Director of Public Prosecutions v Stallone and Natale
[2008] VSC 634
•25 September 2008
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1554 of 2007
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| MARIA ANGELINA STALLONE DOMINIC ANTHONY NATALE |
---
JUDGE: | KING J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATES OF HEARING: | 4, 22 August 2008 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 25 September 2008 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Stallone and Natale | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2008] VSC 634 | |
---
Plea, incitement to murder, brother and sister attempt to have father murdered. Murder for gain. Nine years – minimum of six.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr GM Horgan SC | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused: Stallone | Mr C Traill | Dean Cole & Associates |
| For the Accused: Natale | Mr C Traill | CD Traill Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
Dominic Natale, you are 48 years of age, having been born on 16 August 1962. You reside at Lot 19, Joakim Avenue, Mildura, and you are a builder by occupation.
Maria Angelina Stallone, you are 44 years of age, having been born on 2 March 1964, residing at Unit 2, No. 14 Smith Street, Reservoir, and you were a teacher at the time of this offence.
You have both pleaded guilty to one count of incitement to murder Dominic Natalie in September 2006. The maximum penalty for that offence is life imprisonment. The prosecutor opened this matter at some length and whilst I will not repeat all of the matters referred to in that opening, I will repeat the salient facts.
You, Maria Stallone, together with you, Dominic Natale, decided that you were going to have your father murdered. The motive the Crown say was an attempt to get control of moneys from the sale of the property that had been sold in Preston, and either get the money or prevent the sale of another property that was about to be sold in North Fitzroy.
Your intended victim was your father, Dominic Natale senior, who is now aged 83 years of age. You, Dominic Natalie, are the eldest and you, Maria Stallone, are the next in age. You have two younger sisters, Desapina, 42, and Franka, 41. In 1965 your father and mother bought the matrimonial home at 89 Barkly Street, North Fitzroy, and in 1974 they purchased a second house at 17 Victoria Street, Preston. The marriage was not a happy one and your father moved out of the matrimonial home in 1984 but returned in 1990.
In 1996 your mother was seriously bedridden from a brain tumour that had developed earlier. She had great difficulty in expressing herself and she died subsequently in 2005. Your father, whilst remaining at home until 2002, had little to do with the care of your mother. At that stage he went to live with his niece, Maria Antoinetta, and her daughter at Hillside. It was apparent from all the material placed before me that there was not a good relationship between your father and any of the children, which had been the situation for most of the time you had been alive.
When your mother died she left no will and as a result litigation was commenced in 2006 between your father and all of the children. Your father sought possession of the North Fitzroy property and the Preston property. The action was settled in the following terms. You, Maria, were to vacate the Preston property within 60 days and your father was to have that title absolutely. The North Fitzroy property was to be sold at auction, the proceeds to be divided 50/50 between your father and all of the children.
The Preston property was sold on 16 September and the North Fitzroy property was to be auctioned on 7 October. It was before the first and between the second auction that the steps were taken to have your father murdered, believing that you would then be able to control how the moneys from the sale of the properties would be distributed to make sure they came to you and your other two sisters, and also to prevent the sale of the North Fitzroy property which had been the family home for all of your lives. It was equally important to ensure that the moneys did not go to the niece or her daughter or to the church of which your father was a member.
From the tape-recordings it appear that you believed that your father's niece and her daughter had ingratiated themselves into your father's affections with a view to getting a benefit from the sale of the properties. The steps taken to effect this murder are really made apparent from the intercepted telephone calls and the listening device utilised by an undercover police officer who posed as a professional hit man.
You, Dominic Natale, sought the help of someone you knew called Dave to help you find a hit man. Ultimately the police were notified and an undercover police officer called Charles Stutton became involved in the role, pretending to be a hit man for hire.
It is clear from the intercepts that the plan was already on foot before the undercover came to your attention, that plan being to inject your father with something when he was out walking that would cause him to have what appeared to be a heart attack. There are references in the intercepted material to that plan having been discussed between the two of you prior to any involvement of Charles Stutton. Because of your father's age, it was supposed there would be no autopsy and the crime would go undiscovered.
