Three years after Sidney Ross Bridson was killed at his isolated Waitaanga property, the two men convicted of his murder have been sentenced in the High Court at New Plymouth. The sentencing brought renewed focus to the impact of Bridson’s death on a family that described him as a generous, caring man whose life was taken before his time.
eLocal Report: Based on reporting by Tara Shaskey for RNZ / New Zealand Herald HERE
Sidney Ross Bridson, known as “Yip Yip”, was killed at his Waitaanga property east of Taranaki in the early hours of 11 October 2023.
According to the court evidence reported by RNZ and the New Zealand Herald, Stefan Hannon-McGinn and Ethan Howe travelled to Bridson’s isolated property following an ongoing dispute involving Bridson and Hannon-McGinn’s father, Mathew David Hannon.
Hannon and Bridson were neighbours whose relationship had deteriorated amid disagreements that included hunting in the area. Witnesses during the subsequent trial described the remote district as the “Wild West”.
Hannon-McGinn had driven from Hamilton with Howe. Bridson was called outside his home and, while standing on the deck, was shot once in the stomach by Hannon-McGinn while Howe stood guard.
Bridson’s body was subsequently taken back inside the house and the property was set alight.
The pair were found guilty of murder by a jury in May. Both were also sentenced for arson. Hannon-McGinn had admitted the arson charge, while Howe had unsuccessfully defended it.
A Family Describes Its Loss
The sentencing hearing also gave Bridson’s family an opportunity to describe the man they had lost.
Their victim impact statements portrayed him as intelligent, generous and kind — a friend and mentor to his sons, a caring brother and someone who made time for those around him.
His mother, Ann Bridson, told the court her son had been diagnosed with a rare form of leukaemia approximately a year before his death. Despite the diagnosis, his treatment had given the family hope that he had more time ahead of him.
Bridson’s sister Margaret Kemp described her brother as a “caring soul” and recalled family visits to Waitaanga, where they hunted and spent time together.
The isolated property had been Bridson’s “happy and safe haven”, she told the court. His killing and the lengthy legal proceedings that followed had compounded the family’s grief.
Stefan Hannon-McGinn (L) and Ethan Howe were sentenced in the High Court at New Plymouth. Photo: Open Justice
The Murder Trial
During the trial, Hannon-McGinn acknowledged that he had fired the shot that killed Bridson but maintained that he had acted in self-defence.
Howe accepted that he had been present but disputed that he was criminally responsible for Bridson’s murder.
Their case was that they had travelled to Bridson’s property to discuss the dispute between Bridson and Hannon, taking a firearm with them as a precaution.
Hannon-McGinn told the court that Bridson had reached for what he believed was a firearm. The object was subsequently found to be a stick. Hannon-McGinn said he interpreted the confrontation as “kill or be killed”.
The jury rejected the defence and found both men guilty of murder.
The aftermath of the fire at Sidney Ross Bridson’s home on Waitaanga Rd. The home of his neighbour, Mathew David Hannon, is the building pictured on the left in the background. Photo: Supplied / Open Justice
Crown Sought Minimum 18-Year Terms
At sentencing, Crown prosecutor Prue Lange sought life imprisonment with minimum periods of imprisonment of 18 years for both men.
The Crown argued that the circumstances engaged section 104 of the Sentencing Act, under which a minimum term of at least 17 years can be required unless imposing it would be manifestly unjust.
The Crown pointed to Bridson’s vulnerability, the circumstances surrounding the entry into his home and what it characterised as the particularly callous nature of the offending.
Lawyers for both defendants opposed the application of section 104.
Hannon-McGinn’s lawyer Nicola Manning argued for a 14-year starting point and sought reductions reflecting remorse and his personal circumstances.
Howe’s lawyer Nick Dutch also argued that section 104 should not apply. He sought a substantially shorter minimum term, pointing to Howe’s remorse and evidence concerning his mental functioning.
Justice McQueen Sets Different Minimum Terms
Justice Helen McQueen found that although aspects of the offending engaged section 104, imposing minimum periods of 17 years or longer would ultimately be manifestly unjust.
The judge considered Hannon-McGinn the instigator and found that, as the man who fired the fatal shot, he carried greater culpability.
Hannon-McGinn received a life sentence for murder with a minimum period of imprisonment of 13 years, after Justice McQueen reduced a 14-year starting point to reflect his remorse and personal circumstances.
For Howe, the judge adopted a 12-year starting point before applying reductions for remorse, time spent on electronically monitored bail and his mental health. He received a life sentence with a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years and four months.
Both men were also sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment for arson, to be served concurrently, and were prohibited from owning firearms.
Father Previously Sentenced for Manslaughter
Mathew David Hannon, father of Stefan Hannon-McGinn, was sentenced on an admitted charge of manslaughter. Photo: Open Justice / NZME
Mathew David Hannon had previously been sentenced to five years and three months’ imprisonment after admitting manslaughter in connection with Bridson’s death.
Although Hannon was not present when Bridson was shot, the court found that he had engineered the circumstances leading to his neighbour’s death.
He was also prohibited from owning firearms.
Does This Affect New Zealand?
The Waitaanga case is primarily the conclusion of an individual criminal prosecution rather than a wider policy story. Its significance lies in the operation of New Zealand’s criminal justice system: how murder liability can extend beyond the person who fires the fatal shot, how aggravating and mitigating circumstances affect minimum non-parole periods, and how section 104 of the Sentencing Act is considered in particularly serious murders.
It also illustrates the lengthy process families can face between an offence, investigation, trial and final sentencing. For Bridson’s family, the court proceedings have provided legal conclusions, but their statements at sentencing made clear that those conclusions cannot undo the loss that began at Waitaanga in October 2023.
Source: Tara Shaskey, NZ Herald, republished by RNZ. The original story also appears in the New Zealand Herald.
Independent reporting. Original context. Credited sources.