A teenage boy spent several days at home, unwell with a cough and growing steadily sicker. 

It was not until the sixth day that his parents sought medical help. But by then, it was too late. 

An ambulance took him to a hospital, where he was found to be suffering from a lung infection, and his condition continued to deteriorate. 

The boy, from the Manawatū-Whanganui region, was significantly underweight and had sores on his body, indicating he had been lying down for a period of time. 

Ultimately, the lung infection led to a cardiac arrest and stroke, and he later died. 

His parents’ failure to seek medical help sooner has now led to their conviction for neglect of a child, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment. 

Last week in the Whanganui District Court, Judge Justin Marinovich described the case as one of the more difficult sentencings he has been involved in. 

“There are a significant number of layers that all mould together to make a determination relatively difficult,” he said. 

While information to the court suggested there were concerns raised in 2012 relating to the boy, and he had been underweight for much of his teenage life, the judge said his assessment was limited to the six days set out in the charge. 

“I need to be careful that I assess your culpability for the charge and time period rather than guess or speculate as to what may have been between 2012 and the time of the charge,” Judge Marinovich told the couple, who can not be named. 

‘Can’t have it both ways’ 

The judge noted there had been “discussions” around the summary of facts and how it was to be presented for a sentencing indication and a plea. 

While acknowledging the boy’s death “hung over all of this”, he pushed back against attempts to characterise the offending more seriously than the now “narrowed” scope in the summary allowed. 

The couple were sentenced in the Whanganui District Court. Photo / Bevan Conley 

“Can’t have it both ways... manslaughter – hold your guns, go through it. Charge wilful neglect through an extended period of time – hold your guns, go for it. Reduce it to a period of six days and a scope, then that’s what I need to sentence on,” Judge Marinovich said, speaking to Crown prosecutor Amber Kearny. 

“And I need to sentence in the context of it occurring in awareness that the victim was sick, aware that he had a cough and was unwell, realising too late and calling the ambulance.” 

Defence lawyer Jamie Waugh, who made submissions on behalf of both defendants, emphasised the summary was clear in that there was no causation by omission, nor did the couple accept anything beyond what they had pleaded guilty to. 

He submitted that when sentencing the pair, the judge should take into account their remorse, loss of their son, previous good character and prospects of rehabilitation. 

Waugh argued that following deductions, a sentence of community detention was the most appropriate outcome. 

While Kearny did not seek an end sentence of imprisonment on behalf of the Crown, she submitted that community detention did not meet the purposes and principles of sentencing, a position accepted by Judge Marinovich. 

‘You both hold responsibility’ 

He adopted a starting point of 36 months’ imprisonment, accepted by the couple at an earlier sentencing indication, and found there were no personal aggravating factors. 

The judge said he had received a significant amount of information on the case, including presentence reports, submissions and affidavits from the couple. 

“It is clear to me that this has been distressing to you,” the judge said, addressing the couple. 

He accepted that neither of the defendants had previously appeared in court, they supported one another and were focused on their remaining children, who appeared to be flourishing, and were both remorseful. 

The judge said the reports reflected the couple’s acknowledgment that they should have sought help for their son sooner. 

“You try to explain or justify in your minds why you didn’t, but acknowledge that you should have, there you both hold responsibility and both say that you live with your choices every day,” he said. 

“I accept that the remorse that you have expressed is genuine. I don’t determine that the remorse you expressed is because of your predicament. 

“It’s the reality of your situation, that your omissions led to health issues for your son, those health issues ultimately led to his organs wanting to shut down and his health deteriorating.” 

The judge allowed a 5% discount for their remorse and a further 5% for their previous good character and prospects of rehabilitation. 

However, he did not give credit for the loss of their son, saying he accepted there was no causative link to his death, “hence the charge”, but there was still an omission that led to his neglect. 

After credit for the couple’s guilty pleas, the judge reached an end sentence of 23 months’ imprisonment, which he commuted to 11.5 months of home detention. 

The couple also applied for permanent name suppression, relying on the extreme hardship that publication of their details may cause their children. 

Judge Marinovich granted the application, finding the impact it would have on the children, who were victims too, having lost their brother, outweighed the public interest in the case and the seriousness of the offending. 

Tara Shaskey is an assistant editor and reporter for the Open Justice team. She joined NZME in 2022 and has worked as a journalist since 2014.