Director of Public Prosecutions v Edmunds
[2019] VCC 1581
•26 September 2019
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-19-00870
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| RAYMOND EDMUNDS |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE PULLEN | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 11 September 2019 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 26 September 2019 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Edmunds | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2019] VCC 1581 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991; Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004.
Cases Cited:
Sentence: Total effective sentence of 23 years' and 5 months' imprisonment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr R. Hammill | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Offender | Mr P. Chadwick Q.C. | Ann Valos Criminal Law |
To ensure there is no possibility of identification, this sentence has been anonymised by the adoption of pseudonyms in place of names of the victims and family or witnesses.
HER HONOUR:
1 Raymond Edmunds, you have pleaded guilty to three charges of common law rape; the maximum penalty on two being 20 years' imprisonment and one rape (Charge 9) a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment. Also two charges of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, maximum penalty 5 years' imprisonment; false imprisonment, maximum penalty 10 years' imprisonment; two charges of indecent assault of a female, maximum penalty 5 years' imprisonment; and one charge of indecent assault, maximum penalty 5 years' imprisonment. Your offending occurred between 15 July 1971 and 21 February 1984 and involved nine complainants.
2 It is not necessary for me to recount in great detail the facts of this matter, as the matter was opened in some detail by the learned prosecutor consistent with Exhibit A. I proceed to sentence you on the basis of the facts as summarised by the prosecutor and discussed during the course of the plea hearing. It is sufficient for present purposes to simply say the facts in this case are most serious and disturbing. In addition, you have a concerning and relevant criminal history to which I shall shortly refer.
3 At the time of sentence you are 75 years of age and serving terms of life imprisonment without parole.
4 I turn to a summary of your offending before me.
5 In March 2017, an investigation was commenced by the Sexual Crimes Squad Cold Case Unit into a number of unsolved rapes reported to Victoria Police between 1971 and 1985.
6 In April 2018, you independently, without knowledge of this investigation, expressed a willingness to discuss a number of crimes you had committed in the seventies and eighties that remained unsolved.
7 You were subsequently interviewed by detectives on a number of occasions in 2018 and made admissions to committing a number of unsolved assaults and rapes during the 1970s and 1980s.
8 The victims of your offending are referred to within Exhibit A (paragraph 6).
9 I turn to the circumstances of your offending involving Rose Tepper.[1] At the time of your offending she was 27 years of age and lived with her husband and two sons. She was then three months pregnant with her third child.
[1]A pseudonym.
10 Ms Tepper's husband worked at Sandown Racecourse on Monday and Thursday nights and would arrive home at around 11.00 pm.
11 On Thursday, 15 July 1971, Ms Tepper was at home with her two sons. Her husband had gone to work and the family car was parked in the driveway. Mr Tepper was in the lounge room watching television when a man (you) entered the house through the front door and approached her in the lounge room carrying a knife.
12 You told Ms Tepper to go to the bedroom and not to scream or you would use the knife on her. Out of fear, Ms Tepper went to the bedroom with you, where you forced her to remove her clothes and you removed yours. You raped her. You left the house through the front door (Charge 1, common law rape).
13 Ms Tepper ran to a neighbour's house, banged on the door and told her neighbour what had happened and police were called.
14 Ms Tepper was taken to Box Hill Hospital and later assisted police to compile a face image of you.
15 Ms Tepper's children were asleep in their bedroom when this offending occurred.
16 At your request, you were interviewed by police in relation to this incident on 10 October 2018. During the interview you admitted you entered Ms Tepper's home and raped her. You could not recall how you entered the house or where the house was. You said you believed the victim was asleep in bed when you approached her. You said you had seen a face image of yourself at Doncaster police station when you had attended for an unrelated matter.
17 I turn to your offending involving Eden Laby.[2] Ms Laby was 23 at the time of your offending. She lived with her parents in Donvale.
[2]A pseudonym.
18 On 24 August 1972, Ms Laby went to dinner with her fiancé, returning home at around 10.00 pm. When she returned home, her parents were not at home.
19 The garage door to the house was open but no car parked at the house. Ms Laby and her fiancé saw an unknown vehicle parked on the street at nearby shops which they thought was odd given the time of night.
20 Ms Laby got ready for bed and did some reading in the sunroom before going to her bedroom at the back of the house and she went to bed and slept with her bedroom door open.
21 During the night Ms Laby woke to you trying to fight her. She struggled with you and realised that she had been pulled to the floor. You hit her with your fists to the back of the head and neck as she crouched on the floor. She attempted to push you away from her with her legs. You put a pillow over her face and pushed down onto both sides of her face. She could not breathe. Ms Laby struggled with you and kicked you. You put your hands around her throat and started strangling her. Ms Laby heard a car coming up the gravel in the driveway and realised her mother had returned home. Ms Laby's mother heard muffled noises coming from Ms Laby's bedroom and went to her room. She saw you kneeling over Ms Laby on the floor trying to suffocate her. Ms Laby's mother said something. You stood up and pushed her aside as you walked out the hallway towards the sunroom and left the house.
22 Ms Laby's mother called Ms Laby's fiancé who lived around the corner. Police were called. Ms Laby was taken to hospital and as a result of the assault she sustained a broken cheekbone and bruising to her face (Charge 2, assault occasioning actual bodily harm).
23 Police established you entered the house by smashing the back door which was a plate glass wooden framed door.
24 Again at your request, you were interviewed by police in relation to this incident on 10 October 2018. You said you saw the victim drive home in her car. That you parked your car at the front of some shops nearby, waited in the car for a while, then walked back to her home. You saw a light on in the bedroom, so went to it and saw her sleeping. Another lady came out of a room further up the passageway, said something to you so you left. You could not recall how you gained entry to the house and did not recall breaking a window. You denied assaulting the victim. You said, when you broke into the house you intended to have sex with the victim. You now, by your plea of guilty admit that assault.
25 I turn to your offending involving Alexandra Scherk[3].
[3]A pseudonym.
26 At the time of this offending, Ms Scherk was 57 years of age living in Preston. On 22 September 1973, Ms Scherk was picked up from her home by her son, Ronald Scherk,[4] and taken to his home. Mr Scherk and his wife attended a wedding and Ms Scherk remained alone at the house looking after her two grandchildren.
[4]A pseudonym.
27 After the children were put to bed, Ms Scherk was watching television. At about 8.45 pm she heard a noise at the laundry door. She then heard footsteps along the hallway into the kitchen. She turned and saw a man (you) standing with a stick in one hand and a knife in the other. You had a mask on with the eyes cut out covering your face and were wearing gloves.
28 Ms Scherk screamed. You told her to 'quieten down' or similar. You then used her phone to make two calls. Ms Scherk was told to sit in a chair, and you tied her hands behind the chair with a pair of stockings (Charge 3, false imprisonment). You then untied Ms Scherk, told her to take her clothes off, and said 'I'm going to have sex with you'.
