New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : R v TABER; R v STYMAN; R v STYMAN [2003] NSWSC 93 HEARING DATE(S) : 09/09/02-13/09/02, 16/09/02-20/09/02, 23/09/02, 24/09/02, 26/09/02, 27/09/02, 30/09/02, 01/10/02-03/10/02, 08/10/02-11/10/02, 14/10/02-18/10/02, 21/10/02-25/10/02, 28/10/02-31/10/02, 01/11/02, 04/11/02-08/11/02, 11/11/02-15/11/02, 18/11/02-22/11/02, 25/11/02-29/11/02, 02/12/02, 04/12/02-06/12/02, 09/12/02-11/12/02, 14/02/03 JUDGMENT DATE : 28 February 2003 JURISDICTION: Common Law JUDGMENT OF : Barr J at 1 DECISION : For the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation Peter David Taber is sentenced to imprisonment for twenty years. His sentence will be taken to have commenced on 26 March 2001. No non-parole period fixed.; For the murder of Joy Golbie Alchin Peter David Taber is sentenced to imprisonment for life. His sentence will commence on 26 March 2003.; For the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation the offender Ian Craig Styman is sentenced to imprisonment for twenty years. His sentence will be taken to have commenced on 26 March 2001. No non-parole period fixed.; For the murder of Joy Golbie Alchin Ian Craig Styman is sentenced to imprisonment for life. His sentence will commence on 26 March 2003.; For the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation Shannon Troy Styman is sentenced to imprisonment for eight years. His sentence will be taken to have commenced on 26 March 2001. No non-parole period fixed.; For the unlawful killing of Joy Golbie Alchin Shannon Troy Styman is sentenced to imprisonment for fourteen years. His sentence will commence on 26 March 2002. A non-parole period of nine years, expiring on 25 March 2011, is fixed. He will become eligible for parole on that day. CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - sentencing - murder by reckless indifference. - Criminal law - sentencing - involuntary manslaughter. - Criminal law - sentencing - breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation. REGINA v Peter David TABER PARTIES : REGINA v Ian Craig STYMAN REGINA v Shannon Troy STYMAN FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 70212/02; 70210/02; 70211/02 Crown: JP Kiely SC/J Baly COUNSEL : Offender Taber: GD Wendler Offender Ian Styman: R McCrudden Offender Shannon Styman: PD Young Crown: SE O'Connor SOLICITORS : Offender Taber: Van Houten Offender Ian Styman: AP Sparke & Broad Offender Shannon Styman: Nikola Velcic & Co IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION GRAHAM BARR J Friday, 28 February 2003 70212/02 - REGINA v Peter David TABER 70210/02 - REGINA v Ian Craig STYMAN 70211/02 - REGINA v Shannon Troy STYMAN SENTENCE 1 HIS HONOUR: The offenders Peter David Taber, Ian Craig Styman and Shannon Troy Styman were charged with the following offences - 1. the murder of Joy Golbie Alchin; 2. breaking and entering the dwelling of Mrs Alchin and committing a serious indictable offence, namely robbery, in circumstances of aggravation, namely being in company of each other and depriving Mrs Alchin of her liberty (which I will call 'aggravated robbery'); and 3. having sexual intercourse with Mrs Alchin without her consent in circumstances of aggravation, namely being in company with each other (which I will call 'aggravated sexual intercourse without consent'). 2 Shannon Troy Styman pleaded guilty at the commencement of the trial to the count of aggravated robbery and all the offenders went for trial before the jury on the remaining counts. In due course the jury returned the following verdicts - Peter David Taber was found guilty of murder and of aggravated robbery but not guilty of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent; Ian Craig Styman was found guilty of murder and of aggravated robbery but not guilty of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent; and Shannon Troy Styman was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter and not guilty of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent. 3 The deceased, Joy Golbie Alchin, was a slight, seventy-one year old woman who lived alone in a house at Greenwell Point, a village about ten kilometres east of Nowra. Members of her family lived in the district. One of them was her sister Mrs Cheryle Ravell, the mother of Melinda Ravell and Leonie Ravell. Mrs Alchin used to keep very much to herself and did not often leave the house. She used to get others to do her errands for her and drive her when she had to leave the house. Mrs Ravell used to do her shopping. 4 Mrs Alchin kept large sums of money in the house. In November 1999 she lent Mrs Ravell the sum of $22,200, which she handed over in currency notes in a paper bag. Later on a difference of opinion arose about the manner in which Mrs Ravell was performing her shopping services and there was a falling-out. In October 2000 a solicitor telephoned Mrs Ravell requiring her to repay the loan in full. She did so in October or November. 5 During 1999 Mrs Alchin lent Melinda Ravell the sum of $3,000, also in cash. Later on she lent her a further sum of $20,000, also in cash. During 2000 Mrs Alchin became dissatisfied at the rate at which Melinda Ravell was paying off the loan and had her solicitor write to her demanding repayment of the loan in full. So the loan was repaid in September or October 2000. 