The man was previously sentenced to nine months’s supervision and community work following a number of charges, including assaulting his partner and the police.
Today he was sentenced to 12 months’ supervision and 150 hours of community work, added to the existing hours, on two charges of breaching a protection order after he sent text messages described as “belittling” and “psychological abuse” of a protected person.
The police said the offending warranted a starting point of a short term of imprisonment, noting that the man’s attitude was “defiant, hostile, victim-blaming”, that he showed no remorse and he considered the protection orders issued had been “tools used against him”.
Police prosecution said a probation officer handling the case once had to end an interview with the man because of how he was speaking about the victim, and that they had wanted to see “proper acceptance behaviour”.
The police also noted that while the man had sought professional help for his mental health it had been on his own terms.
Judge Tony Zohrab opted instead for a community-based sentence but issued the man a final warning.
“You need to understand that even if it’s just text messaging, the starting point next time would have to be prison,” Judge Zohrab said.
He also said the man needed to remain working in order to contribute to the child support he was legally obliged to pay.
The man’s lawyer Yvanca Clarisse said an electronically monitored sentence was impractical because the nature of the man’s line of work meant he travelled to remote areas that were sometimes outside reception zones.
She said his employer had been a “great support” over what had been a difficult time and had acknowledged that his job was important to maintaining his mental health.
The man’s mental health, described as fragile, was mentioned in supporting letters to the court from his doctor and a psychologist he had been seeing.
Judge Zohrab received confirmation from the man’s lawyer that the professional body overseeing the industry he worked in would be notified of the convictions.
He said in determining whether to grant name suppression that the police had been put in a tough position, knowing how much the defendant’s actions had affected the victim, and that he still seemed to be minimising his conduct.
Judge Zohrab said he was required to consider the victim’s views, in that she had said she was “sick of this consuming her life”, how the defendant’s words had harmed her own mental health, and how she had shouldered the burden of increased financial obligations because of his actions.
“She just wants the fighting to stop. She wants to move on and she wants you to move on as well,” Judge Zohrab said.
He considered the threshold of extreme hardship had been reached in granting the man name suppression, and when weighing up the competing interest of the public’s right to know.
Judge Zohrab said undue hardship to the victim was also likely if the man’s name was published.
“It’s not as if this offending has been hidden and those who need to know, already know,” he said.
The man was assisted from the dock by court security staff as Judge Zohrab said he hoped he understood what a final warning meant.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.
