The wood splitter was designed to have a two-hand control system to stop the blade from moving inadvertently or from moving when the operator has his hands away from the hand control.
Crown Solicitor Robin Bates said Mr Anderson had been showed by Heaps how to operate the machine using the single lever only, as the other lever was disconnected.
Approximately 15 minutes after starting work, Mr Anderson saw some bark stuck to the left of the wood-splitter blade, Mr Bates said.
He reached for it with his left hand and at the same time, he activated the blade with the right-hand control.
The blade descended and crushed Mr Anderson's left hand. He was taken to hospital by Heaps where Mr Anderson underwent a four-hour surgery to repair tendons and a severe laceration on his left wrist.
On the next day, the defendant visited Mr Anderson at the hospital and instructed him to lie, Mr Bates said.
"The defendant instructed Mr Anderson to tell WorkSafe that he had only been to the farm on a couple of occasions to talk to the defendant, to look around and collect wood for home use."
He also asked Mr Anderson to say to WorkSafe this was the first time he had used the wood splitter, that he wasn't working for 4 Hippos and that the wood splitter was a two-handed operation.
In another occasion, in August, Heaps told Mr Anderson to give the same explanation to the person conducting the defendant's investigation into the incident.
In his first interview, the victim did so and said to the inspector he was a friend and he just helped himself to the wood.
He also added Heaps did not know he was at the farm on the day of the incident.
"As a result of this first interview, WorkSafe shifted its investigation focus to design and manufacture of the wood splitter."
In a subsequent interview, Mr Anderson said he lied to WorkSafe because the defendant had asked him to, and he was concerned about the consequences if he told the truth.
He said he had worked for the company for several weeks prior to the incident and he lied because he felt intimidated by the defendant.
There was some premeditation in Heaps' actions as he asked Mr Anderson to lie to the investigators, showing the defendant was planning to mislead the investigation, Mr Bates said.
Defence counsel Hamish Evans said the defendant was "unsophisticated" and had a "naive attempt" to foil the WorkSafe investigation.
"No actual threats were made."
Heaps was 48-years-old, was married and had a good character, supported by statements of friends, he said.
Mr Evans read character references including some from former All Blacks players Justin Marshall, Kees Meeuws and Simon Culhane which stated Heaps was of "good character'' and an important figure in the community.
As Mr Anderson was a casual worker and paid in cash, Heaps thought this did not amount to him being an employee and that was the reason he did not provide training or supervision, Mr Evans said.
Judge Mark Callaghan ordered Heaps to pay $25,000 to Mr Anderson in relation to emotional harm and $16,110 in relation to consequential loss of payment.
He also sentenced him to 4 months of community detention but did not fine him due to the financial situation of the company.
An adverse publicity order was issued - meaning the offence, its consequences, the penalty imposed, and any other related matter would be publicised - was also imposed.
