Director of Public Prosecutions v Rule
[2021] VCC 1989
•8 December 2021
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT SHEPPARTON
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR 21-00728
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| QUINTON RULE |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE SMALLWOOD |
WHERE HELD: | Shepparton |
DATE OF HEARING: | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 8 December 2021 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Rule |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 1989 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr D. Cordy | Office of Public Prosecutions |
For the Accused | Mr T. Fitzpatrick | Geoff Clancy Solicitors |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Quinton Rule, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of home invasion, one charge of causing serious injury recklessly. And one charge of damaging property. Those crimes carry maximum penalties of 25 years, 10 years and 10 years respectively.
2 You also pleaded guilty to one uplifted summary charge of breaching an intervention order. On that matter you were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 2 months to be served concurrently with the sentence on the indictment.
3 You pleaded guilty at a relatively early period of time. You were 27 at the time of the offending. In your record of interview when you were spoken to by police you made many admissions. Having now seen all the material in this matter, it is my view that a number of those admissions were simply untrue. Whether they were perceptions that you had of your father or whatever, I do not know. But I am being careful about that, in that the Crown opening does not accord with the admissions you made. But having gone through all of the material I can see exactly why that is. And there will be a couple of simple examples that I will give.
4 I accept that your plea of guilty is now accompanied by appropriate remorse. Because of your quite significant intellectual difficulties, I accept that remorse is a difficult thing for you to understand or to express. But I now accept that it is present.
5 You must also get the utilitarian benefit of that plea of guilty. For the poor victim in this matter to have given evidence would have been a dreadful experience for her. You also get the benefit of the decision of Worboyes, Tyler v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169, in the sense that your plea of guilty has assisted and relieved, at least a tiny bit of the pressure under which the criminal justice system is operating at the moment.
6 You do have prior convictions of significance, they include violence, you have been to gaol previously and they are of real concern. I will be dealing again with that later.
7 You participated in Koori Court over two occasions. On the first occasion it became clear that you had very little idea at all about your Koori origins but you sat through it and did the best that you could.
8 On the second occasion, I told you the first time that when you came back the seriousness of what you had done would be pointed out to you. Aunty Pam was a female, elder present during that Koori Court. She is an older woman and was able to sit there and take you through what you had done. I think you do have difficulty understanding the significance of what occurred. But by the end of her conversation with you, where she really gave it to you, I suppose in the vernacular. I accepted at the end of that you did realise just how simply wrong and seriously wrong what you did was.
9 You get the benefit of that. You get the benefit of having the courage to sit there and cop it. I know I am using the vernacular it's just that I'm trying to talk to you in the circumstances that you were in.
10 The offending which I will describe in a moment has to be regarded as very serious. In the normal course of events for general and specific deterrence, as well as denunciation and appropriate punishment. I have already sentenced your father to a total sentence of 9 years with a 6 year minimum. In his circumstances I pointed out denunciation was very significant. It also remains significant in your particular situation.
11 You will undergo the sentences to be imposed under COVID conditions. You have already undergone a significant period of time in COVID. As I understand it, you have been involved in lockdowns and sorts of matters, it has been difficult for you. The authorities will make certain decision in respect of that which is no concern of mine.
12 There has been a significant delay between the time of the offending and your admissions and the matter actually being finally disposed of. A lot of that delay was caused by people genuinely and sincerely endeavouring to get as much material on you and your father as was possible.
13 I might say that a Forensicare report was ultimately obtained which describes your background and your set of circumstances. I will say that that report is one of the best that I have come across. It is detailed, it is balanced and gives a much clearer insight into the difficulties that you have had in life and the difficulties that you are going to face.
14 They are all the matters that I take into account at this point in time, right from the outset. I make it clear again from the outset that I do not believe that your sentence needs to be anywhere near what that of your father was. It still has to be significant. I think there are very great differences between the two of you. And whilst parity is clearly a matter I take into account, I will endeavour to articulate the differences that I see.
15 I also point out from the start, that you pleaded to a different Crown opening than your father did. There are a number of matters I will refer to briefly as I go through the opening that do relate to that.
