R v Parker
[2013] VSC 479
•11 September 2013
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 0077 of 2013
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| SCOTT ALAN PARKER |
---
JUDGE: | KING J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 16 August 2013 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 11 September 2013 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Parker | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2013] VSC 479 | |
---
Plea - Manslaughter – Criminal Damage – Summary offence of breach of family violence order: Manslaughter - One punch – History of assaults – On suspended sentence and family violence order at time of incident.
Sentence: Criminal damage 8 months - Manslaughter 8 years - Family violence order 6 months.
Total sentence 8 years 6 months – minimum of 6 years 3 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Ms A Hassan | The office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr D Gurvich | Emma Turnbull Criminal Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
Scott Alan Parker, you have pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Beau Daniel Lawson by unlawful and dangerous act, on 29 November 2012. You have also pleaded guilty to one count of criminal damage which arose out of the same set of circumstances.
You are now 26 years of age, having been born on 26 September 1986 and will shortly turn 27. The deceased man, Beau Lawson, was 31 years of age at the time he died, having been born on 3 August 1981. I also have to deal with you for a relevant breach of a family violence intervention order, I say relevant, as the breach of the family violence intervention order appears to be the basis of the circumstances that led to this tragic event. That is a summary offence and you have consented to the jurisdiction of this court.
Your prior criminal history is relevant to this matter. The first two matters in your criminal history from 2003 were Children’s Court matters in October and December 2003 – for a charge of theft for which you were convicted and detained in a youth training centre for two months; and a charge of escaping from a prison/police jail, theft of a motor vehicle, unlicensed driving and theft from a motor vehicle (two counts) which resulted in you receiving six months’ detention in a youth training centre on each charge, with a total effective sentence of six months. They are not particularly relevant, and I will not take account of them for the purpose of this sentence.
From 2005 onwards though, there is a pattern displayed within your criminal history that is disturbing. On 16 August 2005 at the Frankston Magistrates' Court you were convicted of the following charges: assault police; resist police; act in a disruptive/abusive manner; recklessly cause injury and fail to answer bail; as well as drunk in a public place. In respect of all charges, apart from being drunk in a public place, you were convicted and placed on a community based order for 12 months to perform 70 hours unpaid community work over a period of six months, to undergo assessment and treatment for alcohol/drug addiction or submit to medical/psychological/psychiatric assessment and treatment, and, importantly, to participate in an anger management course as directed. In relation to being drunk in public place, you were convicted and fined $80.00.
You were next before the court at the Frankston Magistrates' Court on 26 June 2006, for one count of criminal damage (intent to damage or destroy) and two counts of unlawful assault. In relation to each of those offences you were convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of three months imprisonment concurrent sentence which was wholly suspended for a period of 12 months. You were also dealt with on that same date for your failure to comply with the CBO together with the charges for which you had been placed on a CBO. The failure to comply was found proven and on all matters you were sentenced to an aggregate three months imprisonment concurrent with the sentenced imposed on the other offences that day, all of which was wholly suspended for the period of 12 months.
On 26 February 2010, you were before the Frankston Magistrates' Court for failing to answer bail, assaulting police, resisting police, using indecent language in a public place, drunk in a public place and criminal damage (intent to damage or destroy). You were convicted and placed on a community based order for 12 months and directed to perform 150 hours of unpaid community work over that 12 month period.
On 25 January 2011 you were breached for your failure to comply with the community based order and in respect of each of the offences on which you had been placed on a community based order that order was cancelled and you were given an aggregate of three months’ imprisonment wholly suspended for 12 months. You were also convicted and fined an aggregate $2,000.
On 24 July 2012 you were before the Frankston Magistrates' Court again on one count of unlawful assault for which you received 14 days imprisonment, which sentence was wholly suspended for a period of two years. One count of refuse to undergo a breath test, one of owning an unregistered vehicle used on the highway, and on each charge you were, with conviction, fined an aggregate of $1000 and your licence was cancelled and you were disqualified for four years.
In relation to the suspended sentence imposed on 25 July 2011 relating to the offences of the 25 January 2011, the suspended sentence was wholly restored and you were directed to serve a three month term of imprisonment cumulative upon any state sentences presently being served or imposed prior to that date.