In terms of the detail of the crime, on 8 September there were two phone calls made by you, Dominic Natale, to friends that indicated to a degree your motivation for this murder. That motivation appeared to be double-edged, the first being that you believed you were being "shafted" over the sale of the house in North Fitzroy and that in your view the family stood to lose two houses. You also referred to your father as having bashed his wife in the past and that you did not get along with him. You also expressed concern that the money for the houses may have ended up going to the Jehovah's Witnesses or to his niece.
On 11 September 2006, the undercover police officer rang and tried to make arrangements to meet with you, Dominic Natalie, however that was not possible as you were in Mildura and he agreed that he would call you back later that day.
You, Maria Stallone, called your brother shortly after this call to the undercover and your brother informed you of what had occurred. In that call there is a reference to finding the person for the job and also a reference to the needle and the injection required to induce a heart attack. There are then a flurry of calls between the undercover and you, Dominic Natale, and as you are unable to meet him before Friday, you provided him with Maria's number which he contacted and ultimately on that same day you, Maria Stallone, met with the undercover officer at a café in Carlton.
Your number was provided, Maria Stallone with your consent. At that meeting in Carlton you and the undercover discussed a number of matters, including you providing a photo of your father and providing his current address and you saying that the killing was to look as natural as possible. You expressed why you wanted your father killed and that you understood that it did not have to go ahead if you were likely to have any regrets. You agreed on the price being $12,000 and suggested that it should be done between the two options, the first being the next Saturday and the other some weeks later.
You then took the undercover operative to your house at North Fitzroy, provided him with a $3000 cash deposit and a more recent photo of your father. You again mentioned your motivation, including that the house meant a lot to the family and arranged to meet the following Thursday. You were told by the undercover that you could back out of this here and now and you indicated that you wished to go through with it. You then rang one of your sisters to obtain your father's current address which you passed on to the undercover.
There are then various phone calls to people, including a discussion between the two of you reporting back what occurred at the meeting and you, Dominic Natale, promised to do whatever you could to help. You then rang one of your sisters to get up to date photos of your father and you were ultimately provided with some wedding photos.
On 14 September at El Chico restaurant in Fawkner you met the undercover at lunchtime. At that time, you were a school teacher in that area and it was convenient for you to meet him there. You told him that there had been no change of mind and that the killing was to go ahead. The undercover indicated he had checked your father and he had a recent picture and he asked you, "Is that him?" to which you replied, "Yes that's him." He then told you that he did not think the idea of stabbing him in the street would work in terms of an injection and said it was better if he organised a hit and run but that was going to cost you more. Instead of costing $12,000 it was going to cost $14,000. You agreed with that and said to him unless he heard from you that he was to go ahead with it. You then rang your brother Dominic again and relayed this information to him, including that the price had changed and the proposed date being next Wednesday 20 September.
You, Dominic Natale, expressed your concern about the delay in getting it done because it meant that the Preston property would be auctioned before your father was murdered. A response of your sister Maria to that was, "It's better something rather than nothing." You, Dominic Natale, then rang the man Dave to see if he could get the price reduced for the murder. You were unsuccessful.
In a call on 18 September, you, Dominic, tell your sister Maria that you have tried to have the price reduced and that you would have preferred the injection means of killing your father. This call, in my view, demonstrates that neither of you had any hesitation in proceeding with the plan, that you both still desired your father's murder to occur although you would have preferred it could have been done for a lesser price.
The murder was to occur on 20 September. The night before, you, Maria Stallone, had gone to stay with one of your sisters to provide yourself with an alibi if necessary, to ensure that you could not be blamed in any way for the death. At the time that you were arrested on the day of the 20th you had with you the balance of the payment being $11,000 in cash in a brown paper parcel waiting to be collected by the supposed hit man.
Exhibit 2 in this case is a victim impact statement written by your father, Dominic Natale Senior. In that victim impact statement he says, leaving aside the issues relating to the property dispute, "I am living in constant fear for my life. I am fearful of all four of my children that they will try and kill me again" and, "I will not forgive my children for what they did and I can't believe they did this after I'd agreed to give them their mother's share of the estate." I can understand your father's attitude and his fears, although he is now in a position of being extremely safe as to any future attempts upon his life. There is no doubt that your attempt to have him murdered would have caused him great anguish.