16 You were 22 at the time of the offending and you were on and off residing with your father and your co-offender Mr Arthur Rule, he was 47. Your mother and younger brother also resided at the address in St James.
17 A Ms Christine Weller lived next door to the family. She had moved to the country in around about 2016 to escape city life and set herself up for retirement. She had worked as a nurse for 27 years and retired in April 2019. After she first moved in, the families were on fairly good terms. But after approximately 18 months the relationship turned sour. And apparently
Ms Weller removed parts of a tree that was planted on your property that was overhanging on to her property and concealing solar panels on her roof. I point out that that is how, as I understand it, I think it is a rental property that was taken out by your parents.
18 As I understand it, your parents lodged a complaint about this with the Dispute Settlement Centre, claiming that the tree was a sacred tree. When we did the first day of Koori Court the local Elders, the Yorta Yorta people disputed that and found that a bit difficult to believe or that your parents had the right to even suggest such a thing. But be as it may, that appears to have been the start of all this.
19 There were various intervention orders sought. By the end of July 2019 there were at least two or three intervention orders in place. And you have been sentenced for breaching one of those and I have just done that.
20 On 20 July 2019, Ms Weller who at that stage was 64 years of age went to bed at around about 7.30 pm. She woke up about 11 pm to go to the toilet. She heard a loud noise which sounded like something landing on the roof. She decided to stay up and read. So, she went into the dining room, the lamp was on and she could see glass on the floor in front of her family room door. She then noticed a small hole in the bottom of the glass door.
21 Something then hit the glass door and it shattered. Your father stepped through the door frame into her home and you followed him in. She saw that your father held a baseball bat in his hand and you held a straight piece of pipe, approximately a metre long. She estimated that the pipe was as thick, or thicker than a lid of a two litre milk bottle.
22 That's home invasion. It can be pointed out here simply, that the two of you were probably intoxicated. This was a 64 year old lady, she lived by herself, you knew that. She was defenceless you knew that. It was her own home you knew that and you almost certainly would've been aware of her circumstances.
23 Despite that the two of you felt the need to arm yourselves with weapons, you're both big men and it was in that situation, in the middle of the night the two of you attacked an utterly defenceless woman.
24 This is where the differences come in. I sentence you on the basis that your father hit her in the back and she fell to the ground. Your father continued kicking her and hitting her with the baseball bat while she was on the ground. Mainly hitting her back, legs, and ankle. She asked, 'Why he's doing this to her?' He didn't reply instead he looked at you.
25 You then came over and hit her with pipe and kicked her between her arms and stomach. While this attack was going on her dogs were in the room barking. Your father kicked one of the dogs, a toy poodle called 'Fevvie.' She heard something smash against the wall near the kitchen. And your father then screamed at her, 'Get out, get out, get out of town, don't go to the cops.' She told him, 'She didn't think she could get up.' And he kicked her again.
26 She managed to crawl through the family room over the broken glass from the door and the garden bed outside. And made it to her car parked in the carport, a silver grey Mazda. As she was crawling, your father handed her car keys to her. She asked, 'If she could take her dog with her?' And he told her, 'No.'
27 She was struggling to breathe and was in a lot of pain. She opened the driver's side door and pulled herself into the driver's seat. As she put the car in reverse, your father hit the car windscreen with a baton. I've seen the photographs of that and I've seen photographs of the victim too. He was screaming at her to 'Get out and leave town.' You also apparently hit the bonnet of the car.
28 She managed to drive to a friend's house in Oliver Road, Yundool. She sounded the horn and people came to her aid. She was observed to be distressed, an ambulance was called and she was having difficulty breathing.
29 At approximately 11.54 pm police received a report from your mother about a neighbour dispute at 45 Devenish Road, St James. Whilst enroute police members received another job 12 minutes later to attend at the Oliver Road address where a 65[sic] year old had been beaten by a neighbour. That call obviously came from the people that were assisting her. That assault had occurred at 47 Devenish Road, St James which is next door to where you people came from.
30 Shortly after this your mother again called police wanting to cancel police attendance as it was all a misunderstanding. When police arrived at Oliver Road and spoke to Ms Weller, she told them what had happened. Photographs were taken.
