R v Gray - [2019] NZHC 1135

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2017-009-007857

[2019] NZHC 1135

THE QUEEN

v

HAYDEN ANTHONY GRAY

Hearing: 23 May 2019

Appearances:

D L Elsmore for the Crown

E C Bulger and J M Stringer for the Defendant

Judgment:

23 May 2019

SENTENCING NOTES OF OSBORNE J

[1] Mr Gray, you were found guilty of two charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and that followed a Judge-alone trial before me.1

[2]You appear today for sentence on those charges.

Facts

[3] The facts of your offending are fully dealt with in the judgment which I delivered on 1 May 2019.2 It is against the background of those findings that I have to sentence you.

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 188(1) (maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment).
2 R v Gray [2019] NZHC 941 (Reasons Judgment); [2019] NZHC 942 (Verdict).

R v GRAY [2019] NZHC 1135 [23 May 2019]

[4] In summary, you inflicted grave injuries upon your infant son, Carter Hutton, who had been born to you and your fiancée, Megan Hutton, on 24 June 2017. The graver of those injuries occurred on 24 July 2017 when you inflicted on Carter very serious head injuries, including brain damage. You caused those injuries either by severely shaking him or violently throwing him against a soft object.

[5] Some 10 days earlier you had inflicted a large number of rib fractures and long bone fractures on Carter. In all he suffered 40 fractures of which at least 15 had occurred on that occasion, some 10 days earlier. The rib injuries were consistent with your having violently squeezed Carter’s chest. You caused Carter’s other fractures by violently shaking him or violently throwing him against a soft object.

[6] It was clear from the medical evidence that Carter would have been severely hurt by the fractures. There is evidence that he cried a lot around this time and, with the benefit of hindsight, that was consistent with the injuries we now know he suffered. It happens that the nature of the fractures was such that Carter would nevertheless have recovered from them.

[7] What he could not, and never did not recover from, were the injuries you inflicted on 24 July 2017. Again, there were some aspects of those injuries from which, although severe, he might have recovered. That includes the extensive haemorrhaging in his eyes. But his brain injuries which you caused that day meant that a large part of his brain died. He himself ultimately died a year and a day after you inflicted the injuries from complications arising from the injuries.

[8] The extent of his suffering, and the family’s suffering, and I mean the broader family, through that period was not directly relevant to my judgment. But it was spoken to in Court by Ms Hutton and through the medical evidence called from the experts. As much as those close to him strove to give…

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 Gray

Details

AGLC: R v Gray [2019] NZHC 1135
Case: [2019] NZHC 1135
Decision Date: 23 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of R v Gray involved Hayden Anthony Gray who was sentenced for two charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, following a judge-alone trial. Gray inflicted grave injuries on his infant son, Carter Hutton, including brain damage and multiple fractures, leading to Carter's death. The court had to determine an appropriate sentence considering the severity of the offences and the principles of denunciation, deterrence, and accountability.

The legal issues before the court included determining the appropriate sentencing band and starting point based on the nature of the offences, the aggravating and mitigating factors, and the offender's personal circumstances. The court assessed the extreme violence, serious injury, vulnerability of the victim, and breach of trust as significant aggravating factors. The court also considered mitigating factors such as Gray's previously good character and lack of a criminal history, though it found no genuine remorse for the crimes committed.

The court reasoned that Gray's offending was extremely grave, with the 24 July 2017 incident being particularly severe due to the extreme violence and resulting in fatal injuries. The court identified a starting point of 11 and a half years for the 24 July offence and nine years for the earlier offence. After considering mitigating factors, the court decided on a sentence of 10 and a half years for the lead offence and eight years concurrently for the earlier offence. The sentences were to be served simultaneously, reflecting the totality of Gray's offending.

The final orders of the court were that Hayden Anthony Gray was sentenced to 10 and a half years' imprisonment for the charge relating to 24 July 2017 and eight years' imprisonment, to be served concurrently, for the charge relating to the period between 24 June 2017 and 24 July 2017.

Orders