R v Ross - [2021] NZHC 37

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY COMPLAINANT UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS WHO APPEARED AS A WITNESS PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2019-092-2113

[2021] NZHC 37

THE QUEEN

v

LESLIE PETER ROSS

Hearing: 29 January 2021

Appearances:

J J Rhodes and H Watts for the Crown

R Mansfield and H Smith for the Defendant

Judgment:

29 January 2021

SENTENCE OF GAULT J

Solicitors / Counsel:
Mr J J Rhodes and Ms H Watts, Kayes Fletcher Walker, Office of the Crown Solicitor, Manukau City Mr R Mansfield and Mr H Smith, Barristers, Auckland

R v ROSS [2021] NZHC 37 [29 January 2021]

[1]Mr Ross, you appear for sentence today following guilty pleas on:

(a)one charge of kidnapping;1

(b)one charge of assault with intent to injure;2 and

(c)two charges of threatening to do grievous bodily harm.3

Facts

[2] The facts of your offending are that in late January 2019 you, Ms Bennett and H, who viewed Ms Bennett like an aunty, moved to an address in Auckland. You were on EM bail at the time.

[3] On the night of 2 February 2019 you, Ms Bennett and H were sitting in Ms Bennett’s car on the front lawn of the property. During conversation with Ms Bennett, you had a disagreement. You became angry with Ms Bennett and punched her in the face. You got out of the car, ran around to Ms Bennett’s side and pulled her out forcefully causing her to fall into the nearby fence. You then kicked her to the abdomen as she lay on the ground. Ms Bennett received a deep cut above her right eye and bruising to her body.

[4] When you saw that Ms Bennett was bleeding from a cut to her head, you attempted to wipe her head before she ran away. You cut off your electronic monitoring bracelet and left the address in Ms Bennett’s car, ripping off the bumper in the process. You dumped your EM bracelet and went to stay with relatives. The following day, you returned to pick up Ms Bennett and H to take them to that address.

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 209(b). Maximum penalty is 14 years’ imprisonment.
2      Section 193. Maximum penalty is 3 years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 306(1)(a). Maximum penalty is 7 years’ imprisonment.

[5] Initially the two bedrooms at the address were occupied and you moved into the lounge, staying there for about a week. You requested that the occupants of the second bedroom leave the house and once this happened you and the two complainants moved into that bedroom. After this, you became significantly more controlling, particularly towards Ms Bennett. You frequently lost your temper. You did not allow Ms Bennett to leave the house without you, telling both complainants: “Wherever you go, I’ll go”. Sometimes Ms Bennett was confined to the bedroom…

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 Ross

Details

AGLC: R v Ross [2021] NZHC 37
Case: [2021] NZHC 37
Decision Date: 29 January 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Leslie Peter Ross appeared for sentencing in the High Court at Auckland, following his guilty pleas to charges of kidnapping, assault with intent to injure, and threatening to do grievous bodily harm. The court heard that Ross had kidnapped and confined a woman, Ms Bennett, and a juvenile, H, for approximately eight days, subjecting them to threats and physical violence. The court considered the aggravating factors of the kidnapping, including the length of detention, the use of threats, and the vulnerability of the victims. The starting point for the kidnapping and threats was set at four years' imprisonment. An uplift was added for the assault on Ms Bennett and the threats to H, resulting in an adjusted starting point of five years and three months' imprisonment. The court also considered personal aggravating and mitigating factors, including Ross's extensive criminal history, his background of abuse and trauma, and his remorse and guilty plea. The court applied discounts for these factors, resulting in a final sentence of four years and five months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently. The court emphasised the importance of holding Ross accountable for his violent and controlling behaviour, and of promoting a sense of responsibility for the harm he caused.

Orders