Community 'devastated' after police shooting
The pastor of a church attended by a couple shot by police - one fatally - in Christchurch says the incident is "heartbreaking". Woman killed, man 'critical'
It comes as a friend of the couple said they had issues with family violence and addiction but "seemed to be getting alright".
Police were called to a house in Clyde Rd, in the suburb of Bryndwr, about 11pm yesterday after receiving a report that a man armed with a knife was threatening himself and his partner.
Officers arrived at the property a short time later and a woman ran from the house, followed by a man armed with a knife, police said in a statement this morning.
Canterbury District Commander Superintendent Tony Hill said officers shot the man, believing the woman to be at risk of imminent serious harm, critically injuring him.
The woman subsequently picked up the knife and threatened police. Officers appealed for her to put the weapon down, but she instead moved forward, and was fatally shot, he said.
Immediate medical assistance was provided to the woman but she died shortly afterwards, Hill said.
The injured man remains in a critical condition in hospital.
The couple were connected to the New Generation Church in Clyde Rd.
Senior pastor Eduardo Mendonça told RNZ the church helped the local community through various programmes as well as lunches and breakfasts. The couple would regularly attend.
"We just always dealt with them as a couple. Our main goal as a church was just to serve with the basic needs, like immediate needs, and of course, with sharing our beliefs as a Christian church. That is our main involvement with them."
He said the community was devastated at the news.
"Our hearts are broken to know that people so close to us in that community went through this.
"We are devastated. It's heartbreaking to know the people that we've been serving and talking and in a sense, you know, just getting to know slowly, you know, within their own lives, they were going through such pressure and difficulties that that led them to this."
A friend of the couple laid flowers in Clyde Rd for his friends this morning.
Nate Light said the pair had issues with family violence and addiction.
"They had been having their troubles over the past few days. They seemed to be getting all right because we had spoken to them. They seemed to be getting alright," he said, tearfully.
The man was in a "bit of weird headspace".
"I'd like to say that I could have come down with my partner last night and told [the man] to come chill at home with the dogs. But that's me putting it on myself like it's not my fault, you know.
"It's just there's things I could have done. I could have done this, and could have done that, but, f***, there's nothing you can do really at the end of the day."
A nearby resident told RNZ the couple were "always fighting" and said police were routinely called to the address.
The neighbour, who asked not to be named, said they had lived at the house for about six years.
"They were very unhappy. She was a very unhappy person. They fought a lot. She was always calling the police."
For a while police would be called "every few months," she said.
About a year ago the woman who lived at the house told her neighbour the couple were going through anger management.
Since then, things appeared to be quieter she said.
"I thought maybe they had sorted things out."
Last night, the resident said she heard a loud bang and later saw police.
"I was surprised that it happened because they'd been quiet for a long while."
Scene guards were in place at the Clyde Rd property, and residents could expect to see a continued police presence in the coming days.
Kāinga Ora has confirmed to RNZ the fatal shooting was at one of its properties and said its thoughts were with all those affected.
Regional director Liz Krause said it would be reaching out to nearby tenants to see if they needed more support over the coming days.
A investigation was under way and the shooting would also be referred to watchdog the Independent Police Conduct Authority, police said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
8 hours ago
- RNZ News
Dunedin councillor Jim O'Malley quits as committee chair over hostile work environment
Jim O'Malley. Photo: RNZ / Ian Telfer A Dunedin councillor has resigned from chairing a committee because of what he describes as a hostile work environment. In his resignation letter, councillor Jim O'Malley said he does not feel safe as the chair of the hearings committee as he feels targeted by the chief executive. He said he has doubts about the council's commitment to follow due process and natural justice. He is also calling for an investigation into behaviour of the chief executive and the processes for different hearings including the local alcohol policy. The Dunedin City Council has been contacted for comment. More to come...