6 These matters were the cause of some resentment and were spoken about within the Ravell family. From about March 2000 onwards Melinda Ravell was living with Leonie Ravell in a house at 211 Old Southern Road Worrigee, also known as South Nowra. Mrs Ravell visited them and Leonie Ravell became aware from their conversations of the history of the loans and their repayment. She also became aware that Mrs Alchin kept large sums of money in her house. 7 For these and perhaps other reasons members of the Ravell family did not visit Mrs Alchin. She rarely saw members of her family. 8 The offender Taber became friendly with Leonie Ravell and moved into the house at 211 Old Southern Road in August or September 2000. They began cohabiting as though married. Melinda Ravell had moved to live elsewhere in about July of the same year. 9 Taber's trade was the erection of prefabricated sheds. He used to obtain work by referral from a supplier of such sheds pursuant to contracts or subcontracts involving purchasers. He was chronically short of money. He continually pawned and redeemed his tools of trade. He frequently borrowed money from his father. Although he had four bank accounts there was never any substantial amount of money in any of them. He owed the supplier of sheds approximately $1,600 for goods purchased on its account. A van he had been using in the course of his trade developed a serious mechanical defect and needed replacing. About two weeks before Christmas 2000 he asked Melinda Ravell whether she could lend him $2,000 to pay for a holiday he and Leonie Ravell intended to take in Queensland. He asked another occupant of the house, Donyelle Turner, whether she could suggest the name of anyone who might lend money. 10 Not long afterwards Taber and Leonie Ravell left the house intending to ask Mrs Alchin to lend them money. When they returned they told Miss Turner that they had ended up telephoning Mrs Alchin and that she had refused their request for a loan. This evidence was challenged at trial but I am satisfied that Miss Turner's evidence was reliable. So was her evidence that on their return Taber and Leonie Ravell discussed, though in a light-hearted way, killing Mrs Alchin. One of the things they mentioned in their conversation was that if Mrs Alchin were killed nobody would notice her missing because nobody ever saw her. I am satisfied that by December 2000 Taber was well aware that Mrs Alchin kept substantial amounts of cash in her house, lived alone, rarely went out and rarely received visitors. 11 Ian Styman was Taber's best friend and they spent a good deal of time in each other's company. They telephoned each other frequently. Styman had a business in which he worked on computers and computer games, using the garage of the house he, his wife Sharyn Styman and their young children occupied at Sanctuary Point, a few minutes' drive south of Nowra. Styman also worked with Taber from time to time. They used to do casual work as security guards. Styman also obtained work as a concreter and, in connection with Taber's shed erecting jobs, as a labourer. He had no savings to speak of but appears to have received enough money to support himself and his family, especially taking into account his receipt of unemployment benefits. 12 Just before Christmas Taber and Ian Styman went to Mrs Alchin's house and tried unsuccessfully to break in. Their efforts attracted the attention of Mrs Alchin and they ran away. Late in the same month or early in January 2001, by an implied threat, they pressured a friend of Ian Styman's, Mr Andrew Peake, to drive them first to the house of Taber's parents and then to the vicinity of Mrs Alchin's house at Greenwell Point. At Taber's parents' house they practised using plastic cable ties to tie one another up. They were dressed in the uniform they ordinarily wore for their occasional work as security guards. Ian Styman had told his wife that it was on such a job that they were engaged. At Greenwell Point they had Mr Peake stop the car, left him and the car and went to Mrs Alchin's house, posing as security experts. These were preparations for the intended attack on Mrs Alchin. 13 On 20 December 2000 the offender Shannon Styman was released at the expiration of a period of imprisonment and returned to live in the Nowra district. He and his de facto wife lived at Erowal Bay, close to Sanctuary Point. He was friendly with a brother of Taber and had visited him at the parents' house. He had met Taber there on a couple of occasions but did not know him well. He had never been to Taber's house at Worrigee and had never met Leonie Ravell. 14 Shannon Styman knew his uncle Ian Styman well and, being short of money and out of a job, began spending time in his company. During the course of his business Ian Styman used to collect and deliver computers and computer playstations at various places in the locality. He had a motorcycle that he used for this purpose. He began to take Shannon Styman, who had no transport of any kind, on these visits. 