R v Blackwood - [2018] NZHC 306

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF VICTIMS PURSUANT TO S 202 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2016-057-1736

[2018] NZHC 306

THE QUEEN

v

CHRISTOPHER JOHN BLACKWOOD

Hearing: 2 March 2018

Appearances:

E McCaughan and L Nunweek for the Crown I Jayanandan for the Defendant

Judgment:

2 March 2018

SENTENCING NOTES OF GORDON J

Solicitors: Crown Solicitor, Auckland Counsel: I Jayanandan, Auckland

R v BLACKWOOD [2018] NZHC 306 [2 March 2018]

Introduction

[1] Mr Blackwood you appear today for sentence after having pleaded guilty on 15 November 2017 to the following:

(a)Six charges of blackmail;1

(b)One charge of causing harm by posting a digital communication;2 and

(c)One charge of intimidation.3

[2] Blackmail carries a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.4 Causing harm by posting a digital communication carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $50,000.5 Intimidation carries a maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $2,000.6

[3] On your behalf, Ms Jayanandan submits that a sentence of imprisonment is neither automatic nor inevitable. She submits that a sentence of home detention is appropriate.

[4] Mr McCaughan for the Crown submits that an appropriate end sentence would not fall within the range of home detention.

Factual background

[5] There are five victims of your offending. They are all entitled to name suppression. I will set out your offending in relation to each of them individually.

[6] You facilitated your offending through the use of social media applications Facebook, Snapchat and Tinder. Your offending spanned a period from April or May 2014 to late August 2016. You were 21 years old at the beginning of the offending.

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 237(1).
2      Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015, s 22(1).
3      Summary Offences Act 1981, s 21(1)(a).
4      Crimes Act, s 238.
5      Harmful Digital Communications Act, s 22(3)(a).
6      Summary Offences Act, s 21(3).

Offending against “A”

[7] I will refer to the first victim as “A”. On 5 August 2014, you and A were communicating via cell phone. You asked her for intimate photographs in exchange for money. You promised you would not put the photographs on Facebook or send them to any other person.

[8] She complied with your request. She sent you a photograph of her chest covered by her bra, as well as a photograph of her exposed breasts.

[9] On 9 August 2014, you asked A for further intimate photographs. After she refused, you threatened to post the photographs you already had, everywhere you could. A repeatedly told you that she did not want to send you intimate photographs. You replied, “Now or I’m posting all your pics”. A did not provide any further photographs to you. This conduct gives rise to charge one, blackmail.

[10] On 13 August 2014, you asked A to meet you in person. A refused. You then sent…

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 Blackwood

Details

AGLC: R v Blackwood [2018] NZHC 306
Case: [2018] NZHC 306
Decision Date: 2 March 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, the case of R v Blackwood involved the defendant, Christopher John Blackwood, who was sentenced on 2 March 2018, following his guilty plea to multiple charges, including blackmail, causing harm by posting a digital communication, and intimidation. The court heard submissions from both the Crown and the defence, with the latter arguing for a sentence of home detention instead of imprisonment. Blackwood's offending, which spanned over two years and involved five victims, was facilitated through social media applications. The court determined a starting point of four years' imprisonment, considering factors such as the premeditation, breach of trust, impact on victims, and persistence of demands. The court also took into account Blackwood's personal circumstances, including his mental health issues, which led to a 20% discount on the sentence. Further discounts for remorse and a guilty plea resulted in a final sentence of two years and three months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently with the other charges. The court also ordered the destruction of Blackwood's cell phones located by the police.

Orders