IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE
CRI-2018-019-4429
[2019] NZHC 1906
THE QUEEN
v
SIMON PETER WALKER
Hearing:
1 August 2019
Appearances:
J N Foster for Crown
K L Tustin for Defendant
Sentencing:
1 August 2019
SENTENCING REMARKS OF PETERS J
Solicitors: Almao Douch, Crown Solicitor, Hamilton Counsel: K L Tustin, Hamilton
R v WALKER [2019] NZHC 1906 [1 August 2019]
Introduction
[1] Mr Walker, I am sentencing you for the kidnapping and manslaughter of Mitchell Paterson on 12 July 2018.1 I am also sentencing you on one charge each of conspiring to defeat justice and misconduct in respect of human remains, these last two charges arising from events after Mr Paterson’s death.2
[2] You pleaded guilty to these charges on 21 June 2019. Justice Lang gave you what we refer to as the “first strike” warning at the time so I need not repeat that.3
[3] I shall start today by setting out the events that led to Mr Paterson’s death. The jury which heard the case recently against Leon Wilson and Christopher Smith may have a quite different view of the facts, but I am sentencing you on the basis of the summary that was before the Court at the time you pleaded guilty. Once I have summarised the facts, I shall get on with the sentencing itself.
[4] Before I go any further I want to assure everyone in the courtroom, and particularly Mr Paterson’s parents and Ms Taitoko, that everyone involved in this sentencing process has done a good job in informing me of all the relevant matters and cases. It has been a very thorough and comprehensive exercise by them and I have read everything they have given me, I have read the pre-sentence report, I have paid careful attention to their submissions and also had the benefit of hearing your victim impact statements this morning. So I assure you that the appropriate amount of work and thought has gone into this.
Facts
[5] Mr Walker, Mr Paterson’s death and its aftermath involved many people playing different roles. You were involved in every part of it.
[6] In the early hours of 12 July 2018, you and several others were at Wilson’s house, he being the president of the local chapter of the Nomads gang. Apparently
1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 157, 160, 171, 178, and 209. Maximum penalties life imprisonment and 14 years’ imprisonment, respectively.
2 Sections 116 and 150(b). Maximum penalties seven and two years’ imprisonment, respectively.
3 Sentencing Act 2003, s 86B(1).
Mr Paterson had been “bad mouthing” Wilson, and Wilson directed that Mr Paterson should be found and brought to Wilson’s house.
[7] You, and two others – Dylan Boyle and Chloe Kerridge – drove off to get Mr Paterson, learnt that he was in Whitiora, relayed this to Wilson, and then went to the Whitiora address. As I understand it, you were a “prospect” for Wilson, so quite possibly keen…
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 Walker
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Walker [2019] NZHC 1906
Case
[2019] NZHC 1906
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of R v Walker involved Simon Peter Walker, who was sentenced for the kidnapping and manslaughter of Mitchell Paterson, as well as for conspiring to defeat justice and misconduct in respect of human remains. Walker pleaded guilty to these charges on 21 June 2019, and sentencing took place on 1 August 2019. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for Walker based on the severity of his crimes, his personal circumstances, and the principles and purposes of sentencing. The primary legal issue was to establish a starting point for the sentence, considering the nature of the offences and relevant case law, and then adjusting the sentence based on personal mitigating and aggravating factors. The court considered the premeditation and violence involved in the kidnapping, the nature of the act causing death, and the fact that the crimes were part of the activities of an organised criminal group. The Crown submitted that the starting point should be between nine and ten years' imprisonment for the manslaughter and kidnapping charges, increased by one year for the other charges. The defence argued for a lower starting point of between seven and a half to nine years, citing factors such as the spontaneous nature of the violence and Walker's lesser role in the offending. After considering relevant case law and the defence's submissions, the court set a starting point of nine years, taking into account the manslaughter, kidnapping, and the other charges. The court then adjusted this starting point based on personal factors, ultimately sentencing Walker to a total of seven years' imprisonment, with the sentences for the kidnapping, conspiracy, and misconduct charges to be served concurrently with the manslaughter sentence.