R v Te Kira - [2018] NZHC 2086

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

THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHE

CRI 2017-096-1614 [2018] NZHC 2086

THE QUEEN

v

STEVEN TE KIRA

Hearing: 15 August 2018

Counsel:

K Feltham for Crown
V C Nisbet for Defendant

Sentence:

15 August 2018

SENTENCE OF ELLIS J

[1] Steven Te Kira, you appear for sentence today in relation to seven charges:

(a) three charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection and two charges of sexual violation by rape. The maximum penalty for these charges is 20 years’ imprisonment;1

(b)you also appear for sentence today on one charge of male assaults female. The maximum penalty is two years’ imprisonment;2 and

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 128(1)(a) and (b) and s 128B.
2 Section 194(b).

R v TE KIRA [2018] NZHC 2086 [15 August 2018]

(c) one charge of threatening to kill. The maximum penalty for which is seven years’ imprisonment.3

[2] You pleaded not guilty to all charges but you were convicted by a jury on

15 June 2018, after a four-day trial. I gave you a second strike warning that day. A second strike means that any finite sentence I might impose on you must be served without parole. It also means that you have a chance of getting parole earlier if you are sentenced to preventive detention.

[3] The main issue for me to decide in sentencing you today is whether I should impose a sentence of preventive detention, as the Crown asks me to do. Before I get to that point, though, there are quite a lot of things I need to talk about. I start with the offending itself. I will try and confine my description to just the relevant detail. The detail that the evidence at your trial proved.

Your offending

[4] All your offending took place over a single morning on 5 May 2017. Your flatmate had left your flat to attend a course at the local Polytech. He left his girlfriend, T, in his bed at the flat. You arranged your own bed by placing blankets and pillows in one corner. You prepared a bucket of hot water containing some kind of cleaning product, put two flannels into the bucket and put it next to your bed. And you moved a one-metre high bookshelf into a position where it blocked the hallway leading to the door, the only entrance to the property.

[5] At approximately 8:30 am, you went into the bedroom where T was and without warning, jumped on top of her and grabbed her by the throat. You began strangling her, saying “Why are you being a bitch in my house?”. You placed both hands around her throat and said, “This is the day you are going to die”. T tried to get your hands away from her throat. She was terrified, gasping and asking you…

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 Te Kira

Details

AGLC: R v Te Kira [2018] NZHC 2086
Case: [2018] NZHC 2086
Decision Date: 15 August 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Te Kira involved Steven Te Kira who was convicted on seven charges, including three counts of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, two counts of sexual violation by rape, one count of male assaults female, and one count of threatening to kill. Te Kira was sentenced by Justice Rebecca Ellis. The primary legal issue was whether Te Kira should be sentenced to preventive detention due to the significant risk he posed to the community. Justice Ellis considered the seriousness of the offending, Te Kira's history of sexual offending, and the risk he posed for future offending. Te Kira had a long history of sexual offending spanning over 26 years and involving multiple victims. Reports from health assessors indicated that Te Kira presented a high risk of re-offending sexually. Despite previous convictions and opportunities for rehabilitation, Te Kira had not shown any genuine effort to address the causes of his offending. Given the gravity of the crimes and the risk Te Kira posed, Justice Ellis concluded that a finite sentence would be inadequate. Therefore, Te Kira was sentenced to preventive detention with a minimum term of imprisonment of nine years for the sexual violation charges. The sentence was to be served concurrently with one-year sentences for the charges of male assaults female and threatening to kill.

Orders