29 Ms Scherk remonstrated with you. You moved behind her and pulled her clothes apart. Ms Scherk screamed and swore at you, asking, 'why are you here?' You said, 'sorry, we have made a mistake'. Ms Scherk continued screaming and remonstrating with you. You told her to 'shut up' and 'don't move until the next ad comes on TV'. You then left the house.
30 Police attended.
31 Ms Scherk's two grandchildren were asleep in the house during this incident.
32 Ms Scherk passed away in 2006.
33 At your request, you were interviewed by police in relation to this incident on 26 September 2018, during which you stated you entered the house through the unlocked backdoor. The victim was babysitting and you believed she threw something at you. You said it was night time and the victim was watching TV and you remembered tying her up to a chair then leaving.
34 You could not recall why you changed your mind about having sex with her. You tied Ms Scherk up so that she could not raise the alarm until you had got away. You left through the backdoor the same way you went in. You said you only touched the victim when you tied her to the chair.
35 I turn then to your offending involving Grace Meyers.[5] She was 37 years of age at the time of it and five months' pregnant with her third child. Her husband worked as a real estate agent, working days and nights.
[5]A pseudonym.
36 On 2 October 1976, Ms Meyers was at home alone with her two children. She put them to bed and went to her bedroom to lie down. She had the radio on, read a book and dozed off.
37 At around 9.00 pm, she woke to you shaking her. You were standing next to the bed with a stocking mask covering your face. You said, 'I've got a knife'. She told you her husband would be home soon. You replied 'yes, I know'. Ms Meyers told you she was pregnant and went to sit up, but you pushed her back down with your hand on her chest. Ms Meyers did not put up much resistance as she was fearful her baby might be harmed.
38 You rubbed Ms Meyer's stomach and told her 'you're beautiful', or words similar. You pulled down her underwear and got on the bed next to her, lying on her left side, and tried to roll on top of her (Charge 4, indecent assault of a female). Ms Meyers said 'no'. You said, 'I'll use my knife'. Ms Meyers asked what knife you were talking about, as she had not seen one at that point. You suddenly got off the bed, walked to the chest of drawers, picked up something from it, walked out of the bedroom and left the house.
39 Ms Meyers got up and put her clothes back on. She closed the bedroom door and pushed a chest of drawers across it to stop you from coming back in, Ms Meyers was scared you would return.
40 Ms Meyers left the bedroom and checked on her children who were asleep, then went to the kitchen. Her husband arrived home, and the police were called.
41 At your request, you were interviewed by police regarding this incident on 19 September 2018. You stated you recalled steps leading to the bedroom and that the victim's husband was a doctor or real estate agent. You remembered going into the house and that the door was unlocked. You did not remember that the victim was pregnant. You said you always noticed a Mercedes was parked at the house when you drove down Ferntree Gully Road.
42 I turn to complainant Natalie Metters.[6] At the time of your offending Ms Matters was 31 years of age and lived in Wheelers Hill with her two children.
[6]A pseudonym.
43 Ms Matters owned a red Mini Minor and parked her car in the carport at the front of the house, visible from the street.
44 On 28 March 1977, Ms Metters was at home with her two children who were in bed asleep. Ms Metters went to bed at around 11.00 pm.
45 At approximately 3.10 am on 29 March 1977, Ms Metters woke and saw a figure in the doorway (you). She thought it was her brother-in-law who might have forgotten something as he had been there earlier that night. She called out his name. Your figure moved into the bedroom and she saw you. You were wearing a stocking over your head.
46 Ms Metters asked what you wanted and told you she did not have any money. You said, 'I want to make love to you'. Ms Metters told you she did not want that. She was scared. You told her 'I've been watching you for two weeks'. Ms Metters repeated she did not want to 'make love', and told you to go home to your wife.
47 You repeated you wanted to 'make love' to her and raised a knife in your hand. You said 'think about the kids. I know you've got a son in one bedroom and a daughter in the other'. You approached Ms Metters' bed and removed your pants. You told Ms Metters not to look at you and pulled the stocking off your head. Ms Metters pulled the bed sheet over her head and was crying. You raped her (Charge 5).
48 Ms Metters told you to 'hurry and go home'. You got up, got dressed, and said, 'don't follow me and don't ring the police'. You left the bedroom, walking out the front door. Ms Metters called her friend, who came to the house. Police were called. Ms Metters checked on her son, who was still asleep, and noted her daughter was hiding under the covers of her bed. Her daughter had heard you raping her mother and your footsteps in the hallway when you left.
49 Police attended Ms Metters' home and saw the flywire of the laundry window had been cut and that you had climbed in.
50 At your request, you were interviewed by police in relation to this incident on 19 September 2018, during which you said you had seen two cars parked at the house over a period of time, and on this night there was only a Mini Minor parked there. You went in through a laundry window. You went into the bedroom, the victim was in bed. You forced her to have sex with you. You did not recall having anything with you. You may have had a disguise but you could not remember. You said the victim told you she had two or three young children in another bedroom. You left through the front door, got in your car and went home.
51 I turn to complainant Evie Lilley.[7] She was 30 years of age at the time of your offending and lived in Wheelers Hill with her two children.
[7]A pseudonym.
52 Around 9:50 pm on 9 May 1977, Ms Lilley answered a knock at the front door and opened it to see you standing on a porch asking if the, 'Faulkners' lived there. Ms Lilley saw you did not have any shoes on and that your socks were wet.
53 Ms Lilley became scared, screamed and tried to shut the door, but you forced it open and pushed your way into the house. You had a long-bladed knife in your right hand, held that to Ms Lilley's neck and took hold of her left arm. Ms Lilley was screaming. You told her to stop. She pleaded with you that her son was 'retarded'. You said, 'I'm not going to hurt you I just want to make love to you'.
54 Ms Lilley started screaming again. You said, 'don't scream or you'll wake the children'. The two of you struggled and you pushed Ms Lilley into the lounge room, where she knocked over a glass topped coffee table, hoping that it would break. She tried to run to the door, but you stopped her. She asked you why you were doing this and you replied, 'I only want to make love to you'.
55 You both struggled in the dining room and the lounge room, and then you put your hand up her jumper and tried to pull her bra off. You put your hand between her legs and groped her (Charge 6).
56 Ms Lilley fell onto the couch in the lounge room and you tried to lie on top of her. She pushed you away with her foot and screamed. You became annoyed with her and said, 'if you don't stop screaming I'll really hurt you'.
57 You pulled Ms Lilley onto a mattress on the floor that she had earlier prepared for her son and tried to unzip her jeans (Charge 6 continued).
58 The telephone rang which disturbed you. You pointed at the back door and asked Ms Lilley if it led outside and she said, 'yes'. You told her to open the door, and she did. The door led to a balcony and you jumped from the balcony to the ground and ran away.
59 Ms Lilley's neighbours heard Ms Lilley screaming and had been calling her on the phone. Police were contacted. Ms Lilley described you having 'a terrible strong smell of body odour about him'.
