R v Cameron - [2025] NZHC 1505

NOTE: SUPPRESSION OF FACTS AT [14] UNTIL FURTHER ORDER OF THE COURT.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2024-009-7035

[2025] NZHC 1505

THE KING

v

ELLIOTT ALFRED JAMES CAMERON

Hearing: 10 June 2025

Appearances:

B Hawes for Crown

C M Ruane for Defendant

Judgment:

10 June 2025

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

[1]Mr Cameron you appear for sentence today for the murder of Frances Phelps.

[2] The lawyers are agreed that you must be sentenced to life imprisonment.1 The only real debate at sentencing today is when you become eligible for parole, that is, what minimum period of imprisonment should be imposed and that will be the focus of what I talk about today.

1 Pursuant to s 102 Sentencing Act 2002.

R v CAMERON [2025] NZHC 1505 [10 June 2025]

The offending

[3]I will now briefly outline the facts of your offending.

[4] Mrs Phelps who was 83 years old, lived alone in Mount Pleasant Road, Christchurch. You had been the gardener for her neighbour for over 10 years. Around 2021, you began doing some gardening for her and her husband. When her husband passed away in 2022, you continued to help her on a casual basis.

[5] At the time, you were living in Hillmorton Hospital as a voluntary patient. You were shortly to move to refurbished accommodation at the hospital and staff were assisting you to reduce the amount of belongings that you had accumulated before you moved into your new accommodation. It appeared that this caused you some anxiety which you had expressed to various staff members.

[6] On Friday 4 October 2024 you left the hospital at 8.50 am and caught the bus to Mount Pleasant. You arrived at the driveway of the victim’s property shortly after 10 am. You met the victim at the garage door, and you took a small axe that you have previously used in the garden from inside the garage. You then struck the victim in the head with the axe multiple times causing catastrophic and fatal injuries to her. You then left her and caught the bus back to Hillmorton Hospital, arriving shortly after midday.

[7]Later that afternoon you disclosed to two separate nurses that, between 10 and

10.30 am, you had assaulted a woman in Mount Pleasant with an axe and they should call the police. The nurses reported this disclosure to police, but due to a number of factors, this was not taken further at the time. The victim’s body was not found until 7 October 2024. However, it is believed she would have died very soon after, if not immediately, from the wounds you inflicted.

Victim Impact Statements

[8] Before turning to sentence, I want to acknowledge the victims of your crime. Mrs Phelps was a much-loved mother, described as kind and generous and who was loved and treasured by all who met her. I have a victim impact statement from

Mrs Phelps’ daughter. She…

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 Cameron

Details

AGLC: R v Cameron [2025] NZHC 1505
Case: [2025] NZHC 1505
Decision Date: 10 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of The King v Cameron, the defendant, Elliott Alfred James Cameron, was sentenced for the murder of Frances Phelps. Cameron, who had a history of mental health issues, killed Phelps by striking her with an axe. Cameron had previously worked as a gardener for Phelps and was living in a psychiatric hospital at the time of the murder. After committing the crime, Cameron disclosed the assault to hospital staff, who failed to notify the police. The case focused on determining the minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) for Cameron's life sentence, with both the Crown and the defence presenting their views on the appropriate duration.

The court considered various factors, including the vulnerability of the victim, the nature of the crime, and Cameron's personal circumstances. The court acknowledged Cameron's mental impairment due to a brain injury sustained at age 15, but also noted his history of threats to harm others, particularly in relation to his desire to remain in a mental health facility. Despite Cameron's lack of remorse and his explanation that he pleaded guilty for better treatment, the court determined that a life sentence was necessary to hold Cameron accountable and protect the community. The Crown proposed a starting point of 12 to 13 years for the MPI, considering the aggravating factors but deducting two years for Cameron's guilty pleas and personal factors. The defence proposed a minimum period of 10 years, taking into account Cameron's age and health. After weighing the arguments and relevant case law, the court decided on a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years.

The final orders of the court were that Cameron be sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Frances Phelps, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years. This decision balanced the need for accountability, denunciation, deterrence, and community protection with Cameron's personal circumstances and mental impairment. The court respected the family's request for privacy regarding the victim impact statements, acknowledging the profound grief and trauma they have endured.

Orders