R v Tauroa - [2020] NZHC 376

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WAIHŌPAI ROHE

CRI-2018-225-000004

[2020] NZHC 376

THE QUEEN

v

PIHAMA JOHN TAUROA

Hearing: 28 February 2020

Appearances:

S N McKenzie and W T Chapman for the Crown S A Saunderson-Warner for the Defendant

Judgment:

4 March 2020

SENTENCING REMARKS OF NATION J

Introduction

[1] Pihama Tauroa you pleaded guilty to being a party to a wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. Your counsel has said everything that could be said for you. I have also had very full submissions from the Crown and everyone in Court should know that I have considered what was presented to me in writing carefully. I have also had the benefit of the three victim impact reports and they assist me in also just explaining what impact your offending has had on other people. Mr Tauroa, with your background and what you know happened within your own family, it has probably been good for you to hear read to you this morning the victim impact report of [ ] mother.

R v TAUROA [2020] NZHC 376 [4 March 2020]

Factual background

[2] I sentence you with reference to the summary of facts. It was the basis on which you pleaded guilty.

[3] At approximately 5.15 pm on 16 February 2018, the victim and three other young people were walking together on a street in South Invercargill. The victim, a 23 year old man, was wearing a Mangu Kaha t-shirt.

[4] Three vehicles occupied by approximately 10 Mongrel Mob members or associates intercepted the group. One vehicle parked directly next to the victim. The front passenger was seen to point a firearm out of the window at the victim and pull the trigger twice, but the firearm failed to fire.

[5] The occupants got out of their vehicles and several approached the victim. A witness reported a second person as carrying a firearm and presenting it at the witness. Indications were that two firearms were presented by people within the group. Your counsel, in her submissions, referred to the fact that a number of the group were there, a number had weapons with them. That is also consistent with the evidence I heard at trial. That is, weapons other than the rifles and the knife.

[6] The group seriously assaulted the victim, punching and kicking him while he was on the ground. Clothing, including his Mangu Kaha t-shirt, cell phone and cap were taken. During the assault, one person produced a knife and stabbed the victim five times in the lower back.

[7] After the assault, the three vehicles left the scene in different directions. One occupant pointed something at a witness that may have been a firearm. As that vehicle drove away, the victim’s cap was thrown out of a window.

[8] The victim was hospitalised with what the summary of facts described as “potentially life-threatening injuries”, including lacerations to his liver, kidney and spleen.

[9] The attack…

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 Tauroa

Details

AGLC: R v Tauroa [2020] NZHC 376
Case: [2020] NZHC 376
Decision Date: 4 March 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Nation J sentenced Pihama John Tauroa for his involvement in a premeditated gang-related assault that resulted in grievous bodily harm to the victim. Tauroa pleaded guilty to being a party to the wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The legal issues the court had to decide included the appropriate starting point for sentencing, the impact of Tauroa's limited role in the actual stabbing, and the mitigating factors based on his background and cultural context. The court considered the aggravating factors such as premeditation, use of weapons, extreme violence, multiple attackers, gang warfare, and the seriousness of the injuries inflicted. The court acknowledged Tauroa's role in setting up the attack but found him equally culpable as the principal offenders due to the nature of the group attack and his position as the president of the local Mongrel Mob chapter. The court decided on a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment, which was then reduced by 15% due to personal mitigating factors and a further 20% due to Tauroa's guilty plea, resulting in a total sentence of six years and nine months imprisonment, with a minimum non-parole period of three years and five months.

Final orders: Pihama John Tauroa is sentenced to imprisonment for six years and nine months with a minimum period of imprisonment of three years and five months.

Orders