R v Goussis
[2006] VSC 168
•3 May 2006
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted | |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1440 of 2005
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| EVANGELOS GOUSSIS |
---
JUDGE: | TEAGUE J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 3-5, 7, 10-14, 17-21, 24-29, 31 October, 2-3 November 2005 and 20 January 2006 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 3 May 2006 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Goussis (Sentence) | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2006] VSC 168 | |
---
Criminal Law – Sentencing – Murder – Victim shot in head in context of other gangland killings – Body dumped in dead-end street – 20 years prison 15 years non-parole period.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr D. Parsons S.C. with Ms R. Carlin | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused Goussis | Mr R. van de Wiel Q.C. with Mr A. Halphen | Slades & Parsons |
HIS HONOUR:
Evangelos Goussis. You have been found guilty by a jury of the murder on 8 May 2004 of Sean Vincent also known as Lewis Caine. I will refer to the deceased after this as Lewis Caine, by which name he was better known.
Before I turn to the circumstances of the murder, I make thepreliminary point that there are reasons for the media to be somewhat circumspect in what is published as to these sentencing remarks. There are other trials still to be heard.
The body of Lewis Caine was found on the roadway in a dead end street in Brunswick shortly after 11 p.m. on the night of 8 May 2004. He had been shot once in the face, just under the right eye. Shortly prior to that shot being fired, you and Keith Faure had been drinking with Lewis Caine for some time at a Carlton hotel. That drinking session had been arranged at a time, and in a context, when there was much publicity about a series of gangland killings. All three of you had close contacts in the camps that were seen to be engaged in a series of retributive shootings. In one camp was the now dead Mario Condello. In the other was the now disappeared Tony Mokbel. All three of you had reasons to be guarded as to where the loyalties of other contacts lay, and to be interested in gathering intelligence. In early May 2004, Lewis Caine had a very close link to one camp. At around that time, the links of you and Keith Faure appeared to be closer to the camp of Mario Condello. That was a matter of some moment, given that Lewis Caine had raised with you the possible execution of Mario Condello. Lewis Caine seems to have chosen to meddle in the gangland war, and to have invited you to meddle too. Whatever the precise nature of the links, and the proposed meddling, gangland killings and blurred loyalties were a significant part of the context in which you were drinking with Lewis Caine.
There was before the jury evidence that that time together at the hotel was a friendly drinking session. There was other evidence which suggested that the apparent friendliness of that drinking session might have been contrived. Keith Faure and you chose to drive from Geelong to the hotel to meet up with Lewis Caine. Further, you asked him to join you for drinks. It was not that he asked you. You chose to take a gun to the meeting. Given a then recent conviction for possessing a gun, your deliberate choice to take a gun was more than curious. It was courting danger. Further, the two of you drove to Melbourne in a recently acquired 4WD. The reasons you were later to give for meeting Lewis Caine were implausible. There was a particular implausibility about your claim that Lewis Caine was keen on buying the 4WD, and about your claim that another vehicle was driven to Melbourne as well as the 4WD. The jury had only your say-so that there were two vehicles, that Lewis Caine wanted to buy the 4WD, and that Lewis Caine had with him a gun. Absent other evidence, I find to the contrary as to each of those three matters.
I would briefly note the thrust of the toxicological results relative to Lewis Caine. He seems not to have had a great deal to drink that night. Moreover, given that only a very small amount of residual cocaine metabolite was found in his system, he could not have been affected significantly adversely by any drugs.
I cannot make precise findings as to what occurred between the time when you and Keith Faure and Lewis Caine left the hotel and the time when he was shot. The nature of the gunshot wound and blood stains point to his having been shot at a time when he was sitting in the back seat of the 4WD. You say that you fired the fatal shot, and there is no contrary evidence. The body of Lewis Caine was promptly dumped in a dead-end street after he had been shot. I was urged to treat that as an indication of no or little premeditation. On the other hand, the callous dumping of a meddler could also have been seen as a way of conveying a message as to how would-be executioners might expect to be dealt with. The 4WD was then driven to Geelong. It was hidden, as was the gun that fired the fatal shot. You and Faure changed your clothes. You then chose to visit some night-clubs.
When the police arrested you, you and Keith Faure told them a set of lies that you had concocted together. When they were seen to be lies, you concocted together a second set of lies. According to the first set of lies, at the time of the shooting, you were at your mother’s home at Fairfield. According to the second set of lies, Lewis Caine produced a gun, which would not fire, a supposedly surprising act which was said to have led to Lewis Caine being shot by you in self defence. The second set of lies were not so readily capable as the first set of being shown to be lies, particularly as the gun was not available to be tested.
After the murder, not only did you lie as to many matters of significance related to the murder, you engaged in other conduct which inferentially spoke clearly of your guilt of that murder. There was an obvious plan to mislead. You claimed not to be able to identify the location of the shooting. You claimed that other considerations warranted your not being able to provide to the police any of three very significant items: the 4WD; the gun fired by you; and, the gun claimed to have been produced by Lewis Caine.
The prosecution case was not, despite certain indications the other way, that this was a premeditated execution. I must sentence you on the basis that the murder was not premeditated. The murder cannot therefore be seen as warranting a sentence towards the top of the range. On the other hand, it cannot be seen as being towards the bottom of the range. This is a far cry from a spontaneous domestic stabbing. This was a shooting, with a gun that should not have been on hand, in the context of other shootings and camps and divided loyalties, by a man whose record shows no great respect for the law.
I have read, and listened to the reading of, three victim impact statements prepared by each of the mother, grandmother and sister of Lewis Caine. Each has described the bonds that tied Lewis Caine to them, and the pain, the heartbreak and the sense of emptiness that has followed his death, that has continued thereafter and that will continue hereafter.
You are 38 years of age, having been born in September 1967 in Tashkent to Greek parents. You came to Australia at the age of eight. Your parents and three older siblings have been law-abiding. You have been a talented boxer. Your time at school and for a year or so thereafter appears to have been spent relatively profitably. Problems only arose when, in your early twenties, you drifted into the night club and illegal drug scene.
You have had two court appearances. For different reasons, both are troubling. In November 1989, you were convicted of attempted murder and of trafficking in heroin. They are serious offences, but the sentences imposed suggest that they were not particularly serious examples of such offences. In March 2004, less than 2 months before you shot Lewis Caine, you were convicted of a number of lesser offences. But they included the carrying of an unregistered handgun. You were not given an immediate term in prison. You were given another chance. It was a chance which you chose not to value. In the years between the two court appearances, you had at times been engaged in various worthwhile pursuits. They included boxing, running a service station and fitness consulting.
You have chosen at times to mix with other men with serious criminal convictions. Your choices as to associates and as to drugs have contributed to your being where you are now. There are several indications that you are by nature disposed to be led rather than to lead. Notwithstanding your admission of having pulled the trigger on the gun used to shoot Lewis Caine, I infer that the strategy as to what preceded and followed that event was not yours but that of Keith Faure. You did his bidding. The sentence that I impose on you must reflect your lesser role.
You suffer health problems, which I must allow for, although it would have been preferable to have had evidence of medical experts to supplement what you said in your police interview. Also to be taken into account is that you have to date suffered prison conditions that are more onerous than normal. I infer that that is likely to continue.
I have signed the retention, forfeiture and disposal orders, there being no objection to my doing so. The period of pre-sentence detention is 715 days. I direct that that be entered in the court records. I sentence you to 20 years in prison. I fix a non-parole period of 15 years.
0
0