Judge Cathcart said a letter Haenga wrote to the court went no further than the remorse already implicit in his guilty pleas.
Neither should Haenga should get additional discount for his transgender status, although he had recently been segregated after an “incident” while remanded in custody.
Not incarcerated with general populationThe judge said he had not been presented with any case law authority to suggest transgender offenders must be given greater allowance because of it. There was no suggestion that Haenga would serve his sentence in the general prison population.
Even if the severity of the sentence were reflected in Haenga’s life choice issue, there was no evidence (as required) that it would be disproportionately severe.
Judge Cathcart put it to Mr Lynch that Haenga had made a life choice for which offenders facing the same factual scenario would not get credit.
But Mr Lynch did not want to speak to the matter, saying he did not know whether Haenga’s lifestyle resulted from “nature or nurture”.
The judge said similar offending had appeared regularly in Haenga’s criminal history and had resulted in other prison terms.
Prosecutor Tess Brownlie said police were concerned Haenga continued to target elderly people. He was fresh out of jail for a burglary last year of a 94-year-old resident at a retirement village when he committed this latest offence.
Judge Cathcart noted Haenga initially denied the offence, claiming a person photographed by bank security footage was someone else who had borrowed his clothes.
The judge pointed to a victim statement that said the complainant, a widow who lived alone, suffered not only financial loss but substantial emotional harm. Her family had also been put under strain because of the offence and now fearful for her safety, were locking her in her house.