R v Pani-Marsden - [2017] NZHC 2696

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA
TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2016-044-3943
[2017] NZHC 2696

THE QUEEN

DICKIE PANI-MARSDENSTEAD NUKU
ARTHUR BRIGGS

Hearing:	3 November 2017
Appearances:	S McColgan for Crown E Priest for Mr Pani-Marsden I Tucker for Mr Nuku S Gray for Mr Briggs
Sentence:	3 November 2017

SENTENCING REMARKS OF LANG J

Mr Briggs, Mr Nuku and Mr Pani-Marsden, you appear for sentence today each having pleaded guilty to 13 separate charges involving allegations of violence towards prison officers. The charges are wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, injuring with intent to injure, assault with intent to injure and assault with a weapon.
The charges carry a range of maximum penalties from 14 years imprisonment on the charges of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm down to two years imprisonment on the assault charges.

Background

All of the charges were laid as a result of an incident that occurred at Auckland Prison in Paremoremo on the afternoon of Wednesday 19 October 2016. I do not propose to go through the facts of your offending because they have been traversed fully in each of the sentence indications that I have given.[1] The sentence indications will be annexed to these remarks and will form part and parcel of them.
[1]R v Pani-Marsden [2017] NZHC 1736; R v Pani-Marsden (No. 2) [2017] NZHC 2402; R v Nuku [2017] NZHC 2423; R v Briggs [2017] NZHC 2690.
In short, however, you each became involved in a premeditated plan to assault two prison officers who were stationed outside the block in which you were residing. The plan involved a Mr Waru going to the grille behind which the prison officers were stationed. He then asked for a bucket and mop, supposedly to carry out cleaning duties. Once the prison officers allowed him access to their area, he attacked them using home-made weapons that were strapped to his hands. You three then joined in the attack on the two prison officers. This resulted in four other prison officers being called to the area, and a sustained incident involving significant violence then occurred. This involved significant injury to some of the prison officers, although thankfully their protective clothing prevented them from receiving more serious injuries.

Starting point

I have accepted that you were of the same culpability, or blameworthiness. Although you were not carrying weapons yourselves, you each knew that Mr Waru was carrying two weapons and that you knew that he was likely to use them. You must also have been aware that the incident was inevitably going to spread and become one of significant proportion. The fact that actual injury was caused as an aggravating factor, as is the fact that it involved a numerically superior force of inmates assaulting a numerically inferior group of officers and the fact that the offending occurred in a prison environment…

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 Pani-Marsden

Details

AGLC: R v Pani-Marsden [2017] NZHC 2696
Case: [2017] NZHC 2696
Decision Date: 3 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, three defendants, Dickie Pani-Marsden, Stead Nuku, and Arthur Briggs, appeared for sentencing following their guilty pleas to 13 charges of violence towards prison officers. The charges included wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, injuring with intent to injure, assault with intent to injure, and assault with a weapon. The court established a starting point of five years imprisonment for each defendant, considering their culpability in the premeditated group attack on prison officers. The court then applied uplifts for previous convictions involving violent offending within a prison environment, resulting in additional months of imprisonment for Nuku and Pani-Marsden, and a more significant uplift for Briggs. The defendants received discounts for their guilty pleas, with Pani-Marsden receiving an additional discount due to his age and educational progress in prison. The final sentences ranged from three years eight months to three years ten months imprisonment, to be served concurrently with their current sentences.

Orders