On my understanding of those prior convictions, it would appear you had assaults and causing injury convictions in 2005, criminal damage and unlawful assault in 2006, assaults and criminal damage in 2010 and assault in 2012. As a result of various sentences imposed, you were at the time of this offence on a suspended sentence for assault, and you had been released from prison only a short time prior to this offence occurring – a matter only of weeks, for other assaults and criminal damage.
Further, on 13 November 2012, a interim family violence intervention order was made at Frankston Magistrates' Court, a copy of which was served upon you at that time, which order stated that you were not to attempt to locate, follow, assault, threaten or intimidate a Ms Rachel Delaney. A final family violence intervention order in precisely the same terms was made in the Frankston Magistrates' Court on 23 November 2012. You were present and agreed to the final order being made in those terms, which was only six days prior to your assault upon Mr Lawson.
It is with that background, that is, that you are on a suspended sentence for assault, that you have been shortly before released from prison for offences including assaults and that you have a family violence intervention order not to assault, harass, intimidate your ex‑partner, that this offending occurs.
The background and circumstances relating to this offending are set out in the crown opening, Exhibit 1 on the plea, and I will outline only in simple terms the tragic scenario that resulted in the loss of Beau Lawson’s life. The circumstances can be well established as there was CCTV at the hotel, making clear the times of certain events, as well as numerous witnesses both at the hotel and in Cadles Road, where this killing occurred.
The deceased man, Beau Lawson, went to the Sands Hotel in Cadles Road, Carrum Downs at 2.44pm on the afternoon of Thursday 29 November 2012, having ceased work earlier that day. He was a regular patron at the hotel and knew many people there. The hotel has a large entertainment complex with bistro, bar, function areas and gaming rooms. Mr Lawson became intoxicated as he consumed alcohol over the course of the day. He appeared to be predominantly happy and friendly, however his behaviour ultimately did annoy some other patrons in that he kept taking the pool ball from the table where they were playing pool. Not unsurprisingly the men became somewhat annoyed and angry. A friend offered him a lift home but he declined. After complaints about Mr Lawson picking fights with other patrons he was told that he would get no further service at the bar and that he had to leave. At around 8.29 he was abusive to another male patron and security removed Mr Lawson from the hotel premises. You had been to the same school as Mr Lawson, but he was a number of years ahead of you, but you all knew each other.
On that same night at 7.37pm, your ex‑girlfriend, Rachel Delaney, arrived at the hotel with a number of her female friends and headed towards the bistro to have dinner. At 7.42pm a friend of yours, Jenna Pringle, who worked at the hotel sent a text to you. It is unknown what the contents of that text were. Initially I was of the view that I may have been satisfied on the evidence that the message she sent was to inform you that your ex girlfriend had arrived at the hotel, however, upon examination of the evidence I cannot be satisfied to the required standard, that was the subject of the message. There was no evidence before the court about the contents of the message at all. What did occur was that at 8.05pm you arrived at the hotel and were seen to speak to Ms Pringle. All of these times have been captured on video surveillance footage at the hotel. During the next 15 minutes, you are seen on the video security footage to walk past the table of Ms Delaney and her friends and you made comments that were clearly designed to offend and upset, including comments that you ‘hoped the hotel staff had spat in their food’. You were described as laughing and attempting to provoke them. Despite the order to keep your distance from Ms Delaney, it was she who ultimately decided to leave the hotel. She considered complaining to the police and did complain to the hotel management about what had occurred, they refunded her money and she and her friends left the hotel to return to the home of one of the women further down Cadles Road.
At approximately 8.18pm you sent a text to a friend of yours which read ‘I’m at the Sands and the cunt’s here’ in which you were clearly referring to Ms Delaney. At 8.21pm you went to the main public bar, sat down with some other males, at 8.26 Jenna Pringle came into the bar area and told you that the women had threatened to call the police and that you should leave. You then did. You were attempting to communicate with a Ms Tate, the person to whom you had earlier sent the message, and you were trying to arrange for her to pick you up from the hotel.