60 At your request, you were interviewed in relation to this offending on 14 November 2018. You said you did not know how you got into the victim's house but recalled a mattress on the floor in either the lounge room or the dining room. You said you probably attended the house to find a woman to have sex with. That would be your only reason you would be there. You did not remember if you had anything with you.
61 You could not recall why you left through the back door, but something must have disturbed you to make you leave. You did not recall a phone ringing and did not remember pushing Ms Lilley onto a mattress or trying to remove her clothes, but it was possible you did.
62 I turn to complainant Stephanie Irvine[8] who was 14 years of age at the time of your offending. She lived at home with her parents and her sister.
[8]A pseudonym.
63 On 2 July 1977, Ms Irvine was watching a movie with her sister as her parents had gone out for the evening. They both went to bed at around 11.15 pm before the parents returned home. Their bedrooms were on the first floor of the house, which was a two-storey house.
64 A short time after Ms Irvine went to bed, she was pulled out of her bed to the floor. Her next recollection was waking up in hospital with stitches in her head and lacerations to her face. Ms Irvine had no memory of the incident.
65 You had entered Ms Irvine's home and assaulted her somehow in that bedroom, which resulted in lacerations to her face and stitches to her head (Charge 7).
66 Ms Irvine's sister woke to hear Ms Irvine screaming and thought it was due to an ingrown toenail that had been causing her pain. She went to Ms Irvine's bedroom and saw Ms Irvine lying on her back on the floor, and you standing over her. Ms Irvine's sister called a neighbour and told them there was a man in the house. She stayed on the phone while the neighbour came out. Police attended shortly thereafter, and Ms Irvine was taken to hospital.
67 Police saw that you had entered that house by breaking a glass sliding door on the ground floor.
68 You participated in an interview with police on 21 November 2018 and said you had no recollection of this incident.
69 I turn to complainant Charlotte Angwin[9] who was 19 years of age at the time of your offending. She lived at Edithvale with her husband and two children. Her husband worked nightshift and would drive the family car to and from work.
[9]A pseudonym.
70 On 27 September 1977, Ms Angwin was watching TV and fell asleep on the couch in the lounge room. Her infant daughter was on the couch with her, her son asleep in the front bedroom.
71 At approximately 2.00 am on 28 September 1977, Ms Angwin woke to you standing over her. You were wearing a stocking mask over your face with a knife in one of your hands. Ms Angwin jumped off the couch in shock and pleaded with you, saying 'please don't kill me and my kids'.
72 At this point, Ms Angwin's son woke. You told Ms Angwin 'just do as I say and I won't hurt you'. Ms Angwin did not believe this and pleaded with you not to kill her or her children. Ms Angwin's other son woke in the front bedroom and started crying. Ms Angwin told you she needed to give him a bottle. You let her go to the kitchen to prepare it, following Ms Angwin as she did. Ms Angwin took the bottle to her son in the front bedroom. You stood outside the room near the couch, where Ms Angwin's other son was sitting and awake.
73 Ms Angwin returned to the lounge and you told her to get on the floor. Out of fear she did what she was told and lay down on her back. She again asked you not to kill her and her children. You undid your belt and pants, got on top of her and raped her. You did not use a condom. You ejaculated, got up, put your pants back on and walked out of the front door (Charge 8)
74 Ms Angwin got up, closed the front door and called her brother-in-law, who came to the house and police were called.
75 At your request, you were interviewed by police in relation to this incident on 13 June 2018, during which you said that you had broken into the victim's house from an unlocked side window. The victim was asleep on the couch. You went into another room off the lounge room but you could not remember if you had sex with her, but probably did. You said there was a child with the victim. That the victim was aware you were in the house because you were touching her.
76 At the time of that incident you were living on the opposite side of the road with your wife and children. You said you did not use any force and could not remember if you had a weapon with you. You did not recall if you had anything covering your face but, if you did, it had probably been a stocking.
77 I turn to complainant Rebecca Holden[10] who was 25 years of age at the time of your offending, living in Clayton South with her husband and two young children.
[10]A pseudonym.
78 Her husband was a nightshift worker. Ms Holden spoke limited English.
79 On Sunday, 20 February 1984, Ms Holden was watching TV with her children. At around 9.30 pm she put her son to bed in her bedroom. At around 10.30 pm she put her daughter to bed in her bedroom and went to bed herself.
80 In the early hours of 21 February 1984, Ms Holden woke to you saying, 'get up and go to the other room'. As you said this you nudged her gently on her left arm. You were standing beside the bed wearing a mask with holes cut out for the eyes, nose and mouth.
81 Ms Holden asked you what you wanted, and you again told her to go to the next room. She did not get up and you grabbed her left wrist, dragged her off the bed and led her to the next room. Ms Holden did not resist as she was scared.
82 You took her into the spare room, led her to the bed, removed her clothing and pushed her onto the bed.
83 You removed your clothing, except for a singlet, and Ms Holden saw what she thought was a knife.
84 You lay on top of her and used your hands to position yourself between her legs. Ms Holden was resisting you. You said, 'you keep pushing me away all the time'.
85 You then raped Ms Holden (Charge 9), forced her to change positions and again raped her (Charge 9 continued).
86 You kissed her on her back as you did this and touched her chest at the same time (uncharged act).
87 You continued raping Ms Holden for a 'little while' before you withdrew your penis from her vagina. You then inserted your fingers into her vagina (Charge 10). You continued to rape her by inserting your penis into her vagina until you ejaculated (Charge 9 continued).
88 You got off the bed, put your clothes on and told Ms Holden to 'turn to the window and don't move for 10 minutes'. Ms Holden did what she was told.
89 You left the bedroom and the house through the backdoor. Ms Holden got out of bed, closed the door, locked it and rang her husband. Police were called and attended. They established you had entered the house by drilling a large hole in the back door, reaching through and unlocking the door from the inside.
90 Following this incident Ms Holden and her family never slept at the house again and the family moved.
91 At your request, you were interviewed in relation to this incident on 5 June 2018 and stated you presumed you had got into the house through the backdoor and assaulted the victim in another bedroom to the one she was in. You knew you did not enter through the front door. You said this incident was the last assault you committed and remembered coming over a back fence into the backyard.
92 You said you had been to the house before to complete a quote for gates and believed the male owner worked for Nylex or similar.
93 You said you chose to go back to the house probably because you knew the victim was on her own and that her husband worked nightshift.
94 You committed your offending during work hours and I was told that you were then working as a security guard. There was a child in the bed, so you took Ms Holden to a different room and forced her to have sex with you. You said you had never seen the victim prior to this incident. You could not recall whether you ejaculated but presumed you would have and you said you went to the house to have sex.
95 On 12 November 2018, you provided a medical forensic sample to police to assist their enquiries into this incident.
Investigation:
96 I turn to the investigation.
97 On 10 February 2012, forensic samples were taken from Rebecca Holden and items seized from the house in 1984 (Holden offending) were removed from a storage freezer of Victoria Police Forensic Services Department for examination and DNA analysis.
