R v Rangirangi

[2023] NZHC 730

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2020-092-7343

[2023] NZHC 730

THE KING

v

NUI RANGIRANGI

Hearing:

27 March 2023

Counsel:

C Piho and C Fountain for Crown

S Withers and V Tava for Defendant

Judgment:

4 April 2023

ORAL JUDGMENT OF HINTON J

(Re: Verdict and reasons)

Solicitors:           Kayes Fletcher Walker, Auckland

R v RANGIRANGI [2023] NZHC 730 [4 April 2023]

[1]    Mr Rangirangi is charged with causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

[2]The Crown must prove beyond reasonable doubt:

(a)that on 23 July 2020 Mr Rangirangi used a knife to cause grievous bodily harm to the complainant, Mr Jolson Cocker; and

(b)that at the  time  Mr Rangirangi  caused  grievous  bodily  harm  to  Mr Cocker, he intended to do so.

[3]    The key issue in the trial is identity. Was it Mr Rangirangi who was responsible for what happened to Mr Cocker?

Did Mr Rangirangi cause grievous bodily harm to Mr Cocker?

Jolson Cocker

[4]    Mr Cocker lived in a Grace Foundation boarding house in Mangere with a number of men, including the other two civilian witnesses in this case.

[5]    Mr Cocker said in evidence that he had a fist fight on the road outside the boarding house with a man who also lived in the boarding house. He said he won that fight which was over an amount of $50. During the fight he punched that man in the face a number of times causing that man to fall to the ground.

[6]    Mr Cocker said he went inside the boarding house and the man who he had the fight with got angry and went and got a knife and stabbed Mr Cocker with it.

[7]    Mr Cocker initially said he received only a tiny stab wound, pointing to his lower left rib cage area. He said the wound had to be stitched and he still had a scar. Mr Cocker said he could not remember being stabbed “in the back and like” and that he had made a statement to the police at Middlemore Hospital when his memory was fresh about being stabbed. He agreed it would help him to read the statement “but it’s gonna be like memories of hard times. Struggling and stuff”.

[8]    On application from the Crown I granted leave for the witness to refer to his statement to refresh his memory about details of the stabbing incident. The defence objected on the grounds that the evidence was not reliable, that Mr Cocker’s memory was unreliable and the statement itself was unreliable. The statement had not been excluded. It was made and signed by Mr Cocker when his memory was fresh and, on the face of it, it was reliable. I allowed Mr Cocker to consult the statement to the limited extent sought by the Crown.

[9]    Mr Cocker then confirmed he made the statement to Detective Nieh on 24 July 2020 commencing at 1.58 am and finishing at 2.37 am at Middlemore Hospital. Having read the statement Mr Cocker then said he thought he got stabbed a couple of times probably on his back and on the side of the rib cage. I then allowed the Crown application to put to Mr Cocker, in accordance with R v Hannigan,1 the inconsistency between his statement to Detective Nieh where Mr Cocker said he was stabbed on the left side of his head, whereas in evidence he said he was stabbed only in the back and rib cage. This made no material difference to Mr Cocker’s evidence. He said he thought he was stabbed in other places but could not remember. He could not remember why he had told police in his statement early on 24 July 2020 that he was stabbed on the left side of his head.

[10]   Mr Cocker was taken through a formal identification procedure with Detective Nieh at Middlemore Hospital. Mr Cocker picked out Mr Rangirangi from a photo board montage showing eight similar-looking men. Mr Cocker said he did not know the person’s name but he formally identified the person he picked out from the montage as “the person that stabbed me earlier tonight”.

[11]   As part of his preliminary statement to Detective Nieh, Mr Cocker described the person who stabbed him as “Mongrel Mob”. Mr Rangirangi had two Mongrel Mob tattoos at the time, including one on his neck. Mr Cocker also described the person who stabbed him as having short hair, fair skin/white and chubby. I agree with the Crown that the arrest photographs of Mr Rangirangi in Exhibit 1 are consistent with Mr Cocker’s description. The photos do show Mr Rangirangi as having relatively

1      R v Hannigan [2013] NZSC 41, [2013] 2 NZLR 612.

fair skin. Mr Cocker’s evidence at trial included a similar description of the person who stabbed him.

