[1] Mr Thomas, what I am going to say will take some time and so you may be seated until I formally hand down your sentence. I shall tell you when to stand.

[2] Cameron Thomas, at the age of 34, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to four charges. These are:

(a)manslaughter;1

(b)two charges of reckless driving causing injury;2 and

(c)failing to render assistance.3

[3] The victims of your appalling driving were Shane Hohepa, Brooke Whitehead and Fred Daley. Shane Hohepa died. The others were seriously injured. You escaped with only relatively minor injuries.

Facts

[4] It is first necessary for me to set out the background facts which led to the tragedy you were responsible for. No one will know them better than you but because sentencing is a judicial function which must be undertaken in public it is necessary for me to describe them. By the guilty pleas you entered late last year you have accepted these facts and there is no dispute about them.

[5] The day was 27 September last year. For you that day started when you were released from Waikeria Prison having completed a sentence for burglary.

1      Crimes Act 1961, ss 160(2)(a) and 171. The maximum penalty, pursuant to s 177 is life imprisonment.
2      Land Transport Act 1998, ss 7 and 36(1)(a). The maximum penalty is five years’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $20,000. The Court must also order the person be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver licence for one year or more.
3      Sections 22 and 36(1)(c). The maximum penalty is five years’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $20,000. The Court must also order the person be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver licence for one year or more.

[6] You made arrangements to catch up with your friend Fred Daley. On your way to his home you stopped at a liquor store and bought a carton of pre-mixed bourbon. Fred was not home when you got to his place because he was at work. He drove home in his BMW to find you, his partner Brooke Whitehead, Shane Hohepa and Shane’s sister at his home. He noticed empty bourbon cans sitting on the kitchen table.

[7] You told them you wanted to buy some more alcohol. You asked Fred if you could borrow his car. Fred did not think you were particularly drunk but he did know that you had previously had lost your licence. And so he specifically asked you whether you had got it back. You promised him that you had. You and Brooke left.

[8] When you returned you told…

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 Thomas

Details

AGLC: R v Thomas [2018] NZHC 819
Case: [2018] NZHC 819
Decision Date: 27 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cameron Thomas appeared in the High Court of New Zealand for sentencing after pleading guilty to four charges: manslaughter, two counts of reckless driving causing injury, and failing to render assistance. The victims, Shane Hohepa, Brooke Whitehead, and Fred Daley, suffered severe consequences due to Thomas's reckless driving, with Shane Hohepa tragically losing his life. The court heard victim impact statements detailing the profound and lasting effects of Thomas's actions on the victims and their families. Thomas's extensive criminal history, including multiple prior convictions for driving offenses, was considered during sentencing. The court noted Thomas's participation in restorative justice conferences and his guilty pleas but found his claims of remorse to be insincere. The court set a starting point for the manslaughter charge at eight years and eight months, considering the aggravating factors of the case. After applying discounts for the guilty pleas and weighing the mitigating and aggravating factors, the court sentenced Thomas to six years and six months in prison, with a non-parole period of three years and three months. Thomas was also disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for 10 years. The custodial sentences were to be served concurrently.

Orders