Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of New Zealand Decisions

R v Kaienua [2019] NZHC 1793 (29 July 2019)

Last Updated: 6 August 2019

VERDICTS OF GAULT J

Solicitors:

Mr B Dickey and Mr L Fraser, Meredith Connell, Office of the Crown Solicitor, Auckland Mr S Tait and Mr J Hudson, Barristers, Auckland

R v KAIENUA [2019] NZHC 1793 [29 July 2019]

[1] Mr Siddhartha Patel and Mrs Gita Patel were stabbed in their family dairy in Grey Lynn, Auckland.

[2] Soon after 7:00 pm on 19 June 2018, a 16-year-old youth (Y¹) entered the dairy, waited as other customers came and went, then moved behind the counter and began stabbing Mr Patel. His mother, Mrs Patel, was in her kitchen, out the back of the store. She saw the man close to her son behind the counter and came running. Mrs Patel was also stabbed.

[3] Mr Patel was stabbed in the front and side of his chest, and received other lacerations to his shoulder, head and hand. The stab wounds injured his hemi-diaphragm muscle between his chest cavity and abdomen, perforated part of his large intestine and lacerated his sternum and caused a collapsed lung. He required surgery twice and was in hospital for nearly six weeks. Mrs Patel was stabbed in the abdomen and the wound extended deeply into the edge of her rib cage.

[4] The Crown alleges Mr Kaienua and Y planned to carry out a robbery of the dairy with Y going in armed with a knife and Mr Kaienua waiting outside as a look-out. Mr Kaienua is charged, as a party, with assault (namely, grievous bodily harm) with intent to rob and aggravated wounding. Y is not before this Court but the Crown must prove the offences to which Mr Kaienua is alleged to be a party. The defence does not dispute Y’s offending. The issues in Mr Kaienua’s trial relate to his knowledge, intention and actions.

[5] On the first morning before commencement of Mr Kaienua’s trial, I granted him leave to withdraw his election to be tried by jury. The trial proceeded as a judge alone trial and I reserved my decision.

[6] I am required to give reasons for my verdicts.² The reasons will be made available to counsel immediately following this hearing.

¹ The youth has name suppression.

2. Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s106(2). See Sena v New Zealand Police [2019] NZSC 55 at [17]- [18], citing R v Connell [1985] NZCA 34; [1985] 2 NZLR 233 (CA) at 237 - 238 and R v Eide [2004] NZCA 215; [2005] 2 NZLR 504 (CA) at [20]- [21].

Verdicts

[7] I return the following verdicts:

(a) On the charge of assault with intent to rob, Mr Kaienua is found guilty.

(b) On the charge of aggravated wounding, Mr Kaienua is found guilty.

[8] Mr Kaienua, having been found guilty, you are convicted on those two charges.

[9] Mr Kaienua is remanded in custody for sentence on Friday, 11 October 2019 at 9:00 am.

[10] I direct a Provision of Advice to the Court report be prepared.










Gault J