31 She was taken to the hospital and initially was in and out of consciousness. Emergency chest drain was inserted and she had to be intubated to maintain breathing. She was then transported by helicopter to the Royal Melbourne Hospital. And I will be going through all the injuries that she suffered in a moment.
32 Police observed that her dogs were frightened and some were hiding. The house was locked down for further processing the following day.
33 Approximately 11 o'clock on 21 July police attended the Rule family residence at 45 Devenish Road and spoke to your mother. She said, 'She knew nothing about the incident, she'd been in Wangaratta at the time. And she didn't know the whereabouts of either of you.' That's pretty hard to believe. It seems pretty clear to me that your father from what appears later, had contacted her, she full well in my view, knew what was going on. And whilst I didn't express that view during the sentencing of your father because I was asked not to. That is my clear view. And also note, as this process has been carried out, that your mother is trying to blame you for all this and exonerate your father. Which in my view is absolute rubbish.
34 In any event in those circumstances, particularly because of a matter that's raised in the Forensicare report, I'm prepared to accept that this incident was largely brought about by your father. He was twice your age, he knew exactly what he was doing. He took you in there, he attacked her, when she asked what was going on, he then invited you to attack. And you then did. As I said, as I just read out before, he just looked at you when she asked why she was being flogged.
35 It's very serious for both of you. But the fact of the matter is in these circumstances, even though you do have significant prior convictions, your father should have known a lot better. And I'll be dealing again with you being effectively led in to this at a later time.
36 The fact of the matter is, that had Ms Weller not been able to make the neighbour's house, there's no doubt in my mind that she would have died.
37 Her injuries included, multiple fractures, including the hand and fingers, complicated right index finger, right ring finger fracture, neck of the left fight hand bone fracture. Multiple complicated rib fractures, dislocations of the right seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth ribs. With flail chest segments directed towards the side and back as bits of rib had come off causing abnormal breathing. That can be fatal in itself. Multiple spinal bone fractures on both sides. Tibia fracture that had to be plaster-cast.
38 Multiple internal organs requiring emergency procedures including lacerated and large volume bleeding of the spleen. Air and blood collection between the pleural and pleural space covering the lungs, resulting in both lungs to collapse. Bleeding to both lungs. Blood loss requiring blood transfusion. And impaired hand functions including swelling and scar tissue. That is the opinion of the doctors. And I accept that implicitly that she would have died had she not been able to get to the neighbour's house.
39 She's now required to have four injections every year and antibiotics for the next three years due to having had her spleen removed. She's provided a victim impact statement and I'll read that in a moment.
40 You, when interviewed by the police, seemed to have adopted, in my view, actions taken by your father. You said, 'You grabbed a pole,' when speaking to police, 'Assaulted her with it.' You said, 'You went into the house and gained entry by breaking the sliding door. You went to the house with your dad. You wrapped the pole across the back of the kneecaps to drop her.' Which is rubbish. 'You kicked one of her dogs,' well I find that your father did that. 'You kicked her a number of times to her rib cage,' you said. 'Told her to get out and don't ever come back and if you do, I'm gonna put a bullet in her head.' I just think your father said all that, not you.
41 'You damaged the walls in her house with the pole.' That might have been you. And 'You damaged her car as she was trying to leave.' That might have been you too.
42 In these circumstances I'm very concerned that your own, bearing in mind your extreme limitations, your own purported admissions whilst you were clearly involved in this and you clearly attacked her and it was clearly grossly cowardly I think that your father was a much greater participant. And much more responsible for all this than you were.
43 As I said, when sentencing your father, the learned prosecutor described the offending as 'Despicable.' And I can think of no other word for it.
44 Aunty Pam, when she was talking to you during Koori Court, became very angry, just couldn't believe that an Aboriginal person could do this to an older woman. She told you exactly what she thought of you.
45 I noted as I was leaving court that despite your difficulties and inappropriate behaviour at times and I'll be going through that again. But as I left court, that after what she had said to you, that you were in the dock crying. I accept that in those circumstances, someone had finally got through to you, just how wrong all this was. As I've said, it's very serious and I think the victim impact statement which I will read in detail conveys everything that needs to be known.
