R v Te Pou - [2022] NZHC 1004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2019-090-5558

[2022] NZHC 1004

THE QUEEN

v

KAIORA TE POU

Hearing: 10 May 2022

Appearances:

D A McGivern for Crown J Verry for Defendant

Sentence:

10 May 2022

SENTENCE OF PAUL DAVISON J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Auckland

R v KAIORA TE POU [2022] NZHC 1004 [10 May 2022]

Introduction

[1] Kaiora Te Pou, you appear before the Court this morning for sentence on one charge of causing intentional damage1 and one charge of assault with a weapon.2 The intentional damage charge relates to your offending at an address in Massey, West Auckland, on 27 October 2019, and the assault with a weapon charge relates to your offending the same day and shortly after the first offending when a vehicle in which you were travelling followed another vehicle and was driven into the back of it when it stopped.

The offending

[2]I shall commence by summarising your offending.

[3] At around 3.30 pm on 27 October 2019 you and Manawanui Te Pou arrived together at a residential address in Don Buck Road in Massey where a Mr Josh Tana was living. That afternoon his sister, his sister’s partner, and her two young children were visiting Mr Tana at that address.

[4] When you and Manawanui arrived at the address you walked up the driveway and said to the occupant that you were looking for someone named “Rangi”. The occupant told you that there was no one with that name living at the address and he then walked you back down the driveway where you both got into a red Ford Falcon motor car and drove away.

[5] However around seven minutes later, you and Manawanui arrived back at the address in the red Ford Falcon, and drove the vehicle into the property and on to the front yard of the residence. You then both got [out] of the vehicle and you both appeared to be in a heightened and agitated state. You, Mr Te Pou, were brandishing two machete knives.

[6] The two of you then moved towards Mr Tana in a threatening manner before turning your attention to a black Honda motor car which was parked on the property

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 269(2)(a): carrying a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
2 Section 202C(1)(a): carrying a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

beside the driveway or on it. It belonged to Mr Tana’s sister who was visiting, as I have said. Manawanui then tried to get into the black Honda but was unable to, and so you and he then proceeded to smash the windows of the vehicle using the machete weapons that each of you had in your possession. Your actions and involvement in the smashing of the Honda’s windows is the basis of the intentional damage charge.

[7] While this was taking place, some other vehicles also arrived at the address, and the drivers of those vehicles appeared…

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 Pou

Details

AGLC: R v Te Pou [2022] NZHC 1004
Case: [2022] NZHC 1004
Decision Date: 10 May 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Kaiora Te Pou was sentenced for charges of intentional damage and assault with a weapon. The intentional damage charge stemmed from an incident where Te Pou and a co-offender, Manawanui, smashed the windows of a vehicle parked at a residence in Massey, West Auckland. The assault with a weapon charge involved Te Pou driving a car into another vehicle and holding a machete knife out of the window in a threatening manner. Te Pou's sentencing involved a two-stage process, determining a starting point and then applying discounts based on various factors.

The Crown argued for a starting point of eight to 10 months' imprisonment, uplifted by two months due to Te Pou's previous convictions, and discounted by 10 per cent for his guilty pleas and another two months for time spent on restrictive electronic monitoring bail. The defence proposed a starting point of 18 months' imprisonment, uplifted by six months due to previous convictions, and discounted by 50 per cent for guilty pleas, cultural background, and time spent on bail. The court determined the appropriate starting point to be 10 months' imprisonment, uplifted by four months to account for Te Pou's history of similar offending, resulting in an adjusted starting point of 14 months' imprisonment.

The court allowed discounts for Te Pou's guilty pleas (10 per cent), his efforts at rehabilitation and expression of remorse (10 per cent), and his personal and cultural background (15 per cent), resulting in a total discount of 35 per cent. This led to a final sentence of nine months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently for both charges. Te Pou was also subject to standard and special conditions of release, as well as a requirement to undergo drug testing upon release from prison.

Orders