Director of Public Prosecutions v Ransley
[2023] VCC 1639
•11 September 2023
S
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-22-00888
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ROBERT RANSLEY |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE BLAIR | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 16 March, 3 July, 17 July, 14 August 2023 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 11 September 2023 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Ransley | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2023] VCC 1639 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence
Catchwords: Intentionally cause serious injury in circumstances of gross violence – possess unregistered category A or B longarm – make threat to kill – plea of guilty – Category 1 offence – family violence – intimate partner violence – inhumane treatment of victim – multiple injuries – limited remorse – difficult childhood – negative attitudes towards women – mental health
Legislation Cited: s5(2G), 10(1) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited:DPP v Kulasinghe (a pseudonym) [2018] VCC 1460, DPP v Taauso
[2022] VCC 1672
Sentence: 9 years and 6 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 5 years and 6 months’
s6AAA – 12 years and 6 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 7 years and 6 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms V. Jones | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Self-represented |
HER HONOUR:
1Robert Ransley, on 16 March 2023 you pleaded guilty on Indictment M12569684 to one charge of make threat to kill, one charge of intentionally cause serious injury in circumstances of gross violence and one charge of possessing an unregistered Category A or B longarm.
2Your case has had a relatively long and tortuous journey through this court, largely as a result of the fact that you have been, and remain, unrepresented. You first appeared before me at Bendigo County Court on 22 August 2022. In an attempt to secure funding and representation, your matter was mentioned on 2 September, 24 November, 15 December 2022, and there was a further mention on 4 February 2023. Your attempt to gain representation has not been successful.
3During the course of these proceedings the OPP have taken care to ensure that you have all documentation in relation to your case. You forwarded written submissions dated 25 February 2023 to the court and I will identify that document as Exhibit 1 on the plea.
4As I have indicated, you were arraigned and pleaded guilty to the charges on 16 March 2023. After arraignment, with your consent, I ordered a Forensicare psychological report to assist me in sentencing. Your plea was adjourned until 3 July 2023 to allow for the preparation of this report and for the prosecution to obtain updated medical material in relation to the victim, Elise Conti.[1]
[1] A pseudonym
5A Forensicare report authored by Professor Michael Daffern dated 8 June 2023 was filed with the court on that date and a copy of this document was forwarded to both yourself and the prosecution.
6On 3 July 2023, Ms Jones, who has appeared for the prosecution throughout the substantive hearings, opened the plea by reading the Summary of Prosecution Opening to the court. Ms Jones also read and tendered victim impact statements from Elise Conti, Rosanna Caruso[2] and Simon Lloyd.[3] Photographs and documents were also tendered as follows: Exhibit E, Photobook 1, it had 19 photos of the victim being attended to at the scene; Exhibit F, Photobook 2, and that had 24 photographs of the victim at hospital; Exhibit G, was a letter from Dr Violet Tadros; Exhibit H, 17 photographs of Ms Conti taken by police on 17 April 2023; Exhibit I, a report from Dr Jason Schreiber dated 5 January 2022 and Exhibit J which was photograph 10 from Photobook 3 which depicts the vacuum cleaner pole that you used in the assault.
[2] A pseudonym
[3] A pseudonym
7On this date you made oral submissions, partly in response to my questions. After hearing from you I adjourned your case for two weeks, until 17 July 2023, to again explore if you might be able to get legal representation, either on a pro bono basis or via Victoria Legal Aid. Shortly before 17 July the court received an email from Victoria Legal Aid which mentioned a possibility of funding. On this basis I further adjourned your plea to investigate this potential. During this hearing you asked if the court had received any character references. The court had not received these documents. You provided the details for your power of attorney and the court made enquiries to locate those testimonials, which we have done.
8I should indicate as well that on each of the occasions, particularly once you had entered your plea, your case was adjourned. It was done so, probably with your reluctant consent, is the best way to describe it, because you have been quite keen to have this matter resolved so that you know where you stand and so that the matter is finalised.
9On 14 August 2023 it was apparent that there was to be no funding and consequently you remained unrepresented. You made submissions in relation to the circumstances of your offending and responded to the written submissions from the prosecution. Ms Jones on behalf of the prosecution made her submissions and you then responded to these. I then adjourned for sentence on 8 September 2023, and this listing was administratively adjourned until today. I apologise for that but I just needed a bit more time.
