More than 250 offenders let off family violence crimes
Saturday, 25 July 2026
More than 250 Kiwis were let off without a conviction for family violence crimes in 2025, including 13 for strangulation or suffocation, new data show.
That brought to 82 the tally of people discharged without conviction for strangulation, since the charge was introduced in 2018. Another 15 never made it to court, having been let off on police diversion.
Advocates say that number is “appalling”, given the specific offence was created because strangulation victims were up to seven times more likely to later be killed by their partner, than those suffering other family violence.
Read more:
Data released under the Official Information Act reveal that, in 2025, 259 people were discharged without conviction for assault on a family member, 65 were let off for breaches of protection orders, 54 got discharges for domestic assaults, 21 for male assaults female, and 13 for strangulation/suffocation.
An offender can only be discharged without conviction if they plead guilty, or are found guilty. Discharges made up about 2.5% of proved strangulation charges, and 8% of proved assaults on a family member.
The Post previously revealed that a women’s health doctor was let off after strangling his wife in their bedroom. The charge was downgraded to assault on a family member and he successfully argued a conviction would unreasonably affect his job prospects.
Other examples celebrated as wins by law firm CJ Legal include an immigrant chef discharged without conviction after his strangulation charge was withdrawn and he pleaded guilty to domestic assault. He argued the threat of deportation and separation from his wife and daughter outweighed the seriousness of the offence.
Another case featured a “skilled immigrant professional” let off on charges of wounding with reckless disregard and assault on a person in a family relationship after a “drug-fuelled domestic incident”. The likely outcome, the firm’s case study said, was “imprisonment, a criminal record, and the end of his career”.
Independent victim advocate Claire Buckley said the fact 13 people were strangled or suffocated with no consequences in one year was “appalling”.
“It's really just saying, well, yes, you did this terrible thing, you strangled your partner, but actually, in this particular situation, that's kind of alright.”
While offenders could write an apology, sit through a course and pay reparation to avoid the life disruption of a conviction, victims did not have that same luxury, Buckley said.
“Their life is probably fairly permanently disrupted. You don't recover from that kind of trauma without long term consequences.”
She knew one family harm victim who still talked about being strangled 30 years ago by a now-dead partner. Another victim spiralled into suicidal depression, after her businessman partner was discharged without conviction on three counts of family violence, because a conviction would damage his job and businesses.
“We're saying that the person who has a business and who has a lot of money is more valuable than the people that he was beating up,” Buckley said. “It's just so soul destroying on the victims.”
She argued while there was a place for discharges without conviction, they should be rarer.
Auckland University of Technology law school senior lecturer, Paulette Benton-Greig, said although discharges without conviction were justifiable in some cases, they could have serious consequences in family violence.
“If the law steps in and then goes ‘Oh, nothing to see here really’, that can undermine the safety of victims in the future. They might not call the police next time…People are going to think to themselves ‘Goodness, why would I do that again?’”
While the justice system tended to treat family violence offences as one-off events, more often they were part of a pattern of physical and psychological abuse. It was hard to imagine a situation where discharge without conviction would be appropriate for strangulation, Benton-Greig said.
“One of the reasons that strangulation is taken so seriously is its message is often - I can kill you. And that’s a very powerful threat.”
The statistics also likely under-count the number of people let off for strangling their partners, because of the “crafty defence strategy” of pleading down - agreeing to plead guilty to a lesser offence, and then applying for a discharge without conviction, Benton-Greig said.
Women’s Refuge chief executive, Naomi Ogg, argued discharge without conviction was never appropriate for family violence offences.
“It reinforces that perpetrators or abusers can act without serious consequences.
“We recognise that every case turns on its own facts, but at the same time, we need to have confidence that the justice system prioritises safety and wellbeing.”
Letting people off proved strangulation charges was particularly concerning, Ogg said.
“They're already exerting complete control, but what's next? It's murder - that's the next step. So, for a victim, knowing that that is potentially next on the cards, it's quite terrifying, and it sends that message again that victims' experiences are minimized.'