Legal Research
Cases
R v Eaton

R v Eaton

Case [2021] NZHC 3357 8 December 2021

Murder

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

Criminal Liability

Mens Rea & Intention

Minimum Period of Imprisonment

Aggravating Factors

Personal Circumstances

Remorse

Sentencing

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE PAPAIOEA ROHE

CRI-2020-054-2399

[2021] NZHC 3357

THE QUEEN

v

DEAN PHILIP EATON

Hearing: 8 December 2021

Appearances:

B D Vanderkolk and G J C Carter for Crown P L Murray and T E Hesketh for Defendant

Sentencing Date:

8 December 2021

SENTENCING NOTES OF ISAC J

Introduction

[1] Mr Eaton, you are here for sentence for the murder of Ricky Osgood. You are also to be sentenced on a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. My remarks will take a little while, so you may sit while I am talking, and I will get you to stand up at the end.

[2] Mr Osgood was an outgoing, larger than life man. Those close to him tell me he was a bit of a character. At 34 he had his life ahead of him. He had two young children, a loving partner, and was adored within his wider family. Before I begin my sentencing remarks, I acknowledge Mr Osgood’s family and loved ones. I commend you on the courage you showed in reading your victim impact statements out to the Court. Of course, no sentence can adequately respond to the loss that you have suffered

R v EATON [2021] NZHC 3357 [8 December 2021]

— and nothing will bring Mr Osgood back — but I hope some sense of justice is provided to you today.

[3] I should also say to all those here today that I presided over the trial and heard all the evidence, and I have had time to consider counsels’ submissions and some reports in order to reach the sentence that I am going to impose.

[4] Mr Eaton, my approach to sentencing you today will be this: I will first outline the facts of your offending and I will then explain the approach that is taken to the sentence for murder. I will then address circumstances that are relevant to your sentence before formally imposing sentence on you.

[5] The required sentence for murder is life imprisonment except in limited circumstances. It is agreed that those limited circumstances do not apply in your case. So, life imprisonment will be your sentence. As you have heard from counsel the key question for me today is what minimum non-parole period (what the lawyers refer to as an MPI) you should serve before you are eligible to be released on parole.

[6] There are several things I must consider in determining the appropriate MPI in your case, but I am going to begin by summarising what you did on 8 September 2020.

The facts

[7] That morning of you were dropped by associates at Ms Tyacke and Mr Osgood’s address on the pretext of obtaining cannabis. It was broad daylight.

[8] Ms Tyacke is the mother of two of your children, and your relationship with her had been difficult. She was in a relatively new relationship with Mr Osgood.…

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 Eaton

Details

AGLC: R v Eaton [2021] NZHC 3357
Case: [2021] NZHC 3357
Decision Date: 8 December 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Eaton, Dean Philip Eaton was sentenced for the murder of Ricky Osgood and an attempt to pervert the course of justice. The High Court of New Zealand, Palmerston North Registry, presided over the sentencing. The central legal issue was to determine the appropriate minimum non-parole period (MPI) for Eaton's murder conviction, considering the aggravating and mitigating factors of his case. The court had to balance the principles of accountability, denunciation, deterrence, and community protection against the personal circumstances of the offender.

The court first outlined the facts of the offence, highlighting Eaton's premeditated actions, including wearing a stab-proof vest and carrying a knife, and his sustained presence at Osgood's property despite being unwelcome. The court noted the serious harm caused by Eaton's stabbing of Osgood, which led to his death. The court rejected Eaton's claims of self-defence and his assertion that his actions were not intended to kill Osgood. For the charge of perverting the course of justice, Eaton had attempted to influence a witness while in custody.

In determining the MPI, the court considered various aggravating factors, such as Eaton's use of a weapon and his attempt to cover his tracks post-offence. The court also reviewed relevant case law and determined an MPI higher than the statutory minimum was necessary. After considering mitigating factors, including Eaton's background and personal circumstances, the court decided on a 10% discount for personal circumstances, leading to an adjusted MPI of 11 years. Consequently, Eaton was sentenced to life imprisonment with an MPI of 11 years for the murder charge and six months imprisonment, concurrent, for the charge of perverting the course of justice.

Orders