10In the interim period, the court has received testimonials from Nicole Grant dated 27 August 2023, June Margaret Mahoney, that was undated, and Frank Herrewyn. Mr Herrewyn's testimonial was in email format and that was dated 28 August 2023. Your power of attorney, Mr Hodson, forwarded these documents to the court by way of email and I will identify these documents as Exhibit 2 on the plea, and a bundle of references.
Circumstances of offending
11At your plea hearing on 3 July 2023 a Summary of Prosecution Opening was read to the court. This document described your offending and a summary of this document is as follows:
12At the time of you offended you were 56 years old. You lived at a rural property on Spring Flat at Mia Mia. You were in a relationship with Elise Conti, who is the victim of your offending. You met Elise through her brother, who was one of your neighbours. You had been in a relationship with Elise for about five months. She did not live with you but would regularly spend the night.
13On Sunday 12 December 2021 at approximately 9am you picked up Elise from her home address in Essendon and drove her back to your property. You got back to your property and had lunch.
14Later that afternoon you became agitated towards Elise because she could not drive a manual vehicle and was not able to look after your property when you went interstate. You became increasingly angry and verbally aggressive. You threw an ashtray at Elise and became more agitated. You told her it was her fault and then you began to kick and slap her to various areas of her body. You picked up a vacuum cleaner pole and repeatedly struck Elise to her head and body. Elise tried to get away and ran to a side fence. She jumped into an open paddock. You followed her and continued to strike her with the metal pole. You struck her to her body, head and face while she screamed for help. Elise could see blood coming from her injuries and begged you to stop. You continued to strike her and said 'I’m gonna kill ya' and 'You’re gonna die today'. That is Charge 1, make threat to kill.
15One of your neighbours heard you yelling and could hear thuds and a sound of someone crying and screaming. At some stage you stopped striking Elise and she collapsed into an armchair on the front porch of the house. She asked if she could go inside and clean up and you allowed her to go into the bathroom but became angry with her when she got blood on the shower, bath and walls. You told her to go back outside.
16Once outside you noticed that your dog was missing and you told Elise to search for your dog. Despite her severe injuries she stood up and searched for your dog. You continued to kick, punch and hit her with the pole whilst she did this. During the assault Elise was unable to defend herself, having been incapacitated by the injuries she suffered due to your earlier assault. This is Charge 2, intentionally cause serious injury in circumstances of gross violence.
17At about 7 pm when Elise was lying outside on the ground you asked her if she wanted a blanket and threw some netting over her. You said to her 'By the time I get up in the morning you’ll be gone and I’ll bury ya'. You went inside leaving Elise outside with significant injuries and in excruciating pain. She was unable to get up so she crawled to a mattress and lay next to the dog under a blanket she found. She pulled the blanket over her head during the night to keep the mosquitoes from her injuries.
18At approximately 1 am you came outside and asked Elise 'Are you dead yet?'. She replied that she was not and you replied 'You’ll be dead soon' and you went back inside the house.
19At approximately 6:30 am you came back out of the house. Elise asked you to call an ambulance. You refused saying you would be sent to gaol. Elise convinced you to call your friend, Simon LLOYD. At about 7:13 am you called Mr Lloyd and asked him to come and help you. Whilst waiting for Mr Lloyd you said to Elise 'Look what I’ve done to you, how come I have done this to you? Look what you made me do.'
20Mr LLOYD arrived about five minutes later and you told Mr LLOYD where Elise was on the mattress and that he 'better brace' himself. Mr LLOYD saw Elise lying on the mattress covered in blood and observed she was not moving. He saw her face was bruised, her hair was red with blood and there was a 'dent in her skull.' He initially thought she was deceased and he demanded you call an ambulance.
21You called Triple 0 and requested an ambulance. You told the operator that Elise had been assaulted by being struck all over the body, including her head, face and hands. In answer to the operator’s questions you said you were not sure if the offender was still at the scene and stated you did not know if any weapons had been used during the assault.
22Elise begged Mr LLOYD not to leave her alone with you and Mr LLOYD observed her to be whimpering, gasping for air and that her breathing was erratic. The index finger on her left hand was badly injured and he could see the bone.
23After the Triple 0 call the Heathcote police called you and you had a brief conversation with Leading Senior Constable Petrie. You showed Mr Lloyd the vacuum cleaner pole you used to assault Elise.
