R v Towersey - [2019] NZHC 1161

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND GREYMOUTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA MĀWHERA ROHE

CRI-2017-085-003294 [2019] NZHC 1161

THE QUEEN

v

CORY ROBERT TOWERSEY

Hearing: 24 May 2019

Appearances:

C C White and C J Boshier for the Crown P H Surridge for the Defendant

Judgment:

24 May 2019

SENTENCING REMARKS OF NATION J

[1] Mr Towersey, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of manslaughter and one charge of conspiring to defeat the course of justice. You are now before the Court for sentencing.

[2] You told the probation officer who prepared the pre-sentence report that the victim, Hayley Williams, was your friend and that you had known Hayley longer than you had known Mr Warren.

[3] With your plea of guilty to a charge of manslaughter, you have acknowledged that you were involved in an unlawful act that caused Hayley’s death. Had you not driven Mr Warren to Ms Williams’ address, it is likely she would never have been killed. Your involvement in what happened on 22 October 2017 has deprived her three boys of all the love and support they could have expected to continue to have from

R v TOWERSEY [2019] NZHC 1161 [24 May 2019]

their mother as they grew up and beyond. It has led to the boys’ grandmother and her partner having the burden of caring for those boys in a way that should never have been necessary. Hayley’s death has and will impact on her mother and others, like her father, and others close to her for the rest of their lives. I express my respect for the way the boys’ grandmother can say, in the context of her and their loss, that caring for those boys is a comfort and a pleasure. But, as she says, that is necessary all because they do not have their mother to care for them.

[4]I need to go through the background to the offending.

[5] Mr Warren was arrested on 2 October 2017 on a charge that he had indecently assaulted Hayley Williams. Mr Warren was incensed at the charge and on several occasions in October 2017 made comments about how he should just kill Ms Williams. He was due to reappear in Court on 24 October 2017 on the indecent assault charge.

[6] You were an associate of Mr Warren. On the afternoon of Sunday 22 October 2017, Mr Warren walked to your address in Cobden. You then drove him to the address of another associate, Tony Moore, in Dunollie. I understand that area to be more than eight kilometres from Cobden. As the summary of facts says, during that visit, Moore gave the defendants, that is you and Mr Warren, a loaded .308 rifle which was placed in the boot of your vehicle. You were both at Mr Moore’s address for about half an hour. During that time, Mr Warren talked about his displeasure towards Hayley Williams because of the indecent assault charge against him.

[7] At 4.00 pm,…

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 Towersey

Details

AGLC: R v Towersey [2019] NZHC 1161
Case: [2019] NZHC 1161
Decision Date: 24 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Towersey stood trial for manslaughter and conspiracy to defeat the course of justice. The court heard that Towersey had driven Warren to Williams' home where Warren shot and killed her. Towersey had denied any knowledge of the firearm or Warren's intent to kill Williams. The court accepted Towersey's plea of guilty to manslaughter on the basis that he accepted he knew Warren intended to use the firearm to intimidate Williams but was not aware of Warren's murderous intent. Towersey also pleaded guilty to conspiring to defeat the course of justice. The court found that Towersey's assistance to Warren in obtaining the rifle and driving him to Williams' home resulted in her death. The court also found that Towersey had demonstrated a weakness of character in agreeing to help Warren and in conspiring to defeat the course of justice. The court sentenced Towersey to four years and eight months' imprisonment, with a discount for his guilty plea. Towersey was also given a first strike warning for the manslaughter charge.

The main legal issue in this case was whether Towersey's assistance to Warren in obtaining the rifle and driving him to Williams' home constituted manslaughter. The court found that Towersey's actions did amount to manslaughter as he knew Warren intended to use the rifle to intimidate Williams and there was a risk of serious harm or death resulting from his actions. The court also considered whether there were any mitigating factors relating to Towersey's offending or personal circumstances. The court found that there were no mitigating factors relating to the offending but that Towersey had shown some remorse for Williams and her children. The court sentenced Towersey to four years and eight months' imprisonment, with a discount for his guilty plea.

Orders