2 Mar 2021
HEKE v R [2021] NZCA 34
- Citation
- [2021] NZCA 34
- Court
- Court of Appeal
The Court held the counter-intuitive expert evidence was properly confined to correcting lay misconceptions and not used diagnostically, the judge's directions were adequate, grooming and statistical evidence were not prejudicial given relevance and context, the threat evidence was collateral and not unduly prejudicial, and the sentencing starting point of 18 years with a minimum period of half was within established banding and properly reasoned; accordingly both conviction and sentence appeals were dismissed.