R v Haerewa - [2019] NZHC 2663

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2017-090-6299

[2019] NZHC 2663

THE QUEEN

v

BENNY HAEREWA

Hearing: 18 October 2019

Appearances:

S Teppett and F Culliney for the Crown J Verry for the Defendant

Judgment:

18 October 2019

SENTENCING NOTES OF POWELL J

R v HAEREWA [2019] NZHC 2663 [18 October 2019]

[1] Benny Haerewa you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty to a number of charges specifically:

(a)one charge of threatening to kill;1

(b)five charges of assault with intent to injure;2

(c)three charges of assault with a weapon;3

(d)one charge of intentional damage;4

(e)one charge of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection;5

(f)two charges of male assaults female;6

(g)one charge of common assault;7 and

(h)one charge of assault on a child.8

Strike warning

[2] I note that as the unlawful sexual connection charge is a qualifying offence under the three-strikes regime, you have received a first strike warning upon entry of conviction on that offence.

Factual background

[3] The offending for which you are being sentenced took place while you were in a relationship with the primary victim. You were in this relationship for approximately five years. The offending occurred during the last two years of that relationship, while

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 306: maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
2      Section 193: maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 202C: maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 269(2)(a): maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
5      Section 128(1)(b): maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment.
6      Section 194(b): maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.
7      Section 196: maximum penalty of one years’ imprisonment.
8      Section 194(a): maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.

you were living together with your young daughter and the primary victim’s other children.

[4] The offending which took place over a lengthy period included you physically and ultimately sexually assaulting the primary victim, and physically abusing her children as well as causing significant damage to the home. I will set out more details of that offending when assessing the aggravating factors later in these notes.

Purposes and principles of sentencing

[5] The Sentencing Act 2002 sets out the purposes and principles of sentencing. The primary purposes of sentencing in this case are to hold you accountable for the harm that you have done to all of the victims;9 to promote in you a sense of responsibility for, and acknowledgement of, that harm;10 to denounce your conduct;11 and to deter you and others from committing similar types of offences12 and of particular importance in this case, to protect the community from you.13

[6] The principles of sentencing that are of particular relevance in this case are the need to take into account the gravity of your offending, including your degree of culpability14 and to take into account the seriousness of the type of offence in comparison with other types of offences.15 It is also necessary to take into account the general desirability of…

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 Haerewa

Details

AGLC: R v Haerewa [2019] NZHC 2663
Case: [2019] NZHC 2663
Decision Date: 18 October 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Benny Haerewa appeared before Powell J for sentencing, having pleaded guilty to multiple charges including threatening to kill, assault with intent to injure, assault with a weapon, intentional damage, sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, male assaults female, common assault, and assault on a child. The case involved extensive domestic violence and abuse over a five-year period within a familial context. The central legal issue was whether Haerewa should be sentenced to imprisonment for a fixed term or preventive detention, which entails indefinite imprisonment with release contingent on the Parole Board’s determination of community safety. The court meticulously assessed the starting point for each offence, adjusted for aggravating and mitigating personal circumstances, and applied a discount for Haerewa’s guilty plea. The starting point for the sexual and violent offending, alongside the intentional damage, was set at 9½ years, while the physical violence against the children warranted a separate starting point of two years, resulting in a total finite sentence of nine years. Given the gravity of the offences and previous convictions, a minimum non-parole period of six years was deemed necessary. The court ultimately rejected the imposition of preventive detention, finding insufficient evidence that Haerewa would commit another qualifying violent offence upon release.

Orders