Youths Sentenced To Life Term For Murder (Press, 21 July 1984)

On 20 July 1984, two young men, Darren Elliott Grant (aged 19) and Benjamin Eugene Manuel (aged 17), were sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of 68-year-old Frank Homer Herbert in Mangere in November 1983. The jury in the High Court at Auckland deliberated for approximately four hours before reaching their verdict. Defence counsel Simon Lockhart, Q.C., and Peter Williams had argued that the young men should be found guilty of manslaughter instead of murder. The Crown, represented by David Morris, presented evidence that the accused had assaulted Mr Herbert and subsequently disposed of his body off the old Mangere bridge. Justice Hillyer, delivering the verdict, indicated that the jury had to consider whether there was intent to kill. The defence had contended that the youths believed Mr Herbert was already dead when they threw him into the water. They pointed to Manuel's use of terms like “the body” and “it,” suggesting a detachment from recognising him as a living person. Additionally, Grant’s statement indicated uncertainty about whether Mr Herbert was alive when he was thrown over the rocks. Justice Hillyer stated that if the jury believed the accused thought Mr Herbert was dead at that moment, it would imply they lacked the intent to kill. Contrarily, Morris argued that Manuel expressed a desire to help Mr Herbert after the incident, indicating a conflicted state of mind between the two youths. Morris also highlighted Manuel’s statements made to the police, referring to Mr Herbert as “the old man,” and Grant’s observations that Mr Herbert was injured and unconscious before being thrown off the bridge. The Crown’s position was that even if the youths had thought Mr Herbert was deceased when they discarded him, the earlier assault constituted a clear intent to kill as part of a continuous sequence of actions against the victim. The defence maintained that Grant and Manuel’s actions were motivated by a desire to discipline Mr Herbert for unwanted sexual advances, rather than a premeditated intent to cause his death. The case raised complex questions about intent, the difference between murder and manslaughter, and the youths' state of mind during the tragic event.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand