Father appeals baby killing conviction

File Photo

A Waikato father found guilty of killing his baby daughter has appealed his conviction and sentence.

Joshua Chris Woodcock was last September found guilty by majority verdict in the High Court at Rotorua of the manslaughter of his three-month-old daughter, Sarah Haddock-Woodcock.

He was also found guilty of three counts of assault on a child, grievous bodily harm and wilful neglect of a child.

The following month, he was sentenced to 12 years' jail, with no minimum term of imprisonment.

Baby Sarah died from a 4cm skull fracture at her parents' home in Putaruru on March 12, 2005.

An autopsy revealed injuries including eight broken ribs, haemorrhaging, a tear to skin between her gum and lip, and bruising to her jaw and chest.

At the Court of Appeal in Wellington today, defence lawyer Warren Pyke said the trial judge erred when directing the jury on majority verdicts.

Justice Edwin Wylie told the jury they needed to reach an unanimous verdict but "if and when the time arises" he would explain majority verdicts further.

The jury later returned with what they said was a majority verdict before being fully directed on the matter - a requirement of majority verdicts.

Mr Pyke said Justice Wylie then "endorsed the pathway" by then giving the jury directions.

"He should have said 'forget about majority verdict'."

Justice Wylie also "double counted" when calculating Woodcock's final sentence and a jail term of 10 years would have been more appropriate, Mr Pyke said.

Crown prosecutor Madeleine Laracy said Woodcock should have been sentenced to 11 or 12 years for manslaughter, with two or three years added for the "very serious" assaults.

His sentence was "properly in the range and properly at the top of the available range", she said.

In the Crown's written submission to the court, Ms Laracy said Justice Wylie did not misdirect the jury and the verdict was not the result of "misguided jury deliberations".

"The Crown does not accept that there was any misdirection, or lack of adequate or timely direction, in respect of the requirements for, first, an attempt to reach an unanimous verdict and, second, a majority verdict."

The verdict was within the parameters of the law, she said.

Justices Terence Arnold, Robert Chambers and Rhys Harrison reserved their decision.

- NZPA