R v Trezise - [2014] VSC 9

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 0192 of 2013

THE QUEEN

LISA ANN TREZISE

---

JUDGE:	T FORREST J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	28 January 2014
DATE OF SENTENCE:	31 January 2014
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Trezise
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VSC 9

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Criminal damage – Recklessly cause injury – Assist offender – Participant in events that led to homicide – Plea of guilty – Significant remorse – Undertaking to give evidence at trial of co-offenders – Evidence that low intelligence and dependent personality made offender vulnerable to being overborne by aggressive males – This evidence, though not amounting to a mental impairment, relevant to moral culpability – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder – R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 – Term of imprisonment would be more onerous as a result of condition existing at the date of sentence – Sentenced to 1 year 9 months’ imprisonment wholly suspended for a period of 2 years.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr M Rochford SC	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr D Risstrom	Jeremy Harper & Associates

HIS HONOUR:

In early January 2013, you were a peripheral participant in events that ultimately led to the brutal death of a 14 year old autistic boy, Timothy O’Brien. You have pleaded guilty to three offences arising from those events. It is necessary to emphasise that none of the charges to which you have pleaded guilty involve complicity in the events that caused Timothy O’Brien’s death.

Peter Williams was then a resident of Smythesdale. He had commenced a relationship with Timothy O’Brien’s mother in approximately 2011. He took on the role of stepfather to Timothy, who became very attached to him. For reasons that are unnecessary to recount, Darren Wilson, a resident of Ballarat, fell out with Mr Williams. He left an abusive note at Mr Williams’ house on 1 January 2013. Police spoke to Darren Wilson on 3 January and advised him to stay away from that house. Wilson demonstrated to the police a large animosity towards Mr Williams and threatened to kill him.

Wilson developed a plan to lure Mr Williams to the address of a nearby resident, RC, a seventeen year old woman. Wilson’s proposal was to bash Mr Williams at that address. RC was complicit in this plan.

Shortly prior to January 2013 you had commenced a relationship with Joel Henderson. He lived with you in the weeks leading up to this episode.

It is unclear how you initially became involved in this plan to lure Mr Williams into this trap. What is clear is that you spoke to Darren Wilson at about 1.00am on 5 January 2013 and then, with Joel Henderson and two of your young children in your car, you drove to the Entourage Bar in Mair Street, Ballarat. At 1.22am, Wilson entered your car. You all drove to the house of Joel Henderson’s mother.…

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 Trezise

Details

AGLC: R v Trezise [2014] VSC 9
Case: [2014] VSC 9
Decision Date: 31 January 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved a criminal case against an individual named Trezise, who had pleaded guilty to charges of criminal damage, recklessly causing injury, and assisting an offender. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for Trezise's involvement in these criminal activities, which culminated in a homicide. Trezise's plea included elements of significant remorse and an undertaking to provide evidence against co-offenders at their trial.

The legal issues the court had to address included the appropriate weight to be given to Trezise's remorse, his vulnerability to influence by more aggressive individuals, and the impact of his low intelligence and dependent personality on his moral culpability. The court also had to consider the relevance of Trezise's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the sentencing process. The court referred to the precedent set in R v Verdins, which held that a term of imprisonment would be more onerous due to conditions existing at the date of sentencing.

The court found that while Trezise's evidence of low intelligence and vulnerability did not amount to a mental impairment, it was relevant to his moral culpability. Taking into account the mitigating factors and the precedent from R v Verdins, the court sentenced Trezise to a term of imprisonment of one year and nine months, which was wholly suspended for a period of two years. This decision reflected the court's consideration of both the severity of the crimes and the personal circumstances of the offender.

Orders