98 In 2017, the profiles obtained matched your DNA.
99 On 23 April 2018, you notified authorities at Port Phillip Prison you wanted to speak to police. I accept you were not aware of Police ‘re-opening' these cases. Police attended the prison on 27 April 2018. No interview was then conducted, but you confirmed you wished to speak to police regarding a number of unsolved sex crimes.
100 You obtained legal advice and participated in interviews with detectives on six separate occasions (see paragraph 92, Exhibit A). As a result of your admissions to police in those interviews, you were charged.
101 It is difficult to find words to describe your horrific offending which I have no doubt was a traumatic and frightening experience for all the victims of it. In particular the victims who likely feared their children might be harmed in some way if they did not comply with your demands, and I shall refer to your offending again later in these sentencing remarks.
102 You have, however, pleaded guilty to these charges and you are entitled to have that fact taken into account in your favour, and I do so. Your pleas have utilitarian value. As a result of your pleas, your victims have been spared the need to give evidence at a trial. I also accept the matter resolved at an early stage after the charges were laid, at a committal mention on 3 May 2019. The matter then proceeded quickly to this Court.
103 As I say, I accept you made admissions to police in the interviews conducted in 2018, although as I discussed with Mr Chadwick you denied your assault upon Ms Laby at that time. You agreed to and did participate in multiple interviews, making admissions.
104 I accept that the pleas of guilty indicate some remorse for your offending. The timing of your pleas, and the fact of your pleas of guilty are matters relevant in mitigation of your sentence. I accept also your pleas of guilty have brought some closure to your victims, albeit many years later.
105 I discussed with Counsel the aggravating features of your offending before me.
106 In brief, referable to Rose Tepper, her two young sons were present in the home. You offended at night and had a knife.
107 Regarding Eden Laby, this occurred at night and involved some pre-planning.
108 Regarding Alexandra Scherk, there were two young children at home at night and you had a stick and a knife. You wore a mask and gloves. It occurred at night.
109 Regarding Grace Meyers, there were two children at home, you wore a stocking mask. You had a knife and threatened to use the knife. You were told by Ms Meyers she was five months pregnant. It occurred at night and involved some pre- planning.
110 Regarding Natalie Metters, two young children at home. You wore a stocking mask and had a knife. There was some pre-planning. It occurred at night. You threatened Ms Metters – 'think about your kids'. Ms Metters' daughter heard you rape her mother.
111 Regarding Evie Lilley, there were two young children at home. It occurred at night. You had a knife and held it to Ms Lilley's neck and threatened her.
112 Regarding Stephanie Irvine, she was 14 years of age. It occurred at night.
113 Regarding Charlotte Angwin, there were two young children at home. Her daughter was on the couch with Ms Angwin when you raped Ms Angwin. It occurred at night, you wore a stocking mask and had a knife. No condom was used by you. There was some pre-planning.
114 Regarding Rebecca Holden, there were two children at home. It occurred at night. You wore a mask. There was some pre-planning and Ms Holden thought she saw a knife.
115 I discussed with Mr Chadwick at length, the aggravating features relevant to each of the complainants and the transcript of the plea hearing will reveal that discussion. While the number and type of aggravating features vary, to a degree, between each complainant, there is no doubt there were globally a number of aggravating features of your offending. You also failed to wear a condom in relation to offending involving Charlotte Angwin.
116 Other aggravating features relevant to some complainants were that young children were at home at the time of your offending and that was known to you, you had a knife, a stick, a mask, gloves, an element of preplanning in relation to some of the offences, threatening to harm the children. You were aware one of your victims was pregnant at the time. You held a knife to Evie Lilley's neck. The young age of Stephanie Irvine. Your offending involving Charlotte Angwin occurred in the presence of one of her two children.
117 In his written outline of submissions and before me, Mr Chadwick conceded the aggravating features as were discussed relevant to the victims and also that the victims being in their own home where they should have been entitled to feel safe. That entry to the homes was gained by breaking in or by stealth. That the victims were mainly the only adult in the house at the time of the attack, making them vulnerable. That each attack occurred at night, with children present in the house on most of the occasions. That violence was used against some of your victims. That a knife was used on some victims and shown to others. That at times you wore articles of disguise and that your offending occurred over a protracted period of more than a decade relevant to the charges before me.
118 The prosecution filed a chronology (Exhibit B) which set out, amongst other things, the timing of your pleas of guilty to the charges before me, and a chronology of your earlier offending and sentences imposed in the various courts.
119 You have admitted an extensive and relevant criminal history. I note this offending before me occurred at the time of other sexual offending by you that occurred between 1971 until your arrest in 1985 for the murders of Mr Heywood and Ms Magill. I note the date of your offending before me relevant to Charge 1 was on 15 July 1971 which pre-dated your offending before the first offending dealt with by Justice Nicholson on 3 April 1986 and 28 October 1986 (i.e. Charge 3).
120 Your criminal record involves similar offending to that before me and I was given a number of decisions of the various courts relevant to charges, sentences and rulings on those charges including rape and attempted rape charges. That sexual offending before Justice Nicholson occurred between 1971 and 1977. Charges 1 to 8 before me occurred between 1971 and 1977, and Charges 9 and 10 in 1984.
121 In 1985 you were arrested for the murder of Mr Heywood and Ms Madill and have been incarcerated since.
122 There is significant similarity between the offending before me and that dealt with by His Honour Justice Nicholson. I stress you are not being resentenced for the offences before his Honour, nor do I regard your other offending as an aggravating feature of the offences that are before me (Lim v The Queen[11]). The circumstances of your then offending, however, put the offences that are before me in context.
[11][2019] VSCA 102.
123 I turn briefly to the plea hearing before His Honour Justice Nicholson on 3 April 1986. The prosecution then referred to a number of common features between your then sexual offending which involved the then complainants. You pleaded guilty to the offences before Justice Nicholson. It appears that there was some evidence located at some of the scenes that confirmed you were involved.
124 Each of those offences involved an attack upon a woman in her own home. Each of the victims were either married or living with their husband and/or fiancé and their partners were not at home at the time. The prosecution case was that either you had anticipated those persons were out or, in fact, you had the house under observation.
125 Each of those victims had children at home with them, and each attack occurred at night. On each occasion, although perhaps not on the last occasion before his Honour, you were armed with a knife and you had gained entry by stealth, furtively entering or breaking in.
126 The prosecution then also described that each of the then offences were committed in circumstances where there was great terror and distress caused to each of the victims.
127 As I have said and I stress, you are not being resentenced for that offending, however it shows your offending over many years relevant to sexual offending.
128 Mr Chadwick conceded your offending before me was part of, in essence, a 'course of conduct', and I do not mean that in the legal sense, over the years of 1971 to 1984 involving a similar modus operandi.
129 His Honour Justice Nicholson sentenced you for that offending on 28 October 1986. His Honour sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 30 years' imprisonment and did not set a non-parole period.
