020] NZHC 1875
Decision Date: 30 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Karen Laing appeals the sentence imposed by Judge Phillips for charges of threatening to kill and criminal harassment. The offending occurred over several months and involved a large number of threats, harassment, and stalking. Ms Laing was subject to conditions not to contact the victims at the time of the offending. The appeal focuses on the starting point of the sentence and the credit given for Ms Laing’s Asperger’s Syndrome.

The court finds that Judge Phillips correctly identified the aggravating features of the offending and the impact on the victims. The approach to sentencing, while unconventional, was not in error. The starting point of 30 months was within range, and the court found no error in the uplifts for offending while on bail, the fact of offending on sentence, and Ms Laing’s criminal history. The court is satisfied the 15 per cent discount for Ms Laing’s Asperger’s Syndrome was appropriate. The end sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment was not manifestly excessive.

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders