[1] Mr Green, you come before me for sentence, having pleaded guilty to charges of conspiring to defeat justice,1 interfering with human remains,2 and driving while disqualified.3 As you know, these charges arose following Mitchell Paterson’s death and disposal of his body in July last year.

[2] The Crown suggests a sentence of two years and nine months’ imprisonment, to be discounted for your guilty plea. Your counsel, Sheila Cameron, seeks an end sentence of two years’ imprisonment or less, enabling you to apply for home detention. In the end, the decision is mine; I am not bound to follow either of their views.

The offending

[3] You played no part in Mr Paterson’s death early on 12 July 2018. Others are charged with his murder, manslaughter and kidnapping. But you assisted Kyra Betteridge and a co-offender to dispose of his body, and the vehicle carrying it.

[4] You were called in the early hours of 13 July 2018 to assist. Although Ms Cameron says you did not know you were to help dispose of Mr Paterson’s body, I must sentence you on the basis of the summary of facts, which records a co-offender discussed what had occurred with you by phone. You went to meet Ms Betteridge and the co-offender, and the three of you agreed to dispose of Mr Paterson’s body at McLaren Falls. You arrived there around 4 am. You and the co-offender removed Mr Paterson’s tarpaulin-wrapped body from the back of the vehicle and threw it over a bridge railing into the water below. The three of you then discussed disposing of the vehicle. You volunteered a nearby rural address at which the vehicle could be left. You all then left McLaren Falls. Mr Paterson’s body was discovered later that morning by members of the public.

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 116. Maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment.
2      Section 150(b). Maximum penalty is two years’ imprisonment.
3      Land Transport Act 1998, ss 32(1) and 32(3). Maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment or a $4500 fine. The court must order the person be disqualified from driving for 6 months or more.

Victim impact statements

[5] The Crown justifiably treats Mr Paterson’s family as victims of your offending, being disadvantaged by it.4 I have statements from Mr Paterson’s father and mother (Craig and Valerie Paterson), and his former partner (Philippa Taitoko) with whom he has a daughter (Jasmine), for my sentencing of you. You have heard Mr Paterson read his statement directly to you. Although those statements largely speak of the devasting effect Mr Paterson’s death has had on their…

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 Green

Details

AGLC: R v Green [2019] NZHC 1481
Case: [2019] NZHC 1481
Decision Date: 26 June 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

James Lee Green has pleaded guilty to conspiring to defeat justice, interfering with human remains, and driving while disqualified. The charges relate to the disposal of the body of Mitchell Paterson, following his death in July 2018. The court heard that Mr. Green assisted in disposing of Mr. Paterson’s body and the vehicle used in the crime. The Crown sought a sentence of two years and nine months’ imprisonment, while the defence sought a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or less, to enable Mr. Green to apply for home detention. The court considered the purpose and principles of sentencing, including holding the offender accountable, encouraging a sense of responsibility, denunciation, and deterrence. The court adopted a starting point of two years and five months’ imprisonment, adjusted for Mr. Green’s guilty pleas by applying a 15% discount, resulting in an end sentence of two years’ imprisonment. The court granted leave for Mr. Green to apply for home detention, subject to conditions including a suitable residence and a material deterioration in his health. The court sentenced Mr. Green to two years’ imprisonment for conspiring to defeat justice, six months’ imprisonment for interfering with human remains (to be served concurrently), and disqualified him from driving for six months.

Final orders: Mr. Green is sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for conspiring to defeat justice, six months’ imprisonment for interfering with human remains (to be served concurrently), and disqualified from driving for six months. Leave is granted for Mr. Green to apply for home detention, subject to conditions including a suitable residence and a material deterioration in his health.

Orders