REGINA v. LULHAM [2000] NSWSC 703

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : REGINA v. LULHAM [2000] NSWSC 703 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal FILE NUMBER(S) : SC No. 70200 of 1999 HEARING DATE(S) : 24/8/99; 7/12/99; 18/7/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 18 July 2000

PARTIES : REGINA v. LULHAM, Dean Richard JUDGMENT OF : Greg James J at 1

COUNSEL : Crown: P. Barnett Offender: B. Murphy SOLICITORS : Crown: S.E. O'Connor Offender: Mark Klees Associates CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - murder - sentence - parity - accessory and principal. LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Previtera (1997) 94 A. Crim. R. 76 CASES CITED : Postiglione (1997) 98 A. Crim. R. 134 Hodges (1997) 95 A. Crim. R. 85 DECISION : Imprisonment for 18 years - non-parole period of 13 and a half years

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 70200 of 1999

GREG JAMES, J.

TUESDAY 18 JULY 2000

REGINA v. DEAN RICHARD LULHAM

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: In the remarks on sentence which I will shortly deliver and in the transcript of these proceedings, reference is made to a person who gave evidence. I order that in the published remarks on sentence and in any published transcript of argument or evidence in these proceedings, that person be referred to by the pseudonym "DT". 2 I have already sentenced the present offender's co-accused on their respective pleas of guilty for their respective crimes and the roles each of them played in the events which have also given rise to the charge against this offender. 3 He was charged that he on 12 November 1998 at Beechwood in the State of New South Wales did murder Robert Christopher Spradbrow. Following those pleas by the others being entered, this offender pleaded guilty to that charge. DT had already pleaded guilty to that charge. 4 On that plea the prisoner has challenged to some degree the respective roles in the killing and the asserted culpability of DT and himself. It therefore became necessary to hold a hearing to ascertain the relevant facts. At that hearing a file of documents, Exhibit A, was tendered. The file included a statement of facts as contended for by the Crown, the offender's criminal history, transcripts of electronically recorded interviews with various witnesses, including with the co-accused, DT and two interviews with the offender. 5 That statement of facts to which I have referred was prepared by Detective Lysaught. He gave evidence before me on the plea and was cross-examined. That statement (amended to reflect the pseudonym order) reads as follows:- "1. The prisoner is a native of Beechwood, which is a small village west of Wauchope on the mid-north coast of New South Wales. Both communities of Beechwood and Wauchope are small and residents are close knit. 2. On the afternoon of Thursday 12 November 1998 this prisoner was at a swimming hole on the outskirts of Beechwood, known as Kooree Island. He was there with [DT]. Both were consuming intoxicating liquor. 3. While both were at the swimming hole the victim, Robert Christopher Spradbrow arrived with his girlfriend, Katie Andrews. The victim and his girlfriend went to one area of the river bank away from the prisoner and [DT]. 4. The victim was well known to the prisoner and [DT] and both had had prior dealings with the victim over the years. 5. The prisoner and [DT] discussed their prior involvements with the victim and the prisoner had suggested that [DT] should shoot the victim. The prisoner left the area of the swimming hole and travelled to the nearby dairy farm, where he worked. There he borrowed a .22 rifle and some ammunition from his employer. The prisoner returned to the Kooree Island swimming hole with the rifle. 6. There further discussions took place in relation to shooting the victim. Other persons were present at the swimming hole and nothing further occurred. The prisoner and [DT] left Kooree Island and went to the home of the prisoner in the main street of Beechwood. 7. They continued to consume liquor and for a short time were joined by a friend. They continued to discuss the victim and what the victim had done in the past. Whilst [the friend] was there, further mention was made of shooting the victim. 8. After some time the prisoner and [DT] left the home of the prisoner. They drove to the hotel where [the friend] joined them. At the time [the friend] was intoxicated. The three men travelled back to Kooree Island in a vehicle belonging to the prisoner's employer. Upon arrival at the swimming hole the victim's vehicle was still parked where it had been when the prisoner and [DT] had left earlier in the evening. The victim and Miss Andrews were camping on the river bank and both were asleep on a mattress. 9. At the insistence of the prisoner, [DT] had walked to where the victim and Miss Andrews were sleeping. At the time [DT] was carrying the .22 calibre rifle in his hands. 10. [DT] had walked up to the victim, who did not awake. [DT] put the rifle to the head of the victim and pulled the trigger. 11. [DT] returned to the car and was driven away by the prisoner. 12. When they were near the Beechwood cemetery the rifle was thrown from the vehicle. The three men returned to the home of the prisoner. 13. The prisoner retired for the night. [DT] and [the friend] returned to the cemetery in the vehicle of [the woman co-accused]. She was driving. The rifle was recovered and taken to a point at the intersection of Beechwood Road and Pappinbarra Road where the rifle was secreted in long grass. They then returned home. 14. At about 10.00 p.m. on Friday 13 November 1998 the prisoner and [the woman co-accused] went to the area of Kooree Island. There the prisoner was spoken to by police and accompanied them to the Port Macquarie police station. 15. At 11.19 p.m. that evening the prisoner entered into an electronically recorded interview with Detective Lysaught. 16. During that interview the prisoner told the police that he had been at Kooree Island on the evening in question. He denied knowledge of the events leading to the death of the victim. He told the police he had spoken with the victim that night and they had reconciled their differences. 17. The prisoner was then told he could leave the police station. Whilst being processed he made certain comments as a result of which at 12.25 a.m. on Saturday 14 November 1998 he commenced a second interview with Detective Lysaught. 18. During this interview the prisoner told the police that he had obtained the gun for the purpose of shooting mullet in the river. He said that he got the gun before the victim had arrived at the swimming hole. He again asserted he had gone over and made his peace with the victim. He told the police that he and [DT] had left the area and returned some time later. He told the police that [DT] had shot the victim but that he did not know that [DT] was going to do that. He asserted he thought [DT] was going over to speak with the victim. 19. Following the interview the prisoner attempted to show the police where the rifle had been disposed of. It could not be located. He accompanied police to the home of [the woman co-accused] where [DT], [the friend] and [the woman co-accused]were arrested."