Kerre Woodham: Three women killed by repeat offenders, when will courts learn?

It was a glorious weekend. Somewhat marred when I read this story from Anna Leask in yesterday's New Zealand Herald. I really had to I really had to reset myself after reading this. Anna writes, urgent calls for change are mounting after a third Christchurch woman was murdered by a violent repeat offender who was subject to monitoring and a raft of prison release conditions designed to keep the community safe. Which it didn't.

Nicole Tuxford, Juliana Herrera, and Chantal McDonald, three Christchurch women murdered in the place they should have been safest, in their own homes. All killed by men with long, documented histories of violence against women, including rape, kidnap, and even previous murders. Men who were released under supervision and conditions designed to keep the public safe.

Nathan Boulter murdered Chantal McDonald in front of her kids, 13 days after he was released from prison where he'd been sent after terrorising, abusing, and kidnapping other women. In 2022 Juliana Herrera was murdered by a convicted rapist, Joseph Brider. He'd been released on parole 72 days before he crept into her house while she was sleeping and subjected her to a prolonged sexual and physical assault before stabbing her to death. And Nicole Tuxford was murdered by Paul Pounamu Tainui, otherwise known as Paul Russell Wilson, who was on parole for the earlier rape and murder of his girlfriend. The girlfriend he'd previously killed had told her mother it was just a matter of time before she ended up dead. She knew he was going to kill her. She knew he was going to do it sooner or later, and he did, and then he was sent to prison, and then he did it again.

After each woman's murder, Corrections mounted a review. Corrections confirmed it communicated and worked with police and others in a multi agency group to monitor the parolees' risk and compliance with their conditions. Clearly they haven't learned any lessons. Not after the first one, not after the second, not after the third. There'll be a fourth and a fifth. And primarily, primarily it's because these men have been given sentences where they have to come out eventually. And then it's on Corrections to try and monitor them, and they can't be monitored.

They have shown through their actions that they cannot be rehabilitated, if they could be habilitated at all. If they were given preventive detention, we, the community and women in particular, wouldn't have to worry. Have a look at Australia. You know, they are not considered a particularly backward, primitive society. You wouldn't think of Australia and think, oh yeah, but they're nutters, you know, they chop people's hands off in the square. No, they don't do that. But what they do do, is keep the community safe.

A man who raped and killed an international student was sentenced to 30 years minimum jail term.  The Crown appealed that because they said despite the fact he was 20 at the time of the attack, that he pleaded guilty, he had no criminal record and had not premeditated the offence, the Crown said its sheer violence meant the safety of the community needed to be placed above the limited prospect of him being rehabilitated when he was released. They argued the minimum 30 year sentence was manifestly inadequate for a 20 year old who pleaded guilty, who'd never had a history of criminal offending. And what do our judges do? Nine years, 10 years, 12 years for people with long, documented histories of violence and abuse.

Another one, Derek Barrett, 32 initially sentenced to at least 34 years in jail in 2017 in Sydney for killing his 26 year old niece who was boarding with him and his wife at the time. It's 46 years. That's what the judge handed out, 46 years, and he's eligible for parole in 34 He probably won't get it because they found out later he'd done all sorts of unspeakable things when they found a USB. That's what that's how much the courts in Australia value the lives of women. Innocent women who have their lives completely and utterly destroyed in prolonged assaults by men who are very, very sick.

Now, in our case, over the ditch in New Zealand, we knew these men were sick. They'd shown they were sick. They'd shown they had absolutely no interest in rehabilitation, and they'd been recalled to jail a number of times for assaults against women before they murdered again. Had our judges applied the same consideration in sentencing these men with their proven history, the other two in Australia had never put a foot wrong that anybody had found out about.

They might have been deviant creeps in their in their private life, hadn't commit you know, they hadn't shown to the judges that they'd done anything wrong. These ones have. Join the dots. Could we make it any clearer? All three of those women named in Anna's article and many, many other women would still be alive today if we applied the sort of sentencing that Australian judges think is perfect

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Carrywood and Mornings podcast from News Talks.
He'd be so.