15 Taber and Ian Styman must have discussed recruiting Shannon Styman to assist in the intended robbery of Mrs Alchin. On 4 January 2001 Ian Styman asked him whether he were interested in making some money and he said that he was. They went together to Taber's parents' house where Taber was waiting for them. Shannon Styman confirmed that he was interested in making money and asked what he had to do. Taber explained that he had a girlfriend who had an aunt who lived at Greenwell Point who kept in her house enough money to buy a house. He told Shannon Styman about the prior unsuccessful attempt to break in and about the preparations carried out by the use of Mr Peake's services. Taber told Shannon Styman that all he would have to do was to make sure that Mrs Alchin stayed where she was and did not get hurt. 16 Further discussions took place on the 5th and the 6th of January. The key to the back door of Taber's house at Worrigee was filed down in a way that would make it effective on other locks. The intention was to use it on the back door of Mrs Alchin's house. 17 The three travelled to Greenwell Point on the night of Saturday 6 January and remained there until the early hours of the following morning. During that time Taber successfully tested the key on Mrs Alchin's back door. At his direction they entered the property at about 4.00 am. On their way to the back door Taber removed a pair of underpants from the clothes line. He led the way to the bedroom and took hold of Mrs Alchin. Ian Styman took hold of her hands. Shannon Styman took hold of her legs. Taber produced cable ties that he had brought with him and they were used to secure the wrists together behind the back and bind the ankles together. Taber placed the underpants across Mrs Alchin's mouth and wrapped duct tape, which he had taken for the purpose, around the gag and the neck, firmly securing it. All these things took place in the dark. Taber took a pillowcase and put it over Mrs Alchin's head, taping it loosely around the neck. Only then did Ian Styman turn on a lamp. 18 Shannon Styman continued to guard Mrs Alchin while the others searched for the money. He called out that one of the wrist ties was too tight, at which Ian Styman returned to the bedroom and cut the tie with a knife he had obtained from the kitchen. He placed duct tape around Mrs Alchin's hands in substitution. The search continued and Ian Styman announced that he had found the money. The party prepared to leave the house and Shannon Styman asked whether they were going to untie Mrs Alchin. Ian Styman said that they would not and that they would telephone the police. 19 Before they left the house the three offenders took bed sheets and placed them over Mrs Alchin's body, securing them under the mattress to stop her from falling off the bed. 20 They left the premises together at about 4.30 am, leaving the back door open. They returned to their car and left Greenwell Point. At 4.54 am Ian Styman made a telephone call to the 000 emergency services number, using a public telephone at East Nowra. That was the first available public telephone on an easterly approach to Nowra. The text of the conversation between Ian Styman and the operator was recorded. It is in these terms - STYMAN: Spies OPERATOR: No one there STYMAN: Hello OPERATOR: Oh, Hello STYMAN: Could you send a car out please? OPERATOR: Where to? STYMAN: Spies OPERATOR: Where? STYMAN: Spies Avenue, Greenwell Point OPERATOR: What's happening there? STYMAN: There was a couple of blokes there that went in with guns, second house from the corner OPERATOR: What do you mean,….a couple of blokes went in ? STYMAN: That went in the house, there's a little old lady there…… OPERATOR: Break and Enter ? STYMAN: I can't talk but they're..they're here OPERATOR: What,..what number?……… 21 For a reason which is not relevant to the sentencing of the offenders the message was not relayed to the police. Mrs Alchin was not rescued. She had been left in a position in which she could hardly move at all and in which she could not breathe through the mouth, call for help, eat or drink. She could breathe through the nose, however, because the nasal passage was unimpeded. 22 Following the break-in attempt, Mrs Alchin had requested a local tradesman, Mr David Bennett, to fit a locking screen door outside the existing back door of the house. He had attended the house, spoken to her and made the appropriate measurements. On 8 January he returned to fit the door and found the back door unlocked and ajar. He called out but Mrs Alchin was unable to make a sound. Receiving no response, Mr Bennett believed that Mrs Alchin was absent and, understandably, did not enter the house. He fitted the door, locked it, left the key with a neighbour and fastened to the door a note stating where the key might be found. Lest there be any doubt about the matter I should make clear that no criticism could reasonably be made of Mr Bennett. He acted entirely properly in every respect. 23 According to the medical evidence, about which there was no dispute, Mrs Alchin died no earlier than 16 January and no later than 18 January. Death resulted from dehydration. 