Through her lawyer, Tanya Surrey, the woman indicated she would also appeal that decision.
She has three weeks to file the appeals in the High Court at Invercargill.
Although the summary of facts relating to the new charges is not yet available, the events at the Hilton early on December 20 were thrashed out in detail at the woman’s judge-alone trial on Tuesday.
A hotel receptionist gave evidence a male guest came to check out about 1.30am but was followed by the defendant, who told the man he could not leave because he had not paid for damage to the room.
When the receptionist went to the room with the pair, he found it “very messy” but undamaged.
The man told him he had been “clawed” by the defendant.
The duty manager on the night told the court she was called to the room because of a “heated” argument between the couple.
During a difficult exchange with the defendant, who repeatedly spoke over her, filmed her with her phone and was intoxicated and antagonistic, she became aware “something else was going on”.
The defendant was making threatening comments to the man, and she noticed scratch marks on his arm.
“It was quite clear he was hurt and intimidated.”
Sergeant Blair Duffy said he went to the hotel with two constables about 2.15am after a report of a domestic harm incident.
He found the defendant “uncooperative and evasive”, and abusive towards hotel staff as she demanded a refund.
The room was in a state of “disarray”, the bed was tipped over and items scattered on the floor, indicating a struggle had occurred.
He took a signed statement from the complainant, who told him the defendant had tried to hit him in the head about 20 times, had struck him with a phone handset, sprayed his face with deodorant and thrown items at him.
He took photos of scratches on the man’s lower left arm and marks on his head.
Giving evidence, the man said the defendant was his ex at the time of the incident, although they had previously been in a long-term relationship.
While drinking together in their room, they had begun arguing and had a “scuffle”, but he denied being assaulted.
His statement to police had been inaccurate because it was late, and he was “tired and shocked” by what had happened.
He had thought police had only come to calm the situation, and never expected his statement to lead to a charge.
“Maybe I was rambling a bit, about previous incidents and the drama in the relationship.”
A sworn affidavit he had given in February was the correct version of events, he said.
Under cross-examination by prosecuting sergeant Ian Collin, he said he could not recall telling police he had been assaulted, and that what he had described might have occurred in earlier incidents between the couple.
Sgt Collin said that was “stretching the imagination.
“You’ve chosen to come along today to completely minimise, to the point of misleading, what happened on December 20.”
Judge Walker said it was clear the defendant had been “aggressive and belligerent” to hotel staff and police, and the man was now trying to minimise the incident.
He considered the February affidavit to be a “post-event rationalisation”, instigated by the defendant, which was aimed at getting the charge dropped.
The man’s claim he could not recall what had happened “stretched credibility”, whereas Sgt Duffy’s evidence was significantly more credible.
He considered the scratches on the man’s arms had been caused by the defendant and found her guilty of assault in a family relationship.
He sentenced her to 12 months’ supervision to enable assessment and treatment for alcohol and anger management issues.
She was remanded on bail until July in relation to the new charges of assault and intentional damage.
