R v Monardo
[2003] VSC 423
•6 November 2003
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1489 of 2003
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| FRANCESCO MARIO MONARDO |
---
JUDGE: | Teague J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 27 October 2003 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 6 November 2003 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Francesco Mario Monardo | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2003] VSC 423 | |
---
Criminal Law – Sentencing – Intentionally causing serious injury – Husband in calculated sadistic revenge attack on wife with cut-throat razor in a city street – major physical and psychological consequences – significant mitigating factors – 14 years prison – non-parole period of 10 years
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr W. Morgan-Payler Q.C. | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr A. Trood | Clarebrough Pica |
HIS HONOUR:
Francesco Monardo, you have pleaded guilty to intentionally causing serious injury to Lynda Monardo on 7 February 2003. Lynda Monardo is your wife. You met her in 1962 in Geelong. That was not long after you had come to Australia from Italy. She was then married to another man, by whom she had had a son. She divorced the other man and lived with you. She married you in 1972. She bore you three sons. Together, you moved to, and built a home in, Thomastown. The two of you raised the four boys.
In more recent years, the two of you drifted apart. You valued your male friends at the Italian Club. Too often, you drank too much on occasions. You came home belligerent and nasty. For a long time, your wife put up with that kind of behaviour. She did not like it, and said so. It was your perception that her attitude was unreasonable. The two of you continued to live in the same house, but you lived separate lives. Your sons had their problems, with health and accommodation and relationships. Their problems imposed further strains on both of you. One son had a problem with heroin.
In October last year, your wife had a particularly worrying health scare. It prompted her to decide to seek a divorce. She consulted the four boys before speaking with you. They urged her not to proceed to a divorce. In early November, she spent a weekend with her first husband. Before she departed, she prepared and left a letter for you. She explained her reasons for leaving. She suggested an equal split of property, with the house to be sold. You prepared and left for her a letter in reply. You accepted that she should have a divorce. You referred in broad terms to her having an entitlement to half of everything. But there was an important reservation. The home was not to be sold. You said that your decision was to keep the house for the boys.
Later in November, you and your wife discussed what she would take when she left you. The failure to reach precise agreement caused trouble when the removal van called at your Thomastown home. On 29th November last year, she left you. She moved to Geelong. It rankled with you that she chose to leave you. It rankled even more when you were told that she was living with her first husband. For nearly 2 months you brooded.
On 20th January 2003, you bought in a city shop a cut-throat razor. You placed tape over the hinge so that it was a more effective weapon for what you had in mind. What you had in mind was a sadistic form of revenge. You planned to carry it out on 22nd January. That was the 37th anniversary of the two of you meeting. On that day, you waited at the Spencer Street station. You bought a bunch of flowers. Your plan was to give your wife the flowers and wish her a happy anniversary. You were then going to cut her throat. Your plan went astray as you could not find her at the station despite a wait of more than 12 hours.
On 6th February, you received a letter from your solicitor. It enclosed a letter from your wife’s solicitor. The letter made a proposal as to how your joint property might be dealt with. The proposal included that the Thomastown home be sold, and the proceeds be split equally. Any proposal meaning that the house was sold was not acceptable to you. You reinstated the plan for revenge that you had made a fortnight earlier. You booked a taxi for early the next morning to get you to the local station.
On 7th February, you travelled by taxi to the station and then by train in to Spencer Street. You waited there for a time, then walked up to near the corner of Bourke and Church Streets. You took up a position where you could watch out for your wife. You had with you the cut-throat razor and a screwdriver. You saw her shortly after 8 a.m. You went up to her and took hold of her. She resisted. You pushed her against the wall. You held her there, using the screwdriver. You took her in a head-lock. You took out the cut-throat razor from the overalls that you were wearing. She put up her hands. You pushed them away. As planned, you made a deep slicing cut along the side of the neck. Other more superficial cuts were inflicted in the course of the struggle. Fearful of worse to come, your wife slid to the ground. She put her hands to her neck. You put down the razor. She tried to move against the wall. You moved her back. The movement exposed part of her back. You took up the razor again. You made another deep slicing cut to the part of her back that was exposed. You then sat back a short distance from her.
