R v Watkins - [2015] NZHC 345

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT(S) PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

CRI-2012-063-003055 [2015] NZHC 345

THE QUEEN

v

JAMES LELAND WATKINS

Hearing: 4 March 2015

Appearances:

A Gordon for the Crown
M J Hine for the Defendant

Sentencing:

4 March 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF WOOLFORD J

Solicitors/Counsel:

Crown Solicitor, Rotorua
Families Matter Law Practice, Rotorua

R v WATKINS [2015] NZHC 345 [4 March 2015]

[1] Mr Watkins, you appear for sentencing on 27 charges. All relate to sexual offending you committed between 2000 and 2006, against two young girls who were your family friends and neighbours. You pleaded guilty to the majority of these charges on 17 April 2014. You pleaded guilty to the sexual violation by rape charges on 16 December 2014.

[2] The majority of these charges are representative.

Offences

[3] In relation to the first victim, your charges are as follows:

Offence
Section

Maximum penalty

3 x sexual violation by rape

s 128(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961

20 years imprisonment

7 x unlawful sexual connection by digital penetration and oral sexual connection

s 128(1)(b) Crimes Act 1961

20 years imprisonment

1 x indecently assaulting a child under 12

s 133(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961

10 years imprisonment

[4] In relation to the second victim, your charges are as follows:

Offence
Section

Maximum penalty

3 x sexual violation by rape

s 128(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961

20 years imprisonment

9 x unlawful sexual connection by digital penetration and oral sexual connection

s 128(1)(b) Crimes Act 1961

20 years imprisonment

1 x indecently assaulting a child under 12

s 133(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961

10 years imprisonment

3 x inducing an indecent act with a girl under 12

S 133(1)(c) Crimes Act 1961

10 years imprisonment

Facts

[5] Mr Watkins, when you moved to New Zealand you married and settled in the Rotorua community. You were closely associated to local churches, and held yourself out as a trained pastor and offered counselling services. At this stage, you became friends with the victims’ family, who were struggling with the ill-health of their child. You became a trusted counsellor to their child, and you and your wife began to assist the family.

[6] Over time, you became close. The family’s two daughters, the victims, were invited to stay at your house while their parents tended to their other child; you and your wife were called “Grandpa” and “Grandma”.1 You regularly had the girls at your house, primarily at separate times, from 2000 until 12 April 2006 when you moved back to the United States of America. During the time of the offending, you lived in both the Rotorua and nearby areas.

[7] There are representative charges of sexual offending across this time period. Despite the graphic nature of some of this offending, I must describe it to demonstrate the extent and seriousness of your offending.

[8] In 2000, when the victims began to stay over at your Rotorua…

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 Watkins

Details

AGLC: R v Watkins [2015] NZHC 345
Case: [2015] NZHC 345
Decision Date: 4 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

James Leland Watkins was sentenced by Woolford J for 27 charges of sexual offending against two young girls who were family friends and neighbours. Watkins pleaded guilty to most charges, which related to offences committed between 2000 and 2006. The court had to decide on the appropriate sentence for Watkins taking into account the purposes and principles of sentencing, aggravating and mitigating factors, and relevant case law. The court determined that the starting point for sentencing should be within 16-20 years imprisonment, placing Watkins in Band 4 of the sentencing guidelines. After considering mitigating factors such as Watkins' age, ill-health, and remorse, the court decided on a final sentence of 12 years and three months imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of five and a half years. This sentence was imposed concurrently on the charges of rape and unlawful sexual connection, and separately on the charges of indecent assault and inducing an indecent act with a girl under 12.

Orders