130 You subsequently sought to appeal that sentence however abandoned that appeal (Court of Criminal Appeal 13 December 1993, see p.1). The Court however set a non-parole period at that time of 16 years and 8 months. I note the Court did not otherwise vary the individual sentences imposed by his Honour on 28 October 1986.
131 At the time of the hearing on 3 April 1986, His Honour heard evidence from Mr Joblin that throughout your life you had suffered some form of personality disorder which impelled you to engage in violent sexual attacks on women.
132 His Honour described your offending as 'treating the women as a kind of inferior species'. That description in my opinion is equally applicable to the charges before me.
133 The Court of Criminal Appeal on 13 December 1993 also described the offending as dealt with by Justice Nicholson on 28 October 1986, 'these were vile offences indeed, and represent a pattern of conduct where women were terrorised, degraded or humiliated. They constitute in a real sense, a blow at the very foundations of a civilised society'. That description in my opinion is also applicable to your offending before me.
134 Further, I have no doubt your offending was absolutely terrifying and frightening to the victims before me.
135 I note you have also been sentenced for sexual offending against your stepdaughter. Again, you are not being resentenced for that and that offending is a different type of offending to that before me. Your criminal history however reflects sexual offending access all age groups (i.e. child and adult).
136 His Honour Judge White of this Court sentenced you on 30 September 1998 for offences of carnal knowledge and incest, committed between 1 January 1972 and 18 March 1979 (i.e. during the period of your offending that is before me.)
137 Your offending in Charge 1 before me, also pre-dated your offending involving your stepdaughter.
138 At that time his Honour referred to a Report from Mr Joblin (although it is unclear if that is the same or a different Report that was before His Honour Justice Cummins when sentencing on 5 August 1994). Mr Joblin concluded you did not have a psychiatric illness and were above average intelligence. Mr Joblin considered you had a personality disorder, were hypersexual with an enormous sexual drive. Mr Joblin concluded you had no apparent cognitive functioning problem.
139 A number of Victim Impact Statements were before me in this hearing and I have read those statements. They are eloquent and it is difficult to do justice to them in these sentencing remarks, but as I say, I have read them all. The victims of your offending have suffered considerably as a result of it.
140 There was a Victim Impact Statement from Joshua Tepper,[12] husband of Rose Tepper, who described being completely devastated arriving home and seeing the condition his wife was in physically and emotionally. He suffered greatly financially as a result of your offending, having to give up lucrative night work. He described the effect your offending had on his wife as 'enormous'. She never settled down. She was convinced you would find her again and no amount of counselling could convince her otherwise. He described that his wife was three to four months pregnant with their son at the time of your assault and eloquently described the impact upon his son and 'flow-on' effect to Mr Tepper (paragraph 3).
[12]A pseudonym.
141 There was a Victim Impact Statement from Edel Laby, who said that on 24 August 1972, her life changed forever. She described the trauma of having a pillow placed over her face and thinking she was going to die. Of having hands around her throat, squeezing harder, making her unable to breathe and thinking she was going to die. Your offending had been life-changing for her. She was still adversely affected by your offending in many ways, 47 years later. She said that four weeks after your offending, she was to be married but could not look at her bruised and battered face. Your offending had adversely affected her father, who felt he had failed Ms Laby by not being there to protect her.
142 There was a Victim Impact Statement from Natalie Metters, who described the biggest impact of your offending as being emotional and social. She was scared to be on her own and frightened by shadows. Sleeping was difficult for many years. She found it hard to stay in the house and knew she would have to sell and move to another area so she could get on with her life with her two children. She said her daughter heard everything that happened that night and had been the most affected by it. She could not sleep in a room on her own. The impact upon her daughter continued even after she married. She always had to have someone staying in the house and she could never be left alone.
143 As a result of your offending, Ms Angwin sold the house and moved away from friends. The children had to change schools, make new friends, which was all very difficult for them and they got a dog for security.
144 Despite her very understanding husband, she said your offending had still impacted on their marriage as described within her statement. She described the trauma of having to give her statement again to police and of preparing her Victim Impact Statement as it brought the feelings back and it was very unsettling for her. She had to work through all the emotions again. At 73 she was still emotionally affected by your offending.
145 There was a Victim Impact Statement from Evie Lilley who described the impact of your offending upon she and her children. Ms Lilley was a very nervous person now and could not open her front door until she knew who it was. She moved interstate, leaving family and friends behind, wanting to get as far away from Victoria as possible, knowing at that time you had not been caught. She was terrified because she could identify you.
146 Her marriage broke down, leaving her with financial difficulties. She had been on her own now for 23 years. Her son had seen what was happening on the night of the attack and said he was too scared to help. He was only eight and her daughter was five. Her son was a depressive person and started using prescription drugs.
147 Relevant is also the notion of social rehabilitation and a number of authorities have referred to the effects upon a victim of sexual offending, including DPP v Toomey[13], in which his Honour Justice Vincent referred to social rehabilitation citing DPP v DJK[14] (I, of course, allow for the differences in the factual circumstances to those cases to yours). Justice Vincent said:
'… With respect to those statements, I repeat comments I have made as a Sentencing Judge on more than one occasion. They constitute a reminder of what might be described as the human impact of crime. They draw to the attention of the Judge who would of necessity, have to consider the possible and probable consequences of criminal behaviour, not only its significance to society in general, but the actual effect of a specific crime upon those who have been intimately affected by it. The statements provide an opportunity [he said] for those whose lives are often tragically altered by criminal behaviour, to draw to the court's attention the damage and sense of anguish which has been created and which can often be of very long duration. For practical purposes, they may provide the only such opportunity. [His Honour went on] Obviously the contents of the statements must be approached with care and understanding. It is not to be expected that victims will be familiar with or even attribute significance to the many considerations to which a sentencing judge must have regard in the determination of a just sentence in the particular case. Nor would it normally be reasonable or practicable for a Sentencing Judge to explore the accuracy of the assertions made. Nevertheless, there has been an increasing level of appreciation by the courts [said His Honour] of the value of victim impact statements. In my view [he said] they play an important role with respect to an aspect of the criminal law to which reference is not often made. They play their part in achieving what might be termed social and individual rehabilitation. Rehabilitation, in this sense, is not perceived from the perspective of the offender, but from that of those persons who have sustained loss and damage by reason of the commission of an offence'.
[13][2006] VSCA 60.
[14][2003] VSCA 109.
148 The effects upon victims are a relevant sentencing consideration (see s.5 Sentencing Act 1991). I am of course conscious, however, that I must not allow the effects upon a victim to swamp the sentencing process.
149 The prosecution submitted that you were to be sentenced as a serious sexual offender on Charges 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 on the Indictment. Your counsel Mr Chadwick agreed those provisions of the Sentencing Act 1991 applied when sentencing you.