Speaker 2 (00:11):
It was a glorious weekend somewhat marred when I read
this story from Annelisk in Yesterday's New Zealand Herald. I
really had to I really had to reset myself after
reading this. Anna writes urgent calls for change and mounting
after a third christ churchwoman was murdered by a violent

(00:34):
repeat offender who was subject to monitoring in a raft
of prison release conditions designed to keep the community safe,
which it didn't. Nicole Tuxford and writes Juliana Herreda and
Chantel MacDonald three christ churchwomen murdered in the place they
should have been safest, in their own homes. All killed

(00:56):
by men with long documented histories of violence against women,
including rape, kidnap, and even previous murders, men who were
released under supervision and conditions designed to keep the public safe.
Nathan Bolter murdered Chantal MacDonald in front of her kids,

(01:18):
thirteen days after he was released from prison where had
been sent after terrorizing, abusing and kidnapping other women. In
twenty twenty two, Juliana Herreta was murdered by a convicted rapist,
Joseph Brider. He had been released on paroles seventy two
days before he crept into her house while she was
sleeping and subjected her to a prolonged sexual and physical

(01:41):
assault before stabbing her to death. And Nicole Tuxford was
murdered by Paul Pinamu Tainoi, otherwise known as Paul Russell Wilson,
who was on parole for the earlier rape and murder
of his girlfriend. The girlfriend had previously killed had told
her mother it was just a matter of time before

(02:03):
she ended up dead. She knew he was going to
kill her. She knew he was going to do it
sooner or later. And he did, and then he was
sent to prison, and then he did it again. After
each woman's murder, Corrections mounted a review, Corrections confirmed it,
communicated and worked with police and others in a multi
agency group to monitor the paroli's risk in compliance with

(02:26):
their conditions. Clearly, they haven't learned any lessons, not after
the first one, not after the second, not after the third.
They'll be a fourth and a fifth, and primarily primarily
it's because these men have been given sentences where they
have to come out eventually, and then it's on corrections

(02:50):
to try and monitor them. And they can't be monitored.
They have shown through their actions that they cannot be rehabilitated.
If they could be habilitated at all, if they were
given preventive detention, we the community and women in particular
wouldn't have to worry. Have a look at Australia, you know,

(03:11):
they are not considered a particularly backward primitive society. You
wouldn't think of Australia and think, oh, yeah, but they're nutters.
You know, they chop people's hands off in the square. No,
they don't do that, but what they do do is
keep the community safe. A man who raped and killed

(03:32):
an international student was sentenced to thirty years minimum jail
term thirty three to zero. The Crown appealed that because
they said, despite the fact he was twenty at the
time of the attack, that he pleaded guilty, he had
no criminal record and had not premeditated the offense. The

(03:53):
Crown said its sheer violence meant the safety of the
community needed to be placed above the limited prospect of
him being rehabilitated when he was released. They argued the
minimum thirty year sentence was manifestly and adequate for a
twenty year old who pleaded guilty, who had never had
a history of criminal offending. And what do our judges

(04:17):
do nine years, ten years, twelve years for people with
long documented histories of violence and abuse. Another one, Derek
Barrett thirty two, initially sentenced to at least thirty four
years in jail in twenty seventeen in Sydney for killing
his twenty six year old niece who was boarding with

(04:39):
him and his wife at the time. It's forty six years.
That's what the judge hand a forty six years and
he's eligible for parole in thirty four. He probably won't
get it because they found out later he had done
all sorts of unspeakable things when they found a USB
That's what That's how much the courts in Australia value

(05:02):
the lives of women, innocent women who have their lives
completely and utterly destroyed in prolonged assaults by men who
are very, very sick. Now, in our case over the

(05:25):
Ditch in New Zealand, we knew these men were sick.
Their shown, they were sick their show, and they had
absolutely no interest in rehabilitation, and they'd been recalled to
jail a number of times for assaults against women before
they murdered again. Had our judges applied the same consideration

(05:48):
in sentencing these men with their proven history, the other
two in Australia had never put a foot wrong that
anybody had found out about. They might have been deviant
creeps in their private life, hadn't committed you know, they
hadn't shown to the judges that they've done anything wrong.
These ones have join the dots. Could we make it

(06:10):
any clearer? All three of those women named an Anna's article,
and many many other women would still be alive today
if we applied the sort of sentencing that Australian judges
think is perfectly reasonable to apply to monsters who are

(06:31):
sick and depraved and see women as a means of satisfaction.
What will it take for our judges to hand down
sentences to offenders that truly reflect the horror of their crimes.

Speaker 1 (06:48):
For more from carry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.