24Ambulance and police arrived at the Mia Mia property whilst Elise was receiving medical treatment. Mr LLOYD advised police there was a firearm located under your bed. Leading Senior Constable O’Bree located the firearm, and this firearm is classified as being a Category A firearm. Leading Senior Constable O’Bree conducted a safety check on the firearm and observed it to be loaded. There was no serial number able to be located on that firearm. That is Charge 3, possession of an unregistered firearm, Category A or B.
25I note you also had a registered firearm in your gun safe that was stored appropriately.
26The crime scene was later analysed by police and the metal pole was seized.
27Ambulance members assessed Elise's injuries as medically serious and determined that a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) was required to transport her to the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne for medical treatment.
28As a result of the assault Elise received the following injuries:
(a) Multiple skull and extensive facial bone fractures, and on 14 December 2021 she required specialist plastic reconstructive surgery (PRS) treatment in the operating theatre (OT). She had a washout and closure in relation to the related facial lacerations. Her injuries included:
(i)Nondisplaced left side of the head (parietal bone) fracture;
(ii)Minimally displaced left cheek bone (zygomatic arch) fracture;
(iii)Complex multi-fragmented eye socket fracture and upper jawbone fracture;
(iv)Complex multi-fragmented nose fractures;
(v)Upper jawbone fractures.
(b) Multiple right-sided rib fractures.
(c) Multiple limb bone fractures, including:
(i)Right forearm fractures which required wrist laceration closure and stabilising splint application;
(ii)Right wrist joint capsular avulsion fracture of the scaphoid;
(iii)Minimally displaced left fifth middle hand bone fracture which required specialist orthopaedic surgery with metal compression plate insertion to stabilise the fracture;
(iv)Complex multi-fragmented open left index finger joint fracture- dislocation which required specialist orthopaedic surgical repair with insertion of a metal screw and K-wire, wound washout and closure, and subsequent splint application;
(v)Mildly displaced extra-articular fracture through the base of the right little finger which required specialist orthopaedic surgery with metal locking plate insertion for stabilisation and wound closure.
(d) Multiple soft tissue injuries which required surgical wound closure including:
(i)Frontal forehead and left brow lacerations;
(ii)Two centimetre superficial lacerations to the back of the head;
(iii)Left cheek laceration;
(iv)Upper lip laceration;
(v)Upper gum (gingiva) laceration;
(vi)Laceration to outer ledge of right eye;
(vii)Moderate scalp blood collection (haematoma).
(e) Head injury with concussions symptoms.
(f) Blood loss requiring blood transfusion.
29Elise remained in hospital until 22 December 2021.
30Dr Schreiber, from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, assessed the medical materials relating to the victim's injuries and opined that the victim 'sustained blunt trauma to the head, torso and limbs with a patterned sharp trauma component to the forearm.'
31Dr Schreiber concluded that:
(a) The injuries were medically severe and required a surgical intervention for the tissues to have a chance to heal;
(b) A skull bone fracture occurred. The skull protects the brain;
(c) Multiple complicated bone injuries occurred to both limbs, that is, the right forearm and finger and the left hand and finger, body parts essential for work and social life;
(d) There is no doubt that without surgical treatments, Ms Conti's hand's full functioning and mobilisation would remain impaired to some degree for the rest of her life;
(e) Even with surgery, it is also possible for the arm, hand and finger function never to return back to normal;
(f) Her body temperature was rising, she was unable to mobilise without collapsing. In this sense, she was unable to seek help independently. Ms Conti was helpless, left outside with significant injuries and fractures without being provided first aid assistance for several hours;
(g) It is likely that she had suffered a high degree of pain;
(h) She will have scars;
(i) And the totality of injuries, that is, the combination of fractures, dislocation and open wounds could have led to potentially life-threatening complications without urgent medical care.
