IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CRI-2020-044-000915
[2021] NZHC 3295
THE QUEEN v
LOPETI TELEFONI
Hearing: 3 December 2021 Appearances:
David Wiseman and Josie Butcher for the Crown Emma Priest and Scott Brickell for the Defendant
Sentencing Notes:
3 December 2021
SENTENCING NOTES OF MOORE J
R v TELEFONI [2021] NZHC 3295 [3 December 2021]
Introduction
[1] Lopeti Telefoni, at the age of 22, you appear for sentence having been convicted of the manslaughter of Blake Lee.1 I presided over your three week trial in this Court. Before it started you pleaded guilty to a charge of injuring Cesar Su’a with intent to injure.2
[2] The facts are well known to you, but because the process of sentencing is quintessentially a public function which must be carried out in open Court, I must set out the facts which are relevant to my assessment of the appropriate sentence. However, before I do that, I need to explain how your charges link in with your three other co-defendants.
Procedural background
[3] You, with three others, Messrs Lisiate, Ngamoki and Tuliloa were jointly charged with the murder of Mr Lee and the assault on Mr Su’a. Mr Lisiate pleaded guilty to the murder charge on 19 May 2021. COVID-19 intervened and delayed his sentencing. He will now be sentenced next week.
[4] At the start of the trial, you and Messrs Ngamoki and Tuliloa pleaded guilty to the joint charge relating to Mr Su’a. The jury acquitted Messrs Ngamoki and Tuliloa of any form of culpable homicide. The jury acquitted you of murder but found you guilty of manslaughter.
[5] I have already sentenced Messrs Ngamoki and Tuliloa. I sentenced Mr Ngamoki to 23 months’ imprisonment and Mr Tuliloa to 22 months. The starting point for each was two years.
Facts
[6]I turn now to set out the facts.
1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 160, 171 and 177. Maximum penalty life imprisonment.
2 Section 189(2). Maximum penalty five years’ imprisonment.
[7] The facts in relation to the manslaughter of Mr Lee are as established through the evidence at trial. The facts in relation to the charge relating to Mr Su’a are as contained in the summary of facts. For the purposes of today’s sentencing the distinction is a fine one and little or nothing turns on it.
[8] In March 2020, you were an inmate at Auckland’s maximum security prison at Paremoremo. You were serving a three year and two month sentence for burglary and robbery.
[9] On the afternoon of 5 March 2020, there were eight inmates in Exercise Yard 5. Two of those were not involved in what happened. In addition to you, the others were Messrs Lee, Su’a, Lisiate, Ngamoki and Tuliloa. It was your one hour of allotted daily exercise time.
[10] What happened in that yard up to and including the attack on Messrs Lee and Su’a was recorded by two CCTV cameras positioned opposite each…
Continue reading R v Telefoni
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Telefoni [2021] NZHC 3295
- Case
- [2021] NZHC 3295
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.