escalating violence in our community Become a member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Graeme Lynn

Graeme Leonard Lynn

Alias

.

Offences

Rape (x3), sexual violation by digital penetration (x5), attempted sexual violation, indecent assault, all of an 11 year old Christchurch girl over five years from 1996
Also admitted indecently assaulting the same girl in 1994

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

Born 1956

Current Location

unknown

Parole/Release Dates

Sentenced to twelve years in April 2001

Background
THE PRESS, April 27th 2001
A 16-year-old girl suffering from post traumatic stress disorder was in the High Court to see the man who sexually abused her go to jail for 12 years. She also heard Justice Chisholm grant her wish that name suppression be lifted on 45-year-old Graeme Leonard Lynn. The court was told the girl suffers from nightmares, stress, and mood disorders. During the four- day trial in the Christchurch High Court she gave evidence from behind a screen. Yesterday she sat in court among family and friends as the man who abused her for five years was jailed for 12 years, and narrowly missed receiving an open-ended sentence of preventive detention.

Crown prosecutor James Rapley had sought preventive detention, and the necessary psychiatric report had been obtained for Lynn's sentencing on three rape charges, one attempted sexual violation, one indecent assault, and five charges of sexual violation by digital penetration. Mr Rapley said Lynn had admitted indecently assaulting the same girl in 1994, and had had been sentenced to periodic detention, plus completed a Stop programme for sex offenders. He had begun reoffending soon after returning to the family home. He said he believed Lynn was at serious risk of reoffending. A report before the court said he regarded sex as dirty, and was not interested in active sexual relationships with adult females.

The psychiatric report said Lynn felt that the complainant had some responsibility for his reoffending. "That demonstrates his lack of coming to grips with the consequences, significance, and gravity of this offending, and importantly shows a lack of remorse to any real degree or ownership of this crime," Mr Rapley said. Counsel for Lynn, John Sandston, said preventive detention was a sentence designed to protect the public, but this case did not go far enough to warrant it. The offending was "situational", limited to a particular victim in a particular household. The fact that there would be no suppression order was significant for minimising the risk in the future.

Justice Chisholm said the offending had devastated a whole family. "Effectively, you threw the support your wife had provided right in the face of herself and the family." He said: "There is reference to your belief that the complainant somehow or other was partly responsible for this conduct. The reality is that you were the adult, and she was the child. There simply is no way that she should be left to carry any part of the responsibility for this offending. You were the guilty party, not her." He said he would not impose preventive detention, because he accepted that it was "situational offending", because a finite term of imprisonment would still protect the family involved, and there must be some hope that the Kia Marama programme for sex offenders might succeed.

The aggravating factors were that the offending had been a breach of trust, had continued for about five years, and had been against the same victim as his earlier offence, he said. He jailed Lynn for 12 years, and directed that the reports be given to the prison authorities to add weight to the recommendation that attendance at Kia Marama should be tried.

---

Corrections and Additional Information
We endeavour to make this database as accurate as possible, but we are at the mercy of whatever information we can find in various online and offline archives. We rely on the public - that is, people like you - to fill in the gaps that we cannot. If you wish to submit additional information or a correction to this file CLICK HERE . Privacy: Trust policy is that all sources are treated as strictly confidential unless we are explicitly told otherwise. If you wish to see a file removed from this database certain conditions must be met by the offender set out HERE Note that this does NOT apply for those that are the primary offender in a murder, rape, or any sexual offending involving minors. We do not enter into correspondence regarding the guilt/innocence of offenders. Such correspondence is not responded to, especially if the offender concerned has a number of prior convictions

Back to Top