R v LR

Case [2024] NZHC 2533 5 September 2024

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF DEFENDANT(S)

PURSUANT TO S 200 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY COMPLAINANT(S)/ PERSON(S) UNDER THEAGE OF 18 YEARS WHO APPEARED AS A WITNESS [OR NAMED WITNESS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE] PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THECRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2021-009-8305

[2024] NZHC 2533

THE KING

v

LR JR

Hearing: 5 September 2024

Appearances:

P N M Brown and K A White for Crown D J Matthews for Defendant LR

P N Dyhrberg and D M Kirby for Defendant JR

Judgment:

5 September 2024

SENTENCING REMARKS OF MANDER J

[1] LR, you are for sentence on three charges, two of which are representative, of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure a young child. JR, you are for sentence on a charge of ill-treatment or neglect of a child. Both of you pleaded guilty

R v LR [2024] NZHC 2533 [5 September 2024]

to these charges following the provision of sentence indications which you each accepted. Those decisions will form part of the record of my sentencing remarks and will be annexed to the sentencing decision delivered this morning.1

[2]For clarity, I will refer to each of you by your first names.

The offending

[3] JR, the victim was your son, and, LR, your grandson. He was four at the time of the offending. In July 2021, JR moved with him and his younger brother into LR’s one-bedroom flat where she was living with her partner.

[4] LR and her partner occupied the bedroom and JR, you slept on a couch in the living room. Your youngest child slept in a cot in front of the couch, while the victim slept in the front door area on a folded duvet with some pillows and blankets on the vinyl floor, and then in a tub in the bathroom.

[5] JR, you were pregnant around this time. On 16 July 2021, you went into labour. There were complications and you suffered a miscarriage. I will address this further in due course. In the weeks following, you became withdrawn and paid little to no attention to your children. LR, you became responsible for their day-to-day care. Over the approximate three-month period the four-year-old was living at the address, the victim was subjected to violence, abuse, and neglect.

[6] The children had no routine in their life. They did not go to any form of day care or have any contact with anyone outside the flat. They were simply allowed to stay up watching television into the early hours of the morning. What little food was provided was not age appropriate. For long periods the victim was not allowed to move from the bath despite his obvious distress.

LR’s offending

[7] LR, I address the three charges for which you are for sentence. The…

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 LR

Details

AGLC: R v LR [2024] NZHC 2533
Case: [2024] NZHC 2533
Decision Date: 5 September 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, LR and JR were sentenced for their roles in the abuse and neglect of a four-year-old child. LR, the child's grandmother, was sentenced on three charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure. The court determined a starting point of six and a half years' imprisonment, considering the severe physical and psychological harm inflicted on the child. LR received a sentence of four years and 10 months' imprisonment, with a 15% credit for a guilty plea and a 10% credit for personal circumstances, resulting in a total of three years and 11 months. JR, the child's mother, was sentenced for the charge of ill-treatment or neglect of a child, with a starting point of two years' imprisonment. She received a sentence of seven months' home detention, with a 15% credit for a guilty plea and a 20% credit for personal circumstances, resulting in a total of approximately four months. The court also granted permanent name suppression for both defendants to protect the identity of the child.

Orders