R v Edwards - [2019] NZHC 2148

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2018-027-890

[2019] NZHC 2148

THE QUEEN

v

MARK ERUITI EDWARDS

Hearing: 30 August 2019

Appearances:

R B Annandale for the Crown JAG Moroney for the Defendant

Judgment:

30 August 2019

SENTENCE OF GAULT J

Solicitors:
Mr R B Annandale, Marsden Woods Inskip Smith, Office of the Crown Solicitor, Whangarei Mr JAG Moroney, Thode Utting & Co, Auckland

R v EDWARDS [2019] NZHC 2148 [30 August 2019]

[1] Mr Edwards is charged with a number of offences arising from a very serious attack on his ex-partner. He has pleaded guilty following a sentence indication I gave on 11 June 2019.1 In the circumstances, I set out my sentencing remarks in full, rather than simply annex the sentence indication.

[2]There are six charges:

(a)assault with intent to injure;2

(b)kidnapping;3

(c)causing grievous bodily harm with intent to do grievous bodily harm;4

(d)threatens to kill;5

(e)intentional damage;6 and

(f)indecent assault.7

[3] I take the lead charge to be causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH). The Crown submits a starting point of 9 to 10 years’ imprisonment is appropriate. The Crown seeks an uplift of 9 to 12 months for Mr Edwards’s previous convictions, and a limited reduction for a guilty plea. The defence seek a starting point of 7 ½ to 8 years’ imprisonment. They submit an uplift in the order of 6 to 9 months is appropriate for previous convictions, a discount to account for mitigating features personal to Mr Edwards, and a discount of 15 to 20 per cent for a guilty plea.

1      R v Edwards [2019] NZHC 1307.
2      Crimes Act 1961, s 193. Maximum penalty three years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 209(b). Maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 188(1). Maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.
5      Section 306(1)(a). Maximum penalty 7 years’ imprisonment.
6      Section 269(2)(a). Maximum penalty 7 years’ imprisonment.
7      Section 135. Maximum penalty 5 years’ imprisonment.

Facts

[4] The complainant is Mr Edwards’ former partner. They lived together in Waima and were in a relationship for several months.

[5] Around lunchtime on 2 March 2018 they drove to Rawene to do their laundry. While there the complainant spoke to a male artist, whom she recognised from when she was younger. Afterwards, when she told the defendant, he became angry and jealous. He drove away in her car but returned a short time later and he and the complainant began driving home, with the complainant driving.

[6] Not far along the road Mr Edwards started calling the complainant a “slut”. He began punching her around the head with his fist. The complainant attempted to jump from the driver’s seat in order to escape. She managed to stop the car, leap out and run down the road, waving down passing motorists. Someone stopped and noticed she was crying and looked in distress. The complainant asked them to call the police. She said the defendant had…

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 [2019] NZHC 2148
Case: [2019] NZHC 2148
Decision Date: 30 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Edwards concerns the sentencing of Mark Eruiti Edwards, who pleaded guilty to multiple serious charges stemming from a brutal attack on his ex-partner. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for Edwards, taking into account the nature and severity of the crimes, his personal circumstances, and the principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act 2002. The key legal issues included establishing the starting point for sentencing, considering any adjustments for Edwards’ personal circumstances, and determining any discount for his guilty plea.

The High Court of New Zealand, Whangarei Registry, began by assessing the severity of the crimes. The lead offence was causing grievous bodily harm with intent, which the court placed within band 3 of the sentencing guidelines due to the extreme violence, pre-meditation, and use of weapons. The court found that a starting point of 10 years’ imprisonment was appropriate, acknowledging the significant harm caused to the victim. The court then adjusted the sentence based on Edwards’ personal circumstances, including his traumatic upbringing and history of abuse, which led to a 20% discount for culpability. Additionally, the court applied a 20% discount for Edwards' guilty plea, which alleviated the trauma of reliving the incident for the victim. Ultimately, the court sentenced Edwards to 7 years and 2 months’ imprisonment for the lead offence, with other sentences for the related charges to be served concurrently. The court declined to impose a minimum period of imprisonment, leaving the decision to the Parole Board, in light of the psychiatrist's recommendations for treatment while incarcerated.

Orders