Singh, in his early 20s, had defended several charges at a judge-alone trial and was found guilty of rape and attempted sexual violation by Judge Philip Crayton in the Hamilton District Court in March.
He reappeared in court for sentencing on Friday, when the judge suppressed the name of the organisation the victim was living at, along with the town where it is based.
In her statement read to the court, the victim said she was involved in a serious crash and, as a result, lived in supported accommodation, where staff helped with her meals and medication.
Singh worked at the facility but was not her support worker.
She said that since the rape, she has had to have her medications increased to help her sleep and has been engaged in counselling.
“Even though I have high security in my house, I still feel unsafe and scared.”
She said she’d endured numerous surgeries as a result of her crash, “then to be abused in this way is disgusting”.
“I should have been able to trust him.”
‘She told you to stop’
In describing the offending, Judge Crayton said it was clear that Singh had come into contact with the victim and her circumstances while training to be a care worker.
After completing his preliminary period, he was required to work under supervision.
On his first day working unsupervised, Singh went to the victim’s home in the supported accommodation.
He had no legitimate reason to be there, the court heard.
The pair talked before he “tried it on”. He tried to kiss her, but the victim was not responding. Then he raped her.
Afterwards, he asked her not to tell his colleagues.
Singh left, and the victim showered, but before she was able to get help, he returned.
He then attempted to sexually violate her.
“She found that painful,” the judge said.
“She told you so, and she told you to stop. She eventually managed to get free of your grip.”
Karanpreet Singh was jailed for eight years, three months and two weeks on charges of rape and attempted sexual violation when he was sentenced in the Hamilton District Court on Friday. Photo / Belinda Feek
Judge Crayton and Crown prosecutor Kasey Dillon discussed Singh’s eligibility for a credit for being a foreign prisoner on the basis that imprisonment would be unduly harsh.
Dillon said the Court of Appeal had made it clear the discount could be given to prisoners who do not speak English and would be totally isolated in prison.
“The Court of Appeal has been very clear that where that is absent, no discount is attracted.
“This defendant speaks at least limited English, and it is not a circumstance where he would be unable to communicate with anyone in prison, and I suggest there is no basis for any discreet discount on the basis of cultural factors.”
But Judge Crayton said traditionally, if a defendant was isolated from their supports, that would make a prison sentence harder than would otherwise be the case.
He said it involved an assessment of the defendant’s level of isolation.
But Dillon remained resolute, saying it wouldn’t be as severe for Singh.
Asked about parole and the impending deportation, Dillon said those matters did not mitigate Singh’s offending in any way.
But defence counsel, Kerry Tustin, pushed for credit for the impact prison would have on Singh.
“There is a discount that ought to apply, and that would be at least 5%,” she said, citing different Court of Appeal case law.
Submitting against a minimum non-parole period, Tustin said her client getting out of jail after serving the minimum period available was “totally unrealistic”.
“The chance of that is less than 5% on statistics to date.
“However, I think he will serve longer than others as he won’t be able to access courses, as he won’t get priority access.”
The judge said that was something he couldn’t predict, and as a serving prisoner, Singh should get the same access as others.
Judge Crayton said the most recent statistics he had seen suggested that generally, offenders were released after serving between 60% and 70% of their sentences.
And for sex offenders, it was higher again.
Tustin said she told her clients facing sex offences, 66%, “but don’t expect anything before that”.
She said while Singh had denied the offending, he now accepted responsibility, despite holding differing views from the author of the pre-sentence report.
‘This was plainly premeditated’
Judge Crayton said the offending involved a gross breach of trust, as Singh used his position to access information about her.
“This involved you entering her safe space.
“You did so uninvited, and you did so without authority.”
Premeditation was also evident, “given what occurred, how it occurred and the time period involved and included you returning to her home”.
“This was plainly premeditated.
“I do not find that there’s any coincidence between this being your first unsupervised period and your offending.”
The victim was “extremely” vulnerable given her disabilities.
“She had limited ability to care for herself.”
Singh also raped her without using protection, which increased the risk to her health.
As for his age, the judge said this offending wasn’t simply a “youthful indiscretion”.
He said his family in India had been left “not only surprised but shocked” by his offending.
From a 10-year starting point, Judge Crayton allowed a 10% discount for youth and 7% for the impact of the prison sentence.
He then jailed him for eight years, three months and two weeks.
Upon release, Singh would be deported back to India.
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for 11 years and has been a journalist for 22.