R v Jedson (aka Grace)
[2004] VSC 345
•10 September 2004
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1525 of 2003
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| PAUL JEDSON (AKA JUSTIN JAMES GRACE) |
---
JUDGE: | TEAGUE J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 10 September 2004 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 10 September 2004 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Paul Jedson | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2004] VSC 345 | |
---
Criminal Law - Sentencing - Intentionally causing serious injury (2 counts) - Assault at night with metal bar on parents by son, aged 16 - Delay in proceeding due to flight by prisoner - Many mitigating considerations, including rehabilitation of prisoner, early plea of guilty and complete forgiveness by parents - 3 years' imprisonment wholly suspended for 3 years.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Ms C. Quin | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr G. Mullaly | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
Paul Jedson, you have pleaded guilty to two counts of intentionally causing serious injury. You seriously injured your parents, John and Linda Grace, at the family home at 3 Tibari Court, Croydon on 24 December 1995. Those injuries were inflicted in the early hours of the morning.
You are the youngest of three children. You were born in January 1979. In December 1995 you were 16 years old. Your older siblings are Monique and John. The relationship between your parents on the one hand and you and your siblings on the other had been at that time strained, to put it mildly.
On the night of 23 December 1995 your parents had gone to bed around midnight. You were home but your brother and sister were not. In the early hours of Sunday 24 December you went to the bedroom of your parents as they were sleeping. You took with you a metal bar. You went to the bed. You struck your mother to the head. Your father tried to get out of bed. You struck him to the head. You struck your mother again. Your father stood and struggled with you. That struggle took both of you away from the bedroom to near the front door. You continued to strike your father. Eventually he was able to get the metal bar off you. He threw it to one side. You then took out a pocket knife. You took your father by the head and cut into his neck with the knife. You said as you did so words to the effect, "This is it for you, dad, it's over". Your father managed to get the knife off you. You then took up the metal again. Once more you struck your father to the head with the metal bar. Your father moved away from you. You followed him. You placed your hands around his neck. Your father managed to move you away from him. He then crawled to the home of a neighbour to get help. Shortly after that your brother arrived home. After a brief exchange, he told you to get out and you did.
Your parents were taken to hospital. Your mother has no recollection of the events of that night. Your father recalled the details. Having to give evidence of those matters would have been a traumatic experience. Both suffered very serious injuries. Both had to have surgery. Your father had to have his left eye surgically removed.
Police efforts to locate you after the events were not successful but, appropriately, the informant made certain checks from time to time. After you left home you made your way out of town by train. You headed west. After a time you chose to stay near Gawler in South Australia. You behaved like someone running from the past. You took on a new name. You showed signs of depression. You continued to drink too much. Nevertheless, you ensured that you kept your head down. Things started to turn around for the better. The turnaround started when you came to share accommodation with Juliet Freckelton. She was somewhat older than you. She was prepared to listen to you and to explore your past. In time, a relationship developed to the advantage of you both. You found work. You worked hard.
In time it came as something of a surprise for Juliet to find that she was pregnant. The birth of Michael in 1998 was a very welcome event. It helped to put a seal on your maturation. You became less withdrawn, more confident. You set about proving yourself to be a good father, a good provider and a good person. You rehabilitated yourself. There was still that nagging concern about your past. At times you spoke about aspects of it, without all the details, to Juliet and her friends. You were ambivalent as to what to do. You were conscious that coming clean could do more harm than good to those you loved. Eventually you chose, in September 2002, to formally change your name. The next routine check by the informant after that was made in 2003. His checking led to discrete inquiries. They led to you being arrested in South Australia on 9 July 2003.
You were brought back to Victoria. You were held on remand until you were granted bail in this court on 17 December 2003. You were released on 22 December 2003. You were in detention for a period of just over five months. The time that you were on remand had adverse effects on your family. It was devastating for Juliet and Michael in emotional, financial and other ways. It was also an emotional time for your parents. The range of emotions that they felt has been partly disclosed to me. It is clear that they were greatly relieved to find that you were alive. They had feared that you were dead. That fear had taken over from the anger at what you had done to them. They visited you in prison and regularly so. The bonds of family were re-established. At the committal hearing and again before me it was made clear by both your parents that they valued the very close relationship that had been established after you came back into their lives. Since your return on bail to South Australia there has been continuing contact between you and your parents. They are clearly very supportive of you now. They, like Juliet and her family and friends, do not want you to be punished by a further period of imprisonment. But, of course, the attitude of all those close to you, including your victims, is but one of many matters for me to have regard to.
I have read the victim impact statement of your sister Monique. She has obviously suffered great trauma and over a long period. Moreover, that still applies. There are continuing adverse consequences for her. Her statement reflects great concern on her part for your parents. It is always helpful to have such statements for their capacity to assist with achieving an appropriate balance in the sentencing process. No such statement has been filed on behalf of your parents or your older brother. I can appreciate the ambivalence of their position.