At around 8.37pm you sent a text to Ms Tate and said that Mr Lawson, who you knew from your school days, was ‘trying to have a dip’. When Ms Delaney and her friends were walking down Cadles Road toward the home of their friend she saw you with Mr Lawson, also on Cadles Road – ahead of her at the corner. You were, as she described it, ‘mouthing off’ to Mr Lawson about her having taken your money. She noticed Mr Lawson, who she said appeared to be drunk but trying to calm you down. The women crossed to the other side of the road to avoid you, but you were not prepared to let that happen and you began moving towards her screaming at her. She described you as screaming at her and being so angry that you were spitting. She said Mr Lawson was just standing to the side and trying to hold a conversation about his day and what had happened. Ms Delaney believed you were about to hit her and she ran away. She said that you tried to follow her but that Mr Lawson stopped you by putting his hand up. At that point there was a parked car on the nature strip and you smashed the back window of that car with your fist, crying and saying, ‘I fuckin loved you, I was going to marry you’. A number of persons were present and saw and heard what you did. One of Ms Delaney’s friends described you as so angry that you were frothing at the mouth, with your arms raised and screaming. One of them reminded you that you had just got out of jail and you should go so that you didn’t get into more trouble. All of them described Beau Lawson as intoxicated but calm and placid when he was speaking to you.
You commenced to walk off and Mr Lawson followed you. A number of people heard you tell Mr Lawson to fuck off. The only indications of Mr Lawson doing anything were contained in statements that he was trying to usher you away or pull your arm back away from a raised fist to Ms Delaney. There were at least three other people in the vicinity who saw and heard what occurred, all of them saw Mr Lawson taking the role of someone trying to calm you down. George Duda, hearing Mr Lawson say, ‘just calm down you’re drunk let things cool off’. Patricia Salmon heard Mr Lawson saying, ‘come on mate lets get out of here’ and observed Mr Lawson trying to guide you across the road.
This is the consistent theme, that you were angry, aggressive, furious with rage directed initially towards Ms Delaney, then to the motor vehicle, and when Mr Lawson was trying to calm you down, you turned and punched him with a closed fist as he was standing there with his arms down trying, as indicated, to calm you down. Beau Lawson fell to the ground and hit his head on the concrete. The blow you used was forceful. Mr Lawson was clearly not expecting it and had done nothing in any way to cause you to behave towards him in this manner.
A number of people tried to assist Mr Lawson. You were not one of them. He was taken to the Alfred Hospital at 8.57. He had suffered traumatic brain injury and was unable to recover. He was placed on life support until his family could come to the hospital and deal with the tragedy that confronted them – that of withdrawing his life support. That was done and he was pronounced dead at 12.38pm on 30 November 2012.
A post-mortem was conducted in respect of Mr Lawson, which showed that there was blunt-force trauma to the side of his head with deep bruising below the right ear which extended into the soft tissue. There was also, and significantly, a recent fracture on the right side of the first cervical vertebrae. The bone had buckled inwards and the pathologist opined that this fracture was the direct result of the punch to the side of the head/neck area. On a scale of mild, moderate and severe force, the view was that the force required to produce that fracture would have to have been at least moderate. There was also extensive subarachnoid hemorrhage centred on the base of the brain, which was due to a focal basilar artery laceration or tear. That tear was a consequence of the blow that you inflicted upon this man that felled him, causing him to strike the back of his head and have this significant tear resulting in horrific brain injury. A sample in relation to Mr Lawson’s blood, which was taken on that night at 10.20pm revealed he had a blood concentration of 0.18.
You had fled the scene; and the police by the early hours of Friday morning had your telephone number. They contacted you on that mobile phone but you refused to present yourself for questioning at that stage. An appointment was made via your solicitors to attend at the Homicide Squad at 6.41pm on Sunday 2 December 2012, where you gave a no comment record of interview.
You were examined by a forensic medical officer who observed multiple lacerations to your hands and arms as a result of your actions in striking the car window. In terms of the criminal damage charge, that relates to the damage you inflicted on the rear window of the Mazda hatchback when you punched it with your fist.
In relation to the family violence intervention order breach, the circumstances are as I have already outlined in the summary, the repeated approaches you made to Ms Delaney both in the hotel and on the street.
You indicated your intention to plead guilty to these offences on 5 May 2013 and you arraigned before this court on 23 May 2013. It is considered, as a result, an early plea. You are entitled to and will receive a reduction in the penalty that would otherwise have been imposed as a result of your plea of guilty and the early stage at which you made that plea, a period that I will declare pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act.
