Spooner v Police - [2015] NZHC 2872

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

CRI-2015-441-000040 [2015] NZHC 2872

BETWEEN
MICHELLE MARIA SPOONER

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 18 November 2015

Appearances:

P Jensen for Appellant
MJM Mitchell for Respondent

Judgment:

18 November 2015

ORAL JUDGMENT OF HINTON J

Counsel/Solicitor:
P J Jensen, Barrister, Napier
Elvidge & Partners, Napier

SPOONER v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2015] NZHC 2872 [18 November 2015]

Summary

[1] The appellant, Ms Spooner, was sentenced in the District Court to 12 months’ imprisonment for six charges of making a fictitious telecommunication,1 two of criminal harassment2 and one charge of making a false statement or declaration.3

[2] She appeals against that sentence on the ground that the appropriate sentence should be one of home detention.

Factual background

[3] In about March 2014 in Auckland, Ms Spooner befriended an 18 year old male (“A”). They had sexual intercourse on one occasion and Ms Spooner became pregnant. When A learnt of that fact, he left Auckland. Ms Spooner was upset that he had left and began sending him abusive text messages.

[4] In December 2014, she sent abusive and threatening text messages to A’s female friend (“B”), pretending to be A. She also befriended B on Facebook by adopting a fictitious personality, calling herself “Sarah Jane”. “Sarah Jane” told B that A had been seeing other women and smoking drugs. She introduced B to “Lincoln Phillips”, a fictitious person.

[5] In early 2015, Ms Spooner sent B text messages pretending to be “Lincoln”. Over a period of time and through hundreds of text messages, B and “Lincoln” formed a relationship though they had never met in person. B believed “Lincoln” was her boyfriend. Through “Lincoln”, Ms Spooner encouraged B to get a restraining order and protection order against A and his mother. Ms Spooner then befriended B through text messaging and phone calls, representing herself as Lincoln’s sister, “Lynda”.

[6] During this time, Ms Spooner also contacted A and his mother but pretending to be B and sent abusive and threatening text messages to them. Pretending to be B,

1      Telecommunications Act 2001, s 112(2)(b) – maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment
or a fine of $2,000.
2      Harassment Act 1997, s 8 – maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.
3      Crimes Act 1961, s 111 – maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.

Ms Spooner claimed that B was pregnant with A’s child and that she was going to the

police with allegations that A had assaulted B.

[7] On 20 December 2014, Ms Spooner sent a series of text messages to A’s mother, advising her of the birth of her grandchild. Several images were also sent. Ms Spooner was in fact still carrying her baby, which was not born until 12 January
2015. She made up a story to explain the baby’s change in appearance.

[8] The charges of criminal harassment arose from events that took place between February and April 2015. Ms Spooner alleged to A and his mother that B…

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 Spooner v Police

Details

AGLC: Spooner v Police [2015] NZHC 2872
Case: [2015] NZHC 2872
Decision Date: 18 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand was called upon to decide an appeal by Michelle Maria Spooner against her sentence imposed by the District Court. Ms Spooner was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for charges including making fictitious telecommunications, criminal harassment, and making a false statement. The primary issue in this appeal was whether the District Court erred in imposing imprisonment as the end sentence, instead of home detention.

The court considered whether the Judge made any fundamental errors in sentencing, as argued by the appellant's counsel, Mr Jensen. Mr Jensen contended that the Judge was overly influenced by victim impact statements, misunderstood the psychologist’s report, and failed to consider the least restrictive outcome principle. The court found that the Judge appropriately weighed the impact of the offending on the victims and balanced the psychologist’s report with other sentencing considerations. The court also held that Ms Spooner was not a suitable candidate for home detention due to the seriousness and duration of her offending, and the lack of remorse shown.

Ultimately, the High Court held that the District Court did not err in its sentencing decision. The court confirmed that the Judge considered all relevant sentencing principles, including accountability, deterrence, and the interests of the victims. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence of 12 months' imprisonment was upheld.

Orders