R v Ruddell - [2020] NZHC 3250

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2020-088-000679

[2020] NZHC 3250

THE QUEEN

v

BRENT JAMES RUDDELL

Hearing: 9 December 2020

Appearances:

B M O’Connor and K Macneil for the Crown D Blaikie for the Defendant

Sentencing:

9 December 2020

SENTENCING NOTES OF WOOLFORD J

Solicitors: Marsden Woods Inskip & Smith (Office of the Crown Solicitor), Whangarei Counsel: D Blaikie, Whangarei

R v RUDDELL [2020] NZHC 3250 [9 December 2020]

[1] Brent James Ruddell, you appear for sentencing having pleaded guilty to 72 charges, mostly related to child sex offending. Those include:

Charge Offence Statutory provision Maximum penalty

1 Exporting prohibited goods
Customs and Excise Act 2018, s 288(1)(b)

and (2)(a)
$5,000 fine

2 Possession of objectionable publication with knowledge
Films, Videos, and Publications

Classification Act 1993, s 131A(1) and

(2)(a)

10 years’

imprisonment or
$50,000 fine

3
Distribution of

objectionable material

Films, Videos, and Publications

Classification Act 1993, s 123(1) and (2)(a)

14 years’

imprisonment

4 Possession of a class C controlled drug
Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 7(1)(a) and

(2)(b)

Three months’

imprisonment or $500 fine

5 Possession of utensil Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 13(1) and (3)
12 months’

imprisonment or $500 fine

6 – 46
Knowingly making an objectionable

publication (x41)

Films, Videos, and Publications

Classification Act 1993, s 124(1)

10 years’

imprisonment

47 – 57
Possession of objectionable

publication with knowledge (x11)

Films, Videos, and Publications

Classification Act 1993, s 131A(1)

10 years’

imprisonment or

$50,000 fine

58, 59 and

62 – 71

Sexual violation by unlawful sexual

connection (x12)
Crimes Act 196, ss 128(1)(b) and 128B
20 years’

imprisonment

60 and 61 Sexual conduct with female under 12 (x2)
Crimes Act 1961,

s 132(3)

10 years’

imprisonment

72 Abduction for sex
Crimes Act 1961,

s 208

14 years’

imprisonment

Factual background

[2] On 18 July 2019, you uploaded (and thereby exported) child sexual exploitation material (CSEM) via a chat message on an overseas social media platform, namely an instant messenger mobile app from a US-based company. On the same day, you were detected uploading another CSEM via the same chat message from the same account. The social media platform does not store information on servers in New Zealand. Any data transmitted between users must leave and re-enter New Zealand. If a person in New Zealand is knowingly concerned in the upload of

an objectionable publication, that upload amounts to an exportation offence under the Customs and Excise Act 2018 as the file is exported to a point outside New Zealand.

[3] CSEM is the consequence of the real exploitation and/or sexual abuse perpetrated against a child. Any publication that promotes or supports, or tends to promote or support, the exploitation of children or young persons for sexual purposes is deemed to be an objectionable publication as defined by the Films,…

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 Ruddell

Details

AGLC: R v Ruddell [2020] NZHC 3250
Case: [2020] NZHC 3250
Decision Date: 9 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Brent James Ruddell was sentenced on 72 charges, predominantly involving child sex offending. The court assessed the charges under various statutes, including the Customs and Excise Act 2018, the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, and the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. The primary legal issue was determining an appropriate sentence for Ruddell's extensive history of sexual violations against children. The court considered the starting point for sentencing, personal circumstances, and the discount for guilty pleas. After evaluating the culpability assessment factors and the aggravating factors, the court set an end starting point of 22 years' imprisonment. The court also considered mitigating factors such as Ruddell's background of disadvantage and his willingness to undertake rehabilitation. Given the serious nature of the offences, the court imposed a sentence of 15 years and five months' imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of eight years. The court concluded that Ruddell was not likely to reoffend if he received treatment, thus deciding against preventive detention. The final order included destruction of the objectionable publications and items on which the publications were stored.

Orders