JUDGE:	Croucher J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATES OF HEARING:	19 June & 10 July 2023
DATE OF SENTENCE:	10 July 2023
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Prestage
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VSC 400

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Assisting offender (manslaughter) — Decomposed body of deceased discovered in mineshaft eight months after disappearance — Accused, SJ, AB and CD originally charged with murder — Murder withdrawn against AB and CD —Subsequently, accused pleaded guilty to assisting offender on basis that SJ committed murder — No evidence against accused that SJ committed murder, save his guilty plea — Before accused sentenced, SJ pleaded guilty to manslaughter — Accused applied to withdraw guilty plea — By consent, plea of guilty set aside, indictment amended, and accused pleaded guilty to assisting offender (manslaughter) — Believing SJ committed manslaughter, accused assisted in removing body from scene and dumping it in mineshaft — Remorse — Criminal history for driving, dishonesty and violence offences — Solid work history — Support of partner — Very strong prospects of rehabilitation — Hardship of prison conditions during pandemic — Sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment with non‑parole period of 12 months — Sentence already served by pre‑sentence detention — But for plea of guilty, sentence of three years and three months’ imprisonment with non‑parole period of two years — Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 325; Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), ss 5, 6AAA, 11(1)(b) & 18.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr J McWilliams with Ms S Gray	Abbey Hogan, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For Mr Prestage	Mr T Marsh with Ms S Gillahan	Stary Norton Halphen

HIS HONOUR:

Overview

On 28 April 2020, Kobie Lee Parfitt, aged 42, disappeared from her home in Ballarat in suspicious circumstances. As a result of false rumours as to her whereabouts, she was not reported missing until August that year. Another four months later, police found Ms Parfitt’s body wrapped in plastic and bedding at the bottom of a mineshaft nearly 30 kilometres away, in Snake Valley. As a result of decomposition, the cause of her death could not be determined. Nevertheless, the prosecution case is that Ms Parfitt was unlawfully killed on the day of her disappearance, and that her body was then dumped in the mineshaft.

Between December 2020 and February 2021, four people were successively arrested and charged with the murder of Ms Parfitt, and held in custody. In October 2022, the Director of Public Prosecutions discontinued the murder charge against two of those accused — namely, AB and CD. They were released from prison, made statements to police, and became prosecution witnesses. The murder trial of the remaining accused — Shannon Jeffrey and Brendon Prestage — was listed to commence tomorrow, 11 July.

However, following the evidence of AB and CD at a pre-trial hearing…

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 Prestage

Details

AGLC: R v Prestage [2023] VSC 400
Case: [2023] VSC 400
Decision Date: 10 July 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Prestage involved the accused, identified as Prestage, who was initially charged with multiple others for the murder of a deceased whose body was found decomposed in a mineshaft eight months after their disappearance. The matter was heard in the Victorian Court of Appeal. Prestage, along with three other individuals, were originally charged with murder, but the charges against two of the co-accused were later withdrawn. Prestage subsequently pleaded guilty to assisting an offender, based on the premise that one of the co-accused, identified as SJ, had committed the murder. However, there was no direct evidence against Prestage that SJ had indeed committed murder, apart from SJ’s own guilty plea.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the appropriate sentence for Prestage’s plea of guilty to assisting an offender in the context of manslaughter, given that SJ had pleaded guilty to manslaughter rather than murder. The court also had to consider the mitigating factors presented, including Prestage’s remorse, criminal history, work history, and personal support network, alongside the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic affecting prison conditions. The court needed to balance these factors against the gravity of the offence and the principles of justice and deterrence.

In its reasoning, the court acknowledged the significant role Prestage played in assisting the offender by removing the body and disposing of it, albeit believing at the time that SJ had committed murder. The court recognised Prestage's remorse, good work history, and the support of his partner as mitigating factors. However, it also considered the seriousness of the offence and the need for general deterrence. The court concluded that a sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 12 months was appropriate, taking into account the time Prestage had already served in pre-sentence detention. Had Prestage not entered a guilty plea, the sentence would have been three years and three months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years.

The court ordered that Prestage's sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 12 months, be effective from the date of his pre-sentence detention, ensuring that he had already served the required term.

Orders