His sister said in a victim impact statement read Nelson District Court that the breach of trust blindsided the family and as parents they felt they had failed in their roles.

However, she said the family cared deeply for him and asked for leniency in sentencing so he could get the help he needed.

“This has been a nightmare year for all of us,” she said.

Judge Peter Hobbs credited the family for their compassion, insight and sympathy, which were not always evident in such circumstances.

The defendant’s sister said that when the crime came to light last year, she and her husband asked him to be honest and he was eventually “driven by the need to do the right thing” to confess to police what did he do

The man, who did not ask for his name to be redacted but was granted it to protect the victims and wider family, was sentenced to a maximum of 12 months’ home detention for an indecent act on a child under 12 and four counts of sexual assault .

This was despite a strong push from the Crown that a starting prison term of nine years was warranted.

Prosecutor Sophie O’Donaghue warned that the views of victims should not overwhelm the sentencing process.

Defense lawyer Michael Vesty said the young man, himself a victim of sexual abuse, was a classic example of how hurt people hurt others.

“He’s a victim himself and now he’s an abuser,” Vesty said.

He said the defendant was part of a large family, meaning the ripple effect of his offending would be felt by “an extraordinary number of people”.

The “nightmare” year.

During a year, the defendant was at his parents’ home, where they lived Tasman District when his sister and children came to visit.

While alone with his grandson, then 5 years old, he exposed himself to the child.

The defendant later moved into his sister’s home and stayed to care for two of the children while his sister picked up the other two from school.

While she was gone, he sexually violated a preschooler.

Another time, he engaged in indecency with another preschooler while playing fighting in the house, and the final act he confessed to involved the infant.

While alone with the child, he took her and sexually assaulted her.

O’Donaghue said he was unable to find any other cases involving the sexual violation of a 1-year-old child.

She said a plea for leniency is not unusual in family crime cases and urged the court to treat it with caution.

Vesty said the charges were based on admissions to the police and the defendant had a genuine desire to rehabilitate himself, supported by specialist psychotherapist Burke Hunter, with whom the defendant underwent intensive counselling.

Challenging circumstances

Judge Hobbs outlined the challenges presented by the circumstances of the case, including the dispute between the Crown and defense over the starting point for sentencing.

He said the summary of facts resulted from admissions to police, but none of the young victims gave statements or evidence and it was not yet known what impact the crime may have had on them.

Judge Hobbs said the Crown was in favor of prison and suggested it might be what the community expected from the court.

However, he was required to balance all the relevant purposes and principles of sentencing to do justice relevant to the case involving an “immature adolescent” who was given the responsibility of caring for children when he was ill-equipped to do so. this thing.

Judge Hobbs said some in the community would want a severe sentence and others would not take such an approach.

“There is no better illustration of this than the approach taken by the parents of the victims,” ​​Judge Hobbs said.

He said it was a serious case for all involved that deserved close and careful attention.

From a starting point of six and a half years in prison, Judge Hobbs gave credit for the defendant’s guilty pleas, youth, remorse and counseling he has undergone so far to arrive at a point of 23 months of prison.

He accepted the Crown’s position but had to step back and consider more generally whether the reduction was disproportionate to the seriousness of the offence.

Judge Hobbs said a prison term would likely jeopardize the defendant’s rehabilitation progress because counseling was unlikely to be available in prison and a home detention sentence was enough to hold him accountable.

He said that registering as a child sex offender was therefore discretionary and was satisfied in this case that he should be registered.

“Your crime was serious, you were young and the victims very young.

“You yourself have been the victim of a sexual offence.”

Judge Hobbs said this was no excuse but was relevant to the sentence.

Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and covered general news including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.