R v Edwards - [2022] NZHC 2209

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CRI-2021-019-003618

[2022] NZHC 2209

THE QUEEN

v

JOHN KINA EDWARDS

Hearing: 31 August 2022

Appearances:

Rebecca Guthrie for the Crown Nicola Graham for the Defendant

Sentencing Notes:

31 August 2022

SENTENCING NOTES OF MOORE J

R v EDWARDS [2022] NZHC 2209 [31 August 2022]

Introduction

[1] John Edwards, at the age of 55, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to a charge of manslaughter.1 As you will know, the maximum penalty for manslaughter is life imprisonment.

The offending

[2] It is first necessary for me to set out the facts of your offending. No one will know them better than you but because sentencing is a judicial function which the law says must be undertaken in public, it is necessary for me to describe what happened and, in particular refer to those facts which are directly relevant to setting the sentence I must impose. Those facts are set out in a summary which you have accepted. There is no dispute about them.

[3] You knew the man you killed, Deiderick Grant, because you were both longstanding patched members of the Mongrel Mob.

[4] The background to what happened needs to be set. Around two years ago a safe containing over $250,000 in cash, apparently belonging to you and your partner, was stolen. You and your associates believed Mana Bennett was responsible. He had previously lived at the property where the safe had been stored.

[5] Mana Bennett and Mr Grant had a close relationship. Mr Grant was in a relationship with Mr Bennett’s mother and had been something of a father figure to him for many years.

[6] After the safe was stolen, Mr Bennett and his partner received threats. You confronted him. You demanded that he return the stolen property. He consistently denied any responsibility for or involvement in the theft.

[7] Mr Bennett’s mother and a number of Mongrel Mob members visited you with the aim of resolving the matter. Those discussions failed.

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 171 and 177. Maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

[8] Mr Bennett met with Mr Grant and told him what had happened. Given his friendship with you, Mr Grant indicated that he would attempt to resolve the dispute.

[9] On 5 June 2020, you and a number of other Mongrel Mob members, travelled to Mr Grant’s home. His partner, adult daughter and three children were there at the time. Mr Grant was not home. His daughter texted him. He replied that he would return home.

[10] When Mr Grant got home, he spoke with you in the garage. From there you both went into the house to speak privately. Your discussions became heated; in fact, very heated. Those elsewhere in the house could hear loud banging sounds coming from one of the bedrooms.

[11] You accept you struck Mr Grant. He fell to the ground. While he was lying prone you repeatedly stabbed…

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 Edwards

Details

AGLC: R v Edwards [2022] NZHC 2209
Case: [2022] NZHC 2209
Decision Date: 31 August 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

John Kina Edwards was sentenced for manslaughter by the High Court of New Zealand. Edwards, a member of the Mongrel Mob, pleaded guilty to killing Deiderick Grant, also a member of the same gang, through an assault using a plastic ballpoint pen. The maximum penalty for manslaughter in New Zealand is life imprisonment. The court detailed the background to the killing, including a stolen safe containing over $250,000 in cash, believed to have been taken by Mana Bennett, who had a close relationship with Grant. Edwards confronted Bennett, demanding the return of the stolen property, which Bennett denied. Edwards and other gang members went to Grant’s home where the fatal assault occurred in the presence of Grant's family. The court considered multiple aggravating factors including extreme violence, targeting the victim's face and head, use of a lethal weapon, and the breach of trust given their gang affiliations. The starting point for sentencing was determined to be ten years’ imprisonment, adjusted for personal mitigating factors such as remorse and a difficult upbringing, resulting in a final sentence of six years and six months’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of three years and three months.

The court balanced the severity of the crime against personal mitigating factors to arrive at the sentence. The judge found that the violent nature of the crime and the gang context necessitated a strong denunciation and deterrence, reflected in the significant minimum non-parole period. The final sentence recognised the mitigating factors while adequately addressing the gravity of the crime.

Orders