R v Savage - [2020] NZHC 2553

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CRI-2018-087-001127

[2020] NZHC 2553

THE QUEEN

v

TEWI SAVAGE

Hearing: 29 September 2020

Counsel:

A J Pollett for Crown

S Tait & J M Hudson for Defendant

Sentence:

29 September 2020

SENTENCE OF PAUL DAVISON J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Tauranga

R v TEWI SAVAGE [2020] NZHC 2553 [29 September 2020]

Introduction

[1] Mr Tewi Savage, at 35 years of age, you appear today for sentencing having been found guilty of murdering your two year-old daughter, Arnica. On 1 July 2018, you took her out into the waters of the Rangitaiki River, let her go, and caused her to drown and die.

[2] In sentencing you, I will first summarise the background and circumstances of your offending and the contents of the victim impact statements, before turning to address your personal circumstances. I will then refer to the purposes and principles of sentencing and explain the approach I am required to take in sentencing you for the offence of murder. I will then summarise the submissions made by the Crown and by your counsel as regards the sentence that they submit should be imposed. Finally, I will outline the sentence I will impose. As part of this, I shall determine whether it would be manifestly unjust to impose a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of at least 17 years without parole.

The whānau in Court

[3] However, before I proceed further it is appropriate that I acknowledge the presence in Court today of members of your whānau. Arnica was a loved and treasured member of your whānau, and her death has had a traumatic and indelible effect on their lives.

[4] I have carefully read each of the victim impact statements which have been written and submitted to the Court. Those who have prepared them, including Ms Moses, have endeavoured to express the deep sense of loss that they feel as a result of the death of a beautiful child whose young life, full of promise, lay ahead of her. As I am sure all you members of Mr Savage’s whānau present in Court well understand, the pain, sense of loss and sadness (te mamae, te pōuri,) that you are experiencing cannot and will never be allieviated by the process of the Court imposing sentence on Mr Savage today. It is clear that Arnica’s death is a loss not only for her immediate family, but also for the extended Savage whānau, and the Court extends its sincere sympathy to each of you for your loss.

[5] In the course of this sentencing, I will be reviewing and referring to the circumstances in which Arnica was murdered. While some of these details will be distressing, it is necessary that the circumstances surrounding the offence of murder and of Arnica’s death are described in open court as part of the process by which the reasons for the sentence imposed are…

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 Savage

Details

AGLC: R v Savage [2020] NZHC 2553
Case: [2020] NZHC 2553
Decision Date: 29 September 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand heard the case of the Queen against Tewi Savage, who was found guilty of murdering his two-year-old daughter, Arnica, by drowning her in the Rangitaiki River. The court was required to decide on the appropriate sentence for Savage, considering the purposes and principles of sentencing, including accountability, denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The court considered the victim impact statements, Savage's personal circumstances, and his criminal history. The court also took into account Savage's mental health issues and the effect of his actions on his whānau.

The court decided that Savage's mental instability and illness at the time of the offending were mitigating factors, which made a 17-year minimum period of imprisonment manifestly unjust. The court found that Savage's disturbed mental state significantly contributed to his offending and reduced his level of culpability. Taking into account Savage's genuine remorse and sense of shame, the court imposed a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 14 years.

The final orders of the court were that Tewi Savage be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 14 years for the murder of his daughter, Arnica.

Orders