R v Roberts
[2012] NZHC 1384
•19 June 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
CRI-2005-092-014492 [2012] NZHC 1384
THE QUEEN
v
BUDDY ROBERTS
Appearances: R J A Marchant for Crown
P E Dacre for Prisoner
Judgment: 19 June 2012
SENTENCING NOTES OF COURTNEY J
Solicitors: Meredith Connell, P O Box 2213, Auckland 1140
Fax: (09) 336-7629 – R Marchant
Counsel: P E Dacre, P O Box 47963, Ponsonby, Auckland 1144
Fax: (09) 376-4675
R V ROBERTS HC AK CRI-2005-092-014492 [19 June 2012]
[1] Mr Roberts, you appear for sentence today for the murder of your former partner, Samantha Rangiawha, whose family called her Piri. This happened in December 2005 but you were subsequently found unfit to stand trial. After you were arrested in 2005 you were held in a special unit at Mt Eden Prison as a result of your mental health issues. Since June 2008 you have been detained at the Mason Clinic
as a special patient.[1] It is only now, after several years of treatment, that it is
possible to resolve matters. Earlier this year you entered a plea of guilty to the murder charge.
[1] Pursuant to s 24(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003.
[2] In 2005 you and Ms Rangiawha were living together in a caravan in Otahuhu. Ms Rangiawha had children from a previous relationship who had been removed from her care. You and she had a six-month-old baby who had also been removed from your care. On the night of Ms Rangiawha’s death the two of you had been sniffing solvents. Later you argued and there was violence used on both sides. In the end Ms Rangiawha came to be on the ground. You picked up a concrete slab weighing over 20 kilos and smashed it onto her head more than once.
[3] The victim impact statements from Ms Rangiawha’s mother and sister speak of the grief and loss that her family experienced, not only of Ms Rangiawha herself, but also the relationship they had with her children and that includes the children that you and she had together. It is clear that they both blame you, not only for Ms Rangiawha’s death but also for the period leading up to that time when you and she drank, used drugs and sniffed solvents.
[4] In sentencing on a murder charge I am required to impose a life sentence of imprisonment unless, in the circumstances, such a sentence would be manifestly unjust.[2] The circumstances of this case do not make that usual sentence of life imprisonment unjust. This was a dreadful murder involving the use of a weapon in the form of a concrete block and has not only caused loss to Ms Rangiawha’s immediate family, but has deprived her children of their mother. It seems likely that
you were affected by solvents and possibly alcohol as well at the time of the killing.
Although you have certainly suffered from a serious mental illness since that time it is not suggested that those factors caused or contributed to your actions that night.
[2] Section 102 Sentencing Act.
[5] I am also required to impose a minimum term of imprisonment of not less than ten years. However, in your present circumstances I do need to consider the alternative to immediate imprisonment. Both counsel have provided me with very helpful submissions and both take a similar view on the best course to take. I therefore turn to consider your personal circumstances which are complex and influence the sentence that I impose today.
[6] You are now 44 years old, one of 11 children raised with a violent father. You have used alcohol, solvents and drugs since you were young and during your teens associated with the Black Power gang. You have children from various relationships but only have contact now with your youngest child, the child you had with Ms Rangiawha, who is now in the care of your mother. You and have a long list of criminal convictions going back to 1982 but most of those do not involve violence and for the purposes of today’s sentence are not significant.
[7] For the last four years you have been resident at the Mason Clinic. You suffer from paranoid schizophrenia and it seems clear that, although you have made good progress in recent years, you continue to require treatment and there would be risks in moving you to a prison environment at this stage. Under s 34 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 I have the option of sentencing you to a term of imprisonment while also ordering that you be detained in a hospital as a special patient under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and
Treatment) Act 1992.[3]
[3] Section 34(1)(a)(i).
[8] This is sometimes described as a hybrid sentence and it means that a sentence of imprisonment can be imposed in addition to a compulsory treatment order so that an offender in your situation can continue to be treated for mental health illnesses, but if assessed as no longer requiring treatment during the term of the prison sentence then serve the remainder of the sentence in prison. If later released from
prison the offender would be subject to release conditions imposed under ss 18 or 19 of the Parole Act 2002 or s 93 of the Sentencing Act 2002.[4]
[4] R v Goodlet [2011] NZCA 357; R v Berran HC Wellington CRI-2005-035-2325, 27 July 2005.
[9] I can only impose this type of sentence if I am satisfied on the evidence of one or more health assessors that you are mentally disordered and that you require compulsory treatment or compulsory care either in your own interests or the interests of public safety. I must also be satisfied on the evidence of one or more health assessors (including a psychiatrist) that you are mentally disordered.
[10] I have been provided with psychiatric reports from Dr Wyness and Dr Claassen. They describe your illness as being characterised by persecutory delusions, thought disorder and auditory hallucinations. Although this illness is currently in remission what emerges from these reports is that your mental illness does require ongoing work in a forensic setting i.e. you need to be in hospital. Although you have shown significant improvement since your time at the Mason Clinic there are very real risk factors associated with you leaving there at this time. In particular, you are said not to properly appreciate the need for long term medication. You have indicated a desire to come off your medication if in prison, this is despite the fact that when you reduced the medication a little last year that led to an increase in hostile behaviour. There is therefore a concern that in a prison setting you are likely to discontinue your medication which will lead to a relapse in your illness.
[11] You are said to have a limited understanding of your mental illness and how it impacts on others. This includes not properly accepting your diagnosis of schizophrenia, not understanding the concept of early warning signs, continuing to react to stressful situations by lashing out physically and demonstrating a lack of empathy.
[12] I am satisfied from the medical reports that you are mentally disordered and that for your own safety and for the safety of others the right course is to make an order under s 34 in addition to imposing the required term of imprisonment. I therefore impose a term of life imprisonment with a minimum period of
imprisonment of 10 years on the murder charge together with an order under s
34(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 that you be detained in a hospital as a special patient under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992.
[13] Mr Roberts, all of that probably sounded like a blur to you, although you might have caught some of what I said. I know that you will have talked to your counsel about what was going to happen today and I know that you understand what has happened in terms of the sentence that I have had to impose. The last several years have been, I am sure, terribly difficult, not only for Ms Rangiawha’s family but for you also struggling with this illness. All I can do is wish you luck in the journey ahead for you because I suspect that there are more difficult years to come. Stand
down.
P Courtney J
0