You have both pleaded guilty to the offence and are entitled and will receive a significant discount for that plea. You, Maria Stallone, indicated that you intended to plead guilty to this offence at an earlier stage than Dominic Natale, but neither could be considered an early plea.
You both have no prior convictions of any kind. An indication that you have lived a law abiding life until you both became involved in this matter in your forties. Further, neither of you has been in any trouble since that offence. I also have to take into account your background and personal circumstances. I will deal with your mutual background and then individually with each of you.
Your father came to Australia in 1962 with your mother and had the four children, to whom I have referred. It appears to have been a most unhappy marriage between your parents and your father left the marital home in 1984, ultimately returning to Italy to live in approximately 1985. Some years later he came back to Australia and moved back into the matrimonial home ultimately in about 1990. You both attended Merri Primary School. You, Dominic Natale, then attended Northcote High School and Collingwood Technical School, completing the equivalent of Year 12 and shortly thereafter commencing and completing an apprenticeship in carpentry. You, Maria Stallone, went on to Fitzroy High School and then, it would appear after a break of some time, attended Melbourne Teachers College and qualified as a teacher.
The family home was not a pleasant environment and it is said that your father beat your mother regularly and also the children of the marriage prior to his leaving the family home. He disputed paternity of all four children, was exceedingly jealous of his wife and was clearly a difficult, irascible man who appeared to have no great love for either his children or his wife. All of the children lived with your mother in the matrimonial home at Barkly Street, North Fitzroy up until the time that each of you married.
Your mother was taken ill in approximately 1991, developing a brain tumour. After surgery she was in a coma for some months and was ultimately discharged to her home. She was capable of speech for the first few years but she ultimately lost that ability and communicated through squeezing of hands and nodding of her head. In approximately 1996, she became totally bedridden, and it was recommended that she be placed in a nursing home to be cared for but you, the children of the marriage, did not approve of that and to your credit, she was managed with the assistance of the children, particularly the three daughters. Although your father resided in the family home for much of that time, he did virtually nothing to assist in her care. This undoubtedly struck all of you as being an unjust situation and there is no doubt that the loyalties of all the children were with your mother.
I accept that your father was not in any way a good, kind or caring father to either you or your siblings. Nor a good kind or caring husband to your mother. Your father moved out of the home in approximately November 2003 and from that time there was little contact between you, your siblings and your father, except ultimately through solicitors.
Your father in 2003 had an operation and when he left hospital he moved in with his niece Maria Ferraro. In approximately December 2004, your father began making demands of you Maria Natale, who was then living in the Preston house, to vacate the premises. In May 2005, your mother died in hospital, she was intestate at that time. From that time forward, you and your siblings were involved in arguments and finally litigation against your father over your mother's estate. That was settled by consent in July 2006 with your father receiving the house in Preston, which was clearly lawfully his, as a sole survivor, and agreeing that your mother's share of the house in North Fitzroy was to be shared between the children, giving all four of you thereby a share of 50 per cent of the property.
Dealing with you individually. Dominic Natale, you married your wife at the age of 22, your father did not attend your wedding and initially you and your wife lived with your mother. The next year you moved to Mildura, from which area your wife came and rented a property from her parents. You worked picking grapes, to begin with and then commenced work as a builder. You also, in 1992 or 93, bought a small farm from your wife's parents and you have cultivated grapes there since that time, as well as working as a builder. You have two children from your marriage, a son aged 19, who is working and a son aged 16, who is still at school. They both reside at home.
You described to Mr Ian Joblin, psychologist, in a report tendered to the court, that whilst you remained living in the same house as your wife, there is no relationship between you and that you have formed another relationship with a woman who has two children and have been living what you described as "a double life". You have been supportive of this woman and her two sons.
Evidence was called during your plea, from a Mr Serge Mellis, who has known you since he was fifteen. Apart from giving you a character reference, saying that you are a very good, hard-working, honest, trustworthy person, someone on whom people could rely, he also recounted coming across you outside the family when you were about 16 years of age. He said it was shortly after you found your father beating your mother and you had gone to her defence and hit your father. He described you as being really upset about your hitting your own father.
