Ruthless-Empire's whānau have made a touching tribute video
Video / Supplied
A wide, toothy grin. Bright, sparkling eyes. Our babies’ happy, trusting faces beam up at us from the newsprint. New Zealand’s babies, tiny and vulnerable.
It’s hard to look at those smiles and think of how they met their end: shaken, hit, stomped on - tortured.
When one of Aotearoa’s children is killed, the reaction around the country can be visceral. They should have been protected, and we want justice to be served.
Stoking New Zealand’s collective rage, the adults present at the time baby Ru received his fatal injuries appear not to be giving police the full story. Mother Storm Wall, as well as Rosie Morunga and her partner Dylan Ross, were all living in the Lower Hutt property with Ru when he died.
Look at any article online about Ru’s death, and the comments section underneath is filled with calls to charge all the people involved with murder, or throw them all behind bars to force them to talk.
The Herald talks to legal expert Bill Hodge about the intricacies of a child homicide investigation, and the challenges police face to bring baby killers to justice. We answer your questions here.
The people of interest aren’t giving the full story - why can’t police just charge them all with murder?
The frustrating aspect of baby Ru’s death is the knowledge that three people were home with him when he was injured, and at least one person is likely to know what happened.
Detective Inspector Nick Pritchard said these people hold vital information to the case, but he could not say why they were not giving “the full truth”.
Chris and Cru Kahui were only 84 days old when they died.
It is tempting simply to say that as all three were present, they should all be charged with murder, but the reality is not so straightforward.
Bill Hodge, a retired law lecturer and independent investigator in the civil sector, said police could not just charge everyone equally in the hopes the convictions would stick.
“It’s not a simple matter of saying, ‘The kid is dead, you were there, so we’re charging everyone’,” he said.
“The difficulty is they don’t have to give evidence [in a trial], and in our system the Crown has to prove beyond reasonable doubt [that they committed the crime].”
Hodge referred to the Kahui twins case, in which those who knew what happened had a code of silence, refusing to give information to police.
Chris Kahui giving evidence during the Coroner's inquest into the twins' death.
Despite the stonewalling police experienced from the family, they eventually charged the twins’ father, Sonny Chris Kahui, with murder. A jury found him not guilty after just one minute of deliberation, but a coroner later ruled that the boys suffered the injuries at a time they were in sole care of their father.
The lack of forthcoming information from those in the know meant police were not able to compile enough evidence to prove Kahui’s guilt, leaving the twins without justice in the end.
It illustrates the lengths police must go to eliminate doubt in a juror’s mind and form a watertight case. Police have a number of tools in their arsenal to build a case, and officers handling Ru’s case will be working hard to pull together as many threads of the story as they can, possibly with DNA, crime scene evidence, cellphone polling, and witnesses from outside the home.
On the flipside of the Kahui twins is the tragic case of Nia Glassie, where a large group of adults were charged in various ways after the 3-year-old’s death.
Even as Nia lay in hospital, police were interviewing members of the household, including other small children who had witnessed the abuse.
Five people were convicted in relation to Nia Glassie's death.
With the information they were able to gather, police charged five people in relation to Nia’s abuse. Her mother, Lisa Kuka, was convicted of manslaughter. Her boyfriend, Wiremu Curtis, and his brother, Michael Curtis, were convicted of murder. Two others, Oriwa Kemp and Michael Pearson, were found not guilty of manslaughter, but guilty of assaulting Nia.
In this case, a variety of charges, tailored to the individual actions of each person, ensured convictions for Nia’s killing. Her mother was not convicted of assaulting the toddler herself, but was guilty of manslaughter due to her failure to protect her daughter or seek help for her.
When Nia slipped into a coma, Kuka was aware the girl was unresponsive, but did not take her to hospital for at least another 30 hours, instead going to a party.
While not actually striking the blows herself, Kuka has earned herself the title of killer. It is possible something similar could unfold in baby Ru’s case, if one or more adults in the house knew he was at risk and failed to protect him, or failed to get him to hospital in time to prevent his death.
What is the difference between manslaughter and murder, and what can Ru’s killers be charged with?
Hodge said to be guilty of murder a person does not just have to have the intention to kill someone. It can still be considered murder if they commit an action with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, and if they know or should know that action would be likely to cause death.
“That’s a very high standard.”
Manslaughter could act as something of a fallback charge. Sometimes it can be difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt that an offender had the intent or knowledge required to be guilty of murder.
