\u201cI lost my beautiful cottage with my furnishings and possessions,\u201d the owner said.<\/p>\n
Her son lost everything he owned, including irreplaceable items gathered during his time overseas as a sportsman.<\/p>\n
The area near Blenheim where Jack Norris set fire to a vineyard cottage in apparent retribution for being told to leave. Image \/ Google Maps<\/p>\n
He said in his statement, read on his behalf, it was terrifying afterwards to learn he and his girlfriend had unknowingly shared a space with someone capable of such action.<\/p>\n
The cost of the damage and losses came to almost $739,000 which left the owner out of pocket by $114,274 after insurance<\/a> was paid out.<\/p>\n \u201cThe loss we have suffered was not just financial. The safety of my family and property was completely violated by you,\u201d the owner told Norris at sentencing.<\/p>\n Should never have been there<\/p>\n Judge Jo Rielly said in sending Norris to prison<\/a> for causing the blaze on July 10, 2023, the situation by which he came to be there should never have happened, and that his conduct after being given notice to leave was \u201cunusual, bizarre and very criminal\u201d.<\/p>\n Norris, 39, was sentenced to five-and-a-half years for the arson<\/a> he had denied, but for which Judge Rielly found him guilty at a judge-alone trial in August this year.<\/p>\n He did, however, admit at the start of the trial to spitting in a police officer\u2019s face while being driven to the Blenheim Police<\/a> Station afterwards.<\/p>\n Through his lawyer, Andrew McCormick, Norris continued at sentencing to deny culpability for the fire, but, puzzlingly to Judge Rielly, he apologised in court for the harm caused to the family.<\/p>\n \u201cThe biggest elephant in the room is, what is he apologising for?\u201d Judge Rielly asked.<\/p>\n McCormick said Norris was \u201chuman enough\u201d to see the harm caused through the financial costs and loss of personal belongings.<\/p>\n Norris interrupted from the dock and said that while he caused the fire, it wasn\u2019t intentional.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m sorry,\u201d he told the property owner.<\/p>\n The owner described Norris at sentencing as a person who was \u201cflawed, destructive and unhinged\u201d.<\/p>\n McCormick said the conduct amounted to revenge built up over a lifetime of extreme trauma and abuse, which had led to him developing harmful anti-social tendencies.<\/p>\n Crown prosecutor Jeremy Cameron said Norris\u2019 capacity for deception was evident at trial, and there had to come a point where someone\u2019s background could not be seen as impacting their decision to commit arson.<\/p>\n \u201cWe say that\u2019s the case here,\u201d Cameron said.<\/p>\n Notice to leave<\/p>\n Norris had been living at the property for about six weeks and was meant to have been gone by July 9.<\/p>\n He had been asked to leave because of increasingly erratic behaviour. On July 10, his birthday, he was alone in the house after his partner had gone to work.<\/p>\n A condition of his bail was that he was not to drink alcohol, but that morning, he got drunk on wine and vodka.<\/p>\n Norris videoed himself drinking, smashing a birthday gift, smashing items in the home, and throwing soft furnishings outside into the mud before setting fire to the house around 1pm.<\/p>\n The Crown<\/a> argued there were two areas where it started – one in a bedroom, and one near a couch in the living room. <\/p>\n The fire investigator\u2019s opinion was that the fire was deliberately lit by a person using an incendiary ignition source, such as a lighter.<\/p>\nJudge Jo Rielly said the situation by which Norris came to be at the Marlborough property should never have happened.<\/p>\n