The appeals against conviction and sentence by six youths convicted of the ambush of pizza delivery man Michael Choy have been dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
Alexander Peihopa and Whatarangi Rawiri were convicted of murder and Bailey Junior Kurariki, Riki Rapira, Joe Kaukasi and Philip Kaukasi were found guilty ofmanslaughter.
They all appealed their convictions and sentences.
Kurariki is the youngest New Zealander convicted of manslaughter.
The appeal was heard in the Appeal Court in Wellington in June. Mr Choy 40, was bashed to death with a baseball bat in September 2001. He was robbed of the pizzas the six teens had ordered to lure him to a Papakura address, as well as his money belt.
Peihopa, then 16, was sentenced to life in prison for murder with a 10-year non-parole period. Rawiri, then 17, was also jailed for life for murder. Kurariki, at 13, the country's youngest convicted killer, was found guilty of manslaughter and jailed for seven years. Kaukasi, then 17, was jailed for 12 years for manslaughter, seven for aggravated robbery and four for attempted aggravated robbery. Riki Rapira, then 16, was sentenced to nine years in jail for manslaughter, six for aggravated robbery. Joe Kaukasi, then 15, was jailed for 8-1/2 years for manslaughter and six years for aggravated robbery. A seventh defendant, Casie Rawiri, then 21, was jailed for 2-1/2 years for theft and 4-1/2 for attempted aggravated robbery, the sentences to be served concurrently.
In a written decision issued today, the Appeal Court dismissed all appeals against conviction and sentence.
Peihopa, Whatarangi Rawiri, Rapira, Kurariki, Joe Edwin Kaukasi and Phillip Kaukasi were appealing their conviction and sentence, while Casie Rawiri who had pleaded guilty was appealing her sentence only.
In their decision, the appeal judges said they admired the way trial judge Justice Fisher had initially conducted what they described as an "anxious case" in the High Court.
"The youth and number of the accused placed especial burdens on him. His rulings and directions to the jury were thorough, careful, and helpful," they said.
"He accurately organised the large volume of material before the court at trial and at the sentencing hearing. Such attention to the task has greatly assisted us on the appeal."
