Noone, 66, from the Marlborough township of Havelock, was told by a judge he was being “punished for something that shouldn’t have happened”.
“Everyone agrees it was an inexplicably poor piece of decision-making,” Judge Noel Sainsbury said in sentencing Noone in the Blenheim District Court to five months’ community detention.
‘Misjudged loyalty’
The charge, which Judge Sainsbury said covered a wide multitude of activity and had varying degrees of seriousness, carried a maximum penalty of seven years in prison.
He said it appeared to be a case of “misjudged loyalty” in helping a wanted person to get away, but if the police had not got wind of what was going on, the accused would have been “spirited away to Wellington”.
There was an active arrest warrant out for the accused thief and police were searching for him when, in March last year, he was traced to Noone’s Havelock address via cellphone data, the police summary of facts said.
“This person knew Mr Noone and thought if he could get away from the top of the South Island and get to Wellington, he might evade arrest,” Judge Sainsbury said.
Noone was asked by the man for help and “foolishly he agreed”, the judge said.
Police intercepted communications
Text message data intercepted by police showed Noone planned to help his friend evade capture by transporting him to Wellington.
Around midday on March 8 last year, Noone booked a ticket for himself and a vehicle on a Bluebridge sailing from Picton at 7pm the same day.
Noone hid his mate under bedding in the back of the car, drove to Picton and checked himself in at the terminal.
He did not disclose that there was anyone else in the vehicle, or pay for an extra ticket, police said.
Noone drove through the check-in gate, moved into a traffic holding lane and waited to board the ferry.
About 10 minutes after Noone had checked himself in, police arrived, stopped him and found the man hidden in the rear of the vehicle.
Noone told police he “didn’t know” his associate had a warrant out for his arrest.
Guilty plea to ‘spur-of-the-moment’ offence
He later pleaded guilty to the charge of obstructing, defeating or perverting the course of justice.
Judge Sainsbury acknowledged the offending could include “spur-of-the-moment” decisions to make misguided offers of help.
Case law showed various examples of such, plus others where family members had helped someone evade the police.
He said in this case, a starting point of 15 to 18 months in prison was not opposed by either the Crown or defence.
“What is serious is that in this case, there was a degree of planning and carrying out that plan,” Judge Sainsbury said.
He said in instances where someone had a “significant criminal history”, an uplift was warranted.
While Noone did have a criminal history, his last offence was in 2011, with the most serious offending being in 1992.
There was therefore no need for a sentencing uplift, Judge Sainsbury said.
Noone’s guilty pleas did not arrive early, but he did finally admit the charge and was given a 20% discount on his sentence.
An overall 30% discount left an electronically monitored sentence as the most appropriate outcome.
Judge Sainsbury said while a sentence of home detention was the appropriate outcome, community detention with a nighttime curfew marked the seriousness of the offending without being unduly harsh.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.