You are now 25 years of age, having been born in January 1979. I have read the report of the psychologist, Mr Crewdson. I have also read the many letters prepared for this plea. Those letters come from family and friends. The quantity is impressive. The quality of what is said about you is much more impressive. Also impressive is the circumstance that many have come to Melbourne to support you at the hearing of this plea. In a sense it is invidious to highlight some letters. I will nonetheless note that three letters struck particularly responsive cords. I refer to those of Juliet Freckelton, Kerry Haydon and Chris Kelton. I have also benefited from hearing the oral testimony of both of your parents and from Juliet and Peter Freckelton. One matter of particular focus for me was what was said in the letters and in the oral testimony as to your personality and your attitudes as a 16 year old youth, and as a 25 year old father and provider.
As a 16 year old you were a much troubled youth. Your physical health had been impaired through allergies and asthma. You had been, like your older brother and a male cousin, sexually abused by an uncle. You perceived your parents to be uncaring. You were profoundly unhappy. Your older sister and brother were also unhappy because of the circumstances at home. Communication then within the family was poor. Alcohol was a source of solace, and not only for you. In your then state of unhappiness you also turned to drugs and to self-mutilation. You blamed your parents for everything but it is not only sentencing judges who are familiar with the different perceptions of teenage children and their parents of each other and with the tension those differing perceptions breed. Fortunately, it is an extremely rare event to have that tension erupt in violence of the kind seen here. General deterrence must be a factor that I must take into account but scarcely on the basis of prevalence.
The crimes to which you have pleaded guilty are very serious crimes. In ordinary circumstances you would expect to be punished with a very long term of imprisonment. However, there are many mitigating considerations that I must take into account. Included are the following: Your pleas of guilty are significant. Also significant is the early indication that you would so plead. Likewise, the hardship of any further period of imprisonment to Juliet and Michael. Likewise, your demonstrations of genuine remorse. I say "genuine remorse" based on what you have said to your parents and on what you have said to many others. Likewise, the absence of any other criminal history or any other history of violence. Likewise, the circumstance of your having been sexually abused as a young boy. Likewise, that you have been punished already in ways including the long separation from your family, the five months you have spent in prison last year, and through the publicity and processes of the criminal law. There are some further matters that appear to me to be of even greater significance. One is your youth, your immaturity, your vulnerability at the time of the offences. The next is the impressiveness of your maturation and rehabilitation over more than eight and a half years. The final matter is the impressiveness of the attitude of forgiveness and reconciliation so publicly demonstrated by your victims, your parents.
Against those matters I must take account of the great seriousness of your crimes and of the consequences of those crimes. There was a prolonged attack on vulnerable people in their beds. Added to that is the aggravation of the situation by your fleeing from Victoria. Before I embarked on the hearing of the plea I carefully studied the cases that have been referred to by Mr Mullaly and Ms Quin during the plea. I refer to cases including Shaw, Nutter, MFP, Cameron, Cunliffe, Scurrah and White. Some matters can only have a significant bearing on the ultimate sentence in exceptional cases. One such matter is the views of the victims. On the one hand, this is not a private prosecution. The State is prosecuting in the interests of the whole community. On the other hand, it is rare that victims who have been so badly and so humiliatingly injured are prepared to be as forgiving as are your parents. It is a powerful factor encouraging relative leniency.
Another matter of concern to me is that which arises because sentencing is taking place many years after the offending. The delay in your being brought to justice is entirely to be laid at your feet. I am troubled that it could be seen that relative leniency is a form of advantage gained from avoiding contact with the police. However, I justify the allowing of some advantage to the combination of exceptional circumstances that exist in this case.
Mr Mullaly has urged upon me that I should impose a wholly suspended sentence. Ms Quin argues that only an immediate custodial sentence is warranted. It is fair to say that on both ends of the Bar table all points that appropriately could be raised were raised and in a focused way. I am satisfied that the imposing of a suspended sentence is appropriate in these exceptional circumstances. The combination of mitigating factors is extraordinarily impressive.
I propose that a suspended sentence should be imposed; on each charge a sentence of three years' imprisonment to be served concurrently but suspended for three years. I must take the preliminary step of having you confirm that you understand the effect of a suspended sentence. I am required to explain to you the purpose and effect of the order and of the consequences. Do you understand that by having this suspended sentence you are liable to be sent to prison if you reoffend in any way in or out of Victoria over the next three years?
PRISONER: Yes, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Is there any other aspect of a suspended sentence you would want me to explain to you in more detail?
PRISONER: No.
HIS HONOUR: The position is for the next three years you must be on exemplary behaviour and you run the risk that you be brought before me to be resentenced in the event of that not occurring and you could then be obliged to spend three years in prison; you understand that?
PRISONER: Yes, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I sentence accordingly and I direct that you have served by way of pre-sentence detention a period of 167 days. I direct that that be recorded. I have also signed the orders that have been placed before me.
0
0
0