46 Ms Weller said;
'I was 64 years old when the crime was committed. I'd been living in the town of St James for three and a half years. I was enjoying part time retirement involving myself in town activities. I worked as a registered psychiatric nurse when called upon. I lived in a home I owned, had renovated and added solar power, extra water storage and a chook pen. I undertook all the maintenance required as the property was half an acre. The garden required continual upkeep which I enjoyed.
I've always had animals in my life. At the time of the crime, I had two cats and five poodles that I clipped and groomed myself. This was my family. I believed my future was safe and secure.
The impact of the crime has been unrelenting fear. The offending happened so fast I didn't have time to process what was happening. I lost consciousness for a time and felt overwhelming fear as I drove away from home. It was then I registered how scared I was.
I had three surgeries in four days whilst in hospital. I've been diagnosed with lifelong health issues due to the multiple injuries I sustained. I've attached a list of injuries to the end of the victim impact statement. [But we won't need to go there.]
I continue to have pain and permanent decreasing function of the affected areas. I'm now unable to my dogs, tender my garden, or work as a nurse. I could not manage without the support and validation from my sister on a daily basis. This overwhelming fear has affected my mental health severely. And I see a trauma psychologist regularly.
I returned home from hospital in September of 2019. After the committal I continue to fear my life. [Perhaps inadmissible the next bit.]
In February 2020 I had to seek assistance from my granddaughter to leave the house I would never return. These all-encompassing fears led me to selling my home. A home I once owned, I had to sell, to financial loss to myself and had to start again.
I now find I'll never be in a position to buy, let alone another home and faced with the private rental market. I had to re-home two dogs which is heartbreaking. My youngest dog was nine, there was no possibility of renting with five dogs. I'm still alive but my dogs are gone, my lifestyle, my secure future, a home I loved have been eliminated by this crime.
What was once my nest egg for retirement has gone. My secure future and wellbeing were shattered in an instant.
47 Despicable doesn't even go halfway there when I think about it. That's what you did. That's what you did with your father.
48 Some very helpful material was put before me on your behalf. A very significant gaol sentence, even in your situation is appropriate. When I, before sentencing your father I deliberately didn't read the Forensicare report on you because I saw from the start that there was material adverse to your father. And that wouldn't have been fair. It's fair to say that having now read that Forensicare report and your father's attitude and the various things during your life. I wish I'd given him some more, given him more than I did.
49 Be that as it may, we have to sentence these things in fairness and based on two quite distinct Crown openings and I've already mentioned parity is an issue.
50 So far as COVID is concerned, you have been in lockdown for a significant period of time. During the 871 days that you have been on PSD your history has been outlined in three separate meetings with Ms Wood, the forensic psychologist. I'll be going through that in a moment.
51 You have longstanding cannabis and amphetamine problems, you went to 14 or 15 different schools, you left in Year 11. All those matters are taken into account and all those matters are pointed out in the report of Ms Wood. It is a situation where, for reasons that will become obvious, the decisions in Muldrock v The Queen [2011] and R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 play a significant part. And I take them into account in a very significant way.
52 As I have indicated already the sentence was deferred. There was a report tendered from a Ms McDougall that back in 2018 and she described attempts that had been made to deal with you. You're of, you say of Aboriginal origin, or your mother says you are. But in any event, you had been trying to get anger management with Family Care. You joined the men's group at Rumbalara. And all those matters were hopefully going to assist you, trying to keep you remaining abstinent. You started using amphetamines at the age 17. And was smoking cannabis on a daily basis. Back in 2018 you did have some appointments which you were trying to stay in touch with. I accept that, with the men's group and you were trying to get through the courses.
53 I have before me the intellectual disability assessment report, when you were only nine, puts your IQ at about 63. And that's described as a mild intellectual disability. But having had the opportunity of listening to you talking to Aunty Pam and observing you at the Koori Court hearing. Your limitations are very, very obvious. And it must be very, very difficult and frustrating for you.
54 Back in those days you were in Year 3 at Wallan Primary School, you had repeated Prep and you had all sorts of difficulties at school. And I think that report remains on file and can simply remain there.
