Abela Adabon Namoca, 39, appeared in Dunedin District Court yesterday for sentencing on two separate charges of sexual connection with a minor.
The summary of facts said the victim attended a work social gathering with her family at the defendant's residence in September last year.
‘‘All present at the gathering were drinking alcohol, including the victim and the defendant.
‘‘The defendant asked for the victim's phone number, and they connected on WhatsApp.
‘‘The defendant messaged the victim to go to the bathroom. The defendant walked into his bedroom next to the bathroom and the victim followed.’’
The defendant performed a sexual act on the victim and ‘‘the defendant continued to send her messages throughout the gathering’’.
The next day, the defendant picked up the victim from school and drove her to the Northern Dunedin Cemetery.
At the cemetery the defendant parked between bushes.
‘‘The defendant and victim spoke about the victim’s age and that she was 15 and a virgin.’’
The defendant then performed another sex act on the victim, cleaned her up and dropped her at the Dunedin bus hub.
The victim’s mother read victim impact statements for herself and her daughter in court.
The statements said since the incident, the victim had retreated into herself and suffered flashbacks of the ‘‘traumatic’’ event.
There had been a significant financial and mental cost to the family, the mother said.
The victim had become someone the family ‘‘did not recognise’’, the victim’s mother said.
Both the victim’s mother and father had to sacrifice work in order to look after the victim, whereas previously she had been ‘‘very independent’’.
‘‘No mother deserves to carry this pain.’’
In sentencing Namoca, Judge Jane McMeeken noted the only real difference between the Crown and defence’s position was the ‘‘number of aggravating factors’’, and there was not much difference between their respective starting points of three years and three months’ imprisonment; and two and a-half years’ imprisonment.
Judge McMeeken set a starting point of two and a-half years’ imprisonment.
There were concerns raised in the pre-sentencing report that the defendant did not show real remorse for his actions, she said.
The probation officer had also said that Namoca’s wife had at times seemed ‘‘obstructive’’ and this might prove a problem if the sentence was home detention.
While Namoca did not have a ‘‘footprint’’ for this kind of offending, and the offending itself was ‘‘not prolonged’’, it was significant, Judge McMeeken said, because of the vulnerability of the victim and the age difference.
She made discounts for an early guilty plea, previous good behaviour and his enrolling in a Stop programme.
This allowed the sentence to be converted to home detention. She set the period at seven months.
‘‘This will not be an easy sentence,’’ Judge McMeeken told the victim’s mother.
While Namoca was not placed on the sex offender’s register, he was not allowed to make contact with anyone under the age of 16 without strict supervision.
