R v Taueki

[2012] NZHC 3285

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI-2008-042-4346 [2012] NZHC 3285

THE QUEEN

v

LISA CECELIA TAUEKI

Counsel:         I Murray for Crown

D A Ewen for Prisoner

Re-sentencing:           6 December 2012

RE-SENTENCING NOTES OF WILLIAMS J

[1]      Ms Taueki you originally faced two counts of blackmail in a jury trial in Nelson in 2009 before me.  You pleaded guilty mid-trial on the larger of the two counts and I discharged you on the lesser count. The facts can be briefly stated.

[2]      You met the victim in a nightclub and he paid you for sex.   You built up something of a relationship.   I guess he could have been called a bit of a “sugar daddy”.  The victim said he did not want to see you anymore and the allegation was that, through a Christmas card, you demanded $2,000 or you would disclose the facts.  The victim complied.  That formed the basis of Count 1.   But, as you will recall, I said there was a great deal of doubt about the nature of that exchange – whether it was a gift or a bribe, and for that reason I discharged you.  Three days

later you demanded another $3,000 and on that question there is no doubt.   The

R V LISA CECELIA TAUEKI HC WN CRI-2008-042-4346 [6 December 2012]

victim contacted a lawyer and the police, and of course  you were charged and pleaded guilty mid-trial.

[3]      You were sentenced on that second count to 150 hours’ community work.

[4]      Ms Taueki that was a lenient sentence and you know that.  Blackmail is first treated as sufficiently serious to be heard in this court and it usually carries a jail term.

[5]      The Crown is right when Mr Murray says that the starting point here is probably a short term of imprisonment, but everyone at the trial in 2009, even the prosecutor, thought you deserved an even break.  Unfortunately you did none of that community work.

[6]      In the pre-sentence report your explanation was you were young, dumb and too busy partying.  From what you said to me this morning that appears to have been accurate, then.

[7]      The Crown now applies to cancel and substitute your sentence with one you will comply with – that holds you properly accountable, responsible and deters you and others from doing what you did.  And of course bearing in mind your failure to comply with community work.

[8]      I have listened carefully to what both counsel have said to me this morning, and particularly carefully to  the exchange  I have had  with  you.   Frankly I am impressed with the change.    I do  remember  you from 2009.   You really are a different person now, and I do not want to interfere with that.  I want that change to continue and for you to grow to achieve the potential you obviously have.  You have worked hard enough to complete a tertiary qualification.  You are still young.  You clearly have energy for life.

[9]      I want to give you a sentence that gives you some flexibility to get back into employment in your chosen profession.   So I think, even though you could not complete community work in 2009, that you can now.

[10]     I  am  going  to  re-impose  150  hours’ community  work.    The  sentence  is therefore cancelled and a fresh sentence of community work is substituted.

[11]     Now Ms Taueki, do not let me down.  If you do, you know where you are

going.  I am sure you won’t.

[12]     Stand down.

Williams J