R v Biddle - [2025] NZHC 3105

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2022-087-000736

[2025] NZHC 3105

THE KING

v

TE PATU KINO MOKAI KERERU BIDDLE CONWAY DANIEL RAPANA HEREMAIA TAMA GAGE

NGAHERE TAPARA

Counsel:
R W Jenson and M H Tutton-Harris for Crown M E Goodwin and L J L Hemi for Mr Biddle N M Dutch and S R Franklin for Mr Rapana

R E Webby for Mr Gage
C A Gentleman and D J McWilliam for Mr Tapara

Sentences:

17 October 2025

SENTENCING REMARKS OF JOHNSTONE J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Tauranga

R v BIDDLE & ORS [2025] NZHC 3105 [17 October 2025]

[1] Mr Rapana, Mr Biddle, Mr Gage and Mr Tapara, as you know, I will soon be sentencing you for the murder, or for the manslaughter, of Mark Hohua. It will take some time for me to let you and the other people here in Court know the reasons for the sentences I have decided to impose. Towards the end of this hearing, when I am about to impose each sentence, I will ask each of you to stand.

[2]I start by describing what you did.

Offending

[3]In June 2022:

(a)Mr Hohua and each of you were members of the Aotearoa chapter of the Tribesmen gang, based in the Whakatāne District. Mr Rapana, you had been instrumental in forming the chapter, and you were its president. Mr Gage, you were the chapter’s vice president. Mr Biddle, you were its sergeant at arms, and you were responsible for enforcing Mr Rapana’s decisions. Mr Tapara, you were a patched member.

(b)Mr Hohua was attempting to leave the chapter.

(c)And the chapter was intending to gather, during the morning of Saturday, 18 June 2022, at your home, Mr Rapana, on Hodges Road, Waimana. The purpose was to discuss matters of general interest, before senior members were to travel from Hodges Road, to represent the chapter at a national meeting of the Tribesmen gang.

[4] On 16 June 2022, Mr Rapana, you learned that Mr Hohua had made unauthorised purchases using the chapter’s bank account. Immediately, you made a series of phone calls, including to Mr Biddle and to Mr Gage. There is no reasonable explanation for those phone calls, other than that they involved discussions between

you on the topic of what you believed Mr Hohua had done, and how the chapter would respond. I take the view that, by 18 June 2022:

(a)You had agreed with Mr Biddle and Mr Gage that Mr Hohua would join the gathering that day at Hodges Road, and that there he would be seriously assaulted. The assault was to take the form of what Tribesmen members refer to as a “hotbox”. I will come back to this wrongheaded practice shortly.

(b)And, Mr Rapana and Mr Biddle, you had agreed that Mr Biddle would go and get Mr Hohua from his home in Whakatāne, and take him to Hodges Road, for that purpose. You expected Mr Hohua…

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 Biddle

Details

AGLC: R v Biddle [2025] NZHC 3105
Case: [2025] NZHC 3105
Decision Date: 17 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Biddle involved four defendants, Mr Rapana, Mr Biddle, Mr Gage, and Mr Tapara, who were members of the Aotearoa chapter of the Tribesmen gang. They were charged for their involvement in the assault and death of Mark Hohua, who was also a member of the gang. The defendants were found guilty of either murder or manslaughter, depending on their individual roles in the incident. The sentencing remarks of Johnstone J outlined the events leading up to the assault and the roles played by each defendant. The judge also discussed the aggravating and mitigating factors of the case, as well as relevant sentencing authorities.

The judge found that Mr Rapana and Mr Biddle were guilty of murder, as they had planned and executed the assault on Mr Hohua, which resulted in his death. Mr Gage and Mr Tapara were found guilty of manslaughter, as they participated in the assault but did not intend for Mr Hohua to die. The judge imposed sentences of life imprisonment with minimum periods of 13 years for Mr Rapana and 12 years for Mr Biddle. Mr Gage was sentenced to five years' imprisonment, and Mr Tapara was sentenced to four years and six months' imprisonment. The judge considered the individual circumstances of each defendant, as well as the impact of their offending on the victim's family and friends, in determining the appropriate sentences.

The final orders of the court were that Mr Rapana and Mr Biddle were to be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 13 years and 12 years, respectively. Mr Gage was to be sentenced to five years' imprisonment, and Mr Tapara was to be sentenced to four years and six months' imprisonment.

Orders