150 As such, s.6D and s.6E Sentencing Act 1991 has application.
151 When sentencing you I must regard the protection of the community from you as the principle purpose for which the sentence is imposed and I may, in order to achieve that purpose, impose a sentence longer than that which is proportionate to the gravity of the offence considered in the light of its objective circumstances. I note you will not, given the current sentence you are serving, be returning to the community.
152 The prosecution were not seeking a disproportionate sentence and I am of the opinion I can sentence you without the need to impose a disproportionate sentence.
153 When sentencing as a serious sexual offender I apply the principles in RH McL v R[15]; referred to in Matheas v the Queen[16] in which Tate JA in the latter referred to Gordon v The Queen[17] and DPP v Bales:[18]
'When s.6E is enlivened…there is a need to ensure that the totality principle is not applied in a manner inconsistent with the legislative purpose of s.6E, that is, full effect is not to be given to the totality principle as though s 6E "was not on the statute book". The weight to be given to the totality principle is to be moderated to ensure consistency with legislative purpose'.
[15](2000) 174 ALR 1 [76].
[16][2017] VSCA 330 (‘Matheas’).
[17][2013] VSCA 343.
[18][2015] VSCA 261.
154 The principle of totality still has applicability when sentencing you on the charges to which I have just referred (DPP v Hopson[19] also recently Zhao v The Queen[20]). In Zhao the court referred to totality and the 'one episode' rule, which is of relevance to Charges 9 and 10 when sentencing you.
[19][2016] VSCA 303.
[20][2018] VSCA 267 (‘Zhao’).
155 In mitigation of sentence, Mr Chadwick relied heavily upon your pleas of guilty and I accept you did make admissions, and they are important admissions made by you unaware of the re-opening of the various cold cases. Your reason for admitting them now as opposed to earlier, I was told, was 'from a sense of bringing peace of mind to yourself and also to the victims'. When asked by Mr Chadwick, you were not able to say why you had not told police earlier of your offending. I accept your pleas of guilty will bring some closure to your victims in that someone (i.e. you) will be accountable for them.
156 Mr Chadwick submitted the detail you were able to provide in some of your responses to questions by police evolved from you being asked to think about certain aspects of your offending and then recalling those aspects of it.
157 I accept, as I said, that you spoke to police on a number of occasions (that is, not just in one interview) and had made admissions in each, unaware of the police investigation. As I have said, I take into account your pleas of guilty and timing of them when sentencing you.
158 Turning to sentence, Mr Chadwick referred to you having been in custody since 1985, and submitted it was appropriate, for the offences before me I impose a straight sentence and not declare a non-parole period. Further the sentence I impose be directed to be served concurrently with the sentence you are currently undergoing (that is, life with no parole).
159 I discussed that submission with both Mr Chadwick and Mr Hammill, the latter appearing on behalf of the prosecution and both agreed that was the approach I should adopt when sentencing for the charges before me.
160 Mr Chadwick referred to your age at sentence of 75, and that you will be in jail until your death. He submitted your age was a relevant sentencing consideration and it is. At the time you were sentenced by Justice Nicholson you were 42 years of age and you are now 75 (that is, much older).
161 Mr Chadwick said you did not have any major health issues and your physical condition was good. Sentencing you, is in my opinion, a little different to sentencing someone who has been living in the community and then from age 75, being sentenced to imprisonment. The current sentence you are undergoing precludes you from ever being released into the community. Having said that, your now age has relevance to the sentence I impose.
162 The courts have referred to 'older' offenders and those with ill health (the latter not your case) and the relevance to sentencing, referred to in cases such as R v RLP[21] and TRG v The Queen.[22]
[21][2009] VSCA 271.
[22][2011] VSCA 337.
163 In R v Whyte[23] Winneke P noted a sentencing Judge must be astute to pay due attention to the age of an accused but 'they must also be careful to ensure that confidence in the administration of justice is maintained by imposing sentences which reflect the gravity of the crime which is being punished'.[24]
[23](2004) 7 VR 397.
[24]Whyte [29].
164 In R v Iles[25] the court referred to R v Cumberbatch:[26]
'…an offender's age does not mitigate against the imposition of a significant period of imprisonment in the appropriate case'.
[25][2009] VSCA 197.
[26][2004] 8 VR 9.
165 Mr Hammill submitted that whilst you were 'old', he urged the reality was, in your circumstances (i.e. in custody until your death), it 'didn't really matter'. Whilst your current sentence will not see you released, your age at sentence, as I have said however in my opinion, has some relevance when sentencing you.
166 Mr Chadwick did not specifically address delay in detail in his written or oral submissions, although did refer to detail as a point in them. Regarding delay and this offending before me there was no explanation as to why you did not decide to cooperate with police at an earlier stage. And I note since 1985 you have been in custody.
167 In Carter v The Queen[27] the Court referred to Arthars v The Queen[28] referable to delay and considerations of fairness and rehabilitation. In your particular circumstances, in my opinion, those do not mitigate your sentence. The Court also referred to Stalio v The Queen.[29]
[27][2018] VSCA 88
[28](2013) 39 VR 613 [52].
[29](2002) 46 VR 426.
168 The delay in finalising these matters, given your circumstances, has not resulted in prospects of your positive rehabilitation as you will not be returning to the community. Whilst there has been delay in these matters coming before the Court, I do not regard that as a matter in mitigation of your sentence given your circumstances of life sentence without parole. There is also a lack of explanation for why you delayed in your preparedness to plead guilty to these charges.
169 Mr Chadwick tendered a report from Dr Lester Walton, dated 26 July 2019 (Exhibit 2). Dr Walton conducted a psychiatric assessment of you on 24 July 2019. When asked about your motivation towards your aggressive sexualised behaviour with the complainants, relevant to the charges before me, you said 'I have no idea why, I've asked myself that for many years'.
170 You said you had now reflected upon your offending and felt, 'very uneasy – it shouldn't have happened'. It had continued to trouble you not knowing why your offending occurred. The only association you identified as noted by Dr Walton, fell well short of an explanation, in that you said you were intoxicated with alcohol on each occasion. You reported to Dr Walton you enjoyed sound physical health throughout your life and were not receiving any current medical treatment.
171 Dr Walton concluded you were of normal intelligence, with no obvious cognitive deficit, and certainly no psychotic features. In brief, he concluded you were of normal mental health, suffered no discernible psychiatric disorder.
172 In Dr Walton's opinion the reasons for your repeated engagement in aggressive sexual offending remained, 'obscure'. You described being motivated to 'clean up' your outstanding offending and accept responsibility for your misconduct, thus your preparedness to plead guilty.
173 Your previous court appearances and reports, Mr Chadwick submitted, did not shed further light on any mental-health issues.
174 Mr Chadwick stated he was not relying upon the principles in R v Verdins & Ors[30] and such was an appropriate concession on the material before me.
[30](2007) 16 VR 269 (‘Verdins’).
175 Details were provided of your background and history in that Report and further elaborated upon by Mr Chadwick in his written submissions. You described an untroubled childhood. Both your parents are deceased.
