Christchurch District Court Judge Mark Callaghan has taken them both into custody before their October 11 sentencing.
He found the couple guilty of neglect by the elderly for their treatment of the man’s 90-year-old father, who suffered from advanced dementia and was kept locked up at home for most of the day.
During the trial, the man was told that the man was kept locked up in his room for up to 16 hours a day with limited access to light, fresh air and cleaning facilities.
During the three-week trial last month, he was told he was kept in adult diapers and a wet suit overnight because he could soil himself.
Christchurch District Court Judge Mark Callaghan has found the couple guilty of keeping the elderly man under unhealthy conditions.
The couple was found guilty of failing to provide the necessities, which would likely have adverse effects on the old man’s health.
Judge Callaghan found the son not guilty of failing to keep records as a power of attorney, but has convicted him on 32 counts of theft related to his father’s assets. He has also been found guilty of one charge of forgery.
The judge found the son guilty of assaulting his father for an incident after he soiled himself when the Crown said the son was pushing and threatening him.
The couple will face the Supreme Court on July 14 pending an appeal.
Judge Callaghan said he did not find the court’s evidence credible. The court heard how the man’s mother had told him that they would pay for all his expenses and whatever he needed in exchange for credible care for them.
Judge Callaghan said: “There are inconsistencies in the evidence (of the son), which makes him an incredible witness.”
The judge ruled in his decision that the thefts involved a total of $216,000 over a three-year period.
During the trial, many images of the elderly man’s treatment and living conditions were shown, which were captured on video.
Judge Callaghan sent the couple back for their October 11 sentencing. Both attorneys, Clayton Williams for the man and Nicola Hansen for the woman, filed bail for their clients pending their verdict. The Crown opposed granting bail.
Judge Callaghan refused bail, saying the couple’s treatment of the man was “akin to what the public would consider torture”.
The Crown claimed the 90-year-old man was locked in a dark room for up to 16 hours a day, wearing an adult diaper and a wetsuit that he couldn’t take off for when he soiled himself.
His case during the three-week hearing was that he had no access to light, fresh air or water. The light switch was taped, the window was closed tightly, and a sheet was fastened outside the house to prevent daylight from coming in, even with the curtains open.
The man’s son and his partner were charged with neglecting the vulnerable man by imposing the conditions in which he lived, and for not being given his prescribed antibiotics when he was released from hospital after suffering from pneumonia.
The man faced 52 charges alleging that he took a total of $275,239 from the older man’s bank account while holding a standing power of attorney, or from the family account.
He also faced one fraud charge, with police alleging that he transferred $35,000 into the account of a company he owned and used it to purchase a vehicle. When a trustee lawyer questioned the transaction, police said the man had provided a false document showing that the money had been used for repairs to the elderly man’s home.
Crown Prosecutor Penny Brown told the judge-only lawsuit that police executed a search warrant at the home at 8:30 a.m. on June 23, 2020. They found the old man in his bedroom, locked up with a bolt on the door and a key lock. There was an overwhelming smell of feces. The light switch was taped and the bedroom window was secured with duct tape, so there was no ventilation.
The couple had an interim name destruction during the trial. It was denied, but defense counsel said he would appeal the decision, meaning the orders would continue until the appeal hearing.
The pair disputed the Crown’s charges of neglect, including evidence that antibiotics could have the side effect of diarrhea.
-By David Clarkson
Open Justice multimedia journalist