55 I then turn to the report of Dr Wood. She spoke to you on a number of occasions. She said that, 'Your responses indicated that your true appreciation of your legal situation was limited. And you made numerous self-incriminating disclosures.' You did that during the Koori Court sentencing conversation as well.
56 She said, 'Amongst other things that your vocabulary was limited. That you used incorrect words. At times your responses were irrelevant and you misunderstood question. You tended to describe behaviours and events with limited ability to reflect on associated thoughts and feelings. As you spoke to her more and more often you became increasingly forthcoming about how you felt, in terms of your mental health and in terms of what you had done. You didn't make any attempt to withhold information she thought that placed you in an unfavourable light.' And she, 'Thought that you were in fact, doing your best.'
57 She said that, 'Your behaviour was superficially bright and in times incongruous, that is you'd smile when describing past serious assaults.' That was something that I noticed during the course of the hearing, that your smile seemed inappropriate. I think at one stage in the hearing you said, 'That was because of the meds that you were on.' But didn't take that any further.
58 'Your timeframes were conflicting.' She said that, 'Your short term memory was intact and displayed good memory for events.' She said, 'By the time she was dealing with you, you were finally showing insight, or good insight into your offending, anger issues and drug problems.'
The family history is based total on the self-report. You were born in Frankston, apparently of Aboriginal origin though, I think the Elders had some doubts about that. You recalled when talking to her, 'That your parent's relationship was volatile at times, people yelling, throwing objects during arguments.' You said, 'There was no direct physical violence between them' and that may or may not be so. But, 'You recall the house smashed up and cars damaged.'
You moved frequently, went to a number of schools and everyone in the family had prior police involvement. You have had a brother Kaleb who has been apparently a great support to you during this time in custody. And you speak to him weekly. You have less contact with a younger brother and that difficult relationship with your father. You have real difficulties with your father and as I understand it, you were very unhappy that he received bail and you remained in custody. How he was granted bail in these circumstances is beyond my comprehension. But the fact of the matter was, that he in fact was.
You said that, 'Your father was never home.' You said that, 'You were easily frustrated when you received your fathers nagging you, particularly when you drug affected.' And, 'You tolerated it poorly and effectively snap.' You told her, 'That the relationship with your mother was complicated.' And I've already mentioned that she is in fact, it would appear to be supporting your father rather than you through all this.
You always hated school, as I said, by Grade 3 you were assed at an IQ of 63. You went to something like, in her report, 'A dozen schools in total. You had continuing fights at school. You went to special schools. You assaulted teachers and there was just a series of misunderstandings of you being unable to understand what was going on and where you were.' And finally, you left school midway through Year 10. Somewhat significantly midway through Year 10, you were already 18 years of age.
You endeavoured to work, you got full time work in a scrap metal yard. Did an automotive course at TAFE. Tried to get a panel beating apprenticeship. And basically, got nowhere. You've had about nine or 10 jobs, once for three years in landscape gardening. You continue to struggle with reading and writing that's pretty self-evident. You do enjoy working on cars.
59 I don't have to go through your relationship history other than your third relationship resulted in the birth of two children now aged 2 and 3. You didn't see much of them because you were using ice to a significant degree during the time that they've been born. DHHS are all involved in this and I don't have any interest in going there.
60 Obviously in custody you've got no contact with them. You understand that your partner's going to try and support you when you get out. But it seems that just in very recent times she's terminated the relationship on the last court date. Which in fact was your birthday.
61 You began drinking alcohol at 13, methamphetamine at 15, cannabis at 16 and ice at 17. In the past you've been unwilling to address that addiction. Prefer to use the drugs than sort yourself out.
62 In custody you have had forced abstinence and it has forced you to reflect on your substance abuse. She said that, 'You showed now good insight into the impact of the abuse and you have attended a number of courses within prison to try and stay abstinent. Once you did stay abstinent for six months after being in gaol. But very easily retracted back into the use of ice by a so-called friend.
63 In the gaol you are working as a billet, I'm not quite sure what you do. You said, you were something in the kitchen. That's good.
