Mitchell Paterson was killed and his body dumped. Photo / Supplied
A woman jailed for her part in the killing of a Ngaruawahia man found dumped in water off the McLaren Falls bridge has had her sentence quashed because a report provided to the court was deemed to be unfair.
Instead of serving her time behind bars, Kyra Betteridge will now be subjected to home detention for a shorter period.
In July last year Mitchell Paterson's body was found bound, wrapped in tarpaulin at the bottom of a body of a water under the bridge at Kaimai Ranges.
READ MORE:
McLaren Falls death: Killing fuelled by gang boss' ego, prosecution says
McLaren Falls killing: 'My client wouldn't have been able to fit in the car' - defence counsel
McLaren Falls death: Victim Mitchell Paterson's fatal spiral into the drug scene
Double killer: Murderer convicted of McLaren Falls manslaughter of Mitchell Paterson
Paterson's killing was sparked by rumours circulating that he had been "dissing" the Waikato Nomad's president.
He was lured out of his home on the pretence of a drug deal and later attacked.
In total, eight people were charged in relation to his death.
In May this year Betteridge pleaded guilty in the Hamilton High Court to one charge of conspiring to defeat the course of justice and one charge of misconduct in respect of human remains.
Her plea immediately followed a sentence indication of 20 and a half months' imprisonment which, after discounts, would have brought her final term into the range where a sentence of home detention could be considered.
Whether or not a sentence of home detention is imposed depends on the contents of pre-sentence reports, and any other relevant information placed before the sentencing judge.
On June 26 Justice Pheroze Jagose sentenced Betteridge to 21 months in jail but refused to convert it to home detention on the basis of a Provision of Advice to Courts (PAC) report which painted a dim picture of her "attitude and rehabilitative prospects".
Betteridge then successfully appealed the refusal to impose home detention, on the grounds that the contents of the PAC report were "wrong, misleading and unfair".
At sentencing Justice Jagose told Betteridge that the PAC report writer found it difficult to assess her risk of further offending, given her "limited conviction history".
The report writer assessed Betteridge's potential to cause further harm as medium, but said it could be reduced if her "substance abuse and impervious attitude was addressed".
"You describe your early life as chaotic. You were in state care by the age of twelve," Justice Jagose said, referencing the report.
"You have been homeless, and have ongoing drug addiction and gang connection problems.
"You have four children with a former partner, now being cared for by your mother, and to whom you are not allowed access. You do not have contact with a fifth child, your 13-year-old daughter.
"You have resisted involvement in rehabilitative programmes, present as indifferent and unmotivated, and show little insight into your offending.
"Ultimately, the report-writer recommends your imprisonment. Concerns are had about your reliability for home detention.
"The doubts expressed about your suitability for home detention relate to your general rejection of rehabilitative measures. That tends to render home detention unsuitable.
"You are not prepared to avail yourself of its advantages. I acknowledge you have not previously been subject to home detention, or indeed been imprisoned. However, in the circumstances, I see no alternative but a sentence of imprisonment being the least restrictive sentence in your case."
Betteridge took her case to the Court of Appeal, saying there were "numerous inaccuracies" in the PAC report that she "did not have the opportunity to correct".
She argued that at sentencing she was "confronted with information" that unbeknownst to the judge was "both unfair and wrong".
Betteridge submitted an affidavit to the Court of Appeal saying that while she accepted she had issues at the time of the killing - homelessness and associated with the "wrong crowd" and increasing drug use and addiction - she had made significant changes since.
Since the PAC report was written she told the Court of Appeal she had been with a "supportive and responsible" partner and had "completely stopped" using methamphetamine with no relapse since September 2018.
Betteridge claimed she told the report writer this.
Her new partner submitted an affidavit saying he did not smoke methamphetamine, that he was subject to random drug testing at work and that he had not seen Betteridge use the drug since they began their relationship.
He said he was present at the PAC report interview and also told the writer about the progress Betteridge had made.
The couple also rejected report writer's view that Betteridge refused to accept help for her addictions and was disinterested in rehabilitative programmes.
She said she struggled to obtain counselling while on electronically monitored bail and when group sessions were offered she advised that she was "apprehensive due to the media coverage and the judgment I had already experienced" during the court case.
"I said I would like to do one-on-one counselling at that point… I wanted to do courses more relevant to me and my children or one-to-one counselling," she told the Court of Appeal.
"I also said that I would like to do a parenting course or any other counselling around my relationship with my children.
"I had no idea that by asking for one on one counselling and refusing group counselling that I was showing a lack of willingness to comply with Corrections or with rehabilitation.
"I never meant to give the impression that I would not undertake or engage with counselling. That was not my intention at all."
In the Court of Appeal decision Justice Rebecca Ellis said Betteridge's explanation was "not implausible".
"And she is right to say that the existence of those reservations cannot fairly be taken as indicative of a reluctance or refusal to engage in rehabilitative steps at all," she said.
"We think the disjunct between the PAC report and what Ms Betteridge now says is significant in terms of the present appeal.
"The report writer's view that she had no motivation to address her drug addiction and presented as unwilling to participate in rehabilitation formed an important platform for her final recommendation of imprisonment and (as a consequence) for the Judge's refusal of home detention."
Justice Ellis said the court formed the view that the PAC report was "unfairly prejudicial" to Betteridge at sentencing and allowed her appeal.
"Ms Betteridge's sentence of imprisonment is quashed and a sentence of eight months' home detention is substituted," she said.
She also imposed three special conditions for Betteridge including attending drug and alcohol and psychological assessments and any counselling or treatment as directed by her probation officer.
Justice Ellis also banned Betteridge from communicating "in any way" with six other people charged with Paterson's death without prior written approval from her probation officer.
*An earlier version of this story referred to Paterson as a prospect for the Nomad's gang. This is incorrect and the story has been amended to reflect that.</strong>
Former Act president's lawyer claims sentence was too harsh, calls for home detention.