In his report, Mr Joblin referred to your excessive use of cannabis and alcohol. He reported that you consumed alcohol on a daily basis, including bourbon, wine and beer. You denied to him that you let it interfere in anyway with your work or that it had any effect upon your threshold of tolerance. In relation to your cannabis use, that had commenced prior to your marriage and upon moving to Mildura where you described the drug as being freely available, you continued to use the drug although not specifically in stating in the report how often or how much you consumed.
It is clear from the other references in that report that it must have been a regular and relatively heavy usage as you describe a level of tolerance that developed over the time and found that the drug no longer had any calming effect upon you. You described to Mr Joblin a good deal of detail as to the history of your relationship with your father, including the fact that your father regularly beat you, your mother and your siblings and particularly beat your mother when she tried to intervene on your behalf. You described him as a violent and aggressive man, he refused to attend your wedding, which was considered by you at the age of 22, to be a devastating rejection.
From an early stage in your marriage, you displayed aggression towards your wife and began assaulting her. Whilst initially cannabis made you calmer, as time progressed it made you more aggressive. You began your other relationship approximately six years ago and that developed into a situation similar to that with your wife. That is, becoming an abusive and argumentative relationship.
You described to Mr Joblin that you fell into a pattern of behaviour that saw you finishing work at around 4 pm in the building industry, then working on your block for a few hours, having a meal, going out, drinking, smoking cannabis with your friends, returning home very late at night and doing the same thing, day after day. You believed yourself that your relationship with your female partners was as a result of modelling yourself upon your father and what you'd seen in your earlier life.
Mr Joblin in his report said that you were aware that what you were doing was wrong in terms of abusing your wife, staying out late, drinking and using cannabis, but you believed you could do nothing about it. You felt that you could not speak to anyone about it. The report from Mr Joblin was one in which it was apparent you were very frank with him in your discussions.
In respect of the aspect of remorse at paragraph 13 Mr Joblin stated:
Specifically in relation to Mr Natale's attitude to the offence, he seems to have a somewhat ambivalent attitude towards his father. He reported his obvious concern over the history which is outlined. However, he also acknowledged that his father is his father and as such must be respected. He indicated that if he has upset his father or caused him distress he is remorseful.
He strongly regrets his involvement with the undercover operative and indeed indicated considerable sorrow that he has been apprehended for an offence. Indeed, one notes this is his first involvement with the criminal justice system. He acknowledged regret over having committed a crime because of the punishment it is to bring. He certainly wishes the behaviour had never happened. If one considers contrition to concentrate more on the deed rather than self-evaluation, Mr Natale acknowledged the inappropriateness of his behaviour over that time.
He did not seek to excuse or minimise the offending by outlining the history, including the difficulties he had with his father. He indicated that after his mother's death and until September 2006 he was having some psychological difficulties and from his description that would seem to be correct."
Paragraph 14:
Overall at the time of my interview with him there was no evidence of any psychological dysfunction in terms of a clinical diagnosis. He is obviously very concerned about the offence and this court appearance. He acknowledged some relief that his father was not in fact harmed. As indicated, he strongly lamented his involvement in the offending and in my opinion indicated some degree of remorse and contrition.
Apart from the evidence that was called on your behalf to which I have referred there are also 11 written character references provided which all speak to your good character, the fact that this offence is described as out of character for you and that you are an honest, reliable, hardworking man with strong family ties and beliefs. They refer to you being anti-drugs and violence. It is unfortunate that some of the authors seem to believe that you were in fact duped or tricked into becoming involved in this offence and that of course is not the situation. I will, however, take those references otherwise into account.
You were about to embark upon a large and substantial building contract which you will be unable to fulfil. This matter has also garnered a degree of notoriety in Mildura where you reside. You will, in all probability, lose the business that you have established over time and it has been submitted that you may have to move to another place to start afresh upon your release from prison.
You, Maria Stallone, as I indicated, had the same family background and the factors relating to the dysfunctional relationship between your father and the family apply equally to you. To continue with your history. In 1989 you became engaged to your husband and in 1990 you married. Your husband, I have been told, has a number of characteristics in common with your father in that he is described as strong and domineering like your father.
