Hayden Barnard, a recognised martial arts exponent, was sentenced in the Nelson District Court on Friday after being found guilty at trial of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.
A jury acquitted him of charges of strangulation and possessing an offensive weapon.
The court heard differing accounts at trial from the victim and Barnard about what happened, which led to the jury’s verdicts.
Barnard claimed he reacted in self-defence, albeit “excessively”.
But there was no dispute he had attacked the victim in the head, causing serious injury, Judge Garry Barkle said.
“The victim was vulnerable and significantly older than you.
“You were a trained martial arts exponent and therefore, once there was an encounter, there was little doubt about who would prevail,” Judge Barkle said.
The victim said the suddenness of the attack had made it difficult to come to terms with what had happened or why.
“The person I was before this is not the person I am today,” he said in his victim impact statement, read in court on his behalf.
Attacked at home
On the night of November 23, 2023, the victim and his partner were relaxing at their semi-rural Tasman District address.
The victim claimed at trial he was in the living room, stepped outside, and when he returned was surprised to see Barnard in the living room, uninvited.
At the time, Barnard was living at a nearby property. The victim said he recognised him as a “new neighbour”.
The victim said he went back outside, thinking his partner might have invited Barnard in, and Barnard followed him outside and began attacking him.
The victim said he tried to stop Barnard but was overpowered.
Barnard’s version of events, which the victim denied, was that he stopped at the house to have a smoke.
He claimed to have been invited in by the victim’s partner and was standing in the couple’s kitchen when the victim came in from outside and yelled at him: “Get the f*** out of my house”.
Barnard claimed he had to defend himself. He started throwing punches and the pair ended up wrestling on the ground.
Crown prosecutor Jeremy Cameron said it was a “serious wounding event” regardless of how it started and a “significant beating” had been delivered.
The Crown called for a prison sentence because Barnard had “used his fighting skills” to attack a physically weaker man.
The defence, in seeking home detention, accepted it was an aggravating matter but the court needed to factor in “excessive self-defence”.
Extensive injuries
The extent of the victim’s injuries was revealed in his impact statement. He said they had “affected every aspect” of his life in the almost three years since.
He said his recovery was slow and ongoing and he had been left with permanent injuries, including to his spine.
A broken nose had required reconstructive surgery and was unlikely to be straight again, the victim said.
He had permanent nerve damage to his forehead, which was so badly bruised it needed draining. He also received bruising to his neck, ears and face and now suffered ringing in his ears from tinnitus.
He had also suffered a significant psychological impact, including PTSD.
“I was active and independent and looked forward to a future that has been taken away from me,” he said.
His partner, who had witnessed the “brutal assault”, said it was “incredibly painful” to see the person she loved in agony, in hospital and then sleeping through much of his recovery, which their relationship had since centred on.
She said the court process, which had been physically and emotionally exhausting, had prolonged their trauma.
“Giving evidence was one of the most distressing episodes of my life,” she said.
“The assault stole something that can never be returned. I don’t know if I will ever fully recover.”
Harm acknowledged
Defence lawyer John Wayne Howell said Barnard acknowledged the harm caused. He accepted he had assaulted the victim and caused serious harm, but the genesis remained unclear.
Judge Barkle said at sentencing it would be unfair to Barnard and unsafe not to factor in the matter of self-defence.
He said what wasn’t in dispute was that Barnard was intoxicated on a mix of alcohol and LSD, and for unknown reasons, entered the couple’s property late that night.
“That’s when events unfolded resulting in really horrendous consequences and injuries to the pair,” Judge Barkle said.
He said the impact on the couple had been “hugely significant” and “life-changing”.
Judge Barkle adopted a three-and-a-half-year starting point before applying a 25% discount for mitigating factors, including remorse and steps taken voluntarily towards rehabilitation.
He allowed a further reduction for the two years and eight months Barnard had spent on electronic bail, arriving at a final sentence of 11 months’ home detention to be served at an address in Waihi.
Barnard was also ordered to pay $2500 to the victim in emotional harm reparation.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.
Join the NZ Herald’s Open Justice team for Case by Case, a video and podcast series examining the disputes and decisions making headlines across New Zealand.