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

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Daniel Edwards

Daniel John Edwards

Alias

.

Offences

Rape of a woman in his Upper Hutt home in November 2004

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

unknown

Current Location

Prison

Parole/Release Dates

Sentenced to 7 years 6 months in December 2006
Eligible for parole January 2008

Background
Yahoo Xtra story here
Fairfax Media story Friday, 31 August 2007
An Upper Hutt man convicted of rape has had his appeal against sentence dismissed in the Court of Appeal today. Daniel John Edwards was convicted on one count of sexual violation by rape, for an offence that occurred in his home in November 2004. He was sentenced in December 2006 to seven years and six months imprisonment. His appeal claimed the starting point for the original sentence was too high, that credit was not given for remorse and insufficient credit was given to his mental health problems.

Justices Arnold, Wilson and Priestley dismissed the appeal and said "the judge took account of all relevant considerations and made no error of principle". Edwards who suffers from schizophrenia was assessed by four different psychiatrists and continued to maintain the sexual intercourse had been consensual.

---

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