No conviction for racially abused man who booted his attacker in the head

Wednesday, 10 June 2026

A young Hamilton man being racially abused and harassed by another man he randomly encountered on the street kicked his attacker in the head - hard enough to knock him out.

Although Juan Manuel Leon Sandoval, 21, was subsequently charged with causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure, he was granted a discharge without conviction when he appeared in the Hamilton District Court on Wednesday.

This was, as his counsel Alvina Tu’Inkuafe successfully argued in court, because he had tried on at least five occasions to simply walk away from his abuser, who was seemingly intent on provoking a violent confrontation.

The confrontation took place about 2.40am on May 21, 2024 when Sandoval - who was then aged 19 - and a friend were out on a night on the town in the central city. By chance the pair crossed paths with the other man and his partner.

As the court was told, Sandoval had come to New Zealand when he was 12 years old as a refugee. He had experienced a traumatic childhood of civil unrest and exposure to extreme violence in his home country.

The other man started yelling derogatory racial slurs at him, and then - as Judge Arthur Tompkins put it - began to “square up” to him, inviting him to fight.

At one point the other man’s partner jumped in between the two men in an apparent attempt to break them apart - but had then kicked Sandoval in the stomach.

In spite of this provocation, Sandoval and his friend had attempted to de-escalate the situation by walking away from their assailants at least five times. But as the judge noted, “each time the victim ran after them and attempted to trigger a physical confrontation”.

Eventually, it did turn physical between the pair, although “perhaps affected by alcohol” each of their thrown punches and kicks missed.

Sandoval was the first to succeed in connecting a punch, knocking the other man to the ground - although he stumbled and fell as well.

Sandoval was the first to get to his feet and kicked his opponent twice, however it was unclear where on the victim’s body those kicks connected, if at all.

Others in the vicinity ran up and separated the pair - but then Sandoval made the fateful decision to re-enter the fray and delivered a last kick to the victim’s head.

The impact was made with sufficient force to knock the man out and - as his treatment in hospital subsequently revealed - cause a brain bleed.

In a statement provided to the court, the victim said he had suffered from memory issues and difficulty sleeping for some time following the incident.

Crown prosecutor Kasey Dillon argued against the discharge, saying that while the victim’s behaviour that night was “by no means spotless”, it was still a significant moment of violence.

“The victim no longer posed a threat and [Sandoval] could have simply walked away.

“A kick to the head with sufficient force to render [the victim] unconscious is a significant aggravating factor.”

Dillon called for the judge to decline the application and then impose a sentence with a starting point of two years and six months in jail.

Tu’Inkuafe said the incident could be described as “excessive self defence”, and Sandoval and his friend had walked “quite a distance away”, only to be pursued by their assailant.

“This offending would not have happened but for the victim’s involvement.”

Her client had no previous convictions, nor had he re-offended in the time since the incident. He was sincerely remorseful for his actions and had wanted to meet the victim to apologise to him in person.

Although Sandoval did “not yet have a foothold in a career”, a conviction would be extremely debilitating to Sandoval’s future prospects, she said.

“He has his whole life ahead of him … Any future employers will not know the context [of the incident] unless they are provided with the summary of facts, and often that does not happen.”

Even though he was currently unemployed and a father to two young children, Sandoval had saved and set aside $500 that could be paid in reparations.

Ultimately, Judge Tompkins did not order any such payment and simply granted the discharge without conviction.

“The defendant attempted to walk away from a fight the victim was intent on having.

“This is particularly noteworthy and commendable given the derogatory racial slurs directed at the defendant at the commencement of this confrontation.”