Top storiesNew ZealandPoliticsBusinessEntertainmentSportsWorld

‘Psychopathic’ criminal who raped and beat partner avoids NZ’s harshest sentence ‘by a whisker’

Tuesday, 30 June 2026

Tasi Faitala Seleni narrowly avoided an indeterminate prison sentence at the High Court at Christchurch on Tuesday.
Tasi Faitala Seleni narrowly avoided an indeterminate prison sentence at the High Court at Christchurch on Tuesday.

A criminal with a violent history who kidnapped, assaulted, strangled, raped and threatened to kill his terrified partner with a knife has narrowly avoided Aotearoa’s harshest sentence.

Tasi Faitala Seleni was imprisoned for 15 years with a minimum non-parole period of a decade at the High Court at Christchurch on Tuesday.

A jury previously found him guilty on 17 charges related to his latest intimate relationship.

Crown prosecutor Pip Currie said Tasi Seleni exercised “power and control” over his victim. (File image)
Crown prosecutor Pip Currie said Tasi Seleni exercised “power and control” over his victim. (File image)

Seleni was subject to an extended supervision order for previous offending when he repeatedly attacked his partner, sometimes in a life-threatening way.

He was supposed to disclose any relationships to those monitoring him, but did not, the court heard.

He broke some of his victim’s bones, inflicted more than 20 blows at a time, kneeled on her neck, ripped out her hair, raped her, tapped her with a knife while telling her she would die, and more.

Tasi Seleni was imprisoned for 15 years, with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years.
Tasi Seleni was imprisoned for 15 years, with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years.

Seleni also perverted the course of justice by forcing the victim to lie for him.

Crown prosecutor Pip Currie said Seleni had been “exercising power and control” over his victim, who was detained at home for extended periods of time and was forced to apply heavy make-up to hide her injuries in public.

Tim Jackson said a sentence of preventive detention would only serve to “bury” his client’s hope. (File photo)
Tim Jackson said a sentence of preventive detention would only serve to “bury” his client’s hope. (File photo)

Currie pushed for a sentence of preventive detention, an indeterminate prison sentence reserved for New Zealand’s most serious offenders, referencing Seleni’s long criminal history, which began at age 15.

A pre-sentence report writer analysed Seleni as having “potentially sadistic motivations” underlying the violence he inflicted, as well as “psychopathic features”, the prosecutor said.

But defence lawyer Tim Jackson said preventative detention would serve “no purpose other than to bury Mr Seleni’s hope”, and the court should not impose it until giving him a chance to engage in treatment.

Justice Melanie Harland found Seleni met the statutory requirement for preventive detention. (File image)
Justice Melanie Harland found Seleni met the statutory requirement for preventive detention. (File image)

“My understanding of it, and perhaps this is unfair, is the Crown wants the court to simply impose a sentence of preventive detention and thereby eliminate Mr Seleni’s future – before treatment,” he said.

Jackson did not go into details of Seleni’s “particularly brutal” background, but said the court also needed to take it into account.

“If anyone has had a chance to set up, try and convict Mr Seleni before time, it was his father.”

Justice Melanie Harland found Seleni’s offending was aggravated, and his attempt to pervert the course of justice an example of his deception.

A previous report writer said in 2021 that Seleni was genuinely remorseful for his past abusive behaviour. But a few months later, he began offending against his latest victim, Justice Harland pointed out.

The judge found Seleni met the statutory requirement for preventive detention with a pattern of serious offending over nearly two decades, but did not impose the sentence.

“By a narrow margin – and can I say to you a whisker, Mr Seleni – I cannot say a lengthy determinate sentence with an extended supervision order will not provide adequate protection for society.”