He remains in the intensive care unit in a stable condition, but on a ventilator. A Givealittle page has been set up for him and his family.
Hundreds of online commenters have called for the defendants – who are due to appear in the Youth Court on Thursday – to be charged as adults.
Central District Commander Superintendent Dion Bennett said the officer who was critically injured was a young father.
“Old enough to be driving around in middle of the night causing trouble, then old enough to get big boys’ punishment,” one person said.
“These young ones who think it’s fun to steal a car and injure anyone should not be protected because of their bloody age,” another said.
The Herald spoke to an expert and looked into the legislation to find out how likely the defendants would be to get dealt with as adults.
Rehabilitation over punishment for youths better for society – law professor
Police did not have any say in the decision to charge the teenagers in the Youth Court, Kris Gledhill, a professor of law at the Auckland University of Technology, noted.
Jurisdiction is governed by the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989, decided on by politicians rather than those enforcing the law.
“Youths are tried in the Youth Court unless it is murder or manslaughter – though 17-year-olds can be tried in the District Court for various other offences,” Gledhill said in an emailed response.
“The police do not have a choice in the matter for those aged 14-15.”
While most people are familiar with the process in an adult court – charges are laid, defendants plead guilty or go to trial and are sentenced if guilty – Youth Court played out differently.
Young people generally don’t plead guilty or not guilty to charges. Instead, they deny or admit them, or have them proven and go through “family group conferences”, a meeting including the young person, their family, the victim, police and other relevant professionals.
The Youth Court is required to consider any decision or recommendations produced by the conference.
Kris Gledhill, a law professor at Auckland University of Technology, said it was not up to police to decide whether the teens were dealt with as adults.
“Youth Courts follow different processes that try to work out why young people have got into trouble and also to work out what is best to try to solve those problems,” Gledhill said.
“This rests on evidence that punitive approaches are less successful in solving future criminal activities than taking steps to deal with the problem.”
Outcomes in the Youth Court are also different to the adult courts and while some may be similar to a sentencing, they are not referred to as such.
In serious cases, youths who have admitted their charges or had them proven can be sent to a youth detention residence.
“For young people, the brain science makes clear that they are not mini-adults and that their brains are developing,” Gledhill said.
“Trying to work out how best to stop them offending is going to be better for society in the long run. We have tried other methods and they have been shown to be less effective.
“That has been the basis for our youth justice system for many decades now.”
Can the youths in this case be dealt with in the adult court?
Based on the charges that have been laid, the legislation does not allow the younger teen, who is aged 14, to be transferred to the District Court.
The act allows a young person to be transferred to a higher jurisdiction for sentence or decision if they are 15 or older, or if they are 14 and facing a serious charge with a maximum penalty of at least 14 years in prison.
Neither defendant currently faces a charge meeting this threshold. The court may make an order to transfer the 15-year-old defendant and alleged driver despite this obstacle, but it is unlikely.
The judge must consider a host of factors when making such an order, including the nature of the offending, the defendant’s personal history and characteristics, the impact on the victim and the risk the defendant poses to others.
The case could also be transferred to the High Court if the officer died and police decided to lay a manslaughter charge.
That might not happen, though. Other charging options included reckless or dangerous driving causing death.
Will the defendants ever be named?
The younger teen will not be named, as he is too young to be transferred to the adult courts, and legislation strictly forbids naming defendants in the Youth Court.
Meanwhile, the older teen will keep his name suppressed as long as he remains in the youth jurisdiction – but even if he were to be transferred to an adult court, it was not a given that he would be named.
In such a case, the regular opportunities to apply for name suppression come into play. A judge must consider whether publication of the defendant’s name would cause adverse effects, such as extreme hardship.
A defence lawyer could argue that the youth’s age and rehabilitation prospects would weigh more strongly in favour of suppression than for an adult defendant.
The police officers were struck on Kairanga Bunnythorpe Rd, just outside Palmerston North, early on Saturday morning. Image / Google Maps
It is not unheard of for youths to be named for offending after being transferred to an adult court.
In 2024, Wellington teenager Mason Moody lost name suppression for an incident in which he tried to murder his ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend with a machete.
He was 17 by the time he lost suppression, with High Court Justice Christine Grice saying publication of his name would cause him “embarrassment”, but that this was an ordinary consequence of the serious offending he had committed.
Later that year, a teen offender with antisocial personality disorder – known as sociopathy – was transferred to the adult court after issues with his compliance with the Youth Court.
Noah Peter Matthews was jailed for a rape he committed against another teenager when he was 16.
Judge John Walker ultimately declined permanent suppression for Matthews in the District Court, noting the issue of whether he should receive it was closely related to “youth justice principles” and “the effect on the defendant’s rehabilitation and reintegration into the community, taking into account his particular circumstances, amounts to extreme hardship”.
He said the existing barriers to treatment and Matthews’ characteristics suggested publication of his name would make little, if any, difference to rehabilitation.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 12 years.