The Queen v Tipene - [2000] NZCA 358

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA 309/00
CA 310/00

THE QUEEN

DOROTHY PAREHIKIHIKI TIPENE
BELINDA LEE EDMONDS

Hearing:	26 October 2000 (at Auckland)
Coram:	Blanchard J Ellis J Anderson J
Appearances:	J C Pike for Crown R G Marshall for Ms Tipene H H Roose for Ms Edmonds
Judgment:	30 November 2000

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY ELLIS J

The appeal

The appellant Ms Edmonds pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of her daughter Mereana and was sentenced in the High Court at Hamilton to five years imprisonment. The appellant Ms Tipene pleaded guilty to ill treating the child while in her custody or control in a manner likely to cause her bodily harm. She was sentenced to imprisonment for 18 months. The Solicitor-General applies for leave to appeal against these sentences on the grounds that they are manifestly inadequate.

The facts

The facts surrounding the death of Mereana are tragic. In the context of this appeal it is appropriate to set them all out. The Police summary follows:
"Mereana Te Mana Motuhake Ms Edmonds was born in Hastings on 24th November 1992. She died at Hamilton on 10th May 1999 aged 6½ years.
Belinda Lee Ms Edmonds is the mother of Mereana and was at the time of birth an addicted solvent abuser.
Nevertheless Ms Edmonds cared for Mereana until she was approximately 18 months old at which time responsibility was passed to the child's maternal grandmother who resided in Hastings.
Mereana remained with her grandmother until December 1998 when she came to Hamilton to be with Ms Edmonds at the request of Ms Edmonds. Prior to that there had been intermittent contact between Ms Edmonds and Mereana following which Mereana's grandmother observed the child was upset and saying she did not want to go back.
Mereana initially lived with her mother in a room at the YWCA. She had difficulty coping with Mereana and she was subject to assaults while in her care there.
After a short period Mereana was moved into the care of her mother's partner Dorothy Ms Tipene.
Ms Tipene resided at 46 Boundary Road, Hamilton and from there Mereana attended Hamilton East Primary School.
Ms Edmonds resided at the YWCA until February 1999 when she joined her daughter and Ms Tipene at 46 Boundary Road, Hamilton.
Care of Mereana was shared between the two. Ms Edmonds worked at night and Ms Tipene during the day. In periods when one was absent sole responsibility fell to the other.
Over the following months staff of the Hamilton East Primary School noted that on occasions Mereana acted strangely. These included occasions when she would attend school on hot days dressed in full‑length clothing obscuring all her body and refused to go swimming. On at least two occasions Mereana was observed to be too scared to go home. On one of these occasions Mereana refused to get off the school bus and when subsequently uplifted by Ms Edmonds at her school clung to the…

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 The Queen v Tipene

Details

AGLC: The Queen v Tipene [2000] NZCA 358
Case: [2000] NZCA 358
Decision Date: 30 November 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand was asked to review the sentences given to Belinda Lee Edmonds and Dorothy Parehikiki Tipene, who had both pleaded guilty to charges related to the death of six-and-a-half-year-old Mereana Te Mana Motuhake. Belinda Edmonds, the child's mother, was sentenced to five years imprisonment for manslaughter, while Dorothy Tipene, who was in charge of the child's care, was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for ill-treatment of the child. The Solicitor-General applied for leave to appeal against these sentences, arguing that they were manifestly inadequate.

The court had to decide whether the sentences imposed on the appellants were indeed manifestly inadequate, and if so, what appropriate sentences should be imposed. The court examined various sentencing decisions and considered the appropriate starting points for both appellants, taking into account the nature and duration of the abuse and neglect, as well as the personal circumstances of the offenders. The court concluded that the sentences imposed by the sentencing judge were too lenient and that the appropriate starting points should have been higher.

After considering the appropriate sentences, the court allowed the appeals and increased the sentences for both appellants. Belinda Edmonds' sentence was increased to eight years imprisonment, and Dorothy Tipene's sentence was increased to two years and three months imprisonment. The court also took into account the early guilty pleas, the offenders' personal circumstances, and the fact that this was a Solicitor-General's appeal, and therefore, the sentences were adjusted to the minimum extent necessary to remove the element of manifest inadequacy.

In conclusion, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand found the original sentences imposed on Belinda Lee Edmonds and Dorothy Parehikiki Tipene to be manifestly inadequate and increased their sentences accordingly. The final orders were that Belinda Edmonds' sentence was increased to eight years imprisonment and Dorothy Tipene's sentence was increased to two years and three months imprisonment.

Orders