R v Cikos - [2001] NSWSC 35

CITATION: R v Cikos [2001] NSWSC 35

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law Division
Criminal

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70048/00

HEARING DATE(S): 20/11/00 & 14/12/00

JUDGMENT DATE:
9 February 2001

PARTIES :

Regina
Sandor Cikos (Prisoner)

JUDGMENT OF: Dunford J

COUNSEL : P Conlon (Crown)
W Terracini SC (Prisoner)

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Russell McLelland & Brown (Prisoner)

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentencing - triple murder - family members - pleas of guilty

CASES CITED: R v Thomson [2000] NSWCCA 309, 49 NSWLR 383

DECISION: See para 27

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL
DUNFORD J
Friday, 9 FEBRUARY 2001
70048/00 R v Sandor CIKOS
SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR. The prisoner, Sandor Cikos, has on arraignment pleaded guilty to the murder on 6 December 1999 of his defacto wife, Allison Penrose & their two sons, Jake aged 4 years and Travis aged 18 months.

2 The deaths were discovered when the prisoner contacted police on his return from work, shortly after 6 pm on that day and informed them that he had found the three deceased dead in their beds at the family home at 2 Benares Court, West Dapto. The wife had two wounds at the rear left side of her head, consistent with the use of a blunt instrument and all three had plastic bags over their faces, suggesting suffocation. Some jewellery regularly worn by the wife was missing, suggesting that the motive for the killings might have been robbery, but there was no sign of forced entry, such jewellery was later discovered in the prisoner's lunchbox and one of the bracelets was blood stained with blood later identified as that of the deceased. Fibres and hairs were observed adhering to the wife's hands and these fibres matched the shorts worn by the prisoner that day, while fingernail clippings from her were later identified as containing the prisoner's DNA, during a later interview, police also observed what appeared to be fresh scratches on the prisoner's body, and the deceased's blood was also located on the shorts worn by the prisoner; all these matters indicating a struggle.

3 The pathologist's report identified the causes of death in the case of the wife as the combined effect of suffocation and a blunt force head injury, and of the two boys as suffocation.

4 In a recorded interview later that evening, the prisoner told police that he and his family had enjoyed a good evening the previous night which included a visit from a neighbour, that he and his wife subsequently watched a video together, that after it finished at about 12 to 12.30 am the deceased made a snack for both of them, following which they went to bed, watched a movie on television beginning at about 1 am, and that he gave the deceased a back rub after which they both fell asleep watching the movie. He said he went to work the following morning in the usual way whilst everyone was…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Cikos

Details

AGLC: R v Cikos [2001] NSWSC 35
Case: [2001] NSWSC 35
Decision Date: 9 February 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Cikos involved the defendant, Cikos, who pleaded guilty to the murders of three family members. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the presiding judge was required to determine an appropriate sentence for the defendant. The legal issues before the court were the appropriate weight to be given to the defendant's guilty pleas, the nature of the crimes, and the need for deterrence and retribution in the sentencing process.

The court considered the principles of sentencing in relation to triple murder cases, as well as the mitigating factors presented by the defendant. In reaching its decision, the court noted the gravity of the crimes and the impact on the victims' families, as well as the defendant's acceptance of responsibility through his guilty pleas. The court also took into account the pre-sentence report, which outlined the defendant's background and personal circumstances.

After considering these factors, the court determined that the appropriate sentence for Cikos was life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 25 years. The court emphasised the need for deterrence and retribution, while also acknowledging the mitigating factors presented by the defendant. The sentence reflects the severity of the crimes and the need to protect the community from further harm by the defendant. The final orders of the court were that Cikos be sentenced to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 25 years.

Orders