Water trough prompted row
A man’s self-described attempt to ‘‘restore his dignity’’ by taking a water trough from his ex-partner’s property has led him to the High Court.
Philip Leslie Stewart claimed it was wrong for Judge Lance Rowe to find him guilty of trespassing and assault during the odd incident.
However, in a recently published High Court judgment, Justice Francis Cooke said there was no reason to consider Stewart’s appeal.
Stewart’s offending took place in Ohingaiti, about 90 kilometres north of Palmerston North, at a property he and his victim shared while they were in a relationship for a year.
He was trespassed from the property in November 2017, but made arrangements to collect his property while a police officer observed.
Stewart was not able to take items if their ownership was disputed.
One of those items was a water trough. He went back later that day, without a police officer, but by agreement with his former partner, to collect two canopies left on the boundary.
His ex-partner went to the front gate to ensure he only took the canopies, but after placing them on his ute he climbed the fence and started walking towards the water trough.
Stewart’s ex-partner stood in front of the trough, concerned he might take it, and tried to stop him.
She then threatened to take his ute keys, climbing the fence and moving towards the vehicle.
Stewart ran after her, picking up an aluminium tent pole on the way, which he waved at her.
He hit a small jack russell dog, which yelped and ran off in pain, before hitting her with the tent pole on the shoulder and leaving in his ute.
Rowe found Stewart guilty after a judge-alone trial in November.
According to Cooke’s decision, Stewart told the trial he wanted to take the water trough to ‘‘restore his dignity’’ after his expartner made hurtful comments to him.
He claimed self-defence to the assault, saying the dog was going to attack him and his ex-partner was trying to stop him leaving.
In his appeal, Stewart said he made complaints about being assaulted, but they were not treated seriously.
But Cooke dismissed the case, saying Stewart failed to put forward an arguable appeal.
He clearly had problems with his expartner’s evidence, but even on his version of events – he only poked her with the pole – he still committed assault, Cooke said.
‘‘Mr Stewart’s argument that he was provoked by what the complainant said to him does not provide a defence.’’