R v Salmon - [2015] NZHC 2808

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF ANY COMPLAINANT(S)/ PERSON(S) UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS WHO APPEARED AS A WITNESS [OR NAMED WITNESS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE] PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF COMPLAINANT(S) PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI-2015-009-1876

[2015] NZHC 2808

THE QUEEN

v

KARL SHERIDAN SALMON

Hearing: 12 November 2015

Appearances:

C Boshier for Crown

A McCormick for Defendant

Judgment:

12 November 2015

SENTENCING REMARKS OF MANDER J

[1] Karl Salmon you are for sentence this morning in respect of five charges of sexual connection with a young person, a charge of blackmail, a charge of doing an indecent act on a young person, four charges of threatening to kill, three of which are representative, two charges of possessing an objectionable publication, and one of making an objectionable publication. You entered guilty pleas and are formally convicted of these charges.

R v SALMON [2015] NZHC 2808 [12 November 2015]

[2] Before I proceed to the imposition of sentence I am required under the Sentencing Act to give you what is called a “three strikes warning”.

[3] The sexual charges, namely the charges of sexual connection with a young person and the charge of indecent act on a young person, in respect of which you are convicted, are deemed as serious violent offences and, as a result, you are now subject to the three strikes law. I am going to give you a warning of the consequences of another serious violence conviction. You will also be provided with a written notice which contains a list of these serious violent offences.

[4] The warning is this. If you are convicted of any one or more serious violent offences other than murder committed after this warning and if a Judge imposes a sentence of imprisonment, then you will serve that sentence without parole or early release. If you are convicted of murder committed after this warning, then you must be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole unless it would be manifestly unjust to do so. In that event the Judge must sentence you to a minimum term of imprisonment.

[5] The sexual offending for which you are for sentence this morning involves two victims, and the threatening to kill charges another three victims. It is necessary for me to set out the factual background of your offending before considering the appropriate sentence to impose.

Factual Background Victim C
[6] Your first victim, who I will refer to as C, was a 14 year old girl who you met on the social internet site Facebook. You were aged 20 years at the time. After exchanging messages and cell phone numbers, a face-to-face meeting in the grounds of a local school was arranged. The victim told you she was 14 years old and you told the victim you were…

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 Salmon

Details

AGLC: R v Salmon [2015] NZHC 2808
Case: [2015] NZHC 2808
Decision Date: 12 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Karl Sheridan Salmon appeared before the High Court of New Zealand in Christchurch for sentencing on charges including multiple instances of sexual connection with a young person, blackmail, and making and possessing objectionable publications. The court also heard charges of threatening to kill. Salmon had entered guilty pleas to all charges. The court noted that the sexual offences and the charges of threatening to kill were deemed serious violent offences, subjecting Salmon to the three strikes law. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence, taking into account the aggravating and mitigating factors, the impact on the victims, and the need for both personal and general deterrence.

The court assessed the gravity of the sexual offences, highlighting the threats and blackmail tactics used against the victims, the age disparity, and the predatory nature of Salmon's conduct. The court also considered the impact of the threats to kill on multiple victims, the objectionable publications, and Salmon's previous convictions for similar offences. The court balanced these factors with personal mitigating aspects, such as Salmon's age and the belated expression of remorse, against the aggravating factor of his criminal history.

The court imposed a sentence of six years imprisonment, with a minimum non-parole period of two and a half years. The sentences for various charges were to be served concurrently, with specific sentences for each charge totaling to the overall term. This decision aimed to provide adequate punishment, protection of the community, and an opportunity for Salmon to address his offending behaviour through potential therapeutic treatment.

Orders