DISTRESSING CONTENT WARNING
A man forced two children to watch as he cut off puppies’ heads with an axe.
Brian Herbert Waru also hung the pet dog, Patch, by a rope from a tree and told one of the girls he had shot her dog, Barney, in the eye and head.
Harming the animals, all of which Waru denied, was one way it was established by a jury that he had ill-treated one of the children, primarily by way of psychological abuse.
Other acts included verbal threats and punching holes in a wall, behaviour that was likely to cause the girl unnecessary suffering.
Waru was found guilty on one count of ill-treating the child and on a representative charge of supplying her with cannabis, all of which was historical offending, at trial in October at the Whangārei District Court. He was sentenced on each in December.
He was acquitted on three charges alleging indecency against the girl and four charges alleging violence against her. He was not charged with harming the animals.
Waru has now had his two-and-a-half-year prison sentence reduced by four months on appeal, after his lawyer Ally Tupuola argued there had been “grave errors” resulting in a manifestly excessive sentence when it should have been a non-custodial one.
At trial, she challenged aspects of the evidence, including around the various incidents of cruelty to animals, and whether the judge was swayed at sentencing by details in a victim impact statement she argued were inadmissible.
However, Judge Philip Rzepecky did not accept that the victim had embellished any of the evidence.
He said aggravating factors were the extensive impact on the victim, her vulnerability given her age at the time, and the nature of the offending, which was “abhorrent”, with violence and verbal abuse used as a means of control.
Judge Rzepecky considered the low point was forcing her and the other child to watch while he “brutally dispatched” the puppies.
‘Prolonged emotional abuse’
The Court of Appeal judgment, released last week, said that when one of the dogs had puppies, Waru “lined up” the two children “on the verandah and then cut off the puppies’ heads so they were forced to watch”.
On another occasion, he hung the dog Patch from a tree using a rope and also told the victim that he had shot her pet dog with two bullets.
Judge Rzepecky accepted Waru did not physically abuse the girl but his behaviour over a significant period caused prolonged emotional abuse.
The cannabis offending began when the victim was in her early teens and Waru “would get her stoned”.
The appeal court said the cannabis offending was “particularly egregious” and could have formed the lead charge.
However, it was satisfied there was a “material error in sentencing”, particularly in relation to matters taken into account when setting the starting point on the ill-treatment charge.
Victim’s evidence challenged
Tupuola said the judge erred by basing his factual findings on what was in the victim impact statement she contended was inadmissible because it contained matters that did not form part of the evidence at trial.
She also challenged the judge’s acceptance of the victim’s evidence about the various incidents of cruelty to animals, including being made to watch the puppies being beheaded.
The victim said while it was a “vague memory”, she recalled the axe coming up high with the puppy being on the chopping block on the back lawn, and that she and the other child spoke about it a lot afterwards.
She said the memory of Waru leaving Patch hanging from the tree was also vague, and that Patch had survived.
The judge said her evidence in this context related to her assertion that what Waru did to animals was to try to control or punish her.
The Court of Appeal said some matters Judge Rzepecky took into account when setting the sentencing starting point on the ill-treatment charge were in error, including the period over which the offending occurred.
The Court of Appeal said the time period “was a problem”. It found the sentencing starting point took into account matters inconsistent with the way the ill‑treatment charge was presented to the jury.
However, the senior court said it could be “fairly said” that Waru engendered an environment of violence, verbal abuse and intimidation over an extended period of the victim’s early teen years.
It arrived at an end sentence of 26 months’ imprisonment and that a reduction of four months warranted resentencing.
That meant the original sentence was set aside and substituted with one of two years and two months’ imprisonment.
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.
