Screwdriver brandishing Hamilton home invader fails to appeal conviction

Thursday, 2 July 2026

Waitai Miru was one of four men who broke into a Hamilton property ‘brandishing screwdrivers’ (file photo).

A Hamilton man who took part in a violent home invasion - and who owned the “get-away car” that was later found at his home - has failed in a High Court bid to appeal his conviction.

Waitai Miru was jailed for five years and 10 months in December last year after being convicted of aggravated robbery in the wake of a Judge-alone trial for his role in the July 2022 home invasion.

Waitai Miru took his appeal to the High Court in Hamilton.

The High Court ruling revealed Miru was one of four men who arrived at the address of the victim, who also had her two daughters at home.

The man were all wearing bandanas to mask their faces and broke down the front door “brandished screwdrivers at the occupants”.

“The occupants were forced into two different rooms,” the ruling said.

“The complainant was forced into her own room. The complainant grabbed her handbag. One of the men grabbed it off her and, in the course of doing so, struck the complainant in the face.”

The men left the property taking a Playstation 4, the handbag containing cash, bank cards, an iPhone and “a distinctive hat”.

Justice Mathew Downs said the issue at Miru’s original trial was identification.

However, he said circumstantial evidence suggested Miru was indeed one of the home invaders, citing original trial Judge Gordon Matenga.

“The fact that the ‘get-away car’ belonged to Mr Miru and was located at his home a few days after the robbery is not of itself, sufficient to prove that Mr Miru was Male 3.”

However, he said viewing the evidence “in totality”, which included “grainy” CCTV footage of tattoos on ‘Male 3’, persuaded him “to the point of being sure that Male 3 pictured in the security footage is Mr Miru”.

Miru’s lawyer argued evidence relating to a jacket should not have been admitted because the officer who testified had not personally located it during the police search.

The Crown countered that no objection had been raised during the trial and that Miru had never disputed the jacket was found at his home.

Instead, his defence was that the property “was something of a drop-in centre for members of the Mongrel Mob”.

“Hence the presence of the jacket was not particularly significant.”

Justice Downs, however, said he was “satisfied the evidence was reliable”.

“The appeal is dismissed.”