Legal Research
Cases
R v Te Maru

R v Te Maru

Case [2020] NZHC 2084 18 August 2020

Criminal Liability

Mens Rea & Intention

Reckless Intent

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

Minimum Period of Imprisonment

Sentencing

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2019-044-541

[2020] NZHC 2084

THE QUEEN

v

PETER JAMES TE MARU

Hearing: 18 August 2020

Counsel:

AM McClintock and AD Luck for Crown RM Mansfield and SR Lack for Mr Te Maru

Sentenced:

18 August 2020

SENTENCING NOTES OF FITZGERALD J

Solicitors: Meredith Connell, Auckland To: R Mansfield, Auckland
S Lack, Auckland

R v Te Maru [2020] NZHC 2084 [18 August 2020]

Introduction

[1] Mr Te Maru, you appear for sentencing today having been found guilty by a jury of the murder of Marino Te Maru, your brother. Given the present COVID-19 alert level three restrictions, this sentencing is taking place with you appearing by AVL, which is obviously not the ideal scenario given the nature of today’s hearing. But this sentencing has been delayed for some time now, for a number of reasons, and it is important that sentencing proceeds without further delay, to give you, and your whānau, certainty going forward.

[2] Before saying anything further, I first want to formally acknowledge your parents and other members of your whānau who have joined by AVL. Tēnā koutou and I am very happy we have been able to make those arrangements for you this morning, as I said earlier. I also acknowledge that many of your broader whānau were present at your trial earlier this year. It is clear that Marino’s death has had a tremendous impact on them all, as I know it has on you as well. But it is equally clear that, despite the terrible tragedy that occurred, your parents and your whānau continue to unconditionally love and support you. I have no doubt that will be of great comfort to you at this time.

[3] Your mother has read her victim impact statement today, which takes real courage. She speaks of the hardship Marino’s death has caused and how her mokopuna have been left without fathers. Your own father is also now unwell. But your mother also speaks of the interconnectedness of your whānau and how they have made peace with what has occurred. Your mother notes the role alcohol played on the night Marino died. She says whatever sentence is imposed on you today, it will also be theirs – they have lost two sons. She knows that your mamae (pain) will always remain with you but so will the love that your whānau has for you. I also formally acknowledge the grief and pain your whānau must be experiencing and I extend to them the Court’s sincerest sympathy.

[4] There is another point I want to address at the outset, which I flagged with counsel. I have read the various reports prepared for today’s sentencing and it is clear you remain of the view that you did not intend to kill Marino. I saw and heard all the

evidence at your trial, and am satisfied that the evidence did not establish that you actually intended…

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 Maru

Details

AGLC: R v Te Maru [2020] NZHC 2084
Case: [2020] NZHC 2084
Decision Date: 18 August 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Peter James Te Maru was found guilty of murdering his brother, Marino Te Maru. The sentencing hearing was conducted via audio-visual link due to COVID-19 restrictions. The court acknowledged Te Maru's remorse and the impact the crime had on his family. Despite Te Maru's argument that he lacked intent to kill, the court found him guilty of murder based on reckless intent. The court found that while Te Maru's alcohol consumption contributed to the events, it did not excuse his actions. The court considered various factors, including Te Maru's personal circumstances, his remorse, and the nature of the crime. The Crown argued for a life sentence with a minimum period of imprisonment of at least 10 years, while the defence submitted that a finite sentence of 10 years would be appropriate. The court ultimately decided that a life sentence was appropriate, but set a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years, taking into account Te Maru's remorse and prospects for rehabilitation. The court emphasised that the decision was based on a principled approach and that the threshold for departing from a life sentence is high.

Orders