Other people came up to where you were sitting and your wife was lying. They were obviously wanting to try to assist her. You told them to stay away, to mind their own business. You even threatened to kill one of them. When the police came, you blamed your wife for having forced you to do what you did.
You made it clear that you did not intend to kill your wife. You said a number of times that if you had wanted to kill her, you would have cut her head off. What you said included that you wanted revenge; that you wanted to hurt her very badly; that you wanted her to suffer; that if she had died, you would not feel sorry; and that, if she lived, she was not going to enjoy life.
I have read the victim impact statement prepared by your wife. It is short. It is measured. It is still very troubling. In part that is because she does not give a litany of her troubles. What she has done is to ask questions. They are questions that I cannot hope to answer. They all start with the word “Why”. They are variants on the basic question. Why did you do this to me?
I could provide to her a copy of the report of Mr Joblin. He tried to suggest reasons why you did it. He opines that you were experiencing a form of grief cycle. I suspect she would find those reasons, as I do, as providing only a shadow of an explanation. I recognise that some part of the explanation lies in the family stresses which were mounting late last year. The detail was provided by your son in his testimony before me. I accept that they were very troubling, particularly as what he said was supported by reports from other sources.
You son also spoke about the possibility of a reconciliation. I have noted the indications in the report of Mr Joblin of the need for great caution in addressing the matter of reconciliation. It seems that, as to that matter, your wife is ambivalent. Given the family dynamics, and the potential for a loving mother to feel guilt so readily and so deeply, I can understand why she is ambivalent.
Although your wife has chosen not to dwell on her problems, they are serious and they are continuing, as you intended that they should be. What emerges from the reports of others makes for depressing reading. I simply list the problems, although that provides no measure of the depth of the pain. Depression. Anxiety. Fear. Sleeplessness. Concern for her sons. Poor concentration. Hyper-vigilance. Suspicion. Self-consciousness as to her scars. Reduced functioning in her arm.
You are 62 years of age, having been born in April 1941 in Calabria in Italy. You were raised in a culture of male dominance. Your history of coming to Australia and making a new life for yourself is impressive. The more so because of the handicaps your overcame. In many respects, your achievements are outstanding. I could not but be impressed by the commending statements made by your son and by Mr Murphy on the hearing of the plea. You have been a supportive father to four sons, one a stepson. I note that your sons are, and are likely to remain, supportive of you. You have no prior convictions. That is the more impressive given your age. Until you attacked your wife you showed every sign of being a man of exemplary character. You have pleaded guilty, and you offered to do so at an early stage. That is a sign of remorse. On the other hand, the case against you was overwhelming. I nonetheless do allow for the plea in that it facilitates the course of justice. I also allow for your having co-operated extensively with the police.
Having noted those mitigating factors, the fact remains that this was an extremely serious instance of a very serious crime. The seriousness of the crime is apparent from the circumstance that the maximum penalty is 20 years. Considerations of general deterrence are important. There are plenty of people dissatisfied with the decision of a wife, a husband or a partner to go his or her separate ways. They must be discouraged from thinking that violence is an option. Your actions were calculated. They were long premeditated. You choice of a weapon was carefully made. The cut-throat razor was selected by you to provide you with maximum control. Further, you chose to carry out your acts in a very public way. Your wife was attacked when she was particularly vulnerable. You added to the controlling position by keeping others away, even to the point of threatening to kill a man who sought to assist your wife. The words used by you to describe to the police your intentions were sadistic in the extreme. You wanted revenge. You wanted your wife to be punished. You wanted the punishment to be inflicted in a way that would not cause death but a lingering painful life. Nevertheless, you were prepared to risk death. But for medical intervention, death would have resulted. You would then have been likely, given your age, to have spent the rest of your life in prison.
I have signed the orders sought and not opposed on the hearing of the plea. I certify for, and direct the recording of, 273 days of pre-sentence detention. I impose a head sentence of 14 years. I fix a non-parole period of 10 years.
0
0
0