IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CRI-2020-092-11967
[2023] NZHC 3364
THE KING
v
GREGORY DAVID ALLAN HART
Hearing:
24 November 2023
Appearances:
N Fletcher and A Al-Janabi for Crown
P Borich KC and J Hudson for Defendant
Judgment:
24 November 2023
SENTENCING NOTES OF VENNING J
Solicitors: Kayes Fletcher Walker Ltd, Manukau, Auckland Counsel: P Borich KC/J M Hudson, Auckland
R v HART [2023] NZHC 3364 [24 November 2023]
[1] Gregory Hart you are for sentence this morning for manslaughter for your role in the death of Wiremu Arapo on 20 October 2020 and on the associated charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice by setting fire to his home at Minerva Terrace. The maximum sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment. The maximum sentence for attempting to pervert the course of justice is seven years. Your co-defendant Sean Hayde, was convicted of murder and attempting to pervert the course of justice. He is now for sentence on 29 February 2024.
[2] The jury differentiated between the roles that you and Mr Hayde played in the killing of Mr Arapo. Having presided over the trial I have a clear view of how the jury came to make that distinction between your respective roles in his killing. I agree with it.
[3] Mr Hayde and you were close friends. In the first half of 2020 he introduced you to Mr Arapo, who at the time was Mr Hayde’s boxing trainer. Then in about July 2020 you moved into Minerva Terrace and became Mr Arapo’s flatmate. You had both previously served in the army. At about the same time Mr Arapo introduced Mr Hayde to his friend, Jenifer McManus with whom Mr Arapo had previously shared a brief sexual relationship. From about mid-August 2020 Mr Hayde and Ms McManus began a sexual relationship. While this was going on problems emerged between you and Mr Arapo as flatmates. You were often late with your payments of rent and general expenses. Mr Arapo was an organised and motivated person. He was annoyed that you did not keep your part of the house tidy and he was frustrated at your attitude and lack of motivation. From text and other messages it seems clear that Mr Arapo considered you to be lazy and a poor father to your then seven-year-old son. Mr Arapo tried to encourage you and arranged work for you from time to time but you came to resent what you referred to as Mr Arapo’s ‘bullshit chats’.
[4] By 15 October 2020 the situation had deteriorated to the stage where Mr Arapo had given you notice to leave the flat. By this time also, the previous friendship between Mr Arapo and Mr Hayde had completely broken down. They had ceased communicating with each other via text messages or Facebook. The underlying issue was Mr Hayde’s relationship with Ms McManus and his apparent jealousy of Mr Arapo’s connection with her. When…
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 Hart
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Hart [2023] NZHC 3364
Case
[2023] NZHC 3364
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Gregory Hart has been sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand for the manslaughter of Wiremu Arapo and for attempting to pervert the course of justice by setting fire to Arapo’s home. The primary legal issue was determining the appropriate sentence for Hart’s involvement in these offences, considering the aggravating and mitigating factors. The court examined the gravity of the offending, Hart’s culpability, and the need for denunciation, accountability, and deterrence.
The court found that Hart was involved in a premeditated assault on Arapo, which resulted in his death. Hart assisted his co-defendant, Sean Hayde, in the assault and subsequently in setting fire to Arapo’s home to destroy evidence. The court rejected Hart’s claim of not knowing the extent of Hayde’s violent intentions. The judge acknowledged Hart’s lack of murderous intent but emphasised the seriousness of his participation in the assault and the subsequent cover-up. The court considered various precedents and submissions from both the Crown and defence, ultimately settling on a starting point of nine years for manslaughter, with an uplift of five and a half years for the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. After applying mitigating factors such as Hart’s clean record, mental health issues, and time spent on electronic monitoring bail, the court determined a final sentence of eleven years and four months for the manslaughter charge, with an additional five and a half years for the perversion of justice charge, to run concurrently.
The court did not impose a minimum period of imprisonment, believing that leaving the term before release to the Parole Board was sufficient for community protection and deterrence. The overall sentence reflects the gravity of the offences, the need to hold Hart accountable, and the importance of deterrence, while also considering his personal circumstances and mitigating factors.