32At 9 am on 13 December 2021 you were arrested and taken to the Bendigo Police Station where you took part in a record of interview. You made the following comments:
a. The victim was a narcissist (A28) who would nag you (A179).
b. You are not a violent person (A45)
c. You asked, 'Why does the law hate men? I mean it’s a man against a woman. The man loses every time' (A48).
d. You said, 'I wanted to be the best I can be for her. That’s all I ever wanted' (A189)
e. You said you 'gave her every opportunity to just stop [nagging you, but] … she wouldn’t … and then the next thing I knew I was hitting her' (A193)
f. You said, 'I didn’t have control any more. I’m disgusted with myself for that. I’ve always been better than that' (A193)
g. You said, 'I physically could not make myself stop. I think until you’ve been in that situation – I can’t describe how scary – scary that is' (A195)
h. You said that you remembered the victim asking you to stop (A202, A248)
i. You said that you thought the victim may have been dead, which is why you checked on her (A207).
j. That you were in a rage (A249) and you hit the victim until you were too fatigued to continue hitting her (A90 – 91)
k. That you put the netting over her because you were just being sarcastic and – ‘cause I was still in this rage' (A440)
l. 'I was punching her wherever I could get her' (A74)
m. That you decided to use the metal vacuum cleaner pole because 'it was just handy' (A85)
n. It was 'good' the pole was thin because if it was something heavier you could have killed her (A52)
o. That you hated what you had done to the victim and that you can't blame Elise for what happened. 'The blame is the way I’ve been treated by women all these years'
p. You said, 'One thing that this definitely proves is I need the help I’ve been trying to get' (A457)
q. And, 'I’m damn sure she didn’t deserve what she copped. No matter what she said she didn’t deserve that' (A397)
Victim impact statement
33The court has received three victim impact statements.
34The first of these was from your victim, Elise Conti. Her victim impact statement was relatively short but it conveys the sheer enormity of what you did to her and what you have taken from her. Ms Conti described that she was petrified during the onslaught and she thought she was going to die. You left her utterly undignified, humiliated and in excruciating pain, more pain than she endured during aggressive chemotherapy. Ms Conti has been left with lasting injuries to her hands and her smile has altered as she can no longer lift her top lip properly. She is constantly reminded of this nightmare by the plates in her face and hands and the scars on her face and scalp. Ms Conti was in hospital for several weeks during the height of COVID. Visitors were restricted and she endured at least 10 operations whilst isolated and alone. Although she says she is not the same happy and social person, she is a determined woman who will not let this affect the rest of her life. Ms Conti is committed to her recovery and will not be defined by this traumatic ordeal.
35Rosanna Caruso, who is Ms Conti’s mother, described the overwhelming feelings she felt when she thought she was going to lose her daughter. She was numb and in shock. When she saw her daughter she was heartbroken. Ms Caruso cared for her daughter when she was discharged from hospital. She said she still feels sick in the stomach when she thinks of the injuries her daughter has endured. Ms Caruso now worries for her daughter’s future as she, that is Elise, now has permanent disabilities.
36Simon Lloyd, who was your friend and neighbour, also submitted a victim impact statement. Mr Lloyd stated that his life has changed forever after this day. He still has graphic images in his head of what he saw and has found it difficult to sleep and concentrate. He has lost motivation to work and perform daily tasks. As a result he has struggled financially. Mr Lloyd finds it hard to trust his judgement about people and he has been participating in counselling which has helped him to cope.
Personal circumstances
37As you were self-represented during your plea hearings, a summary of your personal circumstances is derived partly from what you told me but also from written submissions you sent from custody and also from the Forensicare report of Professor Michael Daffern.
38You are currently 57 years of age and you were 56 at the time of the offending.
39You were born in Sydney and your parents separated shortly after your birth. Your mother remarried and you have a younger half-sister from this relationship. In your written submissions and when you spoke to Professor Daffern, you described an abusive and lonely childhood during which you felt neglected and mistreated by your mother and stepfather. You felt that your sister was given preferential treatment whilst you were discouraged and beaten for minor transgressions. Due to these experiences, you spent your adolescence grappling with feelings of confusion and anger.
40At age 16 you assaulted your stepfather and subsequently you were forced to leave the family home. This marked a rift in the relationship with your mother and you did not have contact with her for approximately 10 years. Once you left home, you lived briefly in a hostel before finding a rental property.
41Some years later you began living with your maternal grandmother and you next had contact with your mother at your grandmother’s funeral. After your grandmother’s death your mother inherited her property and you were evicted.
42You had no contact with your biological father until you were 26 years old. You have had some contact with him in recent years by exchanging letters, though you are unsure of his current circumstances and health. Since your mid-twenties you have remained estranged from your mother and half-sister.
43I take into account that your background has been marked by a difficult relationship with your mother. This has impacted upon you and shaped the man you have become. In my view it is likely that your attitudes to women have been influenced by your upbringing and have some relevance in a general way in terms of the sentence I impose upon you.
