R v Woodward

[2013] NSWDC 264

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

R v Woodward [2013] NSWDC 264

Hearing dates:

25 November 2013

Decision date:

25 November 2013

Before:

Berman SC DCJ

Decision:

Sentenced to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 4½ years and a head sentence of 6 years.

The offender is disqualified from driving for a period of 5 years

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Dangerous driving causing death - Provisional licence - Speeding - Blood alcohol in excess of limit permitted for provisional licence holders

Category:

Sentence

Parties:

The Crown
Tony William Woodward

Representation:

Mr G Fatches - Crown
Mr T Healey - Offender
Director of Public Prosecutions

File Number(s):

2013/61907

SENTENCE

1. HIS HONOUR: Those of us who deal with the criminal law on a daily basis are regularly reminded about the devastation which is caused when drivers act dangerously and thereby cause injury and death. We are regularly reminded of the way in which people can be killed on the road, sometimes through momentary inattention, such as the matter I dealt with in this court last Friday, and sometimes through more extreme and ongoing illegal behaviour. I have an example of the latter category of offending present before me today.

1. As Mr Healey, who appears for Tony Woodward, suggested, the way he was driving when he killed Sam Gunn was such that he was an accident waiting to happen. Those words are easy to say but it is worth analysing what they mean.

1. What they mean is that the offender's driving was so dangerous that the risk of injuring or killing someone else on the road was very high indeed. That necessarily means that the offender's moral culpability was equally high.

1. After drinking for a substantial period of time he got behind the wheel of his car. He was on a provisional licence, so his blood alcohol level should have been zero. That was the first road rule he ignored. Also in the car was Sam Gunn. He was a son, a brother, a father, a partner and a grandson.

1. The offender drove in an incredibly dangerous manner while drunk. He came up behind another vehicle which was travelling at the speed limit, 90 kilometres an hour. Mr Woodward was apparently not willing to travel at the speed limit behind the vehicle in front of him. He overtook that vehicle by crossing unbroken lines, near the crest of a hill and given that that car was going 90 kilometres an hour, Mr Woodward's vehicle must have been going considerably faster.

1. It will be seen now why Mr Healey's words accurately described the circumstances of his client's driving. The inevitable happened a moment later. The offender lost control of his car, it spun around and the passenger's side collided with a tree. Sam Gunn was killed.

1. Victim impact statements were read by members of his family. They demonstrate how harm radiates out from the central tragic event of Sam Gunn's death. Devastation is everywhere, as family members try to carry on with their lives, having experienced an awful loss. I have considered the impact of this offence on others, consistent with the well known authorities which bind me.

1. It is important that judges do what they can to stop other tragic events of this kind occurring. What we try and do is to impose upon people like Tony Woodward significant and even harsh sentences, not only to reflect the grave criminality that they have displayed but also to deter others who might be tempted to drink, cross unbroken lines near the crest of a hill and speed.

1. What we want to do is deter others from acting as Mr Woodward has done. We do not want other families to suffer the way Sam Gunn's family has suffered.

1. It is not only Mr Gunn's family who have suffered too. Mr Woodward has three children, he has a partner and they too will suffer because of his incarceration. But that is a necessary consequence of punishing

1. Mr Woodward as he must be punished. Hardship to others, such as offender's children and partners, is commonplace. The circumstances of this case are not exceptional at all.

1. Mr Woodward expressed his remorse; of course he did not intend to kill Mr Gunn. He recognises belatedly the harm that he has caused Mr Gunn, his family and friends and his own family too. I say he recognised belatedly because had he stopped for a moment before overtaking that vehicle to think about what he was going to do he should have recognised that his conduct was not only dangerous but criminal in the extreme.

1. I know little about Mr Woodward's background. I know that up until today he has been living with his girlfriend and their three children with whom he has a close and supportive relationship. He has worked in the past but has been in receipt of a disability support pension since 2005 and has been a heavy drinker at times.

1. I have said this before when sentencing offenders in cases of this kind, that I do not really care how much a person drinks; what I do care about is when they drink a lot and then decide to drive in an intoxicated state.

1. Guideline judgments concerning sentencing for this matter are well known. They are, as the name indicates, guides. I have taken them into account in determining the appropriate sentence. Mr Healey conceded, I understand, that there were no special circumstances in this case.

1. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non-parole period of four and a half years to date from today, 25 November 2013 and a head sentence of six years. The non-parole period will expire on 24 May 2018, on which day the offender is eligible to be released to parole.

1. I disqualify Mr Woodward from driving for five years.

HIS HONOUR: Do you want me to dismiss the matters on the 166 certificate?

FATCHES: Withdraw them, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: I note that they are withdrawn and they are also dismissed.

**********

Decision last updated: 04 February 2014