The woman has avoided a conviction, but her lawyer said she had since been forced to resign from her job as a public servant because of the offending.
Her husband, who threw the boy, was convicted and sentenced to 40 hours of community service, while her daughter was discharged without conviction.
‘I trusted you’
At their sentencing this week, the court heard that the boy and his younger brother went to live with the trio, who were members of his extended family, because his mother was unable to care for them.
One evening, the brothers were fighting and the older woman sent the boy to his room, where she and her daughter restrained him on his bed.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.The case was heard in the Wellington District Court by Judge Tania Warburton. Photo / RNZ
Hearing the commotion, her husband came into the boy’s room and, as matters escalated, he twice threw him against a chest of drawers, resulting in bruising to the boy’s forehead and chest and a bump to his head.
The boy’s victim impact statement, which was read to the court, described how he was isolated from his immediate family during the time he lived with the group.
He said they ensured he couldn’t tell his parents what had happened.
The trio made him think his mother was a “loser” who didn’t love him, “when it was the other way around”.
As a result of being hurt and told he was lying, the boy said he no longer trusted adults.
“I am angry at you. I trusted you, I loved you and you made me feel less than,” he said.
Judge Tania Warburton noted the aggravating features of the case included the breach of trust, the age of the victim, and that the offending occurred in a home where the boy and his brother were entitled to feel safe.
In mitigation, she said tensions were running high that night, and the offending, particularly by the two women, was at the lower end of the scale.
‘A situational event’
All three sought a discharge without conviction, which police prosecutor Alarna Sharratt opposed.
The court heard the trio had shown no remorse and taken no steps to address their offending.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
The man’s lawyer, Sean Clarke, said the incident was “a situational event” that reflected the stresses of that day.
Steve Gill, for the older woman, submitted that his client had already lost her job, having been forced to resign, which was a situation he described as “outrageous”.
He had suggested she get legal advice and hoped the decision could be reversed.
To lose her position because of restraining a child was out of all proportion to the offence, he said.
Miranda Gardiner-Rodden, for the younger woman, said her client’s involvement was minimal and her actions were not intended to harm the victim.
In agreeing to discharge both women without conviction, Judge Warburton noted that the gravity of their offending was low. She also noted that the mother had already lost her job before sentencing took place.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
In the case of the husband, the judge accepted that he’d stepped into a scene of tension and chaos and was concerned for the safety of those in the room.
But his response was “not reasonable”.
She suppressed the names of all three defendants, saying the mother had a public profile and, if her name were published, she would be unlikely to secure another job in her chosen career.
The judge also noted that suppression of all names allowed for the facts of the case to be reported.
Catherine Hutton is an Open Justice reporter, based in Wellington. She has worked as a journalist for 20 years, including at the Waikato Times and RNZ. Most recently, she was working as a media adviser at the Ministry of Justice.