R v Websdale [2000] NSWSC 636

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : R v Websdale [2000] NSWSC 636 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal FILE NUMBER(S) : SC L19/97 HEARING DATE(S) : 2 June 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 6 July 2000

PARTIES : Regina v Geoffrey Ian Websdale JUDGMENT OF : Studdert J

COUNSEL : D. Frearson (Crown) H. Dhanji (Applicant) SOLICITORS : Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid Commission (Applicant) Sentencing Act LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act Crimes Act Veen v The Queen (No 1) (1979) 143 CLR 458 CASES CITED : Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 R v White [2000] NSWSC 555 DECISION : See para 31

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL DIVISION

STUDDERT J

Thursday 6 July 2000 L19/97 APPLICATION OF GEOFFREY IAN WEBSDALE

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: Geoffrey Ian Websdale made application dated 6 November 1997, expressed to be pursuant to s 13A of the Sentencing Act 1989, for an order determining minimum terms and additional terms for the life sentences I imposed upon him following his conviction for the murders of Karen Joyce Deacon and Ian Hutchinson. 2 When the application was heard by me on 2 June 2000, it was common ground that the application is governed by the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999. Clause 21(1) under Schedule 2 Part 2 Division 4 provides: "Any application under s 13A of the 1999 Act that had been made, but not determined, before the appointed date is to be determined in accordance with Schedule 1 to this Act." 3 The "appointed date" is defined as the day upon which Part 4 of the Act commenced, and that date was 3 April 2000. Plainly then, since this application is now to be determined, the 1999 statute applies. 4 Clause 3(1)(a) of Schedule 1 to the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act requires the Court, in considering this application, to have regard to all the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offences for which the sentences were imposed. 5 The applicant was born on 28 August 1969 so that he was only twenty years of age when he committed these crimes. The deceased were two of four victims of the applicant's shooting spree, but the other two victims were fortunate enough to survive, although one of them was tragically rendered quadriplegic. 6 The crimes were committed on a property near Carrathool on 7 November 1989 and I refer to my remarks on sentence of 2 November 1990 where I recorded the objective facts: "…the prisoner was working as an apprentice shearer in a shearing team then working at Oolambeyan Station some twenty-one kilometres south west of Carrathool. Also working on the property at the time were three of the victims of the events that occurred on that night: Karen Joyce Deacon, Deborah Lorraine Astill, and Daryl Alexander Lamb. The fourth victim was an acquaintance of Deborah Astill who had accompanied her back to her quarters at Oolambeyan after meeting her at the Carrathool hotel. The deceased, Karen Deacon, and her roommate, Deborah Astill, shared a room at Oolambeyan to which they went on the night of 7 November 1989 with Daryl Lamb and Ian Hutchinson. Some time after dark at about 9.00 pm when Karen Deacon was lying on one bed with Daryl Lamb and Deborah Astill was on the other bed with Ian Hutchinson the prisoner came to the room armed with a M1 30 calibre semi-automatic rifle. He kicked the door open, stood in the doorway and started shooting. He fired, firstly, at the victims Karen Deacon and Daryl Lamb and then turned his attention to the other occupants of the room. One of the survivors, Deborah Astill, described how she was shot in the arm and it transpired she was also shot in the back as she fled from the room. The remaining survivor, Daryl Lamb, described how he was shot and rolled on the floor. After he was shot he had heard further shots within the room. The deceased, Karen Deacon, was found lying on one bed. She had been shot and the bullet that caused her fatal injuries was proved to have entered her left arm where it shattered into at least three fragments. These passed through the arm entering her face and head where a fragment damaged the jugular vein and she bled to death. The deceased Ian Hutchinson tried to make his escape through the window of the room and his body was found lying on the grass below the window. The post mortem examination revealed he had been shot twice: once from behind when he was crouched down and again when he was upright. He too died from blood loss when one of the two bullets that entered his body passed through his chest, inter alia, causing heart damage. Seven fired 30 calibre cartridge cases were found in the room and another two cartridges not fired. Outside the room near the body of the deceased Ian Hutchinson, were found three fired 30 calibre cartridge cases and the evidence established that when the accused had fired the shots inside the room he left the hut then firing back through the window at Deborah Astill as she sought to make her escape from the room." 7 When sentencing the applicant I described his behaviour as a savage and senseless outburst of violence. The applicant did not know the deceased Ian Hutchinson; Daryl Lamb was supposed to be a friend; and the young women were work companions, but it would seem that the applicant had been taunted by these women. He had been called "two stroke", which he took to be a reference to his tendency to premature ejaculation. However, I said when sentencing the applicant such taunting and provocative behaviour as the applicant complained of could not have explained his outburst of violence. 8 The applicant was quickly apprehended after the commission of his crimes, and in the course of his interview by police on 8 November 1989 he made responses which I set out in my remarks on sentence and which I again record here: "31. Do you agree that you then told the other Police Officer who was present 'I knew what I was doing while it was happening. I couldn't stop. I was really only after one person.'