You and your husband moved into the Preston house owned by your parents in the same year. It was the next year that your mother developed the brain tumour. You informed Mr Newton, the psychologist, in your interviews that your husband beat you regularly and was abusive in many ways, threatening to kill you if you left him. In 1994 you and your husband purchased a property in Mildura, a citrus farm, which was not ultimately a successful farm. You and your husband were joint mortgagees to that property. You remained living in the Preston home rent free from the time of your marriage until the time that you and your husband separated in early 2003. It was you who left your husband.
In 2001 you took on a part time job as a telemarketer to assist in the repayments of the Mildura property but by 2006 the bank had foreclosed on the Mildura farm and although separated you were still responsible as a mortgagee for that farm. Your father also had provided the Preston home as a guarantee for the loan on the Mildura property, which was part of the financial dispute with your father. When the Mildura property was sold by the bank a sum of money was left outstanding. Your father's intention to sell the Preston property meant that the outstanding money to the Bendigo bank would have to be paid out.
You have lost your employment as a teacher, you are highly unlikely to ever be employed again as a teacher. But you have persevered and continuing working both as a telemarketer and as a waitress. In relation to both of you, I accept that imprisonment is not something that will come naturally to you. You will have trouble coping but ultimately a number of people have trouble coping. Your counsel submitted that what occurred in terms of this offence was the aftermath of your mother's death and a lifetime in a dysfunctional family and I agree with that in part. It is also in my view related to the fact that your mother died intestate and you and your siblings felt that you were not treated fairly by your father in respect of your mother's share of the properties.
The family did in fact purchase the property in North Fitzroy when it was subsequently auctioned by your father. There are other reasons that contribute to you and your brother's motivation, which I shall deal with shortly. Your counsel submitted that all of this was connected to your psychological state at the time of the offending occurring and called a number of witnesses who spoke of your character, your remorse and your situation at the time of the offending.
They were firstly Jackie Clovaro, who has known you about 25 years. She described your husband as very controlling and bossy and she had observed your father's relationship also with his wife and his children which she described as very poor. She said that in 2006 you were not yourself. You were not happy, you were worried, you were sad. She said she went to see after you were charged and indicated at that stage she did not believe you were in fact doing very well at all. You told her that you had a blockage in your mind and that you did not remember some of what happened. You expressed to her regrets about what had occurred and that you were sorry. Daniella Lugoza was a neighbour who had known you for most of your life and described the difficult relationship that existed between your father and the children and your devotion to your mother over the time of her illness. She has spoken to you since your arrest and indicated that you are regretful and remorseful, that you described it as a living nightmare like you are caught in a web but cannot get out.
Martin Ryan was also called. He was a telemarketer whom you met in 2003 at your employment as a telemarketer. He described you as conscientious, bright, polite. He said that when your mother died in 2005 he noticed that you became more distanced and scattered, almost shut off, which he assumed was part of the grieving process. He said the spark of positivity in your life was missing. He said he did not see much of you in 2006 due to change in employment but he was very shocked when you were charged. He said he spoke to you two days after you had been granted bail and described you as emotional, a lot of crying and he said that you were not feeling confident about your own mental stability. He assisted you for some time after that. Also to him you expressed regret and remorse for what you had done.
Helen Mackenzie of Prescott, also a telemarketer, gave evidence. She met you some eight years ago when you both commenced work on Saturday mornings. She said that when your mother died in 2005, you seemed to be more inaccessible, that you seemed to be busy and caught up. She said, in relation to when you did catch up, it would seem to be hard for you to open up and talk to her. You had discussed with her the Part 4 application in relation to your mother's estate and had shown her some of the documentation. She is a qualified lawyer as well as a telemarketer. She said that following your mother's death, your world had started to fall apart, as you no longer knew where you were going to live. She heard that you were charged and she saw you when you came back to work. She said that you seemed to not know why it had all happened.
I accept that you were very upset about your mother's death and also very upset about your financial situation.