64 In terms of the psychiatric history your full scale IQ in the mild range of intellectual disability as tested by Ms Woods. She doesn't give an actual figure. Your testing revealed, 'Severe expressive and receptive language disorders.' You had no disability services involvement since leaving school. And there's been no updated assessment of your cognitive difficulties since you were 10 years of age.
65 There are other incidents that occurred with your father and one instance, involving a chain saw which nearly caused you to lose an arm. You've had anger since the age of 7. And often feel the urge to snap. You clearly have extreme difficulties with anger when, as you perceive it, pushed to a certain point. And it's hopeful that that's being dealt with at the present time.
66 When first incarcerated you said that, 'Your mental health issues had worsened, you were suffering from anger, guilt, trauma associated with the offending' that we've heard here. And you were having, 'Disassociations and flashbacks in relation to it.' And for reasons I'll mention in a moment, 'You have had dreams where you watching helplessly while your father kills Ms Weller.' 'You feel estranged from your family,' which you clearly are. You 'Experience anger and guilt and shame regarding the offence that you committed.'
67 Dr Wood takes the view that they indicate Post Traumatic Stress Disorder resulting from the actual offending on that night. I note that on that night, just shortly after the incident, you alone went to a friends place and drank an entire bottle of whisky. And in a white shaking condition your father arrived later and took you away. No doubt that, on that night things got way out of control for what you thought was going to happen. And I can only hope that it's been a salutary lesson to you in terms of what can happen if you do lose the plot.
68 You were put on anti-depressants in gaol and had improved. You still have difficulties in the sense of unfairness over your father. Your criminal history reflects physical violence being there and Dr Wood described how, 'You have had uncontrolled anger and have difficulty all round.'
69 It is going to be a matter for the Parole Board to try and deal with those matters upon your ultimate release. And there is nothing much I can do about that.
70 You have been violent towards your father in the past, so you say, and it appears to be true. I don't think I need to go that, there was some doubts about the accuracy of a lot of it. But be that as it may.
71 In terms of this offending, you told the psychologist, 'That on 20 July you and your father broke into the victims home, armed with a baseball bat and a long pipe.' You told the psychologist, 'That your father began assaulting the victim and continued in kicking and hitting her with the bat while she was on the ground.' Now that's different to what was in the record of interview. I prefer to believe this version.
72 'You then joined in, hitting the victim with a pipe to her arms and stomach. Your father screamed at the victim to get out of town. The victim eventually managed to get to her car. Both of you hit the car as she was leaving.' And as already indicated, she would have died had she not got to her friend's house.
73 Later on when talking to her, you've told the doctor, 'That you were regretful for what you've done. That the woman did not deserve what had happened to her.' You told the psychologist and I think I'm prepared to accept that this is true. 'That as this was going on you grew increasingly concerned that your father intended to kill her.' You said, 'That you told your father to back off and just let her go.' It was then that your father told her, 'Leave town,' so you bought into it and told her to 'Go before something else happens.'
74 You said to her, 'That you regret your involvement and being involved in the offence.' And you now say, 'You're concerned your father might've done worse if you'd not been there.' You then talk about 'Sculling a bottle of whisky' and I understand that's correct.
75 Of real importance in this matter in my view and your background is bad enough and the problems you've had in life are bad enough. But in terms of how you joined in this attack, the psychologist was able to talk to your brother Kaleb. And he gave her a detailed account of the upbringing and the family dynamics which were largely consistent with what you had said. He said that, 'Your parents often fought at Christmas time and that the parents fought and it affected him a lot.'
76 [That's Mr Candy.] And he said, 'and I'm sure it affected Quinton too.' He said, 'There was no physical violence in the home.' But stated that, 'He and you had witnessed your father be violent to non-family members at times. Including in the context of disputes with previous neighbours.' He also reported that, 'Your father is often verbally abusive to you children, particularly when frustrated at fixing cars and things not going his way. He considered that your father was treating you kids how he was treated by his own father. But abusing your own kid is not a way to get them to help you. He ran away from home at the age of 14 and doesn't see the parents often.