176 You first married when you were 18, and that relationship lasted for about seven years. There are two daughters of that relationship. You also had a son, but he died from a diving accident.
177 You remarried in 1972, and that marriage ended when you were incarcerated in 1985. From that marriage, you have a 41-year-old son.
178 You have twelve grandchildren and four great-grandchildren and maintained contact with them, including receiving some prison visits. Mr Chadwick also referred to other contact by letters and phone.
179 You were educated to Form 3 at Wangaratta Technical School, then worked on your father's farm. At 18, you commenced share farming with your first wife.
180 After that marriage broke down, you came to Melbourne and began factory work, becoming a factory supervisor in a steel-products factory for five years before being imprisoned. Mr Chadwick said, at some stage during your offending to be dealt with by me, you were working as I said, as a security guard or officer.
181 You described never having been troubled by depression or anxiety.
182 Mr Chadwick provided further details of your background and history which I have read however will not repeat here.
183 In custody, Mr Chadwick said you lived the life of a '75 year old'. You had enhanced prisoner status and were a prisoner 'Listener'. You worked in the kitchen and were a compliant prisoner.
184 Regarding your time in custody you were arrested on 22 March 1985 and had been in custody since, initially remanded to Pentridge Prison.
185 You had attempted to escape in 1992, which led to you being held in H Division. In 1994 to 1997, you were housed at Barwon Prison, and from 1997 to 2003 at Port Phillip Prison. You had been a protection prisoner from 1997 to today's date. In 2003 to 2007, you were at Barwon Prison and since 2007 at Port Phillip Prison. You were, Mr Chadwick said, living, 'quietly' in custody.
186 Mr Hamill in his sentencing submissions, referred to the significant number of aggravating features of your offending when sentencing, not only individual to each of the victims but globally. He submitted regarding your offending 'it was hard to imagine anything worse'.
187 Mr Hamill submitted that Verdins had no application (as conceded by Mr Chadwick). That it came down to absence of an explanation for your offending. That there was a void, he submitted, that could not be filled. That I could not speculate as to the reasons for it, and I agree.
188 Regarding your rehabilitation prospects given your circumstances, he submitted it was, 'absolutely zero'.
189 As well as matters personal to you which I have referred, I must also take into account matters such as deterrence, especially general deterrence which is of considerable importance in a case such as this.
190 Turning to specific deterrence, whilst in 'normal circumstances' it would be applicable when sentencing, as you are undergoing a life sentence without parole applying specific deterrence is inutile.
191 I must also consider the question of the protection of the members of the community from you and bear in mind the likelihood of your reoffending. While protection of the community is a principle relevant to sentence, at first blush, as you are incarcerated for your natural life you will not pose a threat to the community.
192 I am called upon by the Sentencing Act 1991 to manifest the community's denunciation of your conduct and generally to impose a just punishment.
193 The very magnitude of your offending before me demands a sentence of some substance.
194 I do not declare any pre-sentence detention pursuant to s.18(4) Sentencing Act 1991, consistent with the submissions.
195 When sentencing you, I take into account principles of totality and proportionality consistent with sentencing for offences that include the applicability of the Serious Sex Offender provisions.
196 I sentence you as follows. All right, well you can stay seated for the moment. I think it is easier.
197 On Charge 1, I will take it slowly, convicted and sentences to 11 years' imprisonment.
198 On Charge 2 convicted and sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment.
199 On Charge 3 convicted and sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment.
200 On Charge 4 convicted and sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment.
201 On Charge 5 convicted and sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment.
202 On Charge 6 convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
203 On Charge 7 convicted and sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.
204 On Charge 8 convicted and sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment.
205 On Charge 9 convicted and sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment.
206 On Charge 10 convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
207 I just ask, are counsel with me so far?
208 MR CHADWICK: Yes, Your Honour.
209 HER HONOUR: Great. Now, I direct the following by way of cumulation and concurrency, and counsel will note you need to listen carefully, because for some of these charges the wording is different, to reflect serious sex offender sentence. You understand, I hope. So I direct the following by way of cumulation and concurrency.
210 I direct that Charge 8 is the base sentence.
211 I direct that 8 years of Charge 1 be served concurrently and 3 years cumulatively upon Charge 8.
212 I direct that 9 months of Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8.
213 I direct that 7 months of Charge 3 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8.
214 I direct that 17 months of Charge 4 be served concurrently and 7 months cumulatively upon Charge 8.
215 I direct that 8 years of Charge 5 be served concurrently and 3 years cumulatively upon Charge 8.
216 I direct that 11 months of Charge 6 be served concurrently and 7 months cumulatively upon Charge 8.
217 MR CHADWICK: I am sorry, how many months was that cumulative?
218 HER HONOUR: I direct that 11 months of Charge 6 be served concurrently and 7 months cumulatively upon Charge 8.
219 MR CHADWICK: Thank you, Your Honour.
220 HER HONOUR: Are you with me?
221 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
222 HER HONOUR: I direct that 7 months of Charge 7 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8.
223 I direct that 5 years of Charge 9 be served concurrently and 2 years cumulatively upon Charge 8.
224 I direct that 8 months of Charge 10 be served concurrently and 4 months cumulatively upon Charge 8.
225 For clarity, the orders for cumulation are upon each other and upon the base sentence.
226 That results in a total effective sentence of 23 years' and 5 months' imprisonment.
227 Turning to s.11 Sentencing Act 1991 I decline to set a minimum term as you are currently serving a life sentence with no parole. To fix a non-parole period would not, in your circumstances, be appropriate.
228 I direct that the sentence I have imposed of 23 years' and 5 months' imprisonment be served concurrently with the sentence you are currently undergoing.
229 I direct you have been sentenced on Charges 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 as a serious sexual offender and I direct that be entered into the records of the court.
230 Pursuant to s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991, had you pleaded not guilty to these offences and been found guilty of them, I would have sentenced you to 30 years' imprisonment.
231 The prosecution were not, given the sentence you are now serving, seeking an order under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004. I do not make such an order.
232 I have a question then. Any other orders? I do not think there are any other orders.
233 MR HAMMILL: No.
234 HER HONOUR: Now, what about the mathematics? I am not asking if you agree with me, I just want you to get them down correctly.
235 MR CHADWICK: I need Your Honour to go back to Charge 8 and repeat what Your Honour said with regard to Charge 8, if you would not mind?
236 HER HONOUR: All right. You mean the cumulations?
237 MR CHADWICK: Yes, well, yes, yes.
238 HER HONOUR: Thereafter?
239 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
240 HER HONOUR: So, not the straight sentences. You want to note the cumulations?
241 MR CHADWICK: Yes. Well, on Charge 7 it was - - -
242 HER HONOUR: No. Let us do it easily, it is easier.
243 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
244 HER HONOUR: I direct Charge 8 is the base sentence.
245 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
246 HER HONOUR: Have you got that?
247 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
248 HER HONOUR: I direct 8 years of Charge 1 be served concurrently and 3 years cumulative.
249 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
250 HER HONOUR: Have you got that?
251 MR CHADWICK: Yes, Your Honour.
252 HER HONOUR: I direct 9 months of Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8. 9 months.
253 MR CHADWICK: Got that.
254 HER HONOUR: Got that? I direct 7 months of Charge 3 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8. Got that?
