R v Blake - [2015] NZHC 1714

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NEW PLYMOUTH REGISTRY

CRI-2015-043-170 [2015] NZHC 1714

THE QUEEN

v

DAVID BLAKE

Hearing: 24 July 2015

Counsel:

C E Clarke and A W M Britton for Crown
P M Keegan and J M Woodcock for Defendant

Judgment:

24 July 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF ELLIS J

These are the sentencing remarks I intended to deliver in Court today. But the advice received from Corrections and Police shortly before the hearing was due to commence was that Mr Blake’s state was such that it was unlikely that I would be able to do so without serious incident. In particular, there were fears of violence against both those guarding him and members of his family. The advice was that, for the same reason, it would be most unwise to require Mr Blake to be in Court for the reading of victim impact statements. Mr Keegan confirmed the advice received.

Accordingly the Court heard brief submissions from counsel in Mr Blake’s presence and then two victim impacts statements were read aloud in his absence. I had, of course, read all the statements. Mr Blake was then returned to Court and was
sentenced in accordance with the final paragraph of these notes.

R v BLAKE [2015] NZHC 1714 [24 July 2015]

I explained the process that I proposed to follow to the media and to the members of the public before the hearing began.

It is nonetheless important that there be a public record of the reasons for the sentence I imposed. Those reasons may be discerned from what follows.

[1] Mr Blake you are for sentence today for murdering your mother, Gwendoline Blake, on 30 January this year. You pleaded guilty on 20 April 2015.

[2] The sentence for murder, unless it would be manifestly unjust, is life imprisonment. In your case there is no suggestion that a sentence of life imprisonment would be unjust so that is the sentence that I will be imposing on you today. But the question I must decide, and to which counsel’s submissions this morning have been directed, is what minimum period of imprisonment should be imposed as a condition of that sentence. The minimum term of imprisonment or MPI is the term that you must serve before you can even be considered for parole. It does not fix the term of your sentence which, I emphasise, will be one of life imprisonment.

[3] The minimum period of imprisonment I impose depends in large part upon the facts of the matter and so I need to summarise those first.

[4] I begin by noting that you say you have very little recall of what actually happened on 30 January and there has not been a trial so I have not heard any evidence. I base what I am about to say on what is contained in the Police Summary of Facts, which is based on the scientific and pathological evidence obtained by the Police when investigating Gwendoline’s death. Notwithstanding the expertise…

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 Blake

Details

AGLC: R v Blake [2015] NZHC 1714
Case: [2015] NZHC 1714
Decision Date: 24 July 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Blake, the defendant, David Blake, faced sentencing for the murder of his mother, Gwendoline Blake. The incident occurred on January 30, 2015, and Blake pleaded guilty to the charge on April 20, 2015. The High Court of New Zealand, New Plymouth Registry, presided over by Justice Ellis, delivered the sentencing remarks on July 24, 2015. Given the defendant's volatile state, the court opted to hear victim impact statements in his absence, followed by a brief hearing with counsel present. The central legal issue was determining the appropriate minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) for the defendant before he could be considered for parole. Given the mandatory life imprisonment sentence for murder, the court had to weigh various factors to determine the minimum term.

The court considered several factors when deciding the MPI, including the brutality of the crime, the defendant's previous convictions, and the impact on the victim's family. The court found that the murder was particularly brutal, as Blake used a knife to stab his mother multiple times, including her eyes and neck, while she was already incapacitated. The use of a weapon, coupled with the extreme harm caused to the victim and her family, were significant aggravating factors. Additionally, the court noted the defendant's history of violent offending, although it did not assign significant weight to his early guilty plea or his remorse. Justice Ellis determined that the brutality and callousness of the crime warranted an MPI of 17 years, but reduced it by one year to account for the early guilty plea, resulting in a final MPI of 16 years. Consequently, Blake was sentenced to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 16 years.

Orders