A young man who held his former partner hostage for almost eight hours, repeatedly raping and assaulting her, had his appeal for a shorter sentence denied today.
The 26-year-old Invercargill man, who cannot be named as it may identify his victims, was sentenced to 10 years' jail, with a minimum non-parole period of six years at the beginning of the year.
On March 24 he was looking after his 15-month-old son, while the boy's mother, his former partner, spent the night with her new partner.
The next morning he called her to say he had the child and was going to commit suicide.
When she agreed to meet him the man took her and their son hostage for seven-and-a-half hours, keeping them locked in a car with him.
He repeatedly assaulted her, punching her in the head and body and showed her shotgun shells, telling her he was going to kill her.
In the back seat of the car he stripped her clothes off then raped her six or seven times before binding her hands and feet.
The woman was then thrown to the ground and kicked.
The man said he was sorry, untied her and gave her back her clothes. He then hit her again and told her he couldn't take her home as she had a mark on her head and would say he had raped her. He said he might as well make the most of it, and raped her again before finally leaving the woman at her brother's house.
Their son was in the car for the entire ordeal.
The man's lawyer, Lester Cordwell, told the Court of Appeal in Auckland last month that his sentence, which was initially set at 11 years and six months, should have been further reduced in recognition of the man entering a guilty plea and expressing remorse.
Crown lawyer Nick Chisnall argued the initial sentence was low.
He pointed out the guilty plea had been entered just shy of the trial and not before the victim had been required to give evidence. The man then attempted to withdraw the guilty plea, extending the period leading up to his sentencing.
In the Court of Appeal decision Justice David Baragwanath agreed with Mr Chisnall, saying the man could have initially faced up to 14 years' jail.
"The offending has a sustained and sinister character which may warrant regard to psychiatric and psychological considerations when questions for parole come into consideration," he said.
Justice Baragwanath said the man presented a high risk of reoffending and had "little self-awareness regarding the seriousness of his actions" which plainly warranted his sentence.