255 MR CHADWICK: Got that.
256 HER HONOUR: I direct 17 - listen carefully - - -
257 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
258 HER HONOUR: - - - months of Charge 4 be served concurrently and 7 months cumulatively.
259 MR CHADWICK: Yes, got that.
260 HER HONOUR: I direct that 8 years of Charge 5 be served concurrently and 3 years cumulatively upon Charge 8.
261 MR CHADWICK: Got that, Your Honour.
262 HER HONOUR: I direct that 11 months of Charge 6 be served concurrently and 7 months cumulatively upon Charge 8. Got it?
263 MR CHADWICK: Yes, got that.
264 HER HONOUR: I direct that 7 months of Charge 7 be served cumulatively upon Charge 8.
265 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
266 HER HONOUR: Got that?
267 MR CHADWICK: Yes, Your Honour.
268 HER HONOUR: I direct that 5 years of Charge 9 be served concurrently and 2 years cumulatively upon Charge 8. Yes? Got that? Two years cumulative.
269 MR CHADWICK: Two years cumulative.
270 HER HONOUR: And I direct that 8 months of Charge 10 be served concurrently and 4 months cumulatively. So, have a seat and do the maths.
271 MR CHADWICK: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
272 HER HONOUR: You right with the figures? I am just asking?
273 MR HAMMILL: Yes, Your Honour. Yes, yes.
274 HER HONOUR: They add up and you do not need them repeated?
275 MR HAMMILL: I got it wrong the first time, but I have added them again.
276 HER HONOUR: Yes, all right. How are you going?
277 MR CHADWICK: I am getting there. That seems to work out. Could I correct - - -
278 HER HONOUR: It does work out.
279 MR CHADWICK: Yes, it seems to, so that - could I correct just a couple of factual matters - - -
280 HER HONOUR: Yes.
281 MR CHADWICK: - - - Your Honour. In the case of, the details with regard to Rebecca Holden.
282 HER HONOUR: Yes.
283 MR CHADWICK: Your Honour indicated that Your Honour was told that Mr Edmunds was working as a security guard. At that time he was actually working in a steel fabrication business, which brought - that was the reason - - -
284 HER HONOUR: That was the gates. I understand that.
285 MR CHADWICK: That - brought him to the gates.
286 HER HONOUR: But I thought - well at some stage then, he was a security officer.
287 MR CHADWICK: He had been a security guard. Yes, yes.
288 HER HONOUR: Yes, well that is - all right - - -
289 MR CHADWICK: But not at that, not at that time.
290 HER HONOUR: No, all right. Well then that, I note.
291 MR CHADWICK: Yes. And it may have been a slip of the tongue, Your Honour. The first time that you referred to my client's murder and the name of the victim, Your Honour may have said the name, 'Reynolds'.
292 HER HONOUR: Did I?
293 MR CHADWICK: It is, 'Heywood'.
294 HER HONOUR: I meant that. Was it the second time, I hope I got it right?
295 MR CHADWICK: Yes, the second time you were right, yes, Your Honour. The third matter - - -
296 HER HONOUR: Well that must be fixed up in the final.
297 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
298 HER HONOUR: Yes. I do apologise for that.
299 MR CHADWICK: I may have misheard it, but I thought Your Honour said, 'Reynolds'.
300 HER HONOUR: Well, I will check it and if I did - - -
301 MR CHADWICK: Yes - - -
302 HER HONOUR: - - - I apologise - - -.
303 MR CHADWICK: But you did say the second time - - -
304 HER HONOUR: - - - unreservedly.
305 MR CHADWICK: - - - the name of, 'Heywood.
306 HER HONOUR: Yes. All right. Check that, Ms - - -
307 MR CHADWICK: Now, the other matter, Your Honour - - -
308 HER HONOUR: Check that, Ms McWilliam. Sorry.
309 MR CHADWICK: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. The other matter is that in the sequence of events, there were two separate occasions where Mr Edmunds went to the Court of Appeal first for - and he abandoned his appeal against the conviction.
310 HER HONOUR: Yes.
311 MR CHADWICK: And then there was a subsequent successful application for the fixing of a minimum term.
312 HER HONOUR: That is right.
313 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
314 HER HONOUR: But as I understood it, there was no change to the individual figures.
315 MR CHADWICK: No. That is correct.
316 HER HONOUR: That was the point I was attempting to make.
317 MR CHADWICK: Yes. But there were two - - -
318 HER HONOUR: Perhaps albeit clumsily. Yes.
319 MR CHADWICK: Yes. There were two separate appearances.
320 HER HONOUR: All right.
321 MR CHADWICK: It was not on the same day.
322 HER HONOUR: Yes.
323 MR CHADWICK: And this is reflected in the decision of the Court of Appeal on 13 December 1993, which sets out the history of the matter.
324 HER HONOUR: All right. Well, I must have missed that.
325 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
326 HER HONOUR: The point I was attempting to make there was, I agree, that there certainly was that non-parole period that was set.
327 MR CHADWICK: Yes.
328 HER HONOUR: But the individual sentences were not varied or altered by the Court. That is the point I was making.
329 MR CHADWICK: That is what occurred, Your Honour. Yes.
330 HER HONOUR: Yes. All right.
331 MR CHADWICK: They are the matters to draw Your Honour's attention.
332 HER HONOUR: All right. No, thank you very much for that. No, anything?
333 MR HAMMILL: No, Your Honour.
334 HER HONOUR: All right. Anything further? No?
335 MR CHADWICK: No, Your Honour.
336 HER HONOUR: We will disconnect the link. All right, Mr Edmunds, now that is, you have heard that sentence, 23 years and 5 months. It will run concurrent with the sentence you are currently undergoing which is life with no parole. So, we are going to disconnect the link now and you will have to speak with your counsel.
337 MR CHADWICK: Yes. Could we ask if the link be kept for the moment? Or we could re-establish the link, so we can have a brief word to him after Your Honour's sentencing?
338 HER HONOUR: Well, I have got another matter five minutes ago. Can you contact him some other way ?
339 MR CHADWICK: Yes, of course, Your Honour. We can do that.
340 HER HONOUR: Is that all right? I am sorry.
341 MR CHADWICK: Yes, we can do that.
342 HER HONOUR: Yes, all right. Thank you. We are just going to disconnect the link now. Your counsel will no doubt speak to you in due course. All right?
343 ACCUSED: Thank you, Your Honour.
344 HER HONOUR: All right, then. Thank you. We will disconnect the link. I will leave while the next matter is organised. Thank you very much.
345 MR HAMMILL: Thank you, Your Honour.
346 - - -
0
15
0