New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Grooming

Legal area

Court

2 Oct 2023

TAYLOR v R [2023] NZCA 476

Citation

[2023] NZCA 476
Court

Court of Appeal

No miscarriage of justice occurred: the Judge correctly directed the jury on consent and reasonable belief consistent with s128A and Christian; there was no evidential basis to leave a grooming/consent narrative to the jury; the Question Trail appropriately summarized relevant subsections of s128A; the Judge's remark about timing was harmless; and an MPI of eight years was properly imposed under s86 given the scale, planning, breach of trust, harm and lack of offender responsibility.
13 Jun 2023

BANNAN v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZCA 227 [13 June 2023]

Citation

[2023] NZCA 227
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the appellant's historical and recent grooming and possession offences together constituted a pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending, the s107IAA criteria for high risk were satisfied (intense drive, predilection, limited self-regulation and lack of full acceptance of responsibility), and a five year extended supervision order was the minimum period required to protect the community; appeal dismissed.
8 May 2023

GOLDSBURY v R [2023] NZHC 1069

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1069
Court

High Court

The Court held the appropriate starting point was 4.5 years imprisonment (reduced from the Judge's 5 years), applied the same discounts for early guilty plea (25%), good character (15%), mental health (5%) and one month for late reparation, resulting in an adjusted sentence of two years five months imprisonment; permanent name suppression for the appellant's wife and company was refused because publication would not cause undue hardship beyond normal adverse consequences and the offending occurred outside childcare operations so would not reasonably lead readers to conclude systemic childcare…
23 Feb 2023

MAKSHUD AHMED v R [2023] NZSC 8

Citation

[2023] NZSC 8
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the issues were case-specific, Christian v R already governed the required approach to consent directions where the defence denies offending, and the Court of Appeal's conclusions that any omission did not produce a miscarriage of justice were not shown to be wrong; therefore no threshold for leave under s 74 was met.
15 Dec 2022

R v STOTHERS [2022] NZHC 3456

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3456
Court

High Court

Preventive detention was imposed with a minimum term of 10 years because the defendant demonstrated a long-standing pattern of serious sexual offending against familial female victims, posed a high and enduring risk of sexual reoffending without intensive treatment, minimised his conduct and had not engaged in remediation; a finite sentence (calculated at 16 years 10 months) would not adequately protect the community or incentivise necessary rehabilitation.
29 Aug 2022

MAKSHUD AHMED v R [2022] NZCA 411

Citation

[2022] NZCA 411
Court

Court of Appeal

Although the trial Judge should have drawn the jury's attention to evidence from the complainant that could support an inference of consent or reasonable belief in it, the directions given on consent and reasonable belief were legally adequate and the omission did not create a real risk of a different outcome in this case; extension of time to appeal was granted; convictions were upheld; the minimum period of imprisonment imposed at sentencing was unjustified and was quashed.
12 Aug 2022

R v CAVE [2022] NZHC 1999

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1999
Court

High Court

Judge fixed separate starting points of five years for the Dilworth offending and five years for the Waikato offending, applied the totality principle to reduce the combined starting point from ten to nine years, then reduced a further year for the defendant's advanced age and an unwell dependent child, producing an effective sentence of eight years' imprisonment because the offending involved vulnerable victims, breach of trust, grooming, premeditation and drug facilitation.
27 May 2022

SMITH v R [2022] NZHC 1211

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1211
Court

High Court

The High Court held the sentencing Judge did not err: the lead offending fell in mid-range of rape band four (starting point 18 years), appropriate uplifts for objectionable publications and overseas offending produced a 23 year adjusted starting point after totality, a 22.5% guilty plea discount was within allowable discretion, and the imposed sentence of 17 years with a 40% MPI was not manifestly excessive; appeal dismissed.
21 Mar 2022

TAYLOR v R [2022] NZCA 70

Citation

[2022] NZCA 70
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the sentencing Judge's nine year starting point was within the available range given the intensive grooming, planning, prolonged penetrative offending, breach of trust, and pregnancy; and the Judge was entitled to refuse any discount for prior good character because the prolonged offending and lack of insight rendered such credit inappropriate, therefore the appeal was dismissed and the six years nine months sentence was upheld.
9 Feb 2022

R v WYATT [2022] NZHC 133

Citation

[2022] NZHC 133
Court

High Court

Preventive detention was required because the defendant posed a high and enduring risk of serious sexual reoffending due to deep-seated causes, lack of insight, history of violent and sexual offending including prior offences against children, multiple breaches of an ESO and expert assessments indicating high likelihood of reoffending; a finite sentence, even with an ESO on release, would not provide adequate protection of the community, therefore the Court sentenced to preventive detention with a five year minimum term.