Two youths who violently assaulted a 78-year-old man in his home and left him for dead avoided being sent to jail this week.

On the face of it, that seems astonishing. It's certainly not what the Crown was asking – it wanted the matter transferred from the Youth Court to the District Court, so they could be sentenced as adults and jailed.

But by Judge Bridget Mackintosh's reasoning it was the right decision: 'I do not see a future for us as a community that I like to look on if both these young men are sent to the district court and sentenced to imprisonment.”

There weren't any winners in this case, heard on Thursday afternoon in Napier's courtroom No.1, filled with the teens' whānau, the victim's family, police, social workers, and lawyers, but as each of the teens hugged the victim's son and listened intently as he spoke to them individually, eye to eye, before leaving the courtroom, it appeared – to those who were involved in it – to be a decision they could live with.

Media are only permitted to report on Youth Court matters with a judge's approval. It was granted to Stuff on this occasion.

The assault occurred in the man's Napier home on the afternoon of January 12, 2022. It occurred because the younger of the youths had seen the man speaking to police and believed he was 'narking” on him for punching the man earlier in the day.

It was a brutal attack on the man, who was asleep in his bed at the time. One youth used a hammer, the other a crowbar.

When police arrived they found the badly injured man with his face covered in blood and a fractured bone sticking out of one of his legs.

'They hit me in the teeth ... There was blood everywhere... They just laughed,” the victim would later say in court.

The two teens were seen by their family members later in the evening. One of the family members told the court that when the younger one was asked how he could attack an innocent old man, he replied: 'It's Mongrel Mob.”

The teens, aged 16 at 17 at the time, denied charges of aggravated burglary and causing grievous bodily harm. Their identities are suppressed as they were appearing in the Youth Court. Neither had any previous convictions.

The younger youth admitted the charges on the second day of a three-day trial late last year. The other was found guilty by Judge Mackintosh.

The hearing on Thursday was a dispositions hearing, which is essentially the Youth Court's version of sentencing.

The victim's son read a victim impact statement written by his father, then one written by him.

His father's said that prior to the assault he had been enjoying the life of 'an independent, active and very social retiree” who began his day with a walk around the neighbourhood in which he had lived for nearly 50 years.

He said he'd often stop and speak to people on the street or in shops. His children had all grown up and moved overseas 'and this is the way I engaged with my community”.

His life had changed dramatically since the assault and 'I've never been so alone and isolated”, and he was no longer able to strike up a conversation with strangers.

He'd never fully recover his mobility and the assault was something he recalled repeatedly through flashbacks.

'The offenders may have an opportunity to eventually move on with their lives, but I've been given a life sentence to deal with this,” he said.

The victim's son told the youths 'bashing a pensioner in his own home isn't an example of being tough”.

'Being left for dead after having a hammer and crowbar break just about every bone in your body, then lying there for two hours all by yourself... that's tough,” he said.

He said the impact of the assault was heartbreaking. Before the attack his dad was 'sharp as a tack”. Now 'he struggles to remember his grandkids' names”.

'So many families here have been shaken by this senseless crime,” he said.

Crown lawyer James Bridgman said the offending was amongst the most serious of its kind and should be moved to the District Court, where a sentence of imprisonment should be imposed in order to ensure the youths were held accountable for their actions.

Bridgman noted that the older youth would soon turn 19, at which point any Youth Court sentence must end, and this would not be appropriate for such serious offending.

Lawyer for the younger youth, Richard Stone, said the youth had shown the victim, social workers and his own family that he can obey rules and remain in the community.

He said the assertion that the youth was associated with the Mongrel Mob was incorrect, and this was spelled out in a social worker's report which said she had seen no connection between him and the gang, but he acknowledged that where he grew up meant he had been impacted by the Mob.

The youth had a very troubled upbringing involving a jailed father, drug use, violence, family harm and a number of referrals to Oranga Tamariki.

Stone said the youth had suffered a bad assault at high school that had lasting impacts on him, including psychotic episodes, and family members said he'd not been the same boy after it occurred.

He said the youth had matured greatly since January last year, had served five months in a youth facility and 11 months on electronic bail without breach, had found work, had assisted helping others after Cyclone Gabrielle.

It was noted that the youth had spent five months in youth residence and 11 months on electronically-monitored bail, which was effectively the same as a three-year prison sentence.

The older youth's lawyer Scott Jefferson said the youth had experienced a 'very profound” meeting with the victim's son in which he gave a heartfelt and genuine apology for his actions.

He said the youth had spent the past 16 months living in another region, where he was working in a conservation role, living independently and in a 'very pro-social way”. He had completed 56 hours of voluntary community work and had committed to complete 200 hours and was living with people who were addressing his substance abuse and dislocation from his culture.

He said he was much different to the 'rudderless” youth at the time of the assault, when he smoked cannabis every day, and Jefferson urged the judge to trust that he would continue on this path.

Judge Mackintosh acknowledged the youths had committed 'very, very serious offending” and their victim had lost the 'opportunity to grow old in a graceful way”.

She said it had sent a ripple effect across many families and the wider community which had been outraged, 'and at first blush, justifiably so”.

She said a prison sentence was a realistic outcome whenever someone offended the way they had, but she had to also consider Youth Court principles, particularly the need to keep young people in the community provided the community's safety was not at risk.

'At the end of the day what we're doing really is looking into the future. It's the future of [the youths] and it's our community's future,” she said.

It was also important that young people knew there would be punishment if they hurt people in an egregious way.

'Out of what was an awful situation that occurred on the 12th of January last year there can be some kernels of hope that the two people involved will be much, much better people than they were,” she said.

She said both youths had shown they had learnt and 'the time has come to work on the future”.

She ordered the older youth to attend drug and alcohol counselling, to make an emotional harm reparation payment of $2000 to the victim's family, and complete 200 hours community work.

She adjourned making any decision about the younger teen as she wanted more information, but said he would not receive a prison sentence.

Before retiring, the judge addressed both the boys' whānau.

'We are all a community and as a community we all need to step up and make sure our future is better. Everyone needs to play their part,” she said.

After the judge left the courtroom the teens walked to the victim's son, whom they hugged. Family members from both whānau then also hugged and spoke with the man before eventually leaving the courtroom.

-Marty Sharpe/Stuff.