R v JB - [2024] NZHC 2033

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF DEFENDANT, DECEASED AND COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY SS 200 AND 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2023-004-000253

[2024] NZHC 2033

THE KING

v

JB

Hearing: 24 July 2024

Appearances:

R McCoubrey for Crown

I Brookie and R Hinds for Defendant

Judgment:

24 July 2024

SENTENCING NOTES OF VENNING J

Solicitors: Meredith Connell, Auckland Counsel: I Brookie/R Hinds, Auckland

R v JB [2024] NZHC 2033 [24 July 2024]

[1] JB, you are for sentence this morning having pleaded guilty to one charge of manslaughter and two representative charges of assault on a child.

[2] The summary of facts you pleaded guilty to sets out the background to your offending. In early 2022, you were 20 years old and the mother of two children. You were their sole caregiver. MB, the older child was born on 16 July 2019. He was aged two and a half when the offending came to the attention of the Police. He has special needs and suffers from a syndrome which impairs his physical and cognitive function. He is non-verbal and prone to seizures. After you became pregnant with him his father played no role in your life, nor in his.

[3] IB your second child, was born on 13 December 2021. He required care in the Intensive Care Unit for six days after being born. You had difficulty breastfeeding him and with his care generally initially and also after discharge from hospital. On 16 January 2022 IB died from injuries that you had inflicted on him. At the time he was almost five weeks old. His father did not live with you and did not share in the care of either child.

[4] When you were discharged from hospital following IB’s birth you initially stayed with a friend who had been looking after MB while you were in hospital. While at her home MB became upset and starting crying. You became angry and used your hand to smack him on the back of the head.

[5] About two weeks later, at around 10.00 am in the morning of 26 December 2021 you visited friends with both children. At some point during the visit IB began to cry uncontrollably. You held him out in front of you at eye level and with your hands under his armpits you shook him back and forth, saying “stop crying”. Later that same day you sent a number of messages to his father. Throughout the course of those messages you talked of the stress you were feeling with both children screaming and crying and refusing to eat. You said you could not “do this shit on your own anymore” and asked for help. You said you had nobody you could talk to or who could help you with the kids and that you were struggling mentally.

[6] A few days later, on…

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 JB

Details

AGLC: R v JB [2024] NZHC 2033
Case: [2024] NZHC 2033
Decision Date: 24 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, the defendant JB was sentenced following a guilty plea to one charge of manslaughter and two representative charges of assault on a child. The defendant, a 20-year-old mother of two, inflicted severe injuries on her infant son IB, leading to his death, and assaulted her older child MB. The court had to determine an appropriate sentence that reflected the gravity of the offences, the defendant's level of culpability, and the need to hold her accountable for the harm caused. The court also considered the defendant's personal circumstances, including her challenging background and the impact of Reactive Attachment Disorder on her ability to care for her children.

The court identified several legal issues, including the appropriate starting point for sentencing manslaughter involving a child, the relevance of the defendant's personal circumstances and psychological profile, and the need to balance deterrence with rehabilitation. The Crown argued for a starting point of eight years, considering the extreme violence and failure to seek medical assistance. Defence counsel submitted a lower starting point of four and a half years, citing the defendant's personal circumstances and psychological condition. The court acknowledged the aggravating factors, including the violence inflicted and the failure to seek medical care, but also considered the defendant's tragic background and personal circumstances as mitigating factors. After evaluating the submissions and relevant case law, the court determined a starting point of six years and three months, uplifted by nine months for the assault charges.

The court ultimately sentenced the defendant to three years and six months' imprisonment for the manslaughter charge and nine months for each assault charge, with the sentences running concurrently. The court emphasised the need to denounce the defendant's conduct and hold her accountable for the harm caused to her children, while also considering her personal circumstances and potential for rehabilitation. The court's decision reflected a balanced approach, addressing the seriousness of the offences and the defendant's background while ensuring the sentence served the purposes of denunciation, accountability, and deterrence.

Orders