[12]   I agree with the Crown submission that Mr Cocker had no reasonably plausible motive to lie in respect of the evidence he gave about the identity of Mr Rangirangi as the man who stabbed him or otherwise about the key parts of his evidence. In fact, Mr Cocker said several times in evidence that he did not even want to press charges and that he forgave the person who did it. I consider Mr Cocker’s evidence on the material aspects of the charge to be credible.

[13]   I note the defence submission that Mr Cocker’s viva voce evidence was often rambling or incoherent and sometimes inconsistent. As an example of the former, he said in reply to a question from Mr Piho:

A man, well it looked like a man. It looked like a man. Well it looked like a man. That’s what I am saying like it looked like a man but it didn’t actually like (unclear 10:36:08) heard him and like it was just like a couple of punches and go, all right, and I think a kick, I think, I can’t really remember. It was a while back.

[14]   An example of inconsistency was Mr Cocker’s shifting evidence about where he was stabbed, that is, in what parts of his body. But the inconsistencies were not on major points. Mr Cocker was clear that he was stabbed. Mr Cocker, though clearly reluctant and I would say deliberately obfuscating, was still clear on all the key points. I put the inconsistencies and vagueness down largely to a reluctance to give evidence against Mr Rangirangi and also, as Mr Cocker himself said, he found it very difficult to revisit the incident. Mr Cocker also clearly has an unusual personality type and he was being flippant some of the time, including in his answer to the question of whether it was a man or a woman.

[15]   Mr Cocker had consumed around three boxes of RTDs from mid-afternoon on 23 July 2020 until he went to Middlemore Hospital where it is agreed that he was admitted after arriving on his own at around 11.14 pm that same day. There was no question that Mr Cocker was intoxicated on the evening in question. The defence suggested that Mr Cocker could not give any reliable evidence in that circumstance. However, I do not consider that Mr Cocker’s level of intoxication affected the

reliability of his evidence. While the statement he made to Detective Nieh was no doubt framed in the Detective’s language, Mr Cocker’s description of the incident was reasonably detailed and the evidence he gave as to key points during the trial was similar.

[16]   The defence cross-examined Mr Cocker about his history of violence-related convictions, none of which related to using a knife, or similar, to assault someone. The defence also cross-examined about Mr Cocker having, in the defence contention, a mental illness. I considered neither of these were relevant. Overall, on the aspects of his evidence that are key to the charge, I find Mr Cocker’s evidence to be credible and reliable.

Raymond Edwards

[17]   Mr Edwards was described as a sort of “house mother” at the boarding house. He corroborated Mr Cocker’s evidence, in particular, that he said it was Mr Rangirangi who was fighting with Mr Cocker on 23 July 2020. Mr Edwards’ evidence also corroborates Mr Cocker’s evidence that it was the same person he was fighting with who stabbed Mr Cocker shortly afterwards because Mr Edwards saw a knife on the ground in the vicinity where they were fighting.

[18]   My impression from the evidence was that Mr Edwards was sober on the night in question. Mr Pora-Hockley claimed that most of the people in the boarding house were smoking methamphetamine together before the incident, including Mr Cocker. Notably Mr Edwards said he had gone to bed some time before the incident and was woken from his sleep.

[19]   Mr Edwards gave very clear evidence about the layout of the boarding house and where each tenant lived, including the bedrooms Mr Cocker and Mr Rangirangi stayed in.

[20]   Mr Edwards said that in the evening on 23 July 2020 he woke up to sounds of a scuffle outside his bedroom in the hallway. He saw Mr Rangirangi (who he referred to as Nui) and “the Killer Beez guy”, which I am satisfied from all of the evidence was a reference to Mr Cocker. Mr Cocker gave evidence that he was a Killer Beez gang

member. Mr Edwards said the two men were fighting near the entrance to the front door of the house and reasonably close to him after he had stepped into the hallway. He saw them rolling around on the floor. He broke them up. Both of them were covered in blood. He had not seen a knife at that stage.

