Jailed for sex offences against family
A man who sexually offended against three generations of his family said it wasn’t unusual where he was brought up.
Yet he used threats to avoid being found out, for example threatening to kill his sister’s future children, the court heard.
The 54-year-old Waikato man narrowly avoided a sentence of preventive detention – which would have kept him behind bars without a set time for release – at the High Court in Hamilton.
The man, who cannot be named to avoid identifying the family members he offended against, was instead sentenced to 13 years and nine months in prison.
He must serve at least two thirds of that time, with possible extra monitoring when released.
‘‘Justice has been served,’’ one of his victims said outside court, ‘‘for myself and my wha¯ nau’’.
The man – who was himself abused as a child – was sentenced on 19 mostly historic abuse charges relating to his sister, two nieces, and a niece’s daughter.
He had pleaded guilty to charges including rape, assault with intent to commit sexual violation, and abduction for the purposes of sexual connection.
However, he unsuccessfully applied to withdraw guilty pleas relating to at least two victims, and denied some offending.
The man had ‘‘distorted views of right and wrong’’ and tried to normalise his behaviour, Justice Christine Gordon said during sentencing on December 11.
‘‘You justified your actions . . . that what you were doing was done by everyone else in the community.’’
Yet he threatened his victims to avoid detection, saying things like he would kill his sister’s future children, or that no-one would believe his niece.
‘‘Those two aspects of the account are difficult to reconcile.
‘‘You will struggle to address the cause of your offending while you continue to deny it occurred, or attempt to normalise it.’’
However, Justice Gordon acknowledged he had not received care after being abused as a child, and that he was willing to complete a sex offender treatment programme.
Most of the man’s offending was historic – from August 1980 to June 1992 – with some against his great niece between late 2011 and 2013.
The man met several requirements for a preventive detention sentence, Justice Gordon said.
There was a pattern of serious offending, serious harm caused, and health assessors believed there was a high risk of him offending again.
There was particular risk for female family members aged under 12, if family members weren’t aware of his extensive history.
The man’s partner and a sister had alleged the victims made up reports of abuse for financial gain, and Justice Gordon was concerned they wouldn’t protect vulnerable young family members.
However, the possibility of an extended supervision order after the man’s release convinced Justice Gordon not to order preventive detention.
The man would be about 69 after his jail term, defence counsel James Gurnick said, and research suggests the risk of reoffending decreases after that age.
He could be monitored until he was nearly 80 under an extended supervision order.
Sexual offending was normalised in the man’s mind after abuse by a close male family member when young, defence counsel James Gurnick said.
The man’s family had not supported him.
He started offending against his sister when he was about 14, but there were periods in his life with no known offending, Gurnick said.
Almost all his client’s offending was against ‘‘relatively close female family members’’, and there was no suggestion he ever sought out unrelated children.
Crown prosecutor Rebecca Mann argued for preventive detention.
The man’s offending had spanned decades and the court couldn’t assume it would decline as he aged.
And there was little chance of successful treatment given he denied offending against several victims and seemed to waver in accepting responsibility, Mann said.
‘‘You justified your actions . . . that what you were doing was done by everyone else in the community.’’