44In your written submissions you said that the only relative you currently have contact with is a great aunt who is aged in her 90s and living in Queensland. The court received a testimonial from your great aunt, June Margaret Mahoney. She speaks of spending time with you each winter and your kindness and compassion when you travelled to Queensland to stay with her and support her upon the death of her husband. Mrs Mahoney says she is aware that you have been charged with a serious violent offence. In her experience she has found you to be extremely kind, courteous, respectful, as well as honest and most helpful.
45You were educated in various schools in New South Wales including Padstow Park Public School followed by East Hills Boys High School and Jannali High School. You reported being an average student academically, preferring practical subjects such as metal working and technical drawing. You had good relationships with your teachers and peers and you were rarely in trouble.
46Your first career preference was to be a motor mechanic, but as this path was not supported by your mother you instead commenced an electrical apprenticeship. You completed three years of this apprenticeship before stopping for reasons you cannot recall.
47Following your departure from the apprenticeship, you worked as a roadie in your early 20s for rock and roll bands. The lack of job security prompted you to eventually move into truck driving, driving both interstate and intrastate routes. You worked as a truck driver until early 2020 when you were let go due to what you described as several uncharacteristic driving errors. You attribute these errors to a sense that your brain was 'slowing down' though Professor Daffern did not identify any obvious signs of cognitive decline during his assessment of you.
48After living in Sydney for many years, you moved to a 20-acre property in Heathcote to escape life in the city. You did not farm your property as such, rather you occupied your time by completing the various maintenance tasks required of a relatively large property. You also own two other investment properties in Albury. Your incarceration has meant that you have no ability to maintain your properties. Your investment properties both have mortgages. You relied upon the rental income to pay the expenses. The recent increase in interest rates has had the impact that there is now a shortfall and you are at risk of losing these properties.
49You told Professor Daffern that you have had several heterosexual relationships throughout your life but you are currently single. You described nearly all of these relationships in negative terms, specifically that your former partners were not faithful, honest or fair.
50You have a son from a previous relationship which ended in 2006. You have never met your son and express regret that you have not had the opportunity to meet him or have any impact upon his life.
51You had been in a relationship with the victim, Ms Conti, for five months prior to the offending incident currently before the court. Ms Conti did not live with you but would visit about once a week and you would spend time together having dinner and going for rides on your motorbike. You also helped her father for several months by cutting firewood for him. This short relationship was tumultuous and Ms Conti’s behaviour frequently made you feel angry, frustrated and threatened.
52You told Professor Daffern that you do not believe you will find a suitable partner in the future and you have given up on the idea of being in a romantic relationship or having a family.
Mental health
53On 8 May 2023 you were assessed by video link in custody by Forensicare consultant psychologist, Professor Michael Daffern.[4]
[4] Forensicare psychological report of Professor Michael Daffern dated 8 June 2023.
54In his report, Professor Daffern opined that your abusive and neglectful childhood likely created a 'heightened sensitivity to mistreatment' by intimate partners.[5] This causes feelings of anger, frustration and aggression when you feel you have been wronged. He notes that you seem to have some insight into the relationship between your childhood experiences and the difficulties you have experienced in your adult intimate relationships. As mentioned, I have taken this into account in the sentencing synthesis.
[5] Professor Daffern report, [26].
55You told Professor Daffern that you have experienced several periods of depression throughout your life and he considers that most of these occasions are linked to breakdowns in your relationships. In your written submissions, you described experiencing suicidal thoughts in 2007 during one of these depressive episodes and you were assisted by Beyond Blue.
56Following a period of depression in 2020, you consulted a GP and then a psychiatrist and two psychologists. You were prescribed antidepressants, however, you told Professor Daffern that you did not find them beneficial and you were now terrified of taking medication. Aside from these instances in 2020, you have not received any other formal treatment for your mental health throughout your life.
57You indicated during one of your plea hearings that you were aware you were experiencing issues with your mental health in the years preceding your offending, but you did not feel that you received an appropriate diagnosis or treatment.
58Professor Daffern was unable to properly establish what effect your low mood may have had on your behaviour because you told him you have little recollection of the attack on Ms Conti.
59At the time of writing his report, Professor Daffern did not consider you to be mentally unwell, though he considered you should be monitored and treated if depressive symptoms arise again. You have told me in court that you have seen psychologists occasionally in prison, however, you have not found this helpful. You were also prescribed medication for anxiety but you do not feel that this has helped to stop the trembling you were experiencing.
