Regina v Leyman
[2002] NSWSC 1226
•19 December 2002
CITATION: Regina v Leyman [2002] NSWSC 1226 FILE NUMBER(S): SC 700079/01 HEARING DATE(S): 01/05/02 JUDGMENT DATE: 19 December 2002 PARTIES :
Regina
Jerome William LeymanJUDGMENT OF: Hidden J at 1
COUNSEL : Mr B Smith - Crown
Mr P Boulten - OffenderSOLICITORS: SE O'Connor - Crown
Stephen Dack & Associates - OffenderCATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW: Sentence - manslaughter - unlawful and dangerous act. DECISION: See para 12
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISIONHIDDEN J
19 December, 2002
SENTENCE700079/01 – REGINA v Jerome William LEYMAN
1 HIS HONOUR: The offender, Jerome William Leyman, was charged with the murder of Anthony Alexander Costello at Woolloomooloo on 11 November, 2000. His plea of guilty to manslaughter was accepted by the Crown prosecutor in discharge of that indictment. He asks that I take into account when sentencing him an offence of possessing an unlicensed firearm, a .22 calibre rifle, on a Form 1. The major offence was committed in the company of his friend, Wesley Patric Waterman, whom I sentenced yesterday.
Facts
2 I summarised the events giving rise to the death of the deceased when I sentenced Mr Waterman, and I need not repeat them. This offender pleaded guilty upon the basis that he accompanied Mr Waterman to confront the deceased, knowing that his companion was armed with a knife and contemplating the possibility that it might be used to cause injury, although not grievous bodily harm. He does not deny having kicked the deceased but, like Mr Waterman, I think it unlikely that he was aware at that time that the deceased was seriously wounded. Also like Mr Waterman, he was intoxicated at all relevant times.
3 In sentencing Mr Waterman I referred to evidence of the tension created by the presence of homeless people in the area. There was abundant evidence to the same effect in the separate sentence proceedings relating to the offender. Indeed, his long standing friend, Samantha Maddigan, gave evidence of an occasion when he intervened to protect her from assault by a drunken man when she was a child.
4 The offender was arrested later in the morning of the killing. He admitted his involvement in an electronically recorded interview with police, although he did not implicate Mr Waterman. He offered to plead guilty to manslaughter immediately after the committal proceedings, which the Crown prosecutor accepted was the first reasonable opportunity. It was common ground that that plea entitles him to leniency, but counsel were agreed that I should not mark it by a quantified reduction of the sentence which would otherwise have been appropriate.
Subjective Case
5 The offender was thirty years old at the time of the offence and is now thirty two. He has a criminal record which is old and relatively brief, and which I do not consider to be of any significance for present purposes. He was brought up in Woolloomooloo, and describes a happy childhood until his parents separated when he was in his early teens. This development devastated him, although he remained close to his parents, as he did to his sister, Michelle. The separation appears to have affected his schooling, which had been satisfactory but which then deteriorated. He left school before completing Year 11. Sadly, his father died of cancer about six years ago and he had great difficulty coming to terms with that tragedy.
6 He had abused cannabis and alcohol since his early teens, and his alcohol consumption increased after the death of his father. The problem continued, unabated, until his arrest for the present offence and, no doubt, played a significant part in his involvement in it.
7 Like Mr Waterman, there is a body of favourable evidence about his general character from family members and friends. The evidence of his sister and Ms Maddigan is of particular significance. It portrays a man who is normally decent and caring, and who is sympathetic and helpful to others in need. Ms Maddigan gave evidence of a period when he provided her with valuable support after a tragedy in her personal life. He had two significant relationships with women, one of which led to the birth of his son, now aged twelve. The other was with Ms Maddigan, a friend since childhood with whom his relationship was sometimes romantic. She has a daughter from another relationship, now aged nine, who sees the offender as her father, having had no contact with her natural father. His relationship with both children is responsible and devoted. As it happens, they were at his home on the occasion of the incident which brings him before this Court.
8 What also emerges from the evidence is that his period in custody has had a marked effect upon him, affording him a new found insight into his personal problems and a determination to maintain a law abiding and satisfying lifestyle. He has undertaken educational courses, as well as undergoing counselling for drug and alcohol abuse and anger management. It is his ambition to become a drug and alcohol counsellor himself. His sister said that he is now able to discuss his problems in a mature way, whereas previously he tended to “bottle them up.” All this is consistent with documentary evidence from the prison authorities, as well as a helpful report provided by Ms Joanne Kennedy and Ms Katherine Barrier, psychologists.
9 I have received in evidence a statement from the offender, expressing his remorse for his involvement in the death of the unfortunate victim and his determination to address his alcohol problem. I accept those sentiments as genuine. They are consistent with the observations of his sister and the other witnesses. It is clear that his experience of incarceration has matured him and I believe that he has good prospects of rehabilitation. Nevertheless, that process needs to be fostered by his being eligible for release on parole for an extended period and, to that end, I find special circumstances.
Sentence
10 None of this is to deny the seriousness of this offence, which I assessed when dealing with Mr Waterman. I accept the submission of Mr Boulten, which the Crown prosecutor did not challenge, that this offender’s culpability for the crime is somewhat less than that of Mr Waterman and that that is a matter which should be reflected in the sentence which I pass. The Crown prosecutor acknowledged that the additional offence on the Form 1 is of little significance, as it relates to an old rifle found by police at the offender’s premises which was not in working order. There does not appear to me to be any relevant difference between the subjective cases of the two offenders.
11 When dealing with Mr Waterman yesterday, I acknowledged the victim impact statement furnished by the deceased’s sister and expressed this Court’s sympathy to all those who mourn his passing.
12 Jerome William Leyman, on the charge of manslaughter and taking into account the matter on the Form 1, you are sentenced to imprisonment for five and a half years, to date from 11 November, 2000, with a non-parole period of three years. You will be eligible for release on parole on 10 November, 2003.
0
0
0