Police v Pokaia - [2017] NZHC 1418

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

CRI-2017-454-5 [2017] NZHC 1418

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

v

TERESSA POKAIA

Hearing: 20 June 2017

Counsel:

N Wynne and K van der plas for Crown
A C Graham for Appellant

Judgment:

23 June 2017

JUDGMENT OF WILLIAMS J

Introduction

[1] Following a judge-alone trial before Judge Large, Ms Pokaia was convicted of common assault and intentional damage.1 Her co-accused, her daughter Ms Haenga, was also convicted of common assault. Ms Pokaia was sentenced to 80 hours community work and $150 reparation, plus $50 witness expenses. She appeals against her conviction on the ground that the Judge erred in his assessment of the evidence such that a miscarriage of justice occurred.

Background

[2] The parties involved are related through the relationship between Ms Haenga and her partner Jade, so for clarity, I include the following whakapapa:

1 Police v Pokaia [2017] NZDC 5293.

NEW ZEALAND POLICE v POKAIA [2017] NZHC 1418 [23 June 2017]

Teressa Pokaia Adele Lawton
(Appellant) (Witness)

(Partners)

Keita Haenga Jade Nicole Tipene
(Co-accused) (Complainant)

Baby Tauwhiti

[3] The incident that led to the charges occurred on 15 August 2016 at the address of Ms Lawton. The complainant was Ms Lawton’s daughter, Ms Tipene. Ms Tipene’s brother, Jade, is co-accused, Ms Haenga’s partner. Their baby Tauwhiti was 14 months old at the time. A verbal confrontation occurred between Ms Pokaia, Ms Haenga and Ms Tipene. Ms Haenga said Ms Tipene had slashed a tyre on Ms Haenga’s car. Ms Haenga’s father and mother (Ms Pokaia) went to pick Ms Haenga up because they were concerned about her safety. The incident occurred as the three of them were leaving the address with Tauwhiti.

[4] The police alleged that as Ms Haenga and her parents were leaving the address, the appellant Ms Pokaia ripped a wing mirror off Ms Tipene’s car. It was also alleged that she used the mirror to score along the side of the car. All of this was, it is said, in retaliation for the tyre slashing. At that time, Ms Tipene said she heard a loud bang coming from the direction of her car and went outside to find out what the departing group had done. Once outside she saw the damage and demanded to know who had done this to her car. She grabbed a rock and walked toward the group on the footpath. But she had second thoughts and threw the rock to one side as she walked down the driveway.

[5] The police say as Ms Tipene walked towards the group, Ms Haenga challenged her to a fight, and threw a road cone at her, hitting her arm. Ms Pokaia then walked towards Ms Tipene, holding Tauwhiti. Ms Tipene pushed her away. Ms Tipene then found herself wrestling with Ms Haenga on the ground. During the conflict, Ms Haenga admitted pulling Ms Tipene’s hair and striking her face and

head. Ms Tipene was seven months pregnant at the time. As a result of…

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 Police v Pokaia

Details

AGLC: Police v Pokaia [2017] NZHC 1418
Case: [2017] NZHC 1418
Decision Date: 23 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Teressa Pokaia appeals against her conviction of common assault and intentional damage, following a trial before Judge Large. She argues that the Judge erred in his assessment of the evidence such that a miscarriage of justice occurred. The main legal issue was whether the trial Judge erred in his assessment of the evidence to such a degree that a miscarriage of justice occurred.

The court found that the Judge’s reasons were sufficient and that there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict. The Judge found Ms Lawton’s evidence credible and convincing, and Ms Pokaia’s evidence not credible or convincing. The Judge also found that Ms Pokaia had kicked Ms Tipene in the head while holding her grandson, Tauwhiti, which Ms Pokaia denied. The court held that the Judge’s reasons were sufficient because he provided a brief assessment on both charges and that the evidence of Ms Lawton was sufficient to found an inference that Ms Pokaia both removed the wing mirror and kicked Ms Tipene while on the ground. The appeal was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal is dismissed.

Orders