60I take into account again in a general way that you have had periods of poor mental health in your life and at a time proximate to the offending.
61You have a fairly limited history of drug use, including sporadic use of methamphetamine and cocaine in your 20s as well as occasional use of cannabis throughout your adult life. You do not believe drug use has ever impacted your daily functioning or mental health.
62Prior to your remand you consumed alcohol daily which was usually between three and seven longneck beers per day. You do not consider yourself to have had a drinking problem and you have not found it difficult to be without alcohol in custody. You have reiterated several times during the plea hearings for this matter that you were not intoxicated by drugs or alcohol during this offending and you had drank only a single beer several hours prior.
63It was Professor Daffern’s opinion following his assessment of you that you may benefit from assessment and, if indicated, treatment for your alcohol use.
64You have a relatively brief criminal history with your most recent offending being a matter heard at the Bendigo Magistrates’ Court in 2004, which is now 19 years ago.
65This matter is a relevant prior being a charge of unlawful assault against your partner at the time. This charge did not originally appear on the criminal history provided to the court and it was only discovered because you discussed the incident with Professor Daffern and it was mentioned in the Forensicare report. You maintain that the complainant was the aggressor in this incident, a fact you say was accepted by the magistrate and police, and it was your understanding a conviction was not recorded for this reason. Your criminal history indicates you received a $750 fine with conviction. As I have said, it is 19 years ago but it still does have some relevance.
66The other prior matters were heard in New South Wales. They consist of charges for driving with a cancelled licence and disobey a traffic signal in 1987, as well as charges for assault and malicious injury heard in 1986 and 1985 respectively. You have stated on a number of occasions that the charge of malicious injury related to an incident of doing burnouts in a park which damaged a grassy area and that there was no injury to a person. In relation to each of these offences you received a fine and a short period of manual labour.
67Since the last court hearing, I have received three character references on your behalf. I have already mentioned Mrs Mahoney’s reference. There was a testimonial from your friend, Nicole Grant, and a former landlord and friend, Frank Herrewyn. I am unsure how much they each understand of your offending but they both seem to appreciate you are in custody. Ms Grant, in particular, speaks of you as an emotionally supportive person who has always been a reliable and dependable figure in her life as well as having an uncle type role with her children. She considers you as a kind, compassionate and generous man. Mr Herrewyn considered you to be a person of good character, however, his contact with you has been limited in more recent times.
68I take into account that prior to this offending you were a man of relatively good character, that is of course, within the context of your prior history.
Further matters in mitigation
69I take into account in your favour that you not only made admissions to your offending but that you immediately indicated your intention to plead guilty to the charges. Ms Conti has been spared the uncertainty of court proceedings and the question of whether she would have to relive the trauma by giving evidence. In this way you have accepted responsibility for your offending and have facilitated the course of justice. Additionally, you have spared the courts the time and expense of a trial. This is particularly important in the aftermath of the COVID‑19 pandemic when the courts are still suffering a significant backlog of trials.
70I propose to allow you a significant discount for your plea of guilty in these circumstances.
71Further, I consider that your plea of guilty is demonstrative of some remorse. However, the depth of your remorse is difficult to ascertain and likely complicated by your experiences within relationships with women, starting with the relationship with your mother. On the whole I accept that you are sorry and that you regret your actions and cannot forgive yourself for what you have done. However, it does not appear that you have true victim empathy and as such I have given limited weight to remorse.
72You have suffered the very direct consequences of your offending. You were immediately remanded in custody for the first time in your life at the age of 56. Professor Daffern describes that you felt hopeless and worthless following your arrest and incarceration and are ashamed of yourself and your actions.
73There has been a delay of 21 months from the date of your offending to sentence. I take into account that during this time you have been in limbo. You have been in custody expecting a lengthy term of imprisonment but you have not known the precise parameters of this and as such I expect you have served your time on remand with a sense of anticipation and dread. You have been unable to plan for your future.
74In addition, I take into account that you have come into custody at a time just after the COVID‑19 pandemic where conditions in custody are more onerous than they were previously. You have experienced several quarantines and lockdowns at MRC, Ravenhall, and Hopkins as a result. You contracted COVID and have experienced a restriction in programs you are able to undertake. You have, however, completed the Atlas One program and programs to assist with depression and stress. You have seen the psychologist at the gaol once every two months.
