[1] Mr Locke, you can remain seated until I conclude my sentencing remarks and then I will ask you to stand for the purpose of formally imposing sentence.

[2] Mr Locke, you are for sentence this morning for the murder of Mark Cowling.1 It is necessary that I set out the factual basis upon which I proceed to sentence you.

The facts

[3] You and Mr Cowling occupied dwellings in a set of adjoining townhouses. In the last four weeks prior to the murder you had periodically been playing loud music, much to the frustration of Mr Cowling and other residents who were disturbed by the

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 167(b) and 172(1).

R v LOCKE [2021] NZHC 1843 [21 July 2021]

noise. Mr Cowling lived with his partner and their six-month-old baby and he was concerned about the effect of the noise on them.

[4] On 5 September last year, you were playing loud music from inside your home. Over the course of the night, Mr Cowling repeatedly phoned noise control. His efforts to have the noise stopped were unsuccessful so he resorted to turning off the power to your property by accessing the fuse box that was located on the outside of his house. It appears he did this on at least two occasions.

[5] In response to the power being switched off you contacted the local supply authority and after the power was restored you again began playing loud music. After the power was switched off again you left your house armed with a kitchen knife, and you walked over to Mr Cowling’s address. It is not entirely clear what occurred when you got to his property. You told Dr Monasterio that Mr Cowling was outside and, when confronted by you, he retreated to his front door, alternatively you may simply have come to his door which he opened — it is not clear. However, it is plain that at the front door of his house you stabbed Mr Cowling three times in the chest. One of those blows was fatal. Mr Cowling was likely trying to shut the door prior to being stabbed. The single fatal stab wound was to the left side of his chest, which the pathologist estimated had a depth of over 10 cm. The other two wounds were superficial.

[6] Mr Cowling collapsed to the ground in the entranceway. You remained with him. The glass window pane to the front door was broken during the stabbing and this woke Mr Cowling’s partner, Ms McMaster. She came downstairs and saw you bending over Mr Cowling with your hands on his chest, trying…

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 Locke

Details

AGLC: R v Locke [2021] NZHC 1843
Case: [2021] NZHC 1843
Decision Date: 21 July 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of The Queen v Tristan Ross Locke, the defendant was convicted of the murder of Mark Cowling. The defendant was sentenced by Mander J in the High Court of New Zealand. The legal issues before the court included determining the appropriate sentence for the defendant, and specifically, the minimum period of imprisonment before the defendant could be eligible for parole. The court considered various aggravating and mitigating factors, including the defendant's Autism Spectrum Disorder, his history of violence, and his immediate regret following the stabbing.

The court found that the murder was premeditated and deliberate, with the defendant arming himself with a knife and confronting Mr Cowling. The court also considered the devastating impact of the murder on Mr Cowling's family. In determining the minimum period of imprisonment, the court compared the defendant's case to other murder cases and considered the defendant's personal circumstances, including his Autism Spectrum Disorder and history of violence. The court ultimately decided on a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years, taking into account both the aggravating and mitigating factors of the case.

The final orders of the court were that the defendant, Tristan Ross Locke, was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years for the murder of Mark Cowling. The court also issued a three strikes warning, stating that if the defendant were to commit another serious violent offence or murder in the future, he would serve the resulting sentence without parole.

Orders