Back to RJ Archive

Palenapa v R.

Justice Doogue, Loretta
June 4, 2015

Source: (2005) NZCA 48 (15 March). Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Downloaded 16 November 2005.

[35] It was further submitted for the appellant that restorative justice might have
occurred had the Court been invited to adjourn sentencing for that process. It was
also submitted that reparation was not considered at sentencing.
[36] For the appellant it was submitted that a final sentence of two years
imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention is the appropriate response to
the appellant’s appeal. This is in particular because of the personal and family
circumstances of the appellant, the fact that her husband is in custody, her
willingness to pay reparation to the victims and her willingness to undertake
restorative processes in order to provide for the interests of the victim. (excerpt)


AbstractCourtsPacificPolicePost-Conflict ReconciliationRJ in SchoolsStatutes and LegislationVictim Support
Support the cause

We've Been Restoring Justice for More Than 40 Years

Your donation helps Prison Fellowship International repair the harm caused by crime by emphasizing accountability, forgiveness, and making amends for prisoners and those affected by their actions. When victims, offenders, and community members meet to decide how to do that, the results are transformational.

Donate Now