R v Cooper - [2013] NZHC 2713

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2012-004-11453 [2013] NZHC 2713

THE QUEEN

v

JAMES GRANT COOPER

Hearing: 18 October 2013

Appearances: A J Pollett for Crown
A M Wharepouri, I M Brookie and K McCoy for Cooper

Sentence: 18 October 2013

SENTENCING REMARKS OF ALLAN J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor Auckland
A M Wharepouri Auckland

R v COOPER [2013] NZHC 2713 [18 October 2013]

[1] Mr Cooper, you appear for sentence this morning following your conviction on one count of manslaughter, for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment, and one of attempting to pervert the course of justice, for which the maximum sentence is seven years imprisonment.

[2] The manslaughter conviction was entered at the conclusion of your trial, when the jury found you not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. You pleaded guilty to attempting to pervert the course of justice at the first callover in this Court in October 2012.

Factual background

[3] These charges arose out of the death of Javed Mills at your home one morning in late July 2009. Javed and you were friends. For some time you had mixed in the same social group. He was a talented musician who loved nothing more than playing his guitar, either in company or on his own, but he had his personal problems associated largely with his drug habit. In the early part of 2009 he was left without accommodation and seems to have spent time in the homes of several people, including for a time with you at your parents’ home in Mt Wellington. Later he went to Rotorua where he stayed at two separate flats, but he got into difficulties there, partly because of his somewhat erratic behaviour. Although he was non-confrontational and not at all violent, some of his flat-mates took issue with some aspects of his behaviour, and his position in Rotorua became untenable.

[4] At that point you and a friend brought him back from Rotorua to Auckland, where he was installed in what was known as the den, a small shed in the grounds of your parents’ residence. He could not stay inside with you as he had done formerly, because your father did not want him in the house. It appears he was staying in the den without your parents’ knowledge.

[5] On the morning concerned you went out to see Javed in the den, apparently for the purpose of talking to him about his plans for the future. That generated a disagreement which turned into a physical fight. Your explanation to the police, and it stands unchallenged, was that Javed suddenly attacked you physically, and that in

the course of defending yourself you punched him twice to the head. But you also told the police that, having become angry at the attack and at a time when Javed posed no immediate threat, you deliberately struck him in the temple region with your right elbow. That was a manoeuvre that you understood was likely to…

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 Cooper

Details

AGLC: R v Cooper [2013] NZHC 2713
Case: [2013] NZHC 2713
Decision Date: 18 October 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Cooper involved the sentencing of James Grant Cooper, who was convicted of manslaughter and attempting to pervert the course of justice. The manslaughter conviction arose from the death of Javed Mills, while the perverting charge related to Cooper's actions following Mills' death, including burying the body and creating a false online profile to mislead authorities. The High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, presided over the case. Cooper was sentenced to a total of eight years and three months in prison, with four years and three months for manslaughter and four years for perverting the course of justice. The court considered various factors, including the nature of the offenses, Cooper's youth, his expressions of remorse, and his early guilty plea. The court emphasized the importance of addressing the administration of justice and the need for a stern response to such offenses.

Orders