district court logo

New Zealand Police v MQ [2019] NZYC 456

Published 16 October 2019

Sentencing - wilful damage of electronic monitoring (EM) bail anklet - assault with intent to rob - aggravated wounding - application for young person to be sentenced in District Court - Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) - New Zealand Police v SD [2018] NZYC 169 - United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children, arts 2, 3, 37 & 40 - United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities -Beijing Rules, r 5.1 - Riyadh Guidelines - Committee of the Rights of the Child 2007 - Oranga Tamariki Act 1989, ss 5(1 )(b)(v), 7, 7 AA, 14(1 ), 101,283,284, 289 & 386A. The young person appeared for sentence after admitting charges of wilfully damaging an EM bail anklet, assault with intent to rob and aggravated wounding. He had absconded from his bail address, gone to a dairy and without provocation stabbed the two dairy owners with a knife. The police sought an order that the young person be transferred to the District Court for sentencing because of the seriousness of the offending, the inadequacy of the orders available to the Youth Court and the need to protect the community. The Court stated that these arguments are inconsistent with the purpose of the youth jurisdiction and the Oranga Tamariki Act, particularly in light of recent amendments. Also international conventions emphasise the rights of young and disabled persons (the young person did not officially qualify as disabled but did have particular needs arising from Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder and ADHD). Expert evidence suggested that punishment would be ineffective in changing the young person's behaviour and that sending him to prison was likely to make him more of a danger to the community. The Court added that the corrections system was not properly equipped to deal with inmates with the young person's particular issues. The Court therefore decided not to transfer the young person to the District Court for sentencing. The Court sentenced the young person to six months' supervision with residence, and approved a plan prepared by the young person's social worker. The young person was to be released from residence early provided he met certain conditions. Judgment Date: 23 September 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements.***

Tags