Mather v The Queen

The appellant, Mather, appealed against his sentence for manslaughter. He had pleaded guilty to manslaughter after initially being indicted for murder. The appeal concerned whether the sentencing judge made adverse findings of fact against the appellant that were not supported by the evidence, and whether the resulting sentence was manifestly excessive. The appeal also raised the issue of whether the guilty plea warranted a greater reduction in sentence than was apparently given.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentencing judge erred in making adverse findings of fact against the appellant, particularly concerning the evidence of a key witness, Brock, regarding the degree of violence used and the deceased's presence in the vehicle when it was set alight. The court also considered whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient allowance for the appellant's guilty plea, and whether the overall sentence of 15 years imprisonment was manifestly excessive in light of the evidence and the plea.

The court found no error in principle regarding the sentencing judge's approach to the guilty plea, noting that while it is preferable to state the reduction given, the judge's acknowledgment of the plea's value implied a reduction was made. Regarding the disputed facts, the court held that the sentencing judge was aware of the difficulties with Brock's evidence, including his prior perjury and status as an indemnified witness. The judge specifically addressed these issues in his sentencing remarks. The court also considered the prosecution's decision not to call Ms White as a witness, noting that the appellant's counsel had made a forensic choice not to complain about her absence or seek her cross-examination, and therefore, this did not constitute an error by the sentencing judge.

The appeal was dismissed.