Jail for sex assault

Locked out of a party, a 14-year-old girl was grabbed by a stranger and taken to a nearby house where he and a mate sexually violated her, Gisborne District Court was told.

Abe Junior Kareti Atkins, 31, and Hiku Patrick Waa, 48, appeared together in the dock last Friday and were jailed by Judge Warren Cathcart — Atkins for seven years, four months; Waa for four years, 10 months.

Both men received three strike warnings and will be added to the national child sex offender register.

Prosecutor Steve Manning said it was “particularly predatory and depraved offending”, which the Crown regarded as extremely serious.

While the men were originally charged as equal parties to the offending, the Crown later agreed to charge them for their individual roles.

Atkins pleaded guilty to sexual violation by rape of a girl aged 12 to 16, and two counts of unlawful sexual connection.

Waa pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting a girl aged 12 to 16, sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, a breach of supervision and a breach of bail.

Mr Manning said the decision to abandon the party liability aspect of the case helped achieve its resolution and avoided the need for a trial, which “would have been an extremely traumatic experience for a very vulnerable victim”.

The development had not changed the context of the case, he said.

The fact the men acted in concert made their individual culpability more serious — a consideration in sentencing.

Also prompting their guilty pleas was confirmation of scientific evidence against them and changes to their legal representation. (Each were eventually assigned more experienced counsel - Vicky Thorpe for Atkins and Matthew Phelps for Waa).

According to an agreed summary, the attack happened after the victim had been drinking alcohol with a relative and her flatmate at their house.

Grossly intoxicated, the teenager kept arguing with her relative and eventually the pair got into a physical fight.

Atkins and Waa, who were not known to the group, were drinking outside that day at a nearby house.

When the fight broke out, they went to see if they could intervene but were told it was not necessary.

The girl was taken home by her relative's flatmate.

The flatmate then went home herself and not expecting the girl to return, went inside for the night, locked all the doors and played loud music.

But the girl came back. She was unable to get inside and could not make herself heard above the music.

While she was knocking on a door, Atkins grabbed her from behind.

She screamed but no one heard her.

Fearful she might be killed, she stopped struggling.

Atkins carried her to the house where he was drinking and took her inside to a couch. He made her perform oral sex on him, then performed it on her.

Atkins then raped the girl, pinning her down with his weight. Waa who was watching, touched the girl's breasts and stomach, then made her perform oral sex on him.

The girl eventually fled and told friends and police about the ordeal.

When police questioned them, Atkins and Waa denied the offending. DNA testing confirmed their involvement.

The men's counsel did not dispute the offending fell within band two of a tariff case where features included a vulnerable victim and offenders acting in concert. Penalties range from seven to 13 years.

The Crown wanted a starting point of 12 years imprisonment for Atkins and eight years for Waa.

Judge Cathcart adopted a 10-year starting point for Atkins (as advocated for by Ms Thorpe) and seven and half years for Waa (midway between the starts suggested by the Crown and Mr Phelps).

Aggravating features of the offences were identified as the girl's young age, her intoxication, the detention of her, and the huge impact on her.

The judge said there was also premeditation, albeit limited.

There was no evidence the girl was earlier targeted by the pair.

Assessing mitigating factors, the judge said the pleas were belated but saved the need for a trial. Of a possible 25 percent discount for guilty pleas, Atkins was given 15 percent (18 months) discount and Waa given 18 percent (16 months).

Atkins got six months discount for remorse and willingness to attend restorative justice.

Judge Cathcart accepted the offending was out of character and that Atkins was ashamed and truly remorseful.

Atkins got two months discount for personal circumstances, the judge noting he came from a supportive, pro-social family. There were no cultural aspects that needed to be considered for him.

He got a further six months discount for time spent (13 months) on electronically-monitored bail13 months.

Waa received 15 percent (13.5 months) discount for matters raised in a cultural report.

The judge said it was “sad reading” and typically, of many he received here, was a “sad indictment of this area”.

It recorded Waa's wellbeing was affected from a very young age. Family violence and dysfunction left him disconnected from whanau life and saw him living as a teenager on the streets with all its inherent challenges.

Aspects traversed in the report — under-education, illiteracy, alcohol and other drug addiction, poverty, homelessness, unemployment, loss and grief, and early exposure to the criminal justice system, resulted in trauma and cultural and social deprivation — all of which bore down on Waa's offending, the judge said.

Waa got a further two and a half months discount for remorse. It was accepted he was genuinely sorry for what he had done.

He was quoted as saying it would never happen again — that he should have known right from wrong even before the girl said her age.