A man who sexually offended against six young relatives has been jailed for 17 years and won’t be eligible for parole until he has served at least half of it.

As a teenager, he was forgiven by some of his relatives for sexual offending against them and not held to account. But that reprieve did not stop the man preying on other young girls in his family.

His sexual offending continued for thirty years, finally ending in 2011 when the earlier complainants found out and went to the police.

Yesterday, he was jailed for 17 years with a minimum non-parole period of eight-and-a-half years when he appeared before Judge Gene Tomlinson in Whangārei District Court.

The man, now in his late 50s, cannot be named for legal reasons.

He continues to deny the offending, claiming he was wronged by the victims. It has divided his family, a large group of whom were in court to support him and sat separately from the victims – one became so upset, she left.

But Judge Tomlinson said he agreed with a jury that found the man guilty earlier this year and was “more than satisfied” the offending happened – and at the different times and in the different ways each victim described.

The effect of the man’s “selfish, controlling, and coercive” sexual behaviour on those vulnerable victims was “profound and lifelong; life-changing, and life-limiting”, as borne out in their victim impact statements, the judge said.

“The tragedy for the earlier victims is that they forgave you; they accepted your word you would not do this sort of thing again and they did not – I suspect at the urging of senior family members – take you to the police to be held accountable by the courts,” the judge said.

It was that act of forgiveness that enabled the man to continue to offend.

And that failure to seek accountability from him at that stage meant a rape he committed when he was about 16 or 18 was “swept under the carpet”, hidden away by the man’s family, causing the victim immeasurable harm – as had his offending involving the other victims, the judge said.

“As the youngest, spoilt, ‘fun uncle’, you predated on these younger vulnerable members of your family for your own sexual desires,” Judge Tomlinson said.

The judge said the offending against the earliest victims would nowadays have amounted to much more serious charges and higher penalties – some involving 20-year maximum prison terms.

But the charges had to be laid and dealt with as the law stood at the time of the offending.

The man originally faced 30 charges in relation to seven girls, but was found not guilty of the alleged offences involving one of the complainants.

He was sentenced for 25 remaining charges of which he was found guilty, some representative of multiple offences: 12 of indecency with a girl aged under 12 (for which a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment applied), indecent assault (10 years imprisonment), indecency with a girl aged 12 – 16 (seven years imprisonment), five charges of sexual conduct with a girl under 12 outside New Zealand (14 years imprisonment), two charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection (20 years imprisonment), rape from 1983 (14 years imprisonment as was the maximum penalty back then), and three charges of sexual violation by rape (20 years imprisonment).

Counsel Russell Boot noted the law now prevented the court from imposing prison terms for charges that carried less than 14-year maximum prison terms if, at the time of the offence, the offender was under 18 years old.

Tomlinson told the man he would benefit from that situation – the court could only convict and discharge him on 12 of the charges, where his age at the time of the offending was or could have been under 18.

Taking the three sexual violations by rape charges as the lead offences, and noting they were some of the most serious of their type, the judge set a sentence starting point in line with a tariff case, of 16 years imprisonment.

He uplifted it by four years for the charges involving unlawful sexual connection and sexual conduct outside of New Zealand.

The judge rejected Boot’s submissions for previous good character discount, but accepted there could be discount for matters raised in a cultural report, particularly the man’s exposure to sexualised behaviour from older siblings at a young age. It undoubtedly contributed to the man’s offending, the judge said.

There was a total of 15 per cent discount for that factor, the man’s age, and health issues.

Imposing the minimum non-parole period, the judge agreed with the Crown that the usual parole eligibility which comes a third of the way through a sentence would not be sufficient to satisfy sentencing principles of deterrence, denunciation, and accountability.

SEXUAL HARM – DO YOU NEED HELP?
If it’s an emergency and you feel that you or someone else is at risk, call 111.
If you’ve ever experienced sexual assault or abuse and need to talk to someone contact the Safe to Talk confidential crisis helpline on:
• Text 4334 and they will respond
• Email support@safetotalk.nz
• Visit https://safetotalk.nz/contact-us/ for an online chat
Alternatively, contact your local police station.
Where to get help:
• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 (available 24/7)
• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 (0508 TAUTOKO) (available 24/7)
• Youth services: (06) 3555 906
• Youthline: 0800 376 633
• Kidsline: 0800 543 754 (available 24/7)
• Whatsup: 0800 942 8787 (1pm to 11pm)
• Depression helpline: 0800 111 757 (available 24/7)
• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155
• Helpline: 1737
If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111.
Safe to talk – He pai ki te kōrero
Contact Us
Sexual harm happens in all of our communities. This service is here for anyone.