[1] Ms Momoisea, you are for sentence in relation to one charge of murder and one of attempted murder. You pleaded guilty to both. It is a common ground you will be sentenced to life imprisonment. The only issue today is the number of years you must serve before you may receive parole. The law calls this a minimum period of imprisonment.

Facts

[2] You and Mr Frazer Ah’Kee were in a relationship for approximately five years. In 2016, he married the other victim of your offending, Ms Milo Poe-Paila. He was then 54; she 39; you were 41.

[3] On 24 June 2017, you told your daughters Mr Ah’Kee had ended things with you to be with his wife. You also told one of your daughters you were going to kill Mr Ah’Kee because he had hurt you, and if he did not die, you would kill yourself.

[4] At 8.00 am on 26 June 2017, you left your home carrying a sports bag in which you had put a large knife. After walking your children to school, you went to
Mr Ah’Kee’s home in Otara. But, he was not there. You left.

[5] You went to the Otara Town Centre. You told your pastor’s wife you intended to kill Mr Ah’Kee. She told others what you had said, including your pastor. But as with your daughter two days earlier, no one believed you.

[6] You went home. Your son opened the bag and found the knife. He took it. He told you to think of your grandchildren. And, not to hurt Mr Ah’Kee. You did not listen.

[7] At 4.00 pm you again left for Mr Ah’Kee’s home. You took with you a large knife, which you hid in your clothing.

[8] Once at Mr Ah’Kee’s home, you went into the garage. It has been converted to a bedroom for an acquaintance of Mr Ah’Kee’s. The garage also provides access to the home from a service lane behind the garage.

[9] The acquaintance told you to leave. You refused. The acquaintance later left.

[10] You sent the acquaintance a text message saying you would wait for

Mr Ah’Kee until 10 o’clock that night. You sat waiting, in the dark.

[11] Mr Ah’Kee and his wife came home at 6.50 that evening. You watched them through a gap in the wall. You readied yourself for an attack: you held the knife in your right hand, and waited on a bed in the garage.

[12] When Mr Ah’Kee entered, you lunged at him. You stabbed him once to…

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 Momoisea

Details

AGLC: R v Momoisea [2018] NZHC 1577
Case: [2018] NZHC 1577
Decision Date: 29 June 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the defendant, Ms. Momoisea, was sentenced for charges of murder and attempted murder. The court had to determine the minimum period of imprisonment before Ms. Momoisea could be eligible for parole. Ms. Momoisea pleaded guilty to both charges, and the court was to decide the appropriate minimum period of imprisonment, considering the circumstances of the offences.

The court considered several factors, including the nature of the murder, the level of planning, the brutality and callousness of the act, and the presence of additional victims. The court found the murder to be especially bad due to the attempted murder of a second victim and the unlawful presence in the victim's home. However, the court did not find the offence to involve extensive planning, a high level of brutality, or callousness. The court then compared the case with similar cases to determine an appropriate minimum period of imprisonment.

After considering the mitigating factors such as the defendant's guilty plea, good character, remorse, and cultural factors, the court decided to reduce the minimum period of imprisonment by two and a half years. This resulted in a minimum period of 14 and a half years before Ms. Momoisea could be eligible for parole on the murder charge. On the charge of attempted murder, the court sentenced Ms. Momoisea to 10 years' imprisonment, to be served concurrently with the murder sentence.

Orders