The Court of Appeal has reinforced the hardline stance taken by a Dunedin judge against the perpetrators of random street violence in the city.
In a decision earlier this month, the court turned down an appeal by Casey John Walsh (21) against a 23-month jail term imposed on him for his part in an unprovoked and violent attack on Corey Sutherland, a 20-year-old father of two, early on February 13 last year.
Walsh was heavily intoxicated when he and co-offender Jeremy Anthony Ruddle (22) encountered Mr Sutherland, his partner and a friend in Moray Pl about 1.30 in the morning.
He flicked his hand in Mr Sutherland's face then kept walking but, when Mr Sutherland called him a "wanker", ran at him with his fist raised. Mr Sutherland ducked and Walsh tripped over him. Mr Sutherland turned to face him but was knocked unconscious by a single punch to the cheek by Ruddle.
While Mr Sutherland lay on the ground, Walsh crouched over him and punched him four to six times in the head before Ruddle and others pulled him away. Walsh and Ruddle and their group then ran away towards the Octagon.
Mr Sutherland's jaw and nose were broken, he had cuts to his face and mouth which had to be stitched and his face was so swollen his grandfather who visited him during his five days in hospital described him as "barely recognisable".
Delivering the court's decision to reject Walsh's appeal against the prison sentence, Justice Simon France said the attack had ongoing physical and psychological consequences for Mr Sutherland.
The physiological impact - a moderate brain injury - had now healed but anxiety had led to what could loosely be termed severe panic reactions to situations. Both Mr Sutherland and his fiancee were troubled about going out and his distress over the situation and his resultant psychological problems, as well as an inability to sleep, had brought about a personality change. He was irritable and unable to cope with their two young children.
The couple's relationship had been under strain, and there had, inevitably, been financial costs, especially in the early stages.
Justice France said the court had set out the victim's situation at some length because it "captures well the reality of the consequences of wanton acts of unprovoked violence" such as happened in Mr Sutherland's case.
The sentencing judge took a starting point of three years' jail, deducting seven months for Walsh's youth, his offer of reparation, his compliance with bail conditions and his remorse and he deducted another six months for the guilty plea, the end sentence being one year and 11 months' jail.
Ruddle was given a lesser term of 18 months, the judge taking into account his co-operation with the police, his attendance at a stopping violence programme and his saving to pay reparation.
Walsh appealed his 23-month sentence, counsel John Westgate arguing that home detention ought to have been substituted for imprisonment.
He claimed the sentencing judge erred in not giving weight to mitigating features including remorse, lack of any previous convictions for violence and a low risk of reoffending as assessed by the pre-sentence report writer.
But the Court of Appeal said the judge did not make any error in reaching the end point of 23 months and in deciding not to substitute home detention.
"This episode of unprovoked violence justified a denunciatory approach" and that it was open to the sentencing judge to conclude that the circumstances and seriousness of the offending were the predominant sentencing considerations in setting the type of sentence, the court said.
Walsh's conduct in attacking a prone, "probably unconscious man was cowardly. The consequences for the victim have been severe," Justice France said, delivering the decision to dismiss the appeal.
