In the Nelson District Court on Tuesday, he appeared to still be in denial during sentencing, despite a jury having found him guilty on representative charges of sexual indecency with a girl aged between 12 and 16 and sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection.
He was found not guilty on a third charge of indecently assaulting a girl aged under 12, because of doubt over the victim’s age at the time.
“The jury’s verdict on this charge cannot be seen in any way as undermining the credibility of the victim,” Judge Noel Sainsbury said.
“The issue is that it required proof at the time of the offending that the victim was under the age of 12 and as the evidence came out there was ambiguity around the age.”
Defence lawyer Steven Zindel said it had been difficult to get instruction from Wood, whose main concern was his partner who was in dementia care, and because he denied what had occurred.
Zindel described Wood as “mentally compromised” which affected his culpability, but he appreciated it had been an ordeal for the complainants.
Crown prosecutor Jeremy Cameron said the offending had been life-changing, and the trial had been arduous for each of the victims.
He said it was significant that all they wanted was an apology, which had not been given.
Cameron said Wood continued to deny the offending which was an indication of the lack of remorse.
“This was not entirely impulsive offending,” he said of the multiple times the victims had been sexually abused.
Wood was then living in a bus and had endeared himself to the community, gaining their trust with his offers of help, including on occasion oversight of the victims when asked to look after them.
“He has taken the opportunity when alone with her [victim one], when no one else was around, to offend against her,” Judge Sainsbury said.
He said the victim did not understand what was happening and that it was only as an adult she began to, and the effects had been devastating.
The judge asked Zindel to explain how mental impairment reduced an offender’s moral culpability and said he found it “difficult to see” that someone who functioned with a low IQ might be more inclined to sexually offend but be less blameworthy.
He said the argument was “dangerously close to advancing the proposition that a person with an intellectual disability co-related to them being a sex offender”.
Zindel said mental impairment led to someone being less able to rationalise their choices.
Judge Sainsbury said it came back to an evidential basis for that to apply, and there was none.
He said having a mental impairment might have a bearing on how Wood coped in prison, but he was not satisfied there was a causative connection between that and his offending.
He acknowledged the two victims' bravery and the dignified way they had conducted themselves in court.
Judge Sainsbury said the court process could seem “cold and brutal” and that “one person’s misery was less deserving than another’s”.
He said the harm caused to a child who had been sexually abused was “extraordinary” and was carried throughout their life.
“The saddest aspect of this case was that all these two wanted was for you to acknowledge that what you did was wrong, to validate their position.
“Instead, you put them through a trial.”
From a sentencing starting point of four years in prison, Wood was given discounts for his age and his mental impairment.
Judge Sainsbury said that while there were some positive aspects to Wood, including that he had no criminal past, he struggled to see how prison would not be the only appropriate outcome.
A release date would be set by the Parole Board, and Wood was now automatically registered as a child sex offender.
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.
