RICK CAMPBELL AND THE KING - [2024] NZHC 2874

THE NAME IN THIS JUDGMENT HAVE BEEN ANONYMISED TO COMPLY WITH

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF DEFENDANT PROHIBITED BY S 201 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WAIHŌPAI ROHE

CRI-2024-425-36

[2024] NZHC 2874

BETWEEN
RICK CAMPBELL

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 3 October 2024

Appearances:

G A Walsh and M J James for Appellant A S C Alcock for Respondent (via VMR)

Judgment:

4 October 2024

JUDGMENT OF DUNNINGHAM J

This judgment was delivered by me on 4 October 2024 at 11 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date……………

CAMPBELL v R [2024] NZHC 2874 [4 October 2024]

Introduction

[1] Rick Campbell was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment by Judge Walker on charges of:1

(a)possession of objectionable material;2

(b)distribution of objectionable material;3 and

(c)sexual conduct with a child under 12.4

[2] Mr Campbell was sentenced alongside his husband and co-offender, who faced similar charges and received an end sentence of four years three months’ imprisonment.

[3] Mr Campbell appeals on the basis that the excessive starting point resulted in a manifestly excessive sentence.

Facts

[4] The summary of facts for Mr Campbell’s offending is, as noted by Judge Walker, “lengthy and graphic”.5

[5] During 2020, Mr Campbell and his husband’s objectionable online activity was detected following an automated Cyber tipline referral from the United States based ‘National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children’. The Department of Internal Affairs commenced an investigation into their activity.

[6] On 21 October 2020, police executed a search warrant at the couple’s rural residential address. Various devices were seized. Mr Campbell possessed 37 objectionable images and video files on his cell phone. A number of these fell into

1      R v [Campbell] [2024] NZDC 17570.
2      Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, s 131A — maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
3      Sections 123(1)(d) and 124 — maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.
4      Crimes Act 1961, s 132(3) — maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
5      R v [Campbell], above n 1, at [2].

category A, the most serious category and two were described as at the “extreme” end of this category.6 The files depicted boys and girls in sexualised positions, involved in sexual activity either alone, with other children, or being sexually abused by adults. The children featured were between approximately three months and 15 years’ old.

[7] Examples of the files include a still image depicting a naked boy appearing between the ages of six and eight and a similar-aged girl who has his penis in her mouth, and a 49 second video which depicts a pre-pubescent boy’s genital area and an adult penis penetrating the boy’s anus whilst the boy is touching his own penis.

[8] Between 15 December 2018 and 17 February 2020, Mr Campbell distributed 10 of these publications to another person, “A”. The two also discussed sexual fantasies involving…

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 RICK CAMPBELL AND THE KING

Details

AGLC: RICK CAMPBELL AND THE KING [2024] NZHC 2874
Case: [2024] NZHC 2874
Decision Date: 4 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rick Campbell appeals against his four-year imprisonment sentence for possession and distribution of objectionable material and sexual conduct with a child under 12 years. The District Court imposed a starting point of four years' imprisonment for the possession and distribution charges, and a stand-alone sentence of 18 months for the sexual conduct charge. After applying a nine-month uplift and a 15% reduction for a guilty plea, the total sentence was four years. Campbell argues that the starting point was manifestly excessive. The Crown contends the starting point was appropriate, and the sentence imposed was within the available range. The High Court found that the starting point of four years was within the range available to the District Court Judge, taking into account the aggravating factors of the offending, including the exploitation of vulnerable children and the appellant's breach of trust with his four-year-old great nephew. The Court also noted the consistency of the starting point with that of Campbell's husband and co-offender. The appeal was dismissed.

Orders