The offending occurred over an almost eight-year period, from December 2015 to September 2023.
The police identified 144 occasions of “contact” offending, including 60 occasions of sexual violation and 84 occasions of performing indecent acts against victims, aged between 5 and 11, that were identified by police.
Most were representative charges, meaning multiple offences of the same type occurred within a single charge.
Most of the offending occurred while the children were asleep. On some occasions, the violation was repeated and prolonged, occurring over several hours, with much of it recorded by Pask.
Crown prosecutor Jackson Webber said at sentencing in the Blenheim District Court the predatory sexual behaviour was present to a high degree, against victims who were “incredibly vulnerable”.
“The harm has been massive and will echo for years, decades and in some cases, probably a lifetime.”
Defence lawyer Marcus Zintl acknowledged the damage done to the victims through the “grave breach of trust”.
He said it had been a “significant fall from grace” for Pask who was not only disgusted with himself but now had to live with what he’d done for the rest of his life.
Pask was also sentenced on charges of possession of an objectionable publication related to content he appeared to have downloaded from the internet, dating back to 2001.
Some of the victims of his offending were unknown because police were unable to identify them from their investigation of the thousands of images, videos and data that Judge Barkle said would be enough to fill 20-30 full-length movies.
The sentence handed to Pask, a once-trusted member of the Blenheim community and “grandfather figure”, included a minimum non-parole period of 10 years.
Zintl submitted that the sentence was manifestly excessive because the starting points taken were too high, there was double counting concerning the objectional publications offending, and a 5% remorse discount should have been allowed.
This month in the High Court, Justice Christine Grice dismissed the appeal against the sentence but substituted the minimum prison time to half the nominal sentence, being just under eight years.
She said Pask’s refusal to identify the unknown victims was relevant to an assessment of remorse.
“Any remorse felt by Mr Pask does not outweigh his desire to protect himself from the further liability that might have resulted from knowledge of the true number of complainants.
“I do not consider the Judge was in error in rejecting a discount for remorse,” Justice Grice said.
Zintl also said the minimum period imposed was in error.
Justice Grice said the judge made no error in determining that a minimum period was justified, but in the circumstances, and in particular, given Pask’s age and his indication to a report writer that he was “now in the right place” to receive help, the 10-year minimum period was too long.
“That is too high in the circumstances and is manifestly excessive,” she said.
Justice Grice said imposing an MPI of half of the nominal sentence (of 15 years and nine months’ imprisonment) was sufficient to satisfy the purposes of denunciation and deterrence.
She said the Parole Board would be in a better position to assess the position in the future.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.
