R v Greer - [2014] NZHC 2364

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND MASTERTON REGISTRY

CRI-2012-035-991 [2014] NZHC 2364

THE QUEEN

v

ALLAN IVO GREER

Hearing:
26 September 2014

(Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:

I R Murray for Crown
Defendant in person

Judgment:

26 September 2014

SENTENCING REMARKS OF MACKENZIE J

[1] Mr Greer you appear for sentencing on one count of sexual violation by rape, three counts of threatening to kill, two counts of aggravated burglary, one count of possession of an offensive weapon, two representative counts of supplying methamphetamine and one representative count of supplying cannabis to a person under 18 years of age. You were found guilty of those offences by a jury following your trial in May 2014. You represented yourself at trial. I need to record that I am satisfied that you were informed of your rights relating to legal representation and legal aid; that you fully understood those rights and had the opportunity to exercise them; but that you refused to exercise those rights.

[2] The facts of your offending are that you formed a most inappropriate attachment to two young women. You sought to dominate those vulnerable young women. You supplied both of them with methamphetamine, and one of them with
cannabis – you will be silent while I deliver my remarks. You terrorised them and

R v GREER [2014] NZHC 2364 [26 September 2014]

their families. You went to the home of the father of the first female victim and threatened to cut his throat. He was sufficiently concerned at that threat to leave his home and go and stay with his daughter, the first female victim, and her partner. You went to the house late one night armed with a knife. When the father opened the door to you you hit him, and made threats to others in the house. Sometime later, when the first female victim and her father were in the kitchen of his house, you visited and said that you would kill her and slit her father’s throat.

[3] Your offending against the second female victim involved supplying her with methamphetamine. On several occasions she drove you around the lower North Island. On one occasion you took her to your residence at Castlepoint. You plied her with drugs and alcohol until she became intoxicated and fell asleep. You then raped her. You went to considerable lengths to break up a relationship between her and the first female victim’s brother. Your threats were taken seriously – be quiet please - your threats were taken seriously to the extent that the family arranged for him to leave town for several weeks to take him away from the danger you presented. In your efforts to break up the relationship, you went to a house where the second female victim was alone. You broke in armed with a shotgun and knife and threatened her and forced her to go with you.

[4] The final straw, which led to a complaint to police, was when you went to the first…

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 Greer

Details

AGLC: R v Greer [2014] NZHC 2364
Case: [2014] NZHC 2364
Decision Date: 26 September 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand presided over the case of The Queen v Allan Ivo Greer. Allan Ivo Greer was found guilty of one count of sexual violation by rape, three counts of threatening to kill, two counts of aggravated burglary, one count of possession of an offensive weapon, two representative counts of supplying methamphetamine, and one representative count of supplying cannabis to a person under 18 years of age. The court had to decide whether Greer posed a significant and ongoing risk to the safety of the community, and if preventive detention was necessary to protect the community from him.

The court considered several factors, including Greer's criminal history, the seriousness of the harm caused by the offending, information indicating a tendency to commit serious offences in the future, and the absence of efforts to address the causes of the offending. The court found that Greer's criminal history revealed a pattern of serious offending, and that the harm caused to the victims and the community was significant. The reports from health assessors indicated that Greer was at high risk of reoffending, particularly in relation to vulnerable girls aged 16 years or younger. Additionally, Greer had made no effort to address the causes of his offending, and in fact, had obstructed any efforts towards addressing the risk he posed.

The court concluded that a sentence of preventive detention was necessary to protect the community from Greer, as the risk he posed was too great for a finite sentence to provide adequate protection. Greer was sentenced to preventive detention, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years, on the charge of sexual violation by rape. He was also sentenced to various terms of imprisonment for the other charges, all to be served concurrently.

In summary, the High Court of New Zealand found Allan Ivo Greer guilty of multiple serious offences and sentenced him to preventive detention, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years, due to the significant risk he posed to the safety of the community.

Orders