RNZ News
8 hours ago
- RNZ News
Protesting at people's private homes to be outlawed
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Protesting outside someone's home is set to be made an offence, with the government introducing new legislation carrying fines or jail sentences if people target private residences. While it will apply to all residences, the justice minister said there had been increased reports of demonstrations targeting the homes of public figures like MPs, judges and other public officials. Paul Goldsmith said the right to protest was valued, and would remain that way. "The public's ability to demonstrate is a cornerstone of our free and democratic society. It is a key way for citizens to express themselves and engage in political activity." However, he said the right to privacy was also valued. "Everyone in New Zealand, and their families, should be able to expect peace and privacy in their own home, no matter what their daytime job is," he said. "Unreasonable intrusions into people's privacy are simply unacceptable." The law will only apply to demonstrations directed at a person in their home, and will consider factors like the time of day, duration, the demonstrators' actions, noise levels and distance to the premises. It will carry a maximum penalty of three months in jail or a fine up to $2000. The ability to protest is protected under the Bill of Rights Act, and would not change. But Goldsmith said all rights were subject to reasonable limitations, and this change was considered reasonable. Earlier this year, The Post reported Goldsmith was in discussions with Parliament's Speaker on legislative changes to protect MPs' safety. Parliamentary Service and Parliament's internal security services have been working with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet since the end of last year on the issue. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Otago Daily Times
8 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Supreme Court finds wrong test used to lock up autistic man
By Anusha Bradley of RNZ The Supreme Court has found the wrong legal test has been used to lock up an autistic man for nearly 20 years, but he will not walk free just yet. It has ordered the Family Court to urgently re-examine whether the man, only known as Jay, should remain detained, according to a just-released decision issued a year after the Supreme Court heard his case. Four of the five Supreme Court Justices said the Family Court must relook at Jay's right to liberty, weighing the seriousness of his original offence, his rehabilitation prospects and current risk. The majority found he could have been moved into the community earlier, and a failure to do so had negatively affected him, but he cannot be released immediately without proper support. The Family Court must now decide Jay's future using the Supreme Court's new guidance. Human rights lawyer Tony Ellis, who represented Jay's mother, described the ruling as a "significant win" and a "major step forward for disability rights". How Jay ended up in secure care Jay, now in his 40s, has been detained in a secure facility under the Intellectual Disability Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation Act since 2006 after he broke four of his neighbours' windows in 2004. He has since been assessed by multiple experts as being too dangerous to release and his care order has been extended 11 times. Jay has spent the past five years almost entirely in seclusion at the Mason Clinic in Auckland. A Family Court judge last year described his current living situation "untenable" after he became so distressed by construction noise next door he stuffed paper into his ears, requiring doctors to remove it. The man's mother brought his case to the Supreme Court in August last year in a bid to get his compulsory care order quashed, claiming he is being arbitrarily detained and his human rights breached. What the Supreme Court found Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann and Justices Ellen France, Joe Williams and Forrest Miller found the Family Court's approach to detaining Jay was incorrect, and concluded that a decision to detain someone under the Act be consistent with Bill of Rights Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Justice Stephen Kós disagreed, ruling he would have dismissed the appeal as Jay's continued detention was justified in order to protect public safety under existing law. "This is a tragic case. But granting the relief sought - J's immediate release into the community - can only lead to further tragedy," he wrote in the 131-page decision that outlines each judge's conclusions. Justices France and Miller said the court must set a new proportionality test weighting liberty against safety. "Eventually the risk of harm will be outweighed where the initial offending is comparatively minor; the person has been a care recipient for an extended period; and/or where the prospects of progress in the immediate future are minimal." They said there was evidence there had been opportunities for Jay to be cared for in the community at an earlier point in time and that failure to release him from care has adversely affected him and contributed to the complexity of his current position. However, they concluded it wasn't for the Supreme Court to direct Jay to be released immediately, and further care orders may be required to allow the necessary steps to be taken before he could be released into the community. Chief Justice Winkelmann said the nature and seriousness of Jay's original offending ought to be a significant factor when assessing whether to detain him, saying previous tests applied by lower courts were discriminatory. Justice Williams favoured a care-centred test focusing on dignity and quality of life and while he agreed the Family Court should look at Jay's case again with fresh consideration, it was not guaranteed he would be released. 'Significant win' Lawyer Tony Ellis says the ruling is "very much a win". "It's a significant win emphasising the rights of the disabled. "This is a complex judgment that's difficult even for lawyers to understand but it essentially says the Court of Appeal got it wrong and the Family Court has to urgently have a fresh look at Jay's case. "After eight years of trying to get him released, in my view, he's now going to have to be released because four out of five judges take the view that his continued detention would be unlawful. "Previously, the decision was you could lock somebody up for repeated periods. That was the law and now it's no longer the law, that was the wrong approach. "So anyone locked up on extended compulsory care orders will be entitled to have their decision revisited as a result of this case. That's a major step forward and a really important decision under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities." Jay's mother was "pleased" with the outcome but still digesting the decision and its implications for her son, he said.