75In custody you have worked in the kitchen and in metal fabrication and you are now working in number plates. Outside of this work you read and have a couple of friends that you talk with.
76You have indicated both orally and in your written submissions that you have learnt from your mistakes. I take into account your relatively confined prior history, the fact that this is your first time in custody and the difficult circumstances you have encountered in the prison environment. For these reasons specific deterrence, whilst still being a relevant sentencing consideration, has less importance than general deterrence and punishment.
77Your status as a sentenced prisoner with the potential of parole should see other programs become available to you. Clearly, you would benefit from education in terms of your relationships with women, men’s behaviour change programs and offence-specific programs dealing with the use of violence.
78In terms of rehabilitation, I consider your prospects to be reasonable. You have accepted responsibility for your behaviour, you are a middle-aged man of relatively good character, you have undertaken some programs in custody, you have a full work history and are working in custody, you have some insight into your mental health issues and appear open to gaining insight and treatment for the same. I am optimistic, with support and supervision by way of programs and then parole, this will increase your ability to reform.
Nature and gravity of offending
79The charges to which you have pleaded guilty are inherently very serious. The charge of intentionally cause serious injury in circumstances of gross violence is punishable by 20 years' imprisonment and has been designated by Parliament as a Category 1 offence. Pursuant to s5(2G) of the Sentencing Act, a Category 1 offence must be punished by the imposition of a term of imprisonment. Further, pursuant to s10(1) of the Sentencing Act, I must impose a minimum non-parole period of four years' imprisonment unless a special reason exists. No such reasons have been advanced by you and I do not find a special reason exists in the circumstances of your case.
80The charge of threat to kill is punishable by a maximum penalty of 10 years and the charge of possess unregistered firearm, Category A or B, is punishable for a first offence by two years' imprisonment or 120 penalty units.
81In relation to the charge of making a threat to kill, I consider this to be a serious example of this offence. It is offending that occurred in the context of the assault and at a time while you were striking Ms Conti with the pole.
82In terms of other factors that relate to the gravity of your offending, you were in an intimate relationship with your victim. You became enraged for no apparent reason and assaulted Ms Conti continuously with a weapon for an extended time, in the order of four hours. You hit her to all areas of her body, including her head, which is a most vulnerable region. You continued to assault your victim after she was incapacitated. This is why your offending has occurred in circumstances of gross violence.
83It must have been clear to you just how severely you had hurt Ms Conti but rather than assist her or call for medical help you did not allow her to tend her own wounds but told her to get out of your house. You left her for dead on your front porch to sleep on the dog mattress and threw a piece of netting over her when she asked for a blanket. Not only did you leave her on your porch in such conditions but you degraded and humiliated her by asking if she was dead yet when you checked on her in the early hours of the morning.
84Ms Conti was left by you in excruciating pain and unable to move. You left her to soil herself and urinate in her pants. Your offending was callous, disgusting and despicable.
85The injuries you inflicted upon Ms Conti were severe. She required extensive surgeries and was in hospital for three weeks and required re-admission for ongoing management of her injuries. Without urgent treatment the totality of Ms Conti’s injuries could have led to potentially life-threatening complications. Ms Conti continues to suffer loss of function to body parts that are essential for work and social life and she is likely to remain impaired for the rest of her life. You have scarred her face, her lip, her scalp and other areas of her body. In addition, Ms Conti has suffered significant psychological damage. She was referred by her GP, Dr Tadros, to a psychologist on a mental health care plan and prescribed antidepressant medication.
86The factors I have described have been identified by the courts as factors that mark the seriousness of an instance of offending. In your case these factors combine to represent a very serious example of offending of this nature.
Sentencing purposes
87Given the circumstances I have just described general deterrence looms large as a sentencing consideration in your case. The courts have repeatedly stated that domestic violence will not be tolerated in our community. People who perpetrate such violence can expect to receive lengthy periods in custody. Additionally, I denounce your offending in the strongest terms possible.
88For the reasons I have already mentioned I have given less weight to specific deterrence. That said, I am confident the sentence I impose upon you will deter you from further offending in the future.
89Community protection is a relevant sentencing consideration in your case, particularly given your deeply ingrained views towards domestic violence of women. There is a real need for rehabilitation in your case. In addition, I must punish you for the offending before this court.