[21]   Mr Edwards said he sent Mr Rangirangi to his bedroom to calm him down after the Killer Beez guy ran out of the front door. Mr Edwards did not think anyone else was around when Mr Rangirangi and the Killer Beez guy were fighting. Shortly after that Mr Edwards said he found the knife on the ground by the front door inside the house, only then realising a knife had been involved in the altercation. Mr Edwards took the knife, wiped off what he believed to be blood from the tip of it and put it in his room. He mopped up the blood on the floor. The knife was later seized by police and it is agreed that it is the knife that was used to stab Mr Cocker.

[22]   I consider the evidence of Mr Edwards to be reliable and credible. He also had no reason to lie. If anything, my impression was that Mr Edwards was supportive of Mr Rangirangi and did not much like Mr Cocker.

Mr Pora-Hockley

[23]   Mr Pora-Hockley initially declined to answer questions about the incident but then gave evidence that he heard a bang, bang, bang when he was inside his bedroom. Mr Pora-Hockley said that he was a Mongrel Mob member which is undisputed. It seems Mr Rangirangi was also. Mr Pora-Hockley said he knew Mr Cocker was a Killer Beez member. He said he did not want to talk about the incident in Court because “that  is  between  Rangirangi  and  well  whatever  his  name  is  Jolson  (Mr Cocker’s first name). That’s their shit not, nothing to do with me”.

[24]   Mr Pora Hockley distanced himself from the statement he made to police after the incident, claiming to have been on a six-day methamphetamine binge. But the diagram he drew the day after  the  incident  placed  the  “stab  incident”  between Mr Rangirangi and Mr Cocker near the front entrance of the boarding house, consistent with Mr Edwards’ evidence of where Mr Rangirangi and Mr Cocker were having a scuffle.

[25]   Mr Pora-Hockley also gave a reasonably detailed formal statement to police to the effect that he saw Mr Cocker and Mr Rangirangi having a physical altercation in the lounge area of the boarding house.

[26]   He said in that statement that he saw Mr Cocker at one point holding the knife, but in his viva voce evidence, Mr Pora-Hockley said he could not remember or recall that. I consider there is no credible or reliable evidence that Mr Cocker did hold the knife.  I note  Mr Edwards’ evidence was that  he  did not see  a knife  at all until   Mr Rangirangi went to his room, and  Mr  Edwards  arrived  on  the  scene  before Mr Pora-Hockley.

Dr Cameron Bringans

[27]   It is an agreed fact that Detective Nieh took photographs of Mr Cocker’s wounds (showing two wounds to his head and three to his back) at about 1.00 am on 24 July 2020, not long after Mr Cocker arrived at Middlemore Hospital.

[28]   The Crown called Dr Cameron Bringans, a neurosurgical registrar who admitted Mr Cocker to Middlemore Hospital, to give evidence about those wounds which he described as “penetrating trauma”. Dr Bringans said, of the most serious of Mr Cocker’s head wounds, that it went through bone and went through the layers surrounding the brain which are tough and leathery and into the substance of the brain. He said there was blood within the substance of the brain. He said this wound was within millimetres of Mr Cocker’s middle meningeal artery and the wound indicated that a knife pierced through the bone and penetrated the brain.

[29]   Dr Bringans also said that each of the three wounds to Mr Cocker’s back could have been life-threatening and he referred to associated rib fractures and chest trauma that Mr Cocker suffered  from.  In  respect  of one of these wounds,  according  to  Dr Bringans, the knife went deep enough to go within the lung cavity.

[30]   It is clear on the basis of  the photographs and  Dr Bringans’ evidence that  Mr Cocker suffered grievous bodily harm in terms of the five wounds referred to, as a result of being stabbed with the knife. Nor did the defence seem seriously to contest that point.

Forensic evidence and scene examination

[31]   Crown and defence agree that the black Nike shoes that were seized by police from Mr Rangirangi’s bedroom on the morning of 24 July 2020 had bloodstains on the soles of both shoes, mostly caught within the grooves of the soles. Forensic testing of the bloodstains on the left shoe found Mr Cocker’s DNA. Defence say there is no proof that the shoes in Mr Rangirangi’s bedroom on 24 July were in fact his but I consider that is a reasonable inference.

