Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi
Former Green Party standout Golriz Ghahraman, who was convicted in June for shoplifting nearly $9000 worth of retail items from high-end stores, has filed an appeal renewing her bid for a discharge without conviction.
During the sentencing hearing in Auckland District Court, Judge June Jelas denied the politician's request not to have a conviction on her record. The 43-year-old former barrister was not given a custodial or supervision sentence but in addition to the conviction she was ordered to pay fines totalling $1600 and court costs of $260.
Her appeal was scheduled to be heard this morning in the High Court at Auckland before Justice Geoffrey Venning, who reserved his decision.
Ghahraman's conviction decreased the odds of being allowed to revive her legal career after a seven-year hiatus prompted by her ascension to Parliament.
Defence lawyer Annabel Cresswell told the district court in June that a mental health report formed the crux of her submissions regarding her request for a discharge without conviction. It found a "clear diagnosis of complex PTSD" with two key contributing factors: her early life in war-torn Iran and the "public vitriol, threats and abuse" she received while in Parliament.
Cresswell said the "threats of rape and death were constant and ongoing and credible", to the point where her security detail was similar to that of the Prime Minister.
She described "loss-reactive shoplifting" in which otherwise law-abiding individuals steal as part of a mental health crisis.
The fact she had so much to lose showed a mental health crisis, Cresswell said.
"This offending was extraordinarily out of character," she explained. "She didn't need the items that were taken."
Crown solicitor Alysha McClintock, representing police, argued against a discharge without conviction during the sentencing hearing. The link between Ghahraman's mental health and her criminal conduct was not as strong as the defence made it out to be, the prosecutor argued, noting a mental health assessor found there was "a possible link".
"The possibility of that is no more than that - a possibility," she said.
While a conviction may make it more difficult to revive a legal career, that is a decision that would ultimately be up to the Law Society, McClintock said.
The offending had the hallmarks of pre-meditation, McClintock added.
"This was a spree of offending," she explained. "It's not a one-off event. It's not a 'moment of madness'-type case."
There might be another explanation for the offending other than a mental health breakdown, she added: "Simply that she wanted the items that she took.
"On its face, that explanation, given the [pre-meditated] nature of the conduct, appears the more likely of the two," she said.
McClintock also suggested Judge Jelas take into account the breach of trust with the public given "a person of her standing and her role has a certain standard expected of them - as a former lawyer and a member of Parliament", and the "heightened understanding of the significance of their conduct".