escalating violence in our community Become a member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Hane Eshaya

Hane Richard Eshaya

Alias

.

Offences

Sexual violation by rape of a 16 year old girl in Houghton Bay, Wellington in June 1997

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

Born 1974

Current Location

Unknown

Parole/Release Dates

Sentenced to eight years in March 2000

Background
Court of Appeal decision here
From the Dominion 11th July 2000
Convicted rapist Hane Richard Eshaya has lost his appeal against his conviction in March. In a written judgment issued yesterday, the Court of Appeal said the facts of the case were relatively straightforward. Eshaya and the complainant, who were slightly known to each other, were members of a group of young people who regularly met with their cars and drove around Wellington.

On the evening of June 6-7, 1997, the complainant got into Eshaya's car and the pair drove round Wellington. The complainant claimed Eshaya stopped the car at Houghton Bay and raped her. She then persuaded him to allow her to drive the car and drove to her workplace where she told her manager. She also told other friends in the days following but did not complain to police for some months. Interviewed in April 1999, Eshaya effectively confirmed the complainant's story but denied having intercourse with the complainant or raping her.

The first jury to hear the trial was discharged without being called on to give a verdict, and a second jury was empanelled. After that jury retired, it sent the judge a note saying: "We don't all agree, have you any suggestions or tips?". The judge, in his reply, told the jury the parties had gone through the better part of the case twice "and it is, as I say, of paramount importance, if you possibly can, to reach a unanimous verdict".

About an hour later, the jury returned with a guilty verdict. Eshaya's lawyer argued in the Court of Appeal that any reference to the ordeal of witnesses if there was to be a new trial should be omitted, and noted the judge's reference to "paramount importance". The court said the judge's note was unlikely to have exerted such additional pressure on the jury as to lead to its verdict being unsafe. The appeal was dismissed.

---

Corrections and Additional Information
We endeavour to make this database as accurate as possible, but we are at the mercy of whatever information we can find in various online and offline archives. We rely on the public - that is, people like you - to fill in the gaps that we cannot. If you wish to submit additional information or a correction to this file CLICK HERE . Privacy: Trust policy is that all sources are treated as strictly confidential unless we are explicitly told otherwise. If you wish to see a file removed from this database certain conditions must be met by the offender set out HERE Note that this does NOT apply for those that are the primary offender in a murder, rape, or any sexual offending involving minors. We do not enter into correspondence regarding the guilt/innocence of offenders. Such correspondence is not responded to, especially if the offender concerned has a number of prior convictions

Back to Top