77 He then went on to say that, 'In so far as your concerned,' he describes you, 'As a good kid but he follows others. And sometimes hangs out with the wrong people to fit in.' He said, 'On his own he's level headed but with others, and especially Dad he's a different person, gets cocky.' He describes examples of you, 'Copying your father and following his lead in harassing previous neighbours.'
78 He reflected, 'All his family members have problems with anger and aggression at times, including himself in the past.' He said that, 'Upon release he's hopeful that you will live with him and his partner.' 'To try and get you away from the area.' He said, 'That his partner is very supportive of you and a most positive role.'
79 With that description from your brother there's no reason to make these things up. I think it is very much a situation where your father's involvement got you heavily involved in this. No question that you should not have gone in there. No question that you knew what you were doing. And no question that you knew what you doing was seriously wrong. But you were 22, he was 47 and there's a very large difference between the two of you.
80 The concern that the psychologist has and is one that I share, is that your potential for violence, whilst it might be controlled is one that, where if you do become violent, the consequences could be dramatic. As I indicated to you, I think during this sentencing indication, this could have easily turned into a plea to murder. And if that was the case Quinton, you'd be doing about 30 years my friend.
81 Insofar as Muldrock and Verdins are concerned, the psychologist said, and I agree with this. 'There is a clear causal nexus between your intellectual disability and early adverse childhood experiences to the development of these complex emotional behavioural problems, impaired social and moral reasoning. And normalisation of violence to resolve disputes all of which in turn contributed to this indexed offence. That is in the absence of adequate reasoning, planning and problem solving skills. You attributed responsibility for your injured dog [If it was ever injured] to the woman next door. And essentially, in that situation went along with your father.'
82 That I finally felt that your father's intentions were more severe than your own. And as I said, I accepted afterwards you were white, shaky and sculled a whole bottle of whisky.
83 That's about as much I can do with all this. I think prospects of your rehabilitation are very problematic. The risk of your re-offending if you don't keep off the drugs and keep this anger management under control is scary, to put it frankly to you Quinton. Something is going to have to be done about it. All I can do is leave it to the Parole Board. As I have indicated, I have given you significantly less than I gave your father. And it is for the all reasons I have just outlined. Whether you get parole is a matter for them, I don't know. But those are the factors that operate in parody. You have genuine remorse, he has none as displayed by his conduct during the plea hearing.
84 Just for the benefit of those who perhaps haven't read the sentencing remarks for the father. He, when arraigned, said he was not guilty but he was pleading guilty. Swore at everybody in the court room as he left after the plea hearing. And then as he was leaving the court after being sentenced by me. Exclaimed that he didn't do it. If anything shows a lack of remorse that did.
85 And that's not the case with you and it's a very significant difference. I accept that he was the ringleader in the severity of this assault, if not the actual going in there. And accordingly, I think you are in a different league quite frankly, despite the very, very serious nature of the offending.
86 In all these matters, having given it some anxious thought I might say. The principles of Verdins apply in so far as I think certainly difficulty in gaol. It's not going to do you any good. Hopefully the abstained abstinence is doing you some good. You've got Verdins, you've got Muldrock, you've probably got Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 if I push the point and all those other factors. So I take all those into account.
87 And on;
· Charge 1, 4 and a half years.
· Charge 2, 3 years.
· Charge 3, 3 months concurrent.
· Summary matter, 2 months concurrent.
88 I direct that 6 months of the sentence imposed on:
- Charge 2, be served cumulatively on sentence imposed on Charge 1.
89 I do that because I believe that the gravamen of the assault charges brought about by your father, even though you were clearly directly involved in it.
90 That gives an effective sentence of 5 years.
91 I direct that you serve a minimum term of 3 years before becoming eligible for parole.
92 I also direct that 871 days be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
93 Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, just so you understand the benefits of you having pleaded to this. Had you pleaded not guilty and been convicted by a jury. I would have sentenced you to be imprisoned for a period of 8 and a half years with a minimum term of 5. It's been a very difficult sentencing situation for me because I've taken a certain view of your father's role in all this. But as I said to you Quinton, it's serious stuff. And it has to be serious sentence.
- - -
0
3
0