Key Takeaways
- Liam Marsh, a man with a childhood traumatic brain injury, committed a series of sexual and violent offenses in Frankton on 25 February 2024.
- The offenses ranged from indecent exposure and suggestive remarks to physical assault on his caregiver, causing her a concussion.
- Marsh’s counsel argued that his brain injury impaired his judgment and urged the court to consider it as a mitigating factor.
- Judge Garry Collin acknowledged the injury but emphasized Marsh’s ongoing risk to public safety, citing his extensive criminal history dating back to 2013.
- The court sentenced Marsh to 13 months imprisonment, with the possibility of applying for home detention if a place in a secure rehabilitation facility became available.
- A pre‑sentence psychiatric report and a Te Whatu Ora assessment highlighted Marsh’s limited capacity to control his actions, unpredictability, and vulnerability, reinforcing concerns about future harm.
- The caregiver’s victim impact statement revealed lasting fear for her safety and physical symptoms (vomiting, concussion) after the attack.
- The judge stressed that suitable housing options for Marsh are scarce, complicating rehabilitation efforts.
- The case underscores the challenges courts face when balancing mitigation due to neurological impairment with the need to protect the community from repeat offending.
Background of the Offending
On the afternoon of 25 February 2024, Liam Marsh began a sequence of incidents outside Frankton Primary School. While walking west on Massey Street at approximately 2:45 p.m., he exposed his genitals to a parent collecting her children, stared at her, and continued toward her despite her demand to “put it away.” He responded, “It’s for later,” and proceeded past the school gates.
Escalation in Public Spaces
About ninety minutes later, Marsh approached a woman entering her workplace on Pembroke Street. Believing he might be a client, she opened the door; Marsh asked, “You’re pretty, can I get into you?” and later commented about “balls.” When she closed and locked the door, he lingered, attempted to re‑enter, and then walked toward Clarence Street Pak’nSave.
Supermarket Encounter
At 4:07 p.m., Marsh accosted a woman loading groceries into her car with her daughter. He stopped in front of her trolley and asked, “Do you want to ride my c***?” After she asked for clarification and repeated the question, she became upset, yelled at him, and he fled toward the Tristram St roundabout before she called police.
Assault on Caregiver
Later that evening, at 5:50 p.m., Marsh returned to his supported accommodation in Weka Street, Frankton. His caregiver was present in the living room when he asked, “Do you want me to punch you?” After she replied “No,” he struck her in the jaw, sending her backward into a wall. She defended herself with a chair, and Marsh seized her laptop, throwing it at her neck and chest, then again onto the floor. He later claimed he believed his knuckles had contacted her face.
Victim Impact Statement
In her victim impact statement, the caregiver described being shocked by the assault, noting she had never doubted her professional abilities before the incident. The attack left her fearing for her safety; approximately four hours later she began vomiting, which was later diagnosed as a concussion. She expressed ongoing anxiety about future encounters with Marsh.
Criminal History and Risk Assessment
Judge Garry Collin outlined Marsh’s extensive prior convictions, dating back to 2013, which included assaulting a child, indecent assault, indecent acts, various violence, theft, and property‑related offenses. Marsh acknowledged his behavior, attributing it to fatigue from his brain injury that “makes him do stupid things.” A pre‑sentence report and a Te Whatu Ora assessment highlighted his impaired judgment, unpredictability, susceptibility to victimisation, and potential to escalate to serious physical harm.
Judicial Considerations
Counsel Christine Hardy conceded that Marsh would likely receive a custodial sentence but argued that his childhood traumatic brain injury diminished his capacity to control his actions and should be weighed as a mitigating factor. She also noted that incarceration could facilitate a psychiatric assessment, as recommended in the pre‑sentence report.
Judge’s Response and Sentencing
Judge Collin told Hardy, “That’s the bit that worries me,” acknowledging the injury but stressing Marsh’s continued risk to the public. He stated, “He may have more limited capacity to determine his actions than some other people … he is therefore an ongoing risk,” and added that while prison appeared inevitable, it might not be the optimal solution. The judge informed a Corrections representative that Marsh remained a risk and discussed the possibility of a secure rehabilitation facility.
Outcome and Conditions
Taking into account the seriousness of the offenses, Marsh’s criminal record, and the public safety concerns, Judge Collin sentenced him to 13 months imprisonment. However, the judge granted Marsh leave to apply for home detention should a vacancy arise in a secure facility, reflecting a tentative pathway toward rehabilitation if appropriate housing and support could be arranged.
Broader Implications
The case illustrates the tension courts face when neurological impairments contribute to offending behavior. While mitigating factors such as traumatic brain injury can reduce culpability, they do not eliminate the need to protect the community from repeat offenses. The scarcity of suitable supported‑accommodation options for individuals with Marsh’s profile further complicates sentencing, prompting judicial calls for secure rehabilitative placements that address both treatment and public safety.
Journalist Note
Belinda Feek, an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato and a NZME journalist for 11 years (22 years total in journalism), covered the proceedings, providing the details outlined above.