KEY POINTS:
A man convicted of assaulting his 8-year-old son has a history of court charges and a 1996 conviction for assaulting a woman, court documents have revealed.
The 33-year-old, whose name is permanently suppressed, pleaded guilty to assault and was sentenced in the Masterton District Court this week to nine months' supervision, including anger-management counselling, for smacking his son on the buttocks.
The case is believed to be one of the first to come before the courts since a law change in May removed a parent's legal defence of using "reasonable force" for disciplining children.
The amendment to the Crimes Act polarised opinion, with critics saying it would criminalise parents who lightly and lovingly smack their children to discipline them.
Judge Anthony Walsh, in his written decision, said the man needed to understand that the law had changed.
"Although you may have felt justified in doing what you did to your son, what you must understand is that what you did amounted to assault.
"Our law has been recently amended to make clear that children must be protected, and while you may have got away with that in the past, you will not now."
He said the man needed to get a grip on his anger.
"The one matter that really comes through here is the need for you to control your anger. If there has been stress in the relationship, that makes it more important than ever that you deal with your anger, because when people are stressed, the potential for violence increases quite dramatically."
The man's wife took photos of their son's injuries and showed them to a relative, who informed police.
Prosecutor Sergeant Garry Wilson described the incident as "heavy smacking" that had had a traumatic effect on the child, affecting his schoolwork. He said police had evidence of bruising to his shoulder and buttocks.
The man's lawyer disputed the bruising on the buttocks in court, which Judge Walsh noted in his decision.
He also noted that the man had been in court on various charges - including an assault conviction in 1996 - and was last in court in 1998.
The family had no comment when approached by the Weekend Herald yesterday.
Child advocacy groups and the Green Party have praised the decision as showing that the law works, while conservative groups including the Destiny Party have said the case shows the amendment needs to be scrapped.
Family First national director Bob McCoskrie this week said an incident that left a child with bruises did not necessarily amount to an unreasonable use of force, as "forcibly removing a child to time-out" might leave bruises.
But bruising did at least warrant further investigation, he said.
He did not want to comment further on the Masterton case without knowing the full context.
"For example, what was the child doing at the time the father grabbed him?"
