Legal Research
Cases
R v Reardon

R v Reardon

Case [2022] NZHC 659 1 April 2022

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE

CRI-2018-083-1456

[2022] NZHC 659

THE QUEEN

v

WAYNE DAVID REARDON

Hearing: 1 April 2022

Counsel:

M M Wilkinson-Smith for the Crown

V C Nisbet and C M Gisler for the Defendant

Judgment:

1 April 2022

SENTENCING OF COOKE J

[1] Wayne Reardon you appear today to be sentenced for the manslaughter of James Butler following your guilty plea. You are the final of six offenders to be sentenced.1

[2] I will begin by outlining the facts of your offending. I will then decide upon an appropriate starting point for the sentence for offending of this kind. I will then address what discounts are appropriate for your guilty plea and other factors personal to you. Finally I will address the impact of the three strikes regime, and how it should affect your end sentence.

1 R v Fore and Ors [2020] NZHC 2290; R v Wynyard [2020] NZHC 2367; R v Audain [2020] NZHC 2367.

R v REARDON [2022] NZHC 659 [1 April 2022]

The facts

[3] The basic events of the offending have been outlined several times before this Court. But the summary of fact to which you have entered your guilty plea is materially different from the previous summaries, especially in relation to your personal involvement. You are a senior patched member of Whanganui Black Power. You took a lead role in the events that led to James Butler’s death. You were one of the organisers and a leader of the group that day. I need to sentence you on that basis.

[4] In the early evening on Sunday 22 April 2018 you were in a Toyota Corona with Kemp Rippon and Daniel Whareaorere at a Z Service Station in Whanganui. A silver Honda Accord station wagon was waiting nearby at Pitt Street with Mark Audain, Dwayne Fore and Hikitia Hakaraia. Your group had at least three firearms between them, including two .22 rifles and a shotgun. You were carrying the shotgun. You planned to carry out a taxing exercise at James Butler’s address — that is demanding with threats or stealing drugs, cash or property from individuals believed to be selling drugs. It was known that James Butler was selling drugs. Over the course of the months leading to the evening of the offending Black Power members had visited the address several times.

[5] The vehicles made their way in tandem to James and Brent Butler’s home and drove down and parked in the driveway, with your Toyota Corona in front. Two members of your group wearing balaclavas approached the back door of the house by going up the outside stairs to the door into the sunroom and knocked. They asked for James Butler and were told he wasn’t there. They went back down the steps.

[6] About 10 seconds later the pair returned with four to six others, with at least one member of your group remaining…

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 Reardon

Details

AGLC: R v Reardon [2022] NZHC 659
Case: [2022] NZHC 659
Decision Date: 1 April 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of The Queen v Wayne David Reardon was heard on 1 April 2022. Reardon had pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of James Butler and was the final of six offenders to be sentenced. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence, considering Reardon's leading role in the events that led to Butler's death, his guilty plea, personal factors, and the impact of the three strikes regime. The central issue was the appropriate starting point for the sentence, which was influenced by Reardon's leadership role in the offence.

The court determined that Reardon's significant involvement in planning and leading the group warranted a starting point higher than that of his co-offenders. While the Crown proposed an 11-year starting point and Reardon's counsel suggested 10 years, the court found a 10-year starting point appropriate, balancing the seriousness of the crime with the fact that the fatal shots were fired during an attempted escape rather than during the planned robbery. The court also considered personal factors, including Reardon's expressed remorse and his background of systemic deprivation and poverty, for which it applied a 10% discount. Additionally, a 25% discount for the guilty plea resulted in a total discount of 35%, bringing the proposed sentence to approximately six years and six months.

However, Reardon's sentence was complicated by the three strikes regime, which mandated that he serve any new sentence without parole and cumulatively on his current sentence for aggravated robbery. This meant Reardon would serve an additional four and a half months for the current offence, making the sentence disproportionately severe. To mitigate this, the court reduced Reardon's sentence by one year and six months, resulting in a final sentence of five years' imprisonment to be served without parole and cumulatively on his current sentence.

Orders