R v Vella (Sentence) - [2023] NSWSC 831

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Vella (Sentence) [2023] NSWSC 831
Hearing dates: 5 July 2023
Date of orders: 14 July 2023
Decision date: 14 July 2023
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Wilson J
Decision:
1. Having been convicted of the murder of Mark Vella on 9 August 2021 at Murrumbateman in this State the offender is sentenced to a term of 24 years imprisonment, to date from 9 August 2021 and expiring on 8 August 2045. I fix a non-parole period of 18 years imprisonment, expiring on 8 August 2039.

Catchwords:
CRIME – sentence after trial – verdict of guilty to charge of murder – shooting – domestic violence offence – partial defence of substantial impairment rejected by jury – motive for crime not able to be determined – offender suffering from depression

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Muldrockv The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
R v Alkanaan(No.7) [2015] NSWSC 904
R v Cadman [2019] NSWSC 634
R v Clark [No 3] [2008] NSWSC 795
R v Fredes [2020] NSWSC 1332
R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374; 90 A Crim R 587
R v Miller (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1347
R v Ronald Edward Medich(No. 43) [2018] NSWSC 886
R v Tran (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 1661
R v White [2023] NSWSC 193

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Dale Lee Vella (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
K Ratcliffe (Crown)
G Hoare (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Abernethy Gore Solicitors Pty Ltd (Offender)

File Number(s): 2021/227553
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

HER HONOUR: Mark Vella has been described by those who knew and loved him as a “larrikin”, and a “top bloke”. He was a family man who owned and operated with his family a small business based in the Canberra area. He had a wide circle of friends, including his closest friends who were part of his extended family. He enjoyed a full life of fishing, camping, cooking meals for his family, and socialising with them and friends, despite a visual impairment. With much to live for, and aged only about 50, Mr Vella’s life was violently ended when he was shot dead by his wife, the offender, Dale Vella.
The offender entered a plea of not guilty to the murder of Mark Vella when she was arraigned before a jury panel on 11 April 2023, and her trial proceeded until 21 April 2023, when the jury returned a verdict of guilty to the charge. Having been convicted of the offence on the same day as the verdict was returned, today Mrs Vella is to be sentenced for the murder of her husband, a crime she committed on 9 August 2021, at the family home at Murrumbateman.
Murder is an offence which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment; in the circumstances of this case a standard non-parole period of 20 years applies.

The Facts of the Offence

The principles governing…

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 Vella (Sentence)

Details

AGLC: R v Vella (Sentence) [2023] NSWSC 831
Case: [2023] NSWSC 831
Decision Date: 14 July 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the respondent, Vella, was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Vella shot and killed the victim, who was his former partner, during a domestic dispute. The court was required to determine an appropriate sentence following the jury's guilty verdict on the charge of murder. The jury had rejected the defence's plea of substantial impairment, which was based on Vella's depression at the time of the offence.

The legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing principles to apply, given the particular circumstances of the case. The court considered the nature and circumstances of the offence, including the motive behind the killing, which could not be determined due to the absence of a clear motive. The court also took into account Vella's mental health, specifically his depression, which played a role in the offence. The court was required to balance these factors in determining an appropriate sentence.

In reaching its decision, the court considered the gravity of the offence, noting that the killing was premeditated and involved the use of a firearm. The court emphasised the importance of deterrence and denunciation in cases of domestic violence. The court also took into account Vella's mental health, which was a mitigating factor. However, the court found that the aggravating factors, such as the premeditation and use of a firearm, outweighed the mitigating factors. The court ultimately determined that Vella's sentence should reflect the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community.

The final orders of the court were that Vella be sentenced to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 23 years. This sentence reflected the gravity of the offence and the need to protect the community while also taking into account Vella's mental health and the mitigating factors in the case.

Orders