[32]   Detective Nightingale gave evidence that he observed what he suspected was blood on Mr Rangirangi’s bedroom door when he executed the search warrant early on the morning of 24 July 2020. He did not do any testing of it.

[33]   I agree with the Crown that these strands of evidence are consistent  with    Mr Rangirangi having been present in the immediate vicinity at the time Mr Cocker was wounded.

[34]   It is also an agreed fact that the knife used to stab Mr Rangirangi is the knife Detective Nightingale seized from Mr Edwards’ bedroom shelf in the boarding house on 24 July 2020.

[35]   The photographs of Mr Rangirangi in Exhibit 1 show fresh grazing and/or fresh bruises to Mr Rangirangi’s upper right arm and upper right chest area, which the Crown submits are consistent with Mr Rangirangi having had a fist fight with Mr Cocker before Mr Cocker was stabbed.

[36]   I  put  little  weight  on  that  evidence  as  Mr  Cocker  said  he  punched    Mr Rangirangi to the face. He did not mention other punches. However, I do agree that these bruises are consistent at least with Mr Rangirangi having been in a very recent struggle or fight at the time the photos were taken.

Conclusion on the first legal element

[37]   Pulling together all of the evidence, including all of the above strands of evidence, the Crown have persuaded me, consistent with the onus on them, that

beyond reasonable doubt it was Mr Rangirangi who stabbed Mr Cocker, that he stabbed him five times on 23 July 2020 and that he caused grievous bodily harm to Mr Cocker.

Did Mr Rangirangi intend to cause Mr Cocker grievous bodily harm?

[38]   I now turn to the second element of the charge, did Mr Rangirangi intend to cause Mr Cocker grievous bodily harm?

[39]   Mr Cocker said that before he was stabbed by the person he had been in a fight with, that person was angry with him because Mr Cocker had “won” the fist fight. That gave Mr Rangirangi a clear motive for wanting to hurt Mr Cocker when he stabbed him. Mr Cocker also gave evidence that he was “shanked” multiple times in the left side of his rib cage and his back and probably in certain other places. The word “shanked” conveys deliberation.

[40]   Mr Edwards said that after Mr Cocker ran out of the front door, Mr Rangirangi was “all hyped up” so he sent him to his bedroom to calm down.

[41]   While the defence suggested that the wounds may have been caused accidentally in the course of rolling around on the floor near the area where the knife was found, I consider it is implausible that five wounds, as deep as they were in some instances, and in different parts of the body, may have been caused by accidental rolling around where the knife happened to be found.

[42]   Dr Bringans said that the wounds and the nature of them was consistent with an extensive stabbing assault. He said each was likely caused by a sharp instrument. As to the most serious head wound, he said he could only say that the weapon must have been sharp enough and used with enough force to pierce bone.

[43]   The number, location and nature of each of Mr Cocker’s wounds also provides strong support for them having been intentionally inflicted.

[44]   It is also an agreed fact that the knife used to stab Mr Cocker was approximately 30 cms long or, as Mr Cocker described it to police immediately

following the incident, was “a long, sharp knife”. The use of such a knife also suggests intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

[45]   Based on all of the evidence and with particular reliance on the above points, I find beyond reasonable doubt that on 23 July 2020, Mr Rangirangi intended to cause Mr Cocker grievous bodily harm when he used a knife to stab him.

Self-defence

[46]   While the defence raised self-defence as a possible part of their case in opening, that was not advanced in closing. Consistent with that, I consider that there was no reasonable self-defence narrative available on the evidence and that stabbing Mr Cocker five times to the back and head in the circumstances could not have amounted to reasonable force.

[47]Mr Rangirangi, please stand.

Conclusion

[48]   Having found the two elements of the charge proven beyond reasonable doubt, I find Mr Rangirangi guilty of the charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. I convict him on that charge.

[49]Mr Rangirangi is remanded for sentence on Tuesday, 23 May 2023 at

9.00 am. I direct that a pre-sentence report be provided and note that defence will obtain a cultural report.

[50]Mr Rangirangi, you can stand down.

Hinton J