R v Peeni - [2020] NZHC 1352

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CRI-2019-019-7257

[2020] NZHC 1352

THE QUEEN

v

RUEBEN PAUL PEENI

Hearing: 16 June 2020

Appearances:

R L Mann for Crown

A M Beveridge for Defendant

Judgment:

16 June 2020

SENTENCING REMARKS OF LANG J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Hamilton

R v PEENI [2020] NZHC 1352 [16 June 2020]

[1] Mr Peeni, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to a charge of murdering your former partner, Crystal Selwyn. The maximum sentence for that offence is life imprisonment together with a minimum non-parole period.

Factual background

[2] The basis on which you are to be sentenced is an agreed summary of facts. This records that you and your former partner were in a relationship for approximately 18 years and have six children together. At the time of the incident giving rise to the charge all the children were less than 12 years of age and resided at your former partner’s address with her.

[3] By this stage your relationship was at an end and she had entered into a new relationship. Notwithstanding the separation you had remained living at her address.

[4] The incident giving rise to the charge needs to be considered against a background involving numerous attendances by the police at the property since April 2008 to investigate instances of family harm involving you and your former partner. These calls to the police were made either by her or by friends and neighbours who heard what was going on in the house and were concerned for her welfare.

[5] The summary records that these incidents related to a variety of forms of conduct on your part including damage to property and violence directed towards your former partner. This included the infliction of physical blows along with threats to kill. Her response when confronted with this type of conduct was to telephone the police. This usually resulted in you being asked or told by the police to leave the address. On some occasions you were arrested. You have several previous convictions going back to 2008 for assaulting your former partner and threatening to kill her. On two occasions during 2017 you were sentenced to imprisonment on these charges.

[6] The events leading to the present charge began with an incident that occurred in the early hours of Friday 22 November 2019. This caused your former partner to contact the police but by the time they arrived at the address you had already left.

[7] On the evening of Saturday 23 November 2019, you, your former partner and five of your six children were at the address. Three children from a neighbouring address were also present. They were aged between seven and 14 years.

[8] You had been consuming alcohol there over the course of the day. After returning from purchasing more alcohol you began walking around the address behaving in an aggressive manner. During this, you were heard within earshot of the children 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 Peeni

Details

AGLC: R v Peeni [2020] NZHC 1352
Case: [2020] NZHC 1352
Decision Date: 16 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Rueben Paul Peeni was sentenced for the murder of his former partner, Crystal Selwyn. Peeni pleaded guilty to the charge and the sentencing hearing was held on 16 June 2020. The primary legal issue was to determine the length of the minimum term of imprisonment Peeni would be required to serve before being eligible to apply for parole. The court considered the aggravating features of the offence, including the brutality of the attack and the presence of children during the incident.

The court determined that a minimum term of imprisonment of 17 years was appropriate, but reduced this to 15 and a half years to reflect Peeni's early guilty plea and remorse. The court found that imposing a 17-year minimum term would be manifestly unjust as it would not give adequate credit for the early guilty plea and the sparing of the victims' families from a trial. Consequently, the court sentenced Peeni to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 15 and a half years before he would be eligible to apply for parole.

The final orders of the court were that Peeni be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 15 and a half years before being eligible to apply for parole.

Orders