24 The robbery did not yield enough money to buy a house, as Taber had said, but only the sum of $23,300. Taber took $14,000, Ian Styman $7,000 and Shannon Styman $2,300. I regard Taber as having taken for his own benefit only half the sum I have mentioned. The three went about spending their money and, so far as the evidence shows, made no enquiry about the fate of Mrs Alchin. 25 The jury were instructed that they could find any offender guilty of murder only if between the time of the telephone call and the death of Mrs Alchin he fully realised that the telephone call had not achieved the intended rescue of Mrs Alchin and that he fully realised that Mrs Alchin would therefore probably die. The verdicts show that the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt about both those matters in the cases of Taber and Ian Styman. 26 The death of Mrs Alchin was caused by the activities of the offenders in binding, gagging and abandoning her and then omitting to discharge the legal duty that fell upon each of them to see her removed from the danger in which they had deliberately placed her. 27 The trial lasted three months. It is unnecessary to review all the evidence, but I should mention that of the offenders, whose attitudes fell into two broad categories. When before the trial began Shannon Styman pleaded guilty to the charge of robbery while in the company of the other two offenders his counsel foreshadowed that he would give evidence accordingly. That is what he did and, except to an extent that it is not necessary to mention here, his case and the Crown's case were factually virtually identical. 28 On the other hand, Taber and Ian Styman swore that they were not present. Each gave evidence on oath. Each set out to explain in a manner consistent with his innocence a number of facts proof of which could not be resisted and to anticipate the evidence of Shannon Styman. 29 One example of such evidence was that their mobile telephones were recorded as having been in communication with each other at 3.25 am and 4.31 am on 7 January. They told a story in which Shannon Styman borrowed Taber's car, restrained and robbed Mrs Alchin, drove to Taber's house at 3.00 am on 7 January and announced what he had done. Taber telephoned Ian Styman at 3.25 am and ordered him to attend a meeting. Ian Styman complied without asking why. The three offenders met, but not long afterwards had to separate again so that Taber could buy petrol and Ian Styman food. They sought by that means to explain the second telephone call. 30 According to the story, they required Shannon Styman to telephone the police to tell them what he had done but that he refused to do so. Because of his refusal Ian Styman felt obliged to make the telephone call to emergency services. Taber insisted that Shannon Styman get rid of stolen goods which he saw on the back seat of his car. He drove the car to the crossing of the Shoalhaven river, where Shannon Styman threw over the bridge a bag containing the goods. 31 In accordance with his instructions to that effect, Taber had his counsel inform the police officer in charge of the case on the first day of the trial that the proceeds of the robbery had been thrown into the river in that place. The resulting hopeless search wasted police officers' time. 32 The jury rejected this story. It was in my opinion a preposterous concoction, so laced with improbabilities that no reasonable person could give it credence. Neither Taber nor Ian Styman stands to receive any heavier sentence on this account, of course. What these circumstances do show is that neither is prepared to acknowledge the truth of the matter. 33 I think that the account given in evidence by Shannon Styman was substantially reliable. The facts which I have summarised are consistent with it. 34 The offenders left Nowra for Sydney within hours of the robbery. They bought cars and household goods. Before long they spent Mrs Alchin's money, most of it before she died. 35 Aggravated robbery attracts a maximum period of imprisonment of twenty years. A single circumstance is enough to warrant conviction for the aggravated form of the offence. The Crown charged each offender alternatively with two such circumstances, namely being in company and depriving Mrs Alchin of her liberty. Both were proved beyond reasonable doubt. The Crown might also have relied on two further circumstances of aggravation, namely using corporal violence on Mrs Alchin and knowing when they entered her house that there was a person within. It is appropriate to take account of all these circumstances in imposing sentence. 