R v Granich

[2013] NZHC 2657

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI 2013-035-053 [2013] NZHC 2657

THE QUEEN

v

CASSANDRA GRANICH

Hearing:                   11 October 2013

Counsel:                  A C Whittaker for Crown

N J Sainsbury for Accused

Sentence:                 11 October 2013

SENTENCE OF RONALD YOUNG J

[1]      Ms Granich you have pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to an alleged murder.

[2]      You  and  others  who  have  been  charged  with  murder  apparently  were socialising on the evening of 11 January 2013.   Amongst the group there was a suggestion that the victim in this matter had acted inappropriately toward a woman. I add that there is nothing to suggest that that was true.   As a result of that conversation a number of people including you drove to the victim’s residence in Featherston.   When the group arrived they went into the victim’s residence.   You stayed outside the victim’s address on the footpath.  The others went inside and it is said as a result of their actions the victim died the following day in the hospital.

[3]      You then went back to Masterton.   The next day one of those said to be involved in the events the previous day arrived at your home.  That man then asked

you if you could get rid of a pair of shoes he had been wearing the night before.

R v GRANICH [2013] NZHC 2657 [11 October 2013]

Initially you said you wanted nothing to do with it but eventually you took the shoes from him.  You knew he had worn the shoes at the time of the alleged assault on the victim.  And you knew his shoes would be of interest to the police investigating the circumstances of the victim’s death.

[4]      You held your sleeves over your hands as you held the shoes to make sure you weren’t linked with the shoes yourself.   You then walked to the rear of the property and into a neighbouring property, threw one shoe down by a shed and the other one in the opposite direction.

[5]      When you were spoken to by the police you were remorseful and said it was a spur of the moment thing and that you didn’t intend to destroy the shoes.  You then helped the police in locating one of the shoes although the other could not be found.

[6]      You pleaded guilty after a sentence indication from me.

[7]      You  have  no  relevant  criminal  history.    The  pre-sentence  report  notes, however, that you do have a significant drug and alcohol problem consuming large amounts of alcohol and smoking cannabis in the evening.   Unsurprisingly the probation assessment suggests that your drug and alcohol use is now at a harmful level. You work at your grandfather’s printing factory in Petone.

[8]      You have expressed remorse for your involvement in this and anger and annoyance that you had become involved in the event. You are motivated it seems to reduce your alcohol and drug use.

[9]      I want to acknowledge the victim impact of this crime and the courage of Mrs Jones in reading out her victim impact statement.  You heard Mrs Jones and the Jones’ family victim impact report.   This death has had a terrible effect on their family.  I hope their words will ring in your ears for many years to come and you will understand the terrible effect that crime has on ordinary New Zealand families.

[10]     The Crown say as relevant to sentence, that you knew the person who owned the shoes had been accused of murder, you knew the shoes would be of interest to

the police you knew that they might contain important forensic evidence.   On the other hand the Crown accept that you assisted the police in finding the shoes, that you are remorseful and that you had pleaded guilty as soon as possible.

[11]     I take into account your counsel’s written and oral submissions.  He stresses that your involvement was a limited one, that you didn’t destroy the evidence and that  importantly  you  helped  in  recovering  the  evidence.   You  appear  as  a  first offender. You are remorseful and he stresses you pleaded guilty straight away.

[12]     Ms Granich being an accessory after the fact to any crime is a serious matter. Normally deterrent sentences are required.  It is, as you will understand especially serious here because you have been an accessory after the fact to an alleged murder. You helped one of those charged with murder to hide potential relevant forensic evidence.

[13]     But a significant feature in your case is the fact that you co-operated with the police, and that they have found most of the evidence that you tried to hide. And so, in the end, the police case does not seem to have been in any important way affected by your actions.

[14]   I accept, therefore, that a proper starting point is one of 15 months’ imprisonment.   I accept that you are remorseful and you deeply regret your involvement.  I accept you have pleaded guilty straight away and I, therefore, reduce that start sentence by a third to one of 10 months’ imprisonment.

[15]     In  my  sentence  indication  I  said  that  I  considered  a  sentence  of  home detention was appropriate because that sentence was, in the circumstances, sufficient to punish you and sufficient for your wrong doing and sufficient to deter you and others.

[16]     Such a sentence is still possible but I have been convinced by your counsel’s submissions  that  a  very  similar  sentence  is  preferable  in  the  circumstances  for reasons I am about to give.

[17]     If I impose a sentence of home detention there is a significant risk that you will not be able to continue with your employment.  In my assessment that is in no one’s  interest,  not  yours,  and  not  the  community’s.    In  this  case  I think  I can construct a sentence as similar as possible to one of home detention with similar restrictions but with providing you the opportunity to continue to work.

[18]     I, therefore sentence you in this way:

(a)       you are sentenced to five months’ community detention;

(b)      the community detention to be at 175 Dickson Street, Masterton;

(c)       the hours of detention will be from Monday to Friday, 7.00 p.m. to

5.30 a.m.  On the Sunday it will be from 6.30 a.m. to 5.30 a.m.; (d)   the sentence will commence 15 October 2013;

(e)      I also impose 150 hours community work.   You will undertake that community work on the Saturday when there is no direct community detention other than in the morning;

(f)      I  also  impose  a  sentence  of  12 months  supervision.    The  special conditions are that you will undertake and complete a programme or counselling or treatment for alcohol and drug abuse to the satisfaction of a probation officer and programme provider.

[19]     If there is anything about the sentence that I have imposed which appears not to achieve the ends I will hear from counsel or at least by memorandum if that is necessary.

[20]     I make an order suppressing the victim impact report and the contents of the oral presentation of the victim impact by Mrs Jones.

Ronald Young J

Solicitors:

Luke Cunningham & Clere, Crown Solicitors, Wellington

N J Sainsbury, Barrister, Wellington