R v Adlam - [2015] NZHC 2192

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

CRI 2015-054-1700 [2015] NZHC 2192

THE QUEEN

v

RICHARD WANI ADLAM

Hearing: 11 September 2015

Counsel:

M Davies and M Blaschke for Crown
P J Drummond for Defendant

Sentence:

11 September 2015

SENTENCE OF SIMON FRANCE J

[1] Mr Adlam, you are to be sentenced today on two charges arising from a driving incident:

(a) the first charge is manslaughter, the victim being a 13 year old girl

Te Rehia McGhie. She was a passenger in your car;

(b)the second charge is dangerous driving causing injury, the victim being a 62 year old man – Mr Peter McMahon. He was driving the vehicle you collided with.

[2] The facts are well known to everyone here today but I need to set them out for the record.

R v ADLAM [2015] NZHC 2192 [11 September 2015]

[3] In October last year you took possession of a car that was not able to be driven. An indication of its condition is given by the fact that you got it by handing over a play station.

[4] To avoid a tow fee you applied a clamp to the right front brake hose. This released the pressure on the rusted brake disc and the brake pads fell out.

[5] You were then able to drive it and did so. Over the next period you continued to drive it. You experienced issues with the brakes but that did not deter you. And so to the day in question.

[6] You took your neighbour’s daughter for a drive. That was contrary to the terms of your restricted licence so you were not permitted to have her in your car. You were driving in a lay-by. When the seal suddenly ended you drove onto the grass, the brakes would not work and you slid down a bank and into on-coming traffic, where you collided head on with Mr McMahon’s car.

[7] The consequences of this offending have been devastating to those affected. Today victim impact statements have been read by four of Te Rehia’s family – they reveal the devastation that will be felt for a long time. I can only imagine how hard it is to lose a child; to do so in circumstances of such total stupidity must almost be too hard to bear. On behalf of the community I extend my sympathies to Te Rehia’s family.

[8] The situation concerning Mr McMahon is also tragic. Not only has he suffered the physical harm and on-going consequences of the accident, but it has revived hard memories of the loss of his own son in a car accident. To you Mr McMahon, and your family, I also acknowledge what this has meant to you.

[9] Mr Adlam, you are 31 years of age. You have numerous driving offences in the past, a record that says you do not really care about others. Whatever limits are imposed on your ability to drive, you ignore, and you have…

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 R v Adlam

Details

AGLC: R v Adlam [2015] NZHC 2192
Case: [2015] NZHC 2192
Decision Date: 11 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Adlam, heard in the High Court of New Zealand, involved Richard Wani Adlam, who was facing two charges arising from a driving incident: manslaughter and dangerous driving causing injury. The victim of the manslaughter charge was a 13-year-old girl, Te Rehia McGhie, who was a passenger in Adlam's car, while the victim of the dangerous driving charge was a 62-year-old man, Mr Peter McMahon, who was driving the vehicle Adlam collided with. The court was required to decide on the appropriate sentencing for Adlam's actions, considering his extensive driving history and the circumstances surrounding the incident.

The court identified the legal issues as determining the appropriate sentence for the charges of manslaughter and dangerous driving causing injury, while also taking into account Adlam's past driving record and the need for deterrence. The court also needed to consider the impact of the incident on the victims and their families. The reasoning of the court involved examining similar cases to determine a baseline sentence, which was then adjusted for the specific circumstances of Adlam's case, including his extensive driving history and the deliberate disabling of the vehicle's brakes. The court also acknowledged Adlam's early guilty plea and his participation in a restorative justice meeting with the victim's family.

The court sentenced Adlam to four years and six months in prison for the charges of manslaughter and dangerous driving causing injury, to be served concurrently. The court also imposed a four-year disqualification from driving, effective from the date of Adlam's release from prison. The court emphasised the gravity of Adlam's actions and the need for deterrence, while also considering the impact of the incident on the victims and their families. The court acknowledged Adlam's remorse but also highlighted the need for him to understand the seriousness of his actions and the consequences of his driving history.

Orders