Gang sergeant jailed for five years

Press, 12 October 1985, Page 4

Gang sergeant jailed for five years

The sergeant-at-arms of the Black Power gang which was involved in the arranging of a prize fight between two women at a hotel, resulting in one being stabbed to death, was jailed by Mr Justice Holland in the High Court yesterday for five years on a charge of manslaughter.

Michael Alexandra Emslie, aged 21, a labourer, had been found guilty by a jury earlier this week on a charge of the manslaughter of Debbie Paul on March 26. He was originally charged with being a party to the murder of Debbie Paul by his sister, Fiona Mary Emslie, aged 23, who committed the fatal stabbing. Fiona Emslie was found guilty of murder by the jury last Monday and was immediately sentenced to life imprisonment but Michael Emslie was found guilty on the lesser charge of manslaughter.

Evidence was given at the trial that Debbie Paul was stabbed 13 times and died almost instantly. The fight between Fiona Emslie and Debbie Paul arose because of an earlier incident involving women members of Black Power and a group known as the Townies.

Tight security was maintained by the police throughout the trial and persons entering the courtroom were searched. The police' were again out in force yesterday for the sentencing but gang members were conspicuous by their absence and there were no incidents.

A policeman said that a number of gang members had gone to the North Island to attend a funeral.

Messrs C. A. McVeigh and B. M. Stanaway appeared for the Crown. Mr Justice Holland said that Emslie had been found guilty of. manslaughter by assisting his sister in the murder of Debbie Paul. “That is a verdict with which I entirely agree on the basis that, the evidence did not satisfy the jury of your knowledge of your sister’s murderous intent. Nevertheless you have assisted in acts from which a person has died of stab wounds,” his Honour said. The murder was one of three gang-related murders in Christchurch this year. Citizens were alarmed and disgusted at the violence associated with gang activity.

Emslie had spent 195 days

in custody and a great deal of that period was spent in isolation and that would be taken into account

As sergeant-at-arms of his gang, Emslie was a leader. He was a sportsman of considerable ability and was a person to whom others should be expected to look up to. He had some responsibility for the violent activities of his gang, its members and associates.

“The evidence satisfies me that on March 26 a prize fight was organised between members of two gangs in which a woman representative of each gang was to meet in the bar of a hotel and either there or outside to participate in something resembling a cock fight,” Mr Justice Holland said.

He was satisfied that Michael Emslie was aware of that arrangement and that his sister was to be the prize-fighter for his gang. “We are being constantly reminded as pakehas to have regard and sympathy for Maoritanga. No-one can advance that it is a part of the history or custom of the Maori race to organise prize-fights by women. “You and all those associated with this disgusting

affair have let down your families and race. More importantly you have set an appalling example for younger people to follow. You and all those present should feel thoroughly ashamed,” said his Honour. . In Emslie’s favour he found that it had not been established that he had handed his sister a knife during the fight or that he had physically aided . her with a criminal, intent in holding back his girlfriend. It had been shown on the evidence of Emslie’s statements to the police and that of his girlfriend that he knew his sister had a knife and was using it in the fight. By shouting “Do it, do it” Emslie was positively encouraging his sister to use the knife. Counsel had submitted that his participation in manslaughter was only as a secondary party and that it should be treated at the lower end of the scale.

He did not regard Emslie’s participation as really appropriate to what was regarded as the normal scale for manslaughter.

“This was an unusual affair and I intend to regard it as such. Any man of good character, whether Maori or

pakeha, should have intervened to stop this fight between two women and not to stir it up,” said his Honour. It was a matter of considerable regret that at the verdict of murder againsthis sister, Michael Emslie and his supporters in the back of the court gave gestures of defiance at an act which had resulted in the death of the mother of two young children.

There had been no sign of remorse, but in that regard he was prepared to accept that Emslie’s gestures related more to his concern to appear brave in the eyes of the gang than to his own personal feelings, his Honour said.

Because of his activities as a gang leader, a sentence would have to be imposed on Emslie which reflected the anxiety of the community in relation to gang violence and murder.

“Had you not so actively encouraged your sister in her lethal attack it may be that a human life might not have been lost,” his Honour said.

Emslie’s criminal record of five separate charges of assault, some of which were obviously serious, and two of carrying an offensive weapon as well as crimes of dishonesty, all before he was 21, did not entitle him

to a reduction in sentence because of previous good conduct Counsel had submitted that Emslie had changed since he was jailed two years ago but his activity on March 26 did not reflect it, said his Honour. Mr K. N. Hampton, for Emslie, said that his client was a young man of reasonable intelligence and ability. He had represented Canterbury in under-age rugby league grades for several years and would have been playing in the premier grade this year had he not

been in custody. Since Emslie was jailed in August, 1983, there had been an improvement in his conduct He had been in . custody for 6% months since his arrest in March and much of that time had been spent in solitary confinement as he was a category A prisoner which. meant that he was kept apart from the other inmates. , ■ The manslaughter was at the lower end of the scale, Mr Hampton submitted. A long term of imprisonment should not be imposed.