R v Harimate Te Heuheu - [2023] NZHC 506

[REDACTED VERSION]

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY COMPLAINANTS UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

NAMES OF ALL PERSONS REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH [4], SAVE FOR KEATON DALE, ON THE BASIS THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN WITNESSES IN THE PROCEEDING AND ENTITLED TO NAME SUPPRESSION UNDER S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2021-209-151

[2023] NZHC 506

THE KING

v

KHANYE ERUERA HARIMATE TE HEUHEU

Hearing: 14 March 2023

Appearances:

D L Elsmore and C C White for Crown

P H B Hall KC and E Huda for Defendant

Judgment:

14 March 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

Introduction

[1] Mr Harimate Te HeuHeu you are here for sentence today having pleaded guilty to one charge of manslaughter and two charges of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH).

R v HARIMATE TE HEUHEU [2023] NZHC 506 [14 March 2023]

[2] Before I discuss the sentence, I want to acknowledge the whānau and friends of the victims, and in particular, of Zion Purukamu who lost his life that night. I agree, no family should have to learn that a night of celebration for their son and brother turned into a night of tragedy and devastating loss. I am deeply conscious that nothing I can do in this Courtroom today will bring Zion back. However, I thank you for the love and courage that you have shown in preparing the victim impact statements which gave me a sense of the young man that Zion was and the ambitions he had.

The facts of the offending

[3] The events which gave rise to these charges happened on Friday, 13 August 2021. A group of friends were at an Airbnb property in Medbury Terrace, Christchurch, to celebrate a young woman’s 17th birthday party.

[4] At around 10 pm, you arrived at the party with two associates, [A] and Keaton Dale. Already at the party were a group of associates which included the deceased, Zion Purukamu, and the two other victims, [B] and [C]. Other members of the group included [D] and [E] and [F]. This group was known as the “Rowley Boys”, because they all came from the same street, Rowley Avenue.

[5] At some point in the evening, [C] and Zion confronted you about kissing a girl whom they considered was too drunk. They told you to leave the property, but you refused. A physical altercation began between you and a number of the Rowley Boys. Those boys then chased you out on to the street where the fight continued. You were chased into a covered entranceway of another property in Medbury Terrace. Your two associates followed the confrontation and Keaton joined you in the entranceway.

[6] A number of the Rowley boys, including two of the victims, Zion and [C], continued to fight with you. [C]…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Harimate Te Heuheu and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2023] NZHC 506
Decision Date: 14 March 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Khanye Erua Harimate Te Heuheu was sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand for manslaughter and two charges of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH). The case arose from a physical altercation that occurred at a birthday party on 13 August 2021. Te Heuheu arrived at the party with two associates and engaged in a fight with a group of people known as the "Rowley Boys". During the altercation, Te Heuheu stabbed three individuals, one fatally. The court considered the principles of sentencing, including accountability, denunciation, and rehabilitation. The Crown argued for a starting point of 12 years, considering the seriousness of the injuries inflicted and the use of a lethal weapon. Te Heuheu's defense highlighted the element of self-defense and the minor injuries he sustained.

The court acknowledged the mitigating factors, including Te Heuheu's age at the time of the offence, his guilty plea, and aspects of his background. The neuropsychological report indicated cognitive difficulties and impulsivity, supporting a discount for youth. The court also considered the benefit of the guilty plea but did not find sufficient evidence of genuine remorse. The final sentence took into account the principle of totality, resulting in a total imprisonment term of five years and six months for manslaughter, and concurrent terms of two and three years for the wounding charges.

Orders