Beau Lawson was a father, a co-parent, a son, a brother, a cousin and a friend to many, and I have received a number of victim impact statements in relation to the consequences of his death upon different members of the community. His mother read to the court her victim impact statement which was on behalf of herself and her husband. You were unable to raise your head and look at her as she gave that statement. I am not surprised. I heard from his mother, his niece Jessica Somerfield, and the rest were read aloud by the prosecutor on behalf of his sister Tanya Somerfield, his partner Naomi Greene, Ms Lisa Hemmingway a friend, and Brooke Timmins a close family friend.
Beau Lawson was the father to two young boys, and photos were tendered of him with his boys that show a caring, loving dad. Whilst he was no longer in the relationship with his partner, they were committed to raising their sons together. Those two boys are Jai aged 7 and Kailem aged 4. Kailem has significant disabilities, particularly in respect of learning, and his mother has been left without the support of her parenting partner. You sat in court, you heard the anguish of these people. It is not possible to sit in these courts and not hear and see the pain in the words that they speak and write. What you have done is that you have destroyed a significant part of the lives of his sons, his parents, his sister, his partner and his friends. Whilst their lives will continue, there will always be a truly significant hole that is irreplaceable.
As I said during the plea to his family, the sentence I impose upon you is a matter of law and I am bound by all of the principles that are set down by Parliament in the Sentencing Act. The sentence is not and is never intended to be a reflection of the worth of their son, father, partner, brother. I am aware that very few people who have lost someone to a crime of violence will ever walk away from a court satisfied that justice has been done. Like every other judicial officer we would like to ease the pain of these very wounded people but it cannot be done, because I cannot restore Beau Lawson to them, and their pain is the loss of that much-loved person and, you, Scott Parker, are responsible for that. You saw and heard the pain you have inflicted and you will have to live with that knowledge for the rest of your life. For those who loved Beau Lawson, I hope, that with the passage of time, when you think of Beau it will be about the joy and pleasure he brought into your lives rather than the horrific and appalling way in which he died, and the fact that he was here for even that short time, rather than the grief and pain of how his life was lost.
This is a terrible crime, it is pointless, motiveless and a result of anger and rage. You had no hatred for Beau Lawson, you had no reason to want him dead, it is more probable that you liked him in a distant way of casual acquaintances. I have no evidence relating to any alcohol that you may have consumed, apart from the short time that you were at the hotel, and nothing was submitted on your behalf as to the consumption of alcohol.
Your counsel submitted that your actions in punching Beau Lawson were on the basis that you thought he was going to harm you. It is also what you told your psychologist which he reported in the following terms ‘with regard to the manslaughter offence Mr Parker stated that he was repeatedly confronted by Mr Lawson outside the Sands Hotel and felt threatened. He stated that he struck Mr Lawson pre-emptively due to believing that he was going to be attacked. Further this is repeated in your letter of apology to the family of Mr Lawson where you state “everything just happened so quick and I just reacted to what was happening the best I could to protect myself and without thinking’. In respect of the charges of breach of family violence intervention order and criminal damage you informed your psychologist that you ‘approached Ms Delaney and damaged the car because he was upset about how the relationship ended.’
These offences to which you have pleaded guilty did not occur outside the Sands hotel, it was further down the road and occurred in the circumstances I have outlined, with all of the witnesses, including those that knew neither you nor Mr Lawson stating that Mr Lawson was trying to placate you during your demonstrated anger and rage towards Ms Delaney and the motor vehicle. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that there was no basis, reasonable or otherwise, for your professed belief that Mr Lawson was about to strike or attack you and I do not accept what has been put forward during the plea, or to the psychologist or in your letter of apology in respect of that matter.
As indicated earlier, your personal circumstances are relevant to the sentencing process. You are 26 years of age, have a younger brother Harley, who is aged 22. Your background circumstances could only be described as poor. Your parents separated when you were five years of age, shortly after they moved to Victoria from South Australia. You have had almost no contact with your father since the age of 9 until recent time, when there has been a resumption of the relationship. You come clearly from a dysfunctional family. The report from the psychologist Dr Aaron Cunningham dated 5 August 2013 (Exhibit 5 on the plea) states that your parents separated when you were aged five. Your father, in his letter to the court, (part of Exhibit 10) states that he lost access and custody of you when you were aged 3. Despite the differences it appears that from a very young age you were in the care of your mother.
Your mother was a nurse, but you describe her as a significant abuser of cannabis to the psychologist and that she was a selfish self‑centred person who cared for herself well-ahead of her children.
