R v Faletolu - [2014] NZHC 2218

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI-2014-009-2140 [2014] NZHC 2218

THE QUEEN

v

TAELE VICTOR FALETOLU

Hearing: 12 September 2014

Appearances:

AMS Williams for Crown
B Ayrey and D Matthews for Prisoner

Judgment:

12 September 2014

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

[1] Taele Victor Faletolu, you are for sentence today, having pleaded guilty on

22 May 2014 to a charge of manslaughter.

[2] Now the events which gave rise to this charge began on the evening of Saturday 1 March 2014. On that night members of the Samoan community, including your victim Utopu (or Alfred) Waterhouse, along with his wife and some female associates, attended a fund raising dance at the New Brighton hall at Christchurch. You also attended that dance.

[3] The dance finished at about 1.30 am on the morning of Sunday 2 March. A group of about 30 people congregated outside in the car park of the hall as people were leaving and, within that group, some of the females began fighting amongst themselves. A female known to Mr Waterhouse was amongst this group. Mr Waterhouse walked over to assist her and a fight developed between some of his
male associates and some of the other males nearby. The fight between the males

R v FALETOLU [2014] NZHC 2218 [12 September 2014]

finished, however the females who had previously began fighting, began fighting again.

[4] Now while Mr Waterhouse was standing near these females, you ran towards him, jumping on top of the bonnet of a parked vehicle nearby and, while still moving forwards, you leapt off the car into the air towards the victim and you kneed or kicked him in the head as you jumped to the ground. Your victim immediately fell heavily onto the footpath where he lay unconscious. There were a number of people standing in the car park who witnessed this assault. You then ran off towards the hall but you were chased by two of the victim’s associates and detained.

[5] Your victim suffered a serious head injury involving a bleed on the brain. Although he received intensive medical care, he ultimately died at Christchurch hospital on 9 March 2014. The cause of death was as a result of a blunt force head injury, almost certainly caused by his fall, which, despite surgical intervention, had resulted in ongoing and irremediable brain swelling.

[6] It is clear from the victim impact statements that we have heard today that the death of Mr Waterhouse has had a huge impact on his family. We have heard from Mr Waterhouse’s young wife, who now, at the age of 22 is left to bring up her two young daughters. She says her husband was a hardworking husband and father who loved his children very much. They had plans to go to Samoa at the end of the year and Mr Waterhouse was saving very hard for that. However, those dreams have been taken away and life will not be the same for her.…

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 Faletolu

Details

AGLC: R v Faletolu [2014] NZHC 2218
Case: [2014] NZHC 2218
Decision Date: 12 September 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand was tasked with sentencing Taele Victor Faletolu, who had pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The court was required to decide the appropriate starting point for sentencing and the degree to which various mitigating and aggravating factors should be weighed. The legal issues included determining the severity of the offence, the impact of the defendant's remorse and character, and the appropriate balance between punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The court found that the significant level of violence, the resulting harm and loss to the victim's family, and the vulnerability of the victim were key aggravating factors. The mitigating factors included the defendant's early guilty plea, genuine remorse, good character, and youth. The court decided that the case was comparable to other single-strike manslaughter cases, but with a slightly higher starting point due to the nature of the attack. The court applied a 25% discount for the early guilty plea and a further 25% for the other mitigating factors, resulting in a total discount of 50%. This led to a final sentence of two years and nine months imprisonment. The court acknowledged the gravity of the offence and the need for denunciation and deterrence while also considering the defendant's potential for rehabilitation.

Orders