Assaults against his former partner, including one where the woman was choked unconscious, have brought 28 months' jail for a Balclutha fisherman.
Gavin James Blackmore (27) earlier admitted disabling or stupefying the woman by rendering her unconscious, assaulting her by forcing a pillow down on her face and elbowing her in the head several times, grabbing her face and forcefully pushing her into a pillow before punching a hole in the wall, then pushing her backwards and grabbing her by the jaw after she ran outside and was calling the police.
The offences happened on various dates between late January and March 5 last year.
At sentencing in the Dunedin District Court yesterday, Judge Michael Crosbie told Blackmore the series of assaults could only be characterised as serious.
The violence generally followed lengthy bouts of drinking and was accompanied by ongoing verbal abuse with offensive and belittling remarks.
Counsel Judith Ablett-Kerr QC argued strongly for a structured sentence such as home detention, which would reinforce the positive changes the defendant had made during his 16 months in custody on remand.
Judge Crosbie earlier gave Blackmore an indication of a prison sentence of two years and four months. But he left the way open for a possible further reduction where home detention could be possible, depending on a favourable report from probation. Although the pre-sentence report did not go that far, it was based on a misapprehension about the actual charges, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said.
She pointed to the apparent progress Blackmore had made during his time on remand. A letter he had written to the court showed he had developed some maturity, was able to reflect on his own behaviour rather than that of other people and to make his own decisions instead of listening to other people.
Crown counsel Robin Bates said the Crown was not opposed to home detention as it would provide a period of oversight which would meet the victim's concerns. But the court would need to be sure such a sentence would work, that the defendant would comply. And the probation service seemed to be saying that was not likely, given Blackmore's past record of failing to comply.
While what had happened could not be changed, the defendant's willingness and his ability to comply could change, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said. What would be lost by sentencing him to home detention with special conditions, she asked. If he failed and repeated his previous pattern of behaviour, he would be back in court. And it would not need offending against another person, just his own failure to comply with his sentence conditions.
Judge Crosbie agreed the pre-sentence report did not rule out home detention. But the victim impact statement showed the clear effect the defendant's violence had on the woman's life. She had spent several months in a refuge until she felt safe and had moved to another town. Her health had been affected and she had also become very security conscious.
The judge said he had been looking for a report which was "a bright shining beacon'', where the defendant was seen as someone with everything going for him, to the extent it was possible to feel able to reduce the sentence to below the indicated two years and four months. Both counsel raised the point that home detention would see the defendant under control for a specified period of time. But it would mean a term of 12 months' home detention, which the Department of Corrections saw as far too long, setting the defendant up to fail.
And Blackmore's past record was not supportive of an electronically monitored sentence, Judge Crosbie said.
In all the circumstances, he was not persuaded his concerns had been met. And he did not think home detention would meet the denunciation and deterrence needed for such serious offending.
On the charge of disabling, Blackmore was sentenced to two years and four months' jail, with concurrent four month terms on the other three assaults. He was convicted and discharged on the intentional damage charge.