Your mother began a new relationship with a person by the name of Gerald with whom she subsequently had two children: Samantha aged 19 and Tamika aged 17.
You attended Monterey Primary School, followed by Monterey Secondary College for a matter of weeks and then Mordialloc College until the end of Year 8. You were described as having behavioural problems during primary school as well as secondary school. You told the psychologist that at secondary college you were bullied and beaten by older students and you had no friends during your time at school. It would appear, however, from the evidence called before me that you did at least have some friends during this time. I will refer to that shortly.
You commenced an apprenticeship as a roof tiler with a person by the name of Luke Vella, which was not completed. You did some sign-writing through a family friend and then finally gained employment with JSW Australia approximately two years ago. That related to working in the mines in Western Australia. You worked two weeks on one week off.
In relation to your childhood, you told the psychologist you were placed in the care of the Department of Human Services when you were aged approximately 13, as a result of being deemed an uncontrollable child, but your counsel submitted it was because your mother did not want you any longer and wished to be rid of you. I am unable to say which it is as I do not have access to any of your earlier Children’s Court appearances. What is clear is that your mother, if she did care for you, did not pursue a relationship with you and appeared to effectively abandon you, and I will act upon that basis.
You commenced using cannabis at the age of 14 but ceased some time ago. You commenced using amphetamines at the age of 15 and described continued recreational use of the drug. That usage had to reduce significantly due to the urine testing performed by your employer JSW Australia when you were working on the mines. You reported only social use of alcohol, which commenced at the age of 14.
The report presented to the court by Dr Cunningham, states that you have presented with symptoms causing him to make a diagnosis of persistent depressive disorder, which is defined as a chronic low level depressed mood. He found that you were predisposed to the development of such a disorder by the instability and lack of emotional connection in your childhood. He also noted that whilst in custody you have been prescribed Escitalopram which has improved your depressive symptoms.
You have had two significant relationships in your life. The first was with Kylie Pasquill from the age of about 19 which ended after two years, and some time after that you commenced a relationship with Ms Delaney. Ms Delaney had three children from a previous relationship and you were close to the children as well as Ms Delaney. You described the relationship as ending very suddenly whilst you were incarcerated on the last occasion. You believed Ms Delaney had removed money from your account whilst you were in gaol. You were also served with an family violence intervention order.
Janice Elizabeth Edwards was called on your behalf, she is a registered nurse who has known you since you were about 8 or 9, you being a childhood friend of her son’s and living in the same neighbourhood. She described what she observed in terms of how you were treated by your mother – not that she observed your mother’s actual treatment but the inferences she drew from what her observations were – including as a young boy between 8 and 11 you would be attending at her house at 7.30am and eat breakfast with them. You would go to school with her children and come and play at her premises until about 9pm without your mother ever enquiring where you were or showing any other indication of concern.
She indicated that she and her family moved to Queensland between the time you were aged about 12 to 15 but she became re-acquainted with you through football. She said when that resumed she found you to be a polite young man, helpful, supportive, and caring. She described your relationship with Kylie Pasquale, with whom you were in a relationship between the ages of 19 and 23. She said that was when you were at your happiest, when you were settled, working, saving and having what, as she described, you had always wanted around you; a family, routine and calmness. She described you as being a little lost after you broke up with Kylie. Since you have been in custody; she has visited you three times and speaks to you at least twice a week, and she described you as shattered over what your actions have done - destroying two little boy’s lives, by destroying their father and destroying a son and a brother.
Hayley Anne Kenny also gave evidence on your behalf. She is the girlfriend of your best friend Ricky Marsden. She gave evidence that you are a kind, caring, gentle person who is devastated by what you have done to Beau Lawson and his family, she has never seen your aggressive side and describes you as not being an angry person at all.
Alana Patricia Parker also gave evidence on your behalf, she is your aunt, your father’s sister. She unfortunately had no contact with you from the age of 4 until approximately four years ago. During the last four years, she and her brother, your father, have been involved in rebuilding relationships, and it is progressing.