36 The offence was preceded by detailed planning and preparation. Having failed in their earlier attempt, Taber and Ian Styman fashioned a key, using experience Ian Styman had acquired during the course of work, and practised using it. They took adhesive tape. They took cable ties and practised using them. They rehearsed the necessary movements, pressing the unwilling Mr Peake into service when it suited them. 37 All three offenders carried out the robbery with tenacity and patience. They wore dark clothes to conceal themselves. They waited for many hours of the night before striking because they wanted the wind to rise and cover any noise they might make. They tested the key. They wore gloves so as not to leave fingerprints. They knew that their victim was in the house. Three strong young men attacked and held down in her own home a sleeping woman they knew was alone and elderly and unlikely to have the strength to resist. They treated her violently. They gagged and blindfolded her. The manner of restraint of the wrists behind the back was needlessly cruel. The cable ties embedded themselves in the flesh. If there had to be restraint, adhesive tape alone would have sufficed. One cable tie was so tight that it had to be cut. The restraint continued over several days. They intended to steal and in fact stole a substantial amount of money. 38 Insofar as the deprivation of Mrs Alchin's liberty is considered as an element of aggravated robbery the telephone call shows that it was not intended to last long, though that says little in the face of the subsequent failure of the offenders to act. For the purposes of that offence the restraint continued until immediately before Mrs Alchin died. 39 The jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on the murder count that before Mrs Alchin died Taber and Ian Styman fully realised that she had not been rescued and that she would probably die. The circumstances and the probable fate of Mrs Alchin must have been foremost in their minds. They must have expected that Mrs Alchin would be rescued within a short time after the telephone call and they must have been alert for news of her rescue. I am satisfied that they became fully aware within twenty-four hours after the telephone call that their attempt to have her rescued by that means had failed. From all that he knew about Mrs Alchin Taber must have realised the implications straight away. He and Ian Styman were best friends and frequently in communication with each other by telephone and in each other's company. Ian Styman must also have shared quite quickly Taber's realisation that since people rarely went to Mrs Alchin's house she would probably not be rescued. They both knew because of the position in which they had abandoned her that if she were not rescued she would certainly die. 40 Mrs Alchin suffered a long, lonely and painful death. She must have been terrified. She managed to get off the bed and onto the bedroom floor. She hurt herself trying to move across the floorboards. In the end she succumbed, lying in her own waste amid the mess the offenders had made of her bedroom. Only they knew about her plight. Everything that happened to her during her last days was predictable. Taber and Ian Styman were resourceful and determined men, as their preparation and persistence show, and had the wit to devise some way of delivering Mrs Alchin without implicating themselves. Yet for nine days neither did a thing to help. Although they did not intend or desire Mrs Alchin to die I think that their cool and callous indifference was as blameworthy as if they had. 41 It was submitted that the telephone call to emergency services mitigated the criminality of the offenders. I am satisfied that the call was intended, and would have been sufficient if acted upon, to effect the release of Mrs Alchin. It was not until 8 January that Taber and Ian Styman realised that Mrs Alchin had not been released and would probably die. For a short time after they abandoned Mrs Alchin they cared enough to act, so it is possible to say that their criminality in the offence of murder could have been greater. However, that does not in my view remove their offences from the worst category of cases. 42 In order to deal with counsel's submissions it has been necessary for me to mention the sufficiency of the telephone message given to emergency services. However, it has not been the function of the Court to deal with the matter except in order to determine issues arising between the Crown and the offenders at trial and on sentence. The Court has no more information about the matter than the exploration of those issues has produced and the Court has no commission to enquire into the matter except in the way I have explained. Nothing in this judgment is intended to be or could be critical of anyone concerned in receiving the message or in making any decision about it. 43 Taber was born on 29 July 1973 and is now twenty-nine years old. He has a minor record which is of no relevance for present purposes and is entitled to be treated as a first offender. He was brought up in a good home, one of five children. A sister died tragically of burns at a young age. A second sister suffered from cerebral palsy and Taber suffered the cruel torts of school children about her condition. She, too, died young. Their father became ill when Taber was fourteen years old and he had to leave school to take care of the family farm. 44 Although he has no professional or trade qualifications Taber has always been in work and has applied himself enthusiastically to work. He has tried a number of fields of employment. His most recent work, in the building industry, continued for about seven years before his arrest. 