90Parsimony, proportionality and totality are also relevant principles I take into account. It is a fundamental sentencing principle that a court must not impose a sentence any more severe than the minimum necessary to meet all of the sentencing purposes and requirements. The principle of totality, in particular, will be reflected in the orders for cumulation and concurrency that will follow.
91I have reviewed each of the cases referred to by Ms Jones. In relation to the cases of Taauso and Kulasinghe, previous decisions of this court, they have been instructive in terms of current sentencing practices, however, each case turns on its own facts. The weapons used were far more serious, i.e. they were an axe and a knife and the assault committed was more purposeful in that in both instances the offender sought to disfigure their victim by cutting and targeting the facial region. Although I consider your moral culpability to be high, it is at a different level to the offenders in those cases.
92In determining the appropriate sentence in your case, I have had regard to all of the matters raised throughout the numerous plea hearings. In particular, I have had regard to the circumstances and seriousness of your offending, the matters raised in mitigation, current sentencing practices for domestic violence offending and the victim impact statements that were tendered.
93Mr Ransley, in my view, the only appropriate punishment is a lengthy term of imprisonment. It is my view the best way to provide for protection of the community and the rehabilitation that you require is through the imposition of a non-parole period that allows for a lengthy period of supervision, support and treatment upon your release from custody.
94In relation to each of the charges before the court you are convicted and sentenced as follows:
· In relation to Charge 1 of make threat to kill, I sentence you to three and a half years' imprisonment – so that is three years, six months;
· In relation to Charge 2, intentionally cause serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, I sentence you to nine years' imprisonment;
· In relation to Charge 3, possession of an unregistered firearm, I sentence you to one month imprisonment.
95The sentence on Charge 2 is the base sentence and I order that six months of the sentence on Charge 1 be served cumulatively upon it. The sentence on Charge 3 is to be served concurrently. So the total effective sentence is therefore nine years and six months.
96As for the minimum non-parole period, having regard to your circumstances and the circumstances of the offending, I consider that justice requires that you serve a period of five years and six months before being eligible for parole. In setting this period I am mindful that the requirement of general deterrence must be reflected in both the head sentence imposed and the non-parole period.[6]
[6] DPP v Bulfin [1998] 4 VR 11.
97HER HONOUR: I declare 637 days pre-sentence detention as having already been served. So the time that you have served gets taken into account. So I am not sure what it works out to, what you have left to do, but I am quite sure that sentence management will talk to you in due course and work that out with you.
98Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I indicate that but for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a total effective sentence of 12 years and six months with a non-parole period of seven years and six months' imprisonment.
99So, Mr Ransley, do you understand the sentence I have imposed?
100OFFENDER: Yes, I think I do.
101HER HONOUR: So nine years, six months, is the head sentence, five years, six months is the bottom, is the non-parole period. So you have to serve that before being eligible for parole. And the 637 days get taken into account as having already been served. I am not sure, you might have some emergency management days but that is an executive function and the gaol will talk to you about that.
102OFFENDER: Okay.
103HER HONOUR: That second figure, or the second sentence that I spoke of, so the 12 years and six months and seven years and six months for a non-parole period, that's what I would have given you had you run a trial and lost. So it shows or demonstrates the value of your plea of guilty, which in my estimation of this case was significant. Okay?
104OFFENDER: Yeah.
105MS JONES: Your Honour, finally, there is an application for a forfeiture order in respect of the Category A longarm under the Firearms Act.
106HER HONOUR: I am pretty confident you would have – have you sent a forfeiture order through?
107MS JONES: Yes, a draft order has been provided - - -
108HER HONOUR: Yes, we've got it. Mr Ransley, I will make the order for forfeiture of the longarm that was seized. It's not the one that was from the gun safe, it's the one that had the serial number off it and that's subject to the charge. Okay? So that will be forfeited.
109OFFENDER: Okay.
110HER HONOUR: I don't think you'll want it back, you'll just get charged with it again – you can't have it.
111OFFENDER: No, I never want it back.
112I should also thank you, Ms Jones. Thank you very much, and your instructor, for the assistance that you've given me, it's been fabulous. You have communicated with Mr Ransley when we've asked and certainly made sure that he's had all the material that he needs, and your submissions were of a very high level. Thank you.
113MS JONES: Thank you very much, Your Honour, that's much appreciated.
114HER HONOUR: Alright, Mr Ransley, good luck for the future and I'll adjourn the court.
- - -
2
0