But a jury did believe her, convicting the man on six charges, which largely related to repeated indecent behaviour, and a physical assault.
This week, the man was sentenced in the Tauranga District Court, and the girl’s victim impact statement was read by Crown prosecutor Richard Jenson.
“I’ve struggled to sleep, struggled to stay awake, even to just be in my own body and head, having the memories of everything that’s happened to me,” she said.
“The feelings of someone else’s hands touching you, you can still feel years after, and there’s nothing I can do about it.”
She had resorted to coping mechanisms that “weren’t the best” and involved self-harm, to try to “be numb”.
“He tore me down and made me feel worthless,” she said.
The man was sentenced in the Tauranga District Court.
The family members who had sided with her stepfather had “kicked her out”, and she had almost been placed into fostercare, but instead her father’s family had taken her in.
“And for them, I am forever grateful.”
She had left the Bay of Plenty for a while, but had since returned to Tauranga.
The girl felt like she was “walking on eggshells when visiting family or friends” and kept “looking around corners, hoping he’s not there”.
She was comforted knowing he would now be serving a sentence “behind bars” and was no longer a threat to her or her siblings.
While the court process was now over, the trauma of what had happened lingered.
“I know the war is over, but it doesn’t feel like it is. This should be the end of the misery, but it honestly doesn’t feel like it,” she said.
“I’ll eventually find a way to cope, but currently I’m pushing my way through the constant fear, anger, depression and anxiety.”
She hoped her stepfather knew the damage he had done, but said she wouldn’t let it destroy her.
As her statement was read, supporters of the man sat in the public gallery, shaking their heads.
‘Trapped’ in a house with repeated abuse
The man, who can’t be named in order to protect the girl’s identity, was found guilty by a jury on three representative charges of indecent assault, one of specific indecent assault, one representative charge of doing an indecent act, and one assault on a person in a family relationship.
The representative charges related to repeated actions by the man.
He would go into the 12-year-old girl’s bedroom, sit on her bed, and touch her breasts on top of her clothes.
He would also have skin-to-skin contact, breathe on her neck, and attempt to kiss her.
There was repeated grabbing of her buttocks and genital area when she was in the kitchen, and this was said to have occurred two or three times a week for more than two years.
One of the charges related to him putting his hands down her pants, being told to stop, and ignoring her.
“It was said you were able to get her to the ground, pin her arms, and then used your hand to grope her vaginal area,” Judge Christopher Harding said, in his summary of the evidence heard at trial.
Another charge related to him standing in the 12-year-old’s doorway to call her for dinner, holding his genitalia through his pants, looking at the girl and asking her “to suck that”.
The assault charge related to an incident where she had spilled some coffee, and the man slapped her across the face with an open palm, causing her to fall back on the bed.
“This was an ongoing, repetitive series of offences against a girl effectively trapped in the home with you as her stepfather,” Judge Harding said.
“Aggravating your offending was the abuse of trust, the vulnerability of the victim, and the premeditation to the extent that this was, albeit opportunistic possibly on individual occasions, an ongoing series of events which must have been intended.”
The Crown sought a starting point of four years’ imprisonment, with discounts of no more than 5%, and said that prison was appropriate.
Defence lawyer Bill Nabney said the Crown’s suggested starting point was too high, and a starting point of between two-and-a-half years and three years was more appropriate, and submitted home detention could be a possible outcome.
Nabney pointed to the “significant support” the man had, and he had supplied the court with reference letters.
“They all point to a situation suggesting that this is entirely out of character, and you continue to have that wide support,” Judge Harding said.
“I simply must observe that they obviously didn’t know what was happening.”
Judge Harding said the pre-sentence report noted the victim’s vulnerability and the prolonged nature of the indecent behaviour.
It said the man maintained his innocence and had no remorse.
It referred to the man’s challenging upbringing, having been passed around to various family members, and noted “antagonistic attitudes to women”, and that he had a bipolar condition.
The man offered emotional harm reparation, which the judge said did not seem to be motivated by a desire to help the victim, but rather for “the assistance of himself” at sentencing.
Although the man had previous convictions, the judge said they were limited and “mainly to do with anger”, and no uplift was sought by the Crown.
The judge adopted a starting point of three-and-a-half years’ imprisonment.
He gave an “extremely limited” discount for the offer of emotional harm reparation, and “some discount” for the difficulties of the man’s upbringing.
The collective discount for those two factors was six months, bringing the end sentence to three years’ imprisonment.
The man will be registered on the Child Sex Offenders Register, and he was ordered to pay $1000 in emotional harm reparation.
Hannah Bartlett is a Tauranga-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She previously covered court and local government for the Nelson Mail, and before that was a radio reporter at Newstalk ZB.