Whangārei crash victim named as 22-year-old Seth Isiah Dundass

The crash site on Riverside Drive was directly outside the carpark for Whangārei Aquatic Centre.
A Whangārei man praised as a 'keen young worker' has been named as the person killed in a crash last Friday.
Police said Seth Isiah Dundass, 22, of Onerahi, died when the truck he was driving crashed into a power pole near the intersection of Riverside Drive and Ewing

Hashtags

#Whangārei

#SethIsiahDundass

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

RNZ News

5 days ago

RNZ News

Whangārei man found guilty of 31 charges, including rape and assault

By Shannon Pitman, Open Justice reporter of All of the women gave evidence that the man demanded sex daily. Photo: Supplied/123/RF WARNING: This article discusses sexual assault and may be upsetting to some readers. A man, whose five ex-partners testified he raped, beat and sexually assaulted them, remained steadfast in his denial, despite the judge handing down 31 guilty verdicts. "For your information, I didn't do this," he said, before being told to sit down in the courtroom dock. On Friday, Justice Rebecca Edwards convicted the 43-year-old man on 31 charges, including rape, threats to kill, assault, and sexual violation, after hearing testimony from five women in a recent judge-alone trial in the Whangārei High Court. The offending spanned a 15-year period, during which the victims had been in relationships with the man, which resulted in seven children. Some of the women described being "love-bombed" and drawn into serious relationships within weeks, only for the man, who cannot be named, to become controlling and abusive soon afterwards. They said he demanded sex daily and when they did not agree, they would be worn down to the point of sleep deprivation, until they gave in. One woman described juggling childcare, work and study, while the man slept through the day, only to then endure his relentless sexual demands throughout the night. Another testified that he held her underwater in a bath, until she lost consciousness, while a third recounted the frequent beatings she suffered, particularly to her head. The man was also found guilty of raping two of the women just weeks after they had given birth to his children. In the Crown's closings, Geraldine Kelly laid out the rules of the law around sexual consent. Kelly said true consent had to be freely given. "Reluctant consent is still consent, but not if free will has been removed," she said. "It is not reluctant consent, if she has been left to feel she has no choice - that is submission." Kelly submitted that the defendant overpowered them and, at times, physically restrained some of the women, taking away their will to refuse. "Each and every one of those women has stood strong and consistent throughout, they are telling the truth," Kelly closed. Throughout the trial, defence lawyers Martin Hislop and Connor Taylor alleged the women had banded together in the "ex-wives' club", as they were aggrieved that he moved on in relationships quickly and had no contact with his children. "It was unhappiness about this man spreading his seed and moving on, and not taking responsibility as a father," Hislop alleged. Hislop claimed that at no stage did he have sex with any of the women without their consent. Following the closings, Justice Edwards reserved her decision, to deliver her verdicts on Friday. After finding the man guilty on 31 of the 33 charges he faced, she said the not-guilty verdicts on the two charges had nothing to do with the victim's honesty. Immediately after the verdicts were read out, the man interjected. "Thank you, your honour, but for your information, I didn't do this," he said. "No, take a seat," Justice Edwards warned him. "I didn't do it," he responded. Discussions were held around the interim suppression order in place, with a permanent order to be argued by the man's counsel at his sentencing in August. The women have automatic name suppression. The man was remanded into custody and did not stand for Justice Edwards, as she retired from the courtroom. * This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .

RNZ News

5 days ago

RNZ News

Parents could be prosecuted for truancy, but principals say it won't work

"The previous government ceased to pursue prosecutions, I think that was a mistake," David Seymour says. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Parents who repeatedly refuse to send their children to school are more likely to be prosecuted as the government cracks down on truancy, but principals say prosecution is not the solution. A primary school principal in Whangārei had earlier called for exactly this - in 2019 Hora Hora primary's Pat Newman called for more prosecutions for parents who deliberately fail to send their kids to school. But six years on, he had changed his mind. Newman told Morning Report prosecuting parents wouldn't work. "This move, in my view, is about looking tough rather than actually doing something effective about it. Attendance is just a symptom, it's not a cause. "I listened to the Minister this morning and he said it's not about punishing children, but if you are talking about fines of up to $3000 a day, then I can't see how that's not actually punishing children." Hora Hora primary's Pat Newman. Photo: RNZ / Sam Olley When asked why the change of heart, Newman said he called for prosecution in 2019 out of frustration, but had since embarked on a "really successful campaign". "It's about communities and families and looking at how we can get these kids to school. It's about kids not at school because they are shifting because of the house rentals, or shifting because of jobs. "Threatening to fine people, what are we going to do when we go from $300 a day to $3000, do we put them in jail then?" Newman said the government should give schools the truancy budget money and let the them do "something effective". "We are already running two buses at our own cost to get kids to school... to help kids who can't get to school, get to school." If given extra money Newman said he would put on more buses, which was helping attendance at his school. Principal of Kaitaia College Louise Anaru told Morning Report the schools and communities were best placed to make decisions about truancy. "I think it's not a one size fits all. "For our school for instance, what works for our communities and where we get the best engagement is when we all sit around the table together with our parents, whānau, student and we come up a really robust attendance plan together." In the 16 years Anaru had been a principal, she said had not come across a situation where a prosecution was necessary. She said she had also not come across people calling for the prosecution of parents. Associate Education Minister David Seymour says the Ministry of Education is proactively contacting schools and truancy officers. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Associate Education Minister David Seymour said the Ministry of Education was proactively contacting schools and truancy officers to ensure parents condoning truancy were referred to the Ministry to be considered for prosecution. The rules were not changing, but the government was ramping up enforcement because schools and truancy officers said it was needed, Seymour said. "There are some parents who just refuse to cooperate, don't care about their kids' futures, and the people working at the coalface have told me it would be helpful if they had another sanction that they could bring into play." They wanted a "coercive power" that would ensure parents took school attendance seriously, Seymour said. No parent had been prosecuted for refusing to ensure their kids attended school for more than five years, he said. "The previous government ceased to pursue prosecutions, I think that was a mistake," he said. "We're making it clear that the Ministry of Education is back in business and will respond to requests from schools to take prosecutions." When a parent is referred to the ministry for condoning truancy, staff would decide whether to prosecute, and it would then be a matter for the courts, he said. Parents faced fines of up to $300 for a first offence and $3000 for a second or subsequent offence. Seymour said 90,000 students were chronically absent. "We are not going to prosecute the parents of 90,000 students. This is an option for people working at the frontline ... if they have someone who is more of a 'won't' than a 'can't'." The ministry would not prosecute parents of students who were "genuinely engaging" with the school, or those who were absent because of chronic illness or health conditions associated with a disability. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

NZ Herald

6 days ago

NZ Herald