Brightwork real estate

A 67-year-old Auckland real estate agent has been sentenced to five years and eight months imprisonment for multiple sexual offences against two pre-teen girls who considered him their grandfather.

Both girls were between the ages of 11 and 12 when they were indecently assaulted. He attempted to rape one of the girls as well.

He previously pleaded guilty to charges including indecent assault, attempted rape and unlawful sexual connection.

Judge Evangelos Thomas said the offences were an “outrageous betrayal” which would have a significant impact on the two girls through their lives.

One of the girls was the man’s step granddaughter, while the other considered him her grandfather, Judge Thomas said.

“It’s not the touching so much that causes the harm, but the depths of that betrayal, a 12 or 13-year-old doesn’t understand that.”

Judge Thomas granted the man permanent name suppression to protect the identity of his victims, and noted the man had never sought suppression for himself.

The offending occurred three years ago and continued for “an extended period of time” until the man handed himself in to police.

Defence lawyer Paul Borich KC said his client was sorry for what he had done to the children.

“The complainants should have expected loving support from him, and instead they got the opposite,” for which he expressed “profound remorse”, Borich said.

But he said despite the man being of good character for much of his life, he had offended against the two girls, Judge Thomas said.

“This didn’t happen once, it wasn’t a brain implosion… it was part of a pattern of conduct that extended over a period of time.”

The man was given a 40% discount on the starting point of nine and a half years imprisonment in consideration of his early guilty plea and his remorse.

Where to get help

• Rape Crisis 0800 88 33 00, click link for local helplines.

• Victim Support 0800 842 846.

• Safetalk text 4334, phone 0800 044 334 webchat safetotalk.nz or email [email protected]

• The Harbour Online support and information for people affected by sexual abuse.

• Women’s Refuge 0800 733 843

• Male Survivors Aotearoa Helplines across NZ, click to find out more (males only).

• If you or someone else is in immediate danger, call 111.

• If you or someone you know is in a dangerous situation, click the Shielded icon at the bottom of this website to contact Women’s Refuge in a safe and anonymous way without it being traced in your browser history. If you’re in our app, visit the mobile website here to access Shielded.

Ending a bitter family dispute, two siblings have won an appeal alleging that their aunt had undue influence over their grandmother, saying she was “bullied” to change her will, so that the aunt’s family would receive 93.75% of a million dollar estate, and cutting the sibling’s share to just 6.25%.

Joan Gorringe, a sheep and cattle farmer, spent the final years of her life in a Mount Maunganui rest home, until she died in October 2019, aged 101, a Court of Appeal ruling published this month says.

She’d had two children, Peter Gorringe, a Hamilton barrister, and Judith Pointon.

Her original will, made in 2011, left her estate to be divided equally between Judith and Peter, with the proviso that should either them die before her, then their own children will be entitled equally to their parent’s share as if that parent had been living at Joan’s death.

When Peter Gorringe, who had been managing his mother’s financial affairs, died suddenly in 2015 of an aneurysm, Joan Gorringe made a sudden and significant change to her will shortly after her son’s death, and again four months later.

READ MORE: ‘Reclusive’ son’s $300k inheritance distributed ‘as if he doesn’t exist’ Family row over haulage magnate’s multimillion-dollar estate ‘A real mystery’ – the search for a reclusive Kiwi set to lose $300k inheritance

Peter’s children, Romiley and Ashley, saw that the changes made in the 2015 and 2016 wills inexplicably favoured the Pointon side of the family.

The 2015 will altered the original intention of the 2011 will, that in the event one of Joan’s children died – as Peter had – then Peter’s half should go to his children.

The new 2015 will left the bulk of the estate to Judith, with just $50,000 each for Romiley and Ashley, along with Judith’s three children. The further amendment in 2016 will added another provision, that if Judith should also die before Joan, the bulk of the estate would pass to Judith’s husband, not the grandchildren.

After Joan’s death, Romiley and Ashley challenged Joan’s testamentary capacity, alleging undue influence by Judith concerning the 2015 and 2016 wills. Their claims were dismissed in March 2022.

On an appeal this month, Justice Brown agreed with the siblings that their grandmother had in fact been unduly influenced by their aunt Judith Pointon, in making the 2015 and 2016 wills which clearly favoured the Pointon family.

The Court of Appeal had considered evidence in an affidavit from Ashley and Romiley recounting what happened when they visited their grandmother two days after their father Peter Gorringe’s funeral.

“While we were there, she told us that she had been bullied by Judith into changing her will two days after finding out dad had died.

“We have since learned that it was Judith who made the call to arrange for the will to be changed. I recall very clearly that grandma said words to the effect that:

“‘I’ve changed my will, Judy made me do it two days after your father died. I didn’t think that I had a choice because I was scared if I didn’t do what she wanted she would stop helping me, and I’m completely dependent on her now with your father gone and you two living overseas. It is now divided between the five grandchildren and Judy’”

The revelation shocked the siblings, said Romiley.

“Ashley and I were speechless and in shock. Ashley got up and walked out of the room. I just said, oh, and grandma continued: ‘Judy bullied me to do it. It is not what your grandfather and I wanted at all’.

“I didn’t know what to say as it was such a shock on top of so much shock and loss already. I didn’t want her to feel bad because she was clearly upset, so I changed the subject and then found Ashley, and we left, stunned.”

The pair did not know what to do, but asked advice from two legal friends of their father.

The Court of Appeal judge noted that there had been no reason to change the 2011 will because as far as that will was concerned, it was clear that when Joan died, half should then go to Romiley and Ashley, because Peter had already died.

The judge considered Judith’s involvement in the later wills, and wondered if Joan actually read them at all, as there was a big misspelling of one of the grandchildren’s names.

The judge also noted Judith’s several discussions with Joan concerning wills, that she was involved in arranging the instructions for the 2015 will, and that Joan didn’t receive any proper legal advice for the 2016 will, as although her solicitor had said it would be an unusual change to make Judith’s husband a beneficiary, the solicitor believed Joan would come to her office and sign the amended wills which would have given her a chance to talk to her.

Instead, Judith Pointon took the amended will to Joan, watched her sign it, with two rest home staff as witnesses, and then Judith returned it to the lawyers.

Having considered again all the circumstances, the Judge ruled in favour of the siblings’ allegation of undue influence on Judith’s part.

Both the 2015 and 2016 wills were declared invalid as they were “procured by undue influence”.

The judge also ordered independent executors and trustees of Joan’s estate and granted probate of the 2011 will.

The judge reserved his decision of the allocation of costs for a later date, asking both parties to make submissions on whether costs should be reimbursed from Joan’s estate.

CORRECTION : Peter Gorringe’s children, Romiley and Ashley, are female and male, respectively. An earlier version of this story incorrectly said Ashley was female (Amended March 23, 2023, 2.23pm).