The victim was older than him and had consumed alcohol and drugs before he gave her sleeping pills. She was unable to stay alert, and he raped her.
He was 18 when he sexually violated two other women. In each case his victims woke to find him sexually assaulting them.
G pleaded guilty to the sexual violations but chose to go to trial on the rape charge. He was found guilty and was sentenced under the Sentencing Act in the normal way for adult offenders.
The rape was taken as the lead offence, and G was sentenced to a total of three years and four months of imprisonment on all three charges.
The issue stems from the fact the rape charge was laid when he was 19 years old. Had he been charged before his 19th birthday, the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 (OTA) and not the Sentencing Act would have applied.
The OTA governs the youth justice system, with different objectives and sentencing outcomes for young offenders.
G’s lawyers argued that had the OTA been applied, a prison sentence would have been applied only as a last resort.
“The result in this case, it is submitted, is that G has been subjected to a considerably harsher penalty than would have been imposed under the OTA, by virtue only of the timing of the complaint and charge,” the Supreme Court said in a decision released today.
“G says that, though now an adult, his sentence should have drawn on the OTA’s youth justice principles because he was 15 when he committed the lead offence,” the decision said.
“These principles emphasise the wellbeing of the young offender — such that their application avoids incarceration except as an absolute last resort.“
The Crown, however, said the Sentencing Act was, by design, the controlling regime for offenders like G, and the OTA had no role.
G currently out on bail
G was in prison for a month on remand when he was first charged, before being granted bail.
After he was sentenced six months later, G spent two further weeks on bail before returning to prison for roughly 11 months.
He was then granted electronically monitored bail in April 2025, on conditions including a 24-hour curfew, while his appeal against sentence was heard.
The Supreme Court decision today said that in cases where offenders had “aged out” of the youth justice system, the likely outcome under the OTA “must be considered as part of the normal sentencing methodology”.
If a community-based sentence would have been reasonably likely under the OTA, the court must account for that when it sets a starting point under the normal methodology of the Sentencing Act.
“It is acknowledged that an outcome absolutely identical to that likely under the OTA may not be possible under the Sentencing Act or even appropriate given the offender’s maturity when sentenced,” the Supreme Court justices said.
“But imposing an identical outcome is not the point.
“Rather the key objective is to achieve substantively consistent justice despite the changed circumstances of the offender.
“The question is therefore whether a community-based sentence is still appropriate to the circumstances of this (now adult) offender.”
The Supreme Court said that G’s appeal must be allowed and he had to be resentenced on all three charges, including the two sexual violations he committed as an adult.
The decision said the justices had considered sentencing him in the Supreme Court to time served, given the amount of time he had spent in prison already and on restrictive bail conditions akin to home detention.
However, there was also a need to provide for G’s rehabilitation, in keeping with the principles that apply to youth.
“On the information before us, for example, there is a pressing need for G to receive treatment for mental health and substance use before he can begin to address his other issues.
“That objective is best addressed by the District Court on the basis of current and comprehensive information.”
The Supreme Court sent the case back to the District Court for resentencing.
Ric Stevens spent many years working for the former New Zealand Press Association news agency, including as a political reporter at Parliament, before holding senior positions at various daily newspapers. He joined NZME’s Open Justice team in 2022 and is based in Hawke’s Bay. His writing in the crime and justice sphere is informed by four years of frontline experience as a probation officer.
