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

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Richard Steeman

Richard Mark Steeman

Alias

.

Offences

Attempted murder of his ex partner in Christchurch while under supervision in January 2002
Previously assaulted and threatened to kill her

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

Born 1958

Current Location

Prison

Parole/Release Dates

Sentenced to 10 years with a 6 year 8 month non-parole period in October 2002

Background
The Press, Christchurch, 18 October 2002
"I guess it is uncertain whether in the end you would have killed her, but I rather think you would have. I think the police probably saved her life." As Justice Young spoke those words in the High Court in Christchurch, the woman who had been rescued by the police intervention was weeping in the public seats.

She had given evidence last week at the trial of Richard Mark Steeman, before the jury found him guilty of attempting to murder her after bursting into her home early on January 1. Yesterday, she was in tears as Justice Young sent 44-year-old Steeman to jail for 10 years, with a minimum non-parole period of six years and eight months.

He also ordered that she be paid $10,000 from Steeman's trust account for the emotional harm and loss he caused. Steeman knew the woman, and had been convicted of assaulting her the previous year, when a protection order had been issued. He had gone to jail for a year for that.

They went out together on New Year's Eve, but had parted company after an argument in the city when Steeman left her in a bar to smoke cannabis outside with a man he had met in prison. Steeman had later watched from across the road as she came out of a bar on Oxford Terrace in a happy mood and holding hands with a woman.

He made a series of unanswered phone calls to her home several hours later -- Justice Young described the calls as having a whining, self- possessed, and bullying tone -- and then cycled to her house and broke in at 6am. The woman called 111 and, although she could not speak on the phone, the police were able to listen in and trace the call. When they burst in, Steeman had a twisted towel around the woman's neck.

His Honour told Steeman: "You obviously drink too much. I suspect you smoke too much cannabis. You are probably a bit old to be smoking cannabis. "You suffer from depression, but I don't see the key as being the depression. Rather, as so many men do these days, you reacted badly to what you perceived as rejection."

Defence counsel Tony Garrett said Steeman, a former building project supervisor, had offered to plead guilty to the alternative charge of intentionally causing grievous bodily harm, but the Crown had rejected the offer, and the case had to go to trial. Mr Garrett said: "It is speculative what may have occurred had the police not intervened in the very timely fashion they did."

He asked His Honour not to take the view that because Steeman had attacked this woman twice he was a danger to other women. Crown prosecutor Mark Zarifeh said the probation report identified Steeman as being at risk of future offending. Given his previous assault conviction, a substantial prison term was called for, he said.

Justice Young said that the attack had occurred while Steeman was serving a sentence of supervision, and it had been a home invasion. Having heard his evidence, he said Steeman was still trying to minimise what he had done, and was still to some extent blaming his actions on the victim. "This attack wasn't something that happened; it was something you did," he said.

But he said he was unwilling to conclude that Steeman was necessarily a danger to other women because of his repeated offending against this woman. The previous jail sentence had obviously not been sufficient deterrent when Steeman was in that frame of mind. "The courts can contribute to a general climate of opinion in which such behaviour is recognised for what it is -- completely unacceptable," said Justice Young, imposing the 10-year jail term.

---

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