Your counsel submitted a report and called a psychologist Mr Patrick Newton, who gave evidence on your behalf. In his report in relation to the background of the offending, he stated at paragraphs 26 and 27:
Ms Stallone indicated that her thoughts at the time had been mixed and that she had been under considerable pressure as a result of the stress dealing with issues surrounding her mother's estate as well as her own marital property settlement. Ms Stallone told me she had been depressed, confused and overwrought at the time of the offending. She also expressed considerable fear regarding the undercover operative. Whilst she would not discuss her feelings regarding her brother, it was apparent that her emotional response to him was a complex one as well.
I have read the report thoroughly and the opinion expressed by Mr Newton in paragraph 3, which I will read, says:
Mrs Maria Angelina Stallone, is a 44 year old Italian/Australian woman who has participated in psychological assessment and treatment in connection with ongoing legal matters. On the basis of a comprehensive evaluation of Ms Stallone's current mental status, a review of her personal history, systematic observation of her mental state and behaviour, during clinical consultation and confirmatory psychological testing, the following conclusions were reached.
(1)Ms Stallone has suffered prominent depressive symptoms throughout the time she has consulted me. These have been evident across her cognitive, emotional and physiological function and caused her marked distress.
(2)Ms Stallone's depressive symptoms are sufficiently severe to warrant the diagnosis of a disorder. This diagnosis encapsulate my professional opinion, that Ms Stallone has suffered chronic depressive mood disturbance, dating back many years. Whilst she has not developed a major depressive disorder, I consider her to be at risk for doing so, if she does not receive ongoing professional treatment.
(3)Of most concern Ms Stallone experiences bouts of suicidal ideation and it is considered imperative that appropriate precautions be maintained to ensure that she is protected from acts of self-harm.
(4)Ms Stallone is suffering extreme and severe anxiety but dominant anxiety can be traced to a post-traumatic response to her experiences of physical abuse in both childhood and adulthood. This continues to plague her and is sufficiently severe to warrant the formal diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. Given the length of time which it has persisted, the condition is specified as chronic.
(5)At an acute level, Ms Stallone is also experiencing intensification of her anxiety as a result of her legal predicament. The anxiety she is experiencing is particularly severe and reflects the ongoing impacts of her prior exposure to trauma and depression.
(6)Ms Stallone's personality adjustment is characterised by a withdrawn, passive and dependent stance. Her repeated experiences of abuse have led her to internalise a view of herself as powerless and ineffectual. Reliant on the protection and assistance of others in a self-defeating cycle, seen repeatedly in survivors of domestic violence, she has turned to overtly dominant individuals for assistance and has subserviented her own needs to theirs in order to maintain their approval. Ultimately this left her vulnerable to further acts of exploitation and abuse, which have reinforced her sense of inadequacy and powerlessness in a vicious cycle of self-reinforcing dysfunction. Ms Stallone's dependency narrowly fails to meet criteria for dependent personality disorder. It is noted as significant traits of personality disorder.
Whilst I have read all of those matters and the other matters contained in the report, I do take issue of the description given you as being frightened of the undercover operative. It is clear from listening to the tapes that you were not frightened of this man but determined to ensure that he carried out the task that you and your brother had asked him to complete, that of murdering your father.
You were given ample opportunities to desist from your conduct, to cancel the contract or to withdraw right up to the time it is meant to occur. Not only did you not do that but you had provided an alibi for yourself and had the cash ready to pay upon the completion of the murder. I find that inconsistent with the references to you being a person who narrowly fails to meet the criteria of dependent personality disorder, but could be considered to have significant traits of dependent personality.
As to the issue of depression, I accept that you suffered a degree of depression which related to your mother's death, your marital breakdown and your financial situation. I do not consider, however, that your depression is the cause or the major cause of your involvement in this offending. It is a factor and pursuant to the principles in Verdins I will take it into account when imposing sentence upon you.
In respect of the offence itself, it is my view that the two of you have entered into this crime for the purpose of ensuring that your father was not able to dispose freely of property that was lawfully his, but which property you both believed should have come to you and your siblings. If this crime had been completed, although not one of the worst examples of its type, it would fall into the category of one of the worst types of murder, that is a cold, calculated murder for gain.