Unfortunately, Ms Parker, like a number of other people, seems to lay the blame for this offence entirely at the feet of the dysfunctional upbringing you underwent, that because you weren’t given the love and support that you needed growing up, you have been damaged and traumatised, resulting in this tragedy occurring. That is not a view I share. Your appalling upbringing is a factor that is relevant to the person that you have become, of that I have no doubt, but, equally, at some stage all of us are responsible for who we are and our own actions. You are no longer a child, you are an adult of 26, and you must take responsibility for your own actions and learn to control your anger and your rage, something you were unable to do at the time of this offending. You have been unable to control that anger and rage in the past as is demonstrated by your prior criminal history particularly as it relates to assaults and criminal damage.
You had many supporters in court and you are a fortunate person to have that. The volume of people in court to support you is also an indication that a large number of people find you a worthwhile and good human being, and the indications from your counsel are that those persons will go on supporting you when you are released into the community. You have undertaken courses whilst in prison and are doing the best you can to improve your life.
In relation to the issue of remorse, I do find that you are remorseful, and you are, to a degree, appalled and horrified by what you did on this night, but it is your insight into your offending that causes me concern. You appear to be still trying to justify your actions by talking about pre-emptive strikes, and how you felt under threat. You need to accept responsibility not only for what you did on this night, but why you did it.
Beau Lawson did nothing other than try to calm you down, he was intoxicated and as a result, to a large degree defenceless, his actions were at the time of his death those of a peacemaker. Your anger and rage has deprived the world of a good man.
There appears to be a persisting view about, despite all the publicity and media campaigns by the police and government, that it’s ‘just a punch’.
A punch kills. We have numerous examples, people just walking along the street, minding their own business, or trying to be helpful, or just the wrong time and place. One punch and one death that follows. This is not television, this is not a video game, this is real life, we have fragile bodies that break, and fragile heads that break with even more dire consequences.
All of the men, particularly the young men of our society ought to come and sit here on this bench and look at the sad eyes that populate this court, the sad eyes of children, parents, partners, and friends who have lost someone they love and treasure because someone lost their temper, or got a bit angry or was showing off. One punch and hundreds of people’s lives are destroyed. Because nothing ever makes it better, time can dull the pain, but it never makes it better. That is what you have to live with – what you have inflicted upon these people for the rest of their lives.
I have been referred to a number of sentences in respect of manslaughter some of which have been of assistance in respect of enunciated principles, some less so. I have considered those matters, and taken them into account in determining the appropriate sentence for this offending.
The crime of manslaughter is serious and this is an example that falls within the middle of the range in terms of seriousness, it is not at the lower end, nor is it at the higher end, but in my view falls somewhere in the middle of the range.
I have to take into account in your favour your plea of guilty, the early stage at which it was entered, your remorse, your prospects of rehabilitation which I find to be reasonable, provided you undertake significant steps to deal with your anger issues, your very difficult childhood, your age and background and your psychological problems, which I find to be not particularly significant in light of your current treatment. Equally I need to consider the matters of both general and specific deterrence, which are of importance in this case, the need for just and appropriate punishment together with the contents of the victim impacts statements, as well as the other matters to which I have already referred to determine the appropriate sentence.
The maximum penalties for the offences are 20 years imprisonment for manslaughter, 10 years imprisonment for criminal damage, and 2 years imprisonment for breach of family violence order
Accordingly you are convicted and sentenced on Charge 1 – criminal damage to be imprisoned for 8 months, and on Charge 2 the charge of manslaughter to be imprisoned for 8 years.
For the offence of breach of family violence intervention order you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 6 months. I direct that the sentence on the charge of manslaughter is the base sentence and that 3 months of the sentence on criminal damage, charge 1, and 3 months of the sentence on breach of family violence order, be served cumulative upon each other and upon the sentence imposed for manslaughter, making a total of 8 years and 6 months imprisonment.
I direct that you are to serve a minimum of six years and 3 months before becoming eligible for release on parole.
I declare that but for the plea of guilty the sentence that I would otherwise have imposed would have been a sentence of 9 years on the charge of manslaughter, 9 months on the charge of breach of family violence order and 12 months on the charge of criminal damage. With cumulation the sentence would have been 9 years and 9 months imprisonment with a minimum of 7 years and 6 months imprisonment.
Declare that subject to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic): 283 (two hundred and eighty-three) days has been served in pre-sentence detention in relation to this matter and such is to be noted in the records of the court.
Application for retention of forensic sample 464ZFB(1) is granted ( earlier).
Compensation Order granted (earlier).
---
2
0
0