R v Heremaia - [2022] NZHC 443

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2020-090-2204

[2022] NZHC 443

THE QUEEN

v

WILLIAM SHANE HEREMAIA

Hearing: 11 March 2022

Appearances:

BD Tantrum and EHK Rangamuwa for the Crown S Tait and JM Hudson for the Defendant

Sentenced:

11 March 2022

SENTENCING NOTES OF FITZGERALD J

Solicitors: Meredith Connell, Auckland

To: S Tait, Auckland
J Hudson, Auckland

R v HEREMAIA [2022] NZHC 443 [11 March 2022]

Introduction

[1] Mr Heremaia, you appear for sentencing today having been found guilty by a jury of the manslaughter of Angela Smith. I removed the charge of murder from the jury, as I did not consider there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could reasonably find you guilty of that charge.

[2] Before going any further, I would first like to acknowledge two groups of persons affected by the tragic events in this case. The first is Ms Smith’s family members. I have received and read a number of victim impact statements written by Ms Smith’s siblings. Each are naturally devastated at the loss of their sister, particularly as it came hard on the heels of the loss of their mother to cancer only a short time earlier. They also speak to the undoubted tragedy of Ms Smith’s 12 year old son losing his mother. Mr Smith has also read his victim impact statement here in court today, and that takes great courage.

[3] The sentence I impose on you today will not, I am sure, compensate Ms Smith’s family for their loss. Indeed, nothing I say or do today can do that. But I acknowledge their pain and loss, and I extend the Court’s deepest sympathy to them.

[4] The second group of people I want to acknowledge today is your own family Mr Heremaia, and in particular your sisters who attended throughout your trial and some of whom are here today. I am sure that you found their presence at trial, and again today, of great comfort.

[5] I have found this a difficult sentencing, both because the precise details of what happened at your unit on the evening of 13 May 2020 will never be fully known, and that there are a number of disputed factual matters between the parties which I have had to consider. For these reasons, there is a fair bit for me to cover in my sentencing remarks today, and it might sound a bit complicated at times. I am sure you just want to know the end result. But sentencing is a public process, and it is therefore important that those here today, and the community more broadly, understand the basis upon which I am sentencing you.

Background/culpability

[6] I first turn to the factual background to your offending. In doing so, it will be necessary for me to discuss some of the more graphic aspects of the assault on Ms Smith.

[7] You and Ricky Rafferty had been drinking at your unit…

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 Heremaia

Details

AGLC: R v Heremaia [2022] NZHC 443
Case: [2022] NZHC 443
Decision Date: 11 March 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

William Shane Heremaia was found guilty of the manslaughter of Angela Smith and was sentenced by Fitzgerald J. The case involved the assault of Ms Smith, who was found dead after a brutal attack. The Court had to decide on the appropriate sentence for Mr Heremaia, taking into account his level of involvement in the assault, the nature of the offence, and his personal circumstances. The Court concluded that while Mr Heremaia was involved in the assault, his participation was less dominant than that of the other attacker, Ricky Rafferty. The Court set a starting point of nine years’ imprisonment, considering the brutality of the attack and the presence of multiple attackers and weapons. After assessing various mitigating and aggravating factors, the Court arrived at a final sentence of six years and seven months’ imprisonment, reduced from the starting point due to Mr Heremaia's lesser role in the assault, his blindness, cognitive difficulties, and current health condition. The sentence also accounted for the time Mr Heremaia spent on restrictive bail conditions.

In summary, the Court acknowledged the tragic loss suffered by Ms Smith's family and recognised the difficulties faced by Mr Heremaia due to his personal circumstances. The final sentence aimed to balance the need for punishment and deterrence with the consideration of factors that may have contributed to Mr Heremaia's involvement in the offence. The Court imposed a sentence of six years and seven months’ imprisonment for the manslaughter of Angela Smith.

Orders