The fact that it was not completed was nothing to do with your planning or your lack of desire or hesitation over murdering your father but solely to the fact that your efforts to obtain the services of a hit-man was sufficient to bring the intention to the police.
Your father may have been a violent and aggressive man, he did not care for you in any manner that a loving parent should during your life, but that was not your motivation for your planning his murder. It may well have made your decision easier, but it was your fear and apprehension that, if he died of natural causes after the recent conflicts, there was a likelihood that he would disinherit his children and leave the money to his niece or to the church. You took these actions to prevent that. That much is made clear by your own statements which are recorded on telephone intercepts and tape recordings of meetings.
While I accept that you may well have had an attachment to your family home, it was not your sentimental attachment to the home that was important, but what you foresaw as the loss of what you considered was your right to the assets of your parents. Even if your father's treatment or lack of love for you children had been your motivation it would not justify or excuse in any manner the plan that was made to murder him. This was not a crime committed in the heat of passion or an extremist, but calculated, planned and pursued over a period of some weeks at the least.
Your father's behaviour towards you as his children was reprehensible. Your behaviour to your father as his children was morally repugnant and indefensible. Accordingly, this is a case that must have a significant element of general deterrence attached to the sentence.
Crimes such as these which are to be perpetrated on elderly people and made to appear accidental must be deterred. The courts and community must do all they can to protect elderly, vulnerable people from offences of this nature. It is rarely presumed that a matter such as an elderly person being hit by a car or suffering what appears to be a heart attack whilst out walking would in fact be a murder and that needs to remain the situation.
In respect of specific deterrence, whilst not as important in your cases due to the factors to which I have already referred, including your lack of prior convictions, lack of subsequent conviction, pleas of guilty demonstrating some remorse as well as your expressions of remorse to a number of other persons, it still has some relevance. In terms of your involvement to each of you in this matter. Whilst you, Maria, still only had more actual involvement in that you were dealing with the undercover hit man, I found that you are each equally culpable in this offence. I have taken the matter of your mental state into account in determining that factor, Ms Stallone. I am of the view that you both have reasonably good prospects of rehabilitation for all the reasons that I have already mentioned.
Counsel have tendered a number of previous cases of incitement to murder. The cases I have read demonstrate that like all sentences it is a matter that is to be determined by the individual circumstances of the offending and the individual circumstances of the offenders. As the persons seeking to have your father murdered, you are more culpable than the person whom you are seeking to employ to carry out that task.
There was a recent case in the Court of Appeal of R v Hildebrand which was a conspiracy to murder involving the gangland shootings. The applicant in that case was under surveillance at all times and once again there was no risk of the killing being carried out except in the mind of the applicant. The sentence imposed in that case was a sentence of 13 years, with a minimum of nine years. The applicant was involved as a driver and getaway man and was clearly employed in his role. He had no significant prior convictions. In the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Justice Dodds-Streeton stated:
No statistics or information on sentences for conspiracy to murder were provided to the court. Sentencing advisory counsel sentencing snapshot No.21 sates, however, that the median term for attempted murder which the Crown submitted to be a comparable offence is ten years and six months.
The offence of conspiracy to murder is by its nature grave. The appellant's offending was, as the sentencing judge observed, one of the worse examples, albeit the conspiracy was thwarted. Here, the murder was thwarted for the reasons I referred to earlier and your crime accordingly remains a particularly grave one.
Balancing all of the factors to which I have referred and imposing a sentence that reflects those matters together with a discount for your pleas of guilty that I have determined will decrease the sentence I would otherwise have imposed by a period of three years on both the minimum and maximum sentence, I convict each of you and sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of nine years. I direct that you are to serve a minimum of six years before becoming eligible for parole.
I declare pursuant to s. 6AAA of the Sentencing Act that the sentence I would otherwise have imposed but for your pleas of guilty would have been 12 years with a minimum of nine years.
I declare that you, Maria Stallone, have served 58 days in pre-sentence detention and that you, Dominic Natale, 40 days in pre-sentence detention and such should be entered in the records of the court. I make the s. 464 orders as sought, together with the forfeiture order.
- - -
0
0
0