R v Young - [2012] NZHC 1460

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2011-092-001800

CRI-2011-092-001799 [2012] NZHC 1460

THE QUEEN

v

PATRICK FRANCIS YOUNG

Hearing: 7 June 2012

Counsel: S J Gray and M R Galler for the Crown
D S Wallwork for the Prisoner

Judgment: 7 June 2012

SENTENCE OF DUFFY J

Counsel: D S Wallwork P O Box 76500 Manukau City Manukau 2241 for the Prisoner

Solicitors: Meredith Connell P O Box 2213 Shortland Street (DX CP24063) Auckland 1140 for the Crown

Copy To: S D Cassidy P O Box 26172 Epsom Auckland 1344

R v YOUNG HC AK CRI-2011-092-001800 [7 June 2012]

[1] Patrick Francis Young, you are for sentence today, having been found guilty of the manslaughter of Aran Jenkanying by a jury and having pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm to Arunee Jenkanying.

[2] You were charged with the murder of Mr Jenkanying. Your defence before the jury was that you had assaulted Mr Jenkanying in self defence. The jury finding you guilty of manslaughter is not inconsistent with how your defence portrayed what occurred on the day of the incident. Their verdict is consistent with them accepting that you acted to defend yourself, but with an extreme and unreasonable use of force. The assault of Mr Jenkanying can be seen that way, or it can be seen in terms of the account of events that Ms Jenkanying gave at the trial.

[3] At the trial, your evidence was that Mr Jenkanying came at you with a tokotoko, made out of wooden Dowling such as is used for broomsticks. You said that you took the tokotoko off Mr Jenkanying and struck him three times on the head.

[4] The evidence showed that Mr Jenkanying was more than 10 years older than you. The photographs show that he was not a large or heavily built man. He received injuries that led to his death. You received almost no injuries at all.

[5] The incident occurred in a suburban setting with neighbouring houses that were occupied. So you could have retreated from Mr Jenkanying, either into your parents’ home, or a neighbouring property. There was no evidence from neighbours of hearing you calling out for help, or for someone to call the police. You could have used the tokotoko to fend off Mr Jenkanying by striking him on other parts of the body that are less vulnerable than the head.

[6] Given the setting in which the assault occurred, Mr Jenkanying’s age and the extent of his injuries, the jury’s rejection of your defence of self defence can be readily understood. However, their verdict does not necessarily establish that Ms Jenkanying’s account of events is true and correct. Indeed, I consider that had the jury been sure that her account of events was true and correct, they would have found you guilty of murder. This is because, on her account, your conduct would at

the least have amounted to what I would call a reckless killing, which…

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 Young

Details

AGLC: R v Young [2012] NZHC 1460
Case: [2012] NZHC 1460
Decision Date: 7 June 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Patrick Francis Young was sentenced for the manslaughter of Aran Jenkanying and causing grievous bodily harm to Arunee Jenkanying. Young had pleaded guilty to the grievous bodily harm charge and had been found guilty of manslaughter by a jury, having initially been charged with murder. The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for Young considering the circumstances of the offence, his criminal history, and the impact on the victims.

The court considered Young's extensive criminal history, which included 53 prior convictions, 12 of which were violence-related offences. The court also considered the seriousness of the current offences, which involved Young using excessive force in response to an alleged assault by Aran Jenkanying, ultimately leading to his death, and causing serious injuries to Arunee Jenkanying. The court took into account the lack of premeditation and Young's denial of culpability, which showed a lack of remorse.

The court set a starting point of seven and a half years' imprisonment for the manslaughter charge, adjusted for the totality of the offending and Young's criminal history. The court imposed a concurrent sentence of six and a half years' imprisonment for the grievous bodily harm charge. The court also imposed a minimum period of imprisonment of four years and six months, reflecting the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence.

Ultimately, the court sentenced Young to nine years' imprisonment for manslaughter, with a minimum period of four years and six months, and six and a half years' imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm, to be served concurrently. The court hoped that Young would learn from this experience and refrain from reoffending in the future.

Orders