Having manslaughter as a backup could help ensure somebody was convicted for the death, rather than run the risk of a jury deciding they couldn’t reach the high standard of murder – and letting a killer walk free.
Moko died on August 10, 2015 from injuries he received during prolonged abuse and torture from two people he was living with while his mother stayed with his sick sibling in hospital.
Lisa Kuka (left) looks at her fellow accused on the other side of the police constable - (from left) Michael Curtis, Michael Pearson, Wiremu Curtis and Oriwa Kemp, during a court appearance for Nia Glassie's death. File photo / Stephen Parker
The 3-year-old Tokoroa boy’s shocking death followed weeks of abuse from the two adults, ending with a brutal assault where they stomped on his stomach repeatedly and dealt a fatal blow to his head.
Horrifically, Moko was then left injured for four days before he was taken to hospital. He died shortly after.
His killers, Tania Shailer and David Haerewa, were originally charged with murder but pleaded guilty to a downgraded charge of manslaughter and received sentences of 17 years in prison.
People took to the streets around the country to “March for Moko”, outraged that such violent and intentional actions had not resulted in murder convictions.
“It was relevant to the likelihood of securing a murder conviction that the injuries Moko suffered were not inevitably fatal. With reasonably prompt medical treatment, he could have been saved,” Finlayson said.
Moko Rangitoheriri was living away from his mother at the time of his death while she cared for another child in hospital.
“Let me be clear, this in no way reduces the seriousness of the abuse Moko suffered. It is, however, something the jury would have had to take into account when deciding if Ms Shailer had murderous intent at the time she inflicted the fatal injuries.”
In Ru’s case, whether the person or people responsible for his death are charged with murder or manslaughter could depend on multiple factors, including whether the blows to his head were of sufficient force that whoever inflicted them knew or should have known they were likely to kill him.
There are also lower-level charges such as failing to protect a child, and failing to provide the necessaries of life. These charges carry lower maximum sentences and could be used in such scenarios as a failure to get medical care after an injury, or if an adult knew the child was at severe risk but did not intervene.
In Ru’s case it is also possible someone could be charged with perverting the course of justice or accessory after the fact to murder for attempting to alter the crime scene.
Tania Shailer and David William Haerewa (right) in court for Moko Rangitoheriri's death. File photo / Andrew Warner.
So why not throw them all in jail to force them to talk?
“It is tempting to ‘throw people in jail’ but under the Crimes Act, such decisions must be based on a reasonable cause to suspect that the arrested person has committed a serious crime,” said Hodge.
“I don’t yet see the reasonable cause - especially where one could argue that it was probable that one of three people committed the crime. That would be at best a one in three probability and wrongful [for] two of the three.
“But generally the police need to step carefully because if they act prematurely, there is a likelihood that any evidence, or even a confession thereby gained would be excluded at any subsequent trial.”
This meant acting too soon could prejudice a future trial - making it harder to secure a conviction.
Why is it taking so long?
It has been three weeks since Ru died. This might seem like an age, but if police were to charge someone in that time frame it would be “lightning speed”, Hodge said.
It was common for police to take a long time to lay charges in cases such as these, he said.
First they needed to determine cause of death and other factors from an autopsy, including whether a child had inhaled chemicals or fumes from intoxicants, and what level of force might have been required to create certain injuries.
“That’s the starting point,” he said, adding the process could take “weeks, not days”.
Then it was important for investigators to gather as much information they could before interviewing the person they believed to be responsible for the death, so they could hopefully catch them out if they lied in the interview.
Sofia Taueki-Jackson died at 14 months when an adult inflicted fatal head injuries.
“I don’t want someone to lie to me or bluff me or pull the wool over my eyes,” he said.
“There’s a real pressure on the police because they want to act quickly but they want to have the best possible background before they go into a crucial interview.”
Hodge said the New Zealand Police were highly skilled at investigating child deaths, and he also had faith in the jury system.
Counties Manukau Detective Inspector Shaun Vickers said at the start of this year the investigation was still very much active and ongoing.
Staranise Waru was seven months old when she died from shaking injuries.
“No matter how much time passes, police remain committed to seeking justice for Sofia and holding to account the person or persons responsible for her death.
“We are confident that slowly but surely we will resolve this case.”
While a coroner found either her mother or father shook her, charges have not been laid.
Staranise should have turned 18 this year. Sofia should have been close to starting school. Moko should have been making friends in intermediate. Nia should have been finding her feet in adulthood. Chris and Cru Kahui should have been about to finish college.
Ru should have been a happy and loved 2-year-old with his whole life ahead of him.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.
