The parents had previously lost a son and the Crown alleges B was so overcome with grief that they left a suicide note wanting to take the family so they could all be together again.

The defendant allegedly tried to convince their spouse to die by suicide, then allegedly tried to kill their daughter and themselves by overdosing on medications.

That morning, the other parent had been out doing groceries when they returned home around 10am to find B slumped over in the computer chair and their daughter in her wheelchair nearby.

The daughter lives with multiple disabilities that require 24-hour care and is unable to speak.

The parent initially said in a police statement that when they arrived home “[the child] was unusually drowsy”.

But when private investigators went to see the parent in July this year, a further statement was provided.

The daughter is on a list of prescribed medications to be taken in the morning, lunchtime and evening, including cannabis drops.

The new statement said the parent wanted to clarify what they meant from their original statement, which was read in court.

“When I said ‘this is unusual at this time of day’, that is incorrect.

“These are the words I used at the time I made my statement, I retract this now and, on reflection, this is not correct and being drowsy isn’t uncommon for [the child] when she was on her normal medication,” the updated statement said.

Under cross-examination, defence lawyer Arthur Fairley asked the parent whether it was normal for the child to be drowsy throughout the day.

“It is normal for her to be drowsy on the day when I got back from the groceries,” Fairley read from the man’s updated statement.

“That is true, isn’t it?” Fairley asked.

“Yes.”

“And it was true for that day?

“Yes, it was.”

The parent told the court that when paramedics arrived they said it did not appear their daughter had been overdosed.

Fairley put to the witness they were in a state of shock coming home to the scene and continued to be in shock later that day when questioned by police.

“When you talked to the police were you in a state of shock?”

“I suppose so,” they answered.

“Were you still upset about what you had seen earlier in the morning?”

“Yes, I was.”

Under re-examination by Crown lawyer Alex Goodwin, the parent said they had been giving the child medication for many years but could not recall whether they had ever given her clonazepam.

Goodwin asked whether the cannabis medication made her drowsy throughout the day, to which the parent responded she was alert.

Goodwin referred to an activities list prepared by Northable (a service provided for disabled people) for the child which said from 8.45am until 11pm the daughter engaged in multiple day activities.

“Was it normal from 8.45am for your daughter to engage in her daytime activities?” Goodwin asked.

“Yes. From 8.45am she was alert.”

“And generally from 8.45am your daughter isn’t drowsy?” Goodwin asked.

“No.”

“So on February 8, 2023, what time did you return home from the groceries and pharmacy?”

“About 10am,” the parent answered.

Goodwin asked the parent to confirm whether the evidence they had given the day prior in which they said they believed the statement they made to police to be correct.

“Yes,” they responded.

The trial continues.

Shannon Pitman is a Whangārei based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the Te Tai Tokerau region. She is of Ngāpuhi/ Ngāti Pūkenga descent and has worked in digital media for the past five years. She joined NZME in 2023.