R v Lucas - [2017] NZHC 651

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THIS JUDGMENT UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL OF MR TE TOMO. PUBLICATION IN
LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TIMARU REGISTRY

CRI-2014-076-000781 [2017] NZHC 651

THE QUEEN

v

OLIVIA TOBY FRANCES LUCAS AND
VERDUN ASHLEY PERRY

Hearing: 5 April 2017

Appearances:

A McRae for the Crown
R Glover & D Brown for the Defendant Lucas
S Bailey for the Defendant Perry

Date:

5 April 2017

SENTENCING REMARKS OF NATION J

[1] Mr Perry, Miss Lucas, I must now sentence you following your convictions for a manslaughter and assault with intent to rob.

[2] The person who died as a result of your offending was Arran Gairns. At the time of his death, he was 34 years old. He was loved by his partner, his parents, his immediate family and his friends. I have carefully read and heard the victim impact reports.

[3] I acknowledge how much of an ordeal the long wait for the trial and the trial itself would have been for all of you. Your victim impact reports eloquently express
your profound sense of loss, the ongoing sense of sadness which will remain with

R v LUCAS & PERRY [2017] NZHC 651 [5 April 2017]

you as you are reminded again and again of what you are not able to share with him and also your understandable anger at what these people did which, as Arran’s father said, “sadly cost AJ his life”.

[4] On the night of Friday 30 May 2014, Mr Gairns travelled to Christchurch and obtained a modest quantity of methamphetamine, mainly for his own use. When he returned to Ashburton, he needed to on-sell some of what he had acquired to help pay for it. One of the people he contacted over this was you Miss Lucas. In the early hours of the morning, around 1.00 am, you arranged to pick him up. You took him to his father’s workshop area. At night it was a secluded place where Mr Gairns used to go when using methamphetamine. It was near the main road through Ashburton, the Millstream and the flood overflow area where he ultimately met his death.

[5] At that spot, you Miss Lucas and Mr Gairns shared some of the methamphetamine that he had brought back. You talked about how you could sell more of that methamphetamine, splitting some of it with a cutting substance to make it go further. While with him, Miss Lucas, you were sending texts to others to see if they might be interested in buying some meth. You also texted Stacey Curtis and indicated you knew Mr Gairns was very much affected by the P he had smoked – in a text, you described him as “frizzled”. Miss Lucas, you knew that, when Mr Gairns was like this, he was intensely fearful and suspicious of others, paranoid was the way you described him.

[6] Miss Lucas, you agreed with Mr Gairns that you would go and…

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 Lucas

Details

AGLC: R v Lucas [2017] NZHC 651
Case: [2017] NZHC 651
Decision Date: 5 April 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Olivia Toby Frances Lucas and Verdun Ashley Perry were charged with the manslaughter and assault with intent to rob of Arran Gairns. The Crown alleged that the pair conspired with others to rob Mr Gairns of methamphetamine, which resulted in his death. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentences for the pair. The sentencing judge found that both the manslaughter and the assault with intent to rob involved actual or threatened violence. The court noted that the offending was premeditated and planned, and that the victim was vulnerable, in part due to being outnumbered and lured to an isolated location under the pretence of a drug transaction. The court held that there were no mitigating factors relating to the offending, but that neither defendant intended for Mr Gairns to die. The court sentenced Olivia to three years, seven months’ imprisonment for manslaughter and two and a half years’ imprisonment for assault with intent to rob, to run concurrently. Verdun was sentenced to the same term of imprisonment.

Orders