45 Mr Clark-Saunders, psychologist, examined Taber for sentencing purposes and administered a number of tests. The events of Taber's childhood might have been thought likely to produce in him a degree of insensitivity to human suffering but Mr Clark-Saunders does not mention the subject. He measured verbal IQ as low-average and performance IQ as high-average. He concluded that there were no intellectual deficit and no psychosis. He concluded that poor reading and writing were probably as a result of failure to progress in high school and the need to leave early. 46 Mr Clark-Saunders diagnosed severe depressive order, resulting from interruptions in Taber's psycho-social development. In coming to that conclusion Mr Clark-Saunders relied on the results of the Beck Anxiety Inventory. As I understand Mr Clark-Saunders' report, in this test the person being interviewed answers questions – the test is called a "self-reported instrument" – and the tester assumes the truth of the answers. Examples of questions asked are whether there is a depressed mood for most of the day nearly every day, whether there is a diminished interest in life, whether there are restlessness and psychomotor agitation and whether appetite, energy, motivation and interest are low. 47 I doubt whether Mr Clark-Saunders' opinion in this respect can be relied on because it depends on the truthfulness of Taber's answers, something Mr Clark-Saunders appears to have been unable to test. Taber is obviously not a truthful person. His evidence shows that he readily resorts to lies when it suits his interests. I observed him over many weeks of the trial and over the several days on which he gave evidence. I thought that he applied himself assiduously to his task. He was not restless or agitated. He was cool, energetic, purposeful and motivated. His interest in his trial could not have been more amply demonstrated. He displayed no symptoms of depression that I was able to recognise. 48 I can accept that the events of Taber's childhood have affected him and that he suffers the depression which would ordinarily follow upon his arrest, imprisonment, conviction and apprehension about sentence. I do not think, however, that he suffers from such severe depression as to be entitled to a lower sentence than would otherwise apply. 49 Taber devised the robbery because of his need for money, using the special knowledge about Mrs Alchin that he had acquired in conversations with the Ravell family. He was involved at every stage of the planning, rehearsal and execution of the robbery. He is remorseless and continues to deny any wrongdoing. 50 There are features which might possibly remove his murder of Mrs Alchin from the worst category of murders, namely his prior good character, the manner in which he is being held in custody and will presumably continue to be held and any prospects of rehabilitation. 51 Prior good character can be given little weight in a case like the present one. 52 Taber received death threats, perhaps because of others' views of the enormity of his offences, and is consequently held in protective custody. He is confined to a cell and a yard and is locked in the cell each afternoon until the following morning. The Court was informed that no educational course had been made available to him pending sentence, but that he would undertake a building course as soon as he might. He would do what he could to improve his reading and writing. It is to be expected, therefore, that the strict regime under which has been kept so far will be relaxed, at least to the extent that it is necessary to do so to enable him to undertake courses and, if appropriate, work. 53 Taber's willingness to embark on courses of self-improvement suggests also that he is not without prospects of rehabilitation, though they could only be assessed as slight in view of his denial of any wrongdoing and his attitude at trial. They cannot bear significant weight in the circumstances of this case. 54 In my opinion none of these considerations reduces the offence of murder from the worst category of offences of its type so far as Taber is concerned. His crime was very wicked and there is a notable absence of mitigating features. I have come to the view that the level of his culpability in the murder of Mrs Alchin is so extreme that the community interest in retribution, punishment and deterrence can only be met by the imposition of a life sentence. I think for the same reasons that the maximum penalty should apply to Taber's commission of the aggravated robbery. 55 Ian Styman was born on 17 April 1963 and is now thirty-nine years old. No evidence was put before the Court about his personal circumstances except such as arose during the trial and such as can be derived from his records of offending. During his mid to late teens he was dealt with in the Children's Court and in courts of petty sessions in Sydney for several offences of stealing and attempting to steal, especially of motor vehicles. During 1981 he was sentenced in the Court of Petty Sessions and in the District Court to a number of periods of penal servitude, the longest of which was twelve months. During 1984 he was convicted in Queensland of stealing, false pretences and for traffic offences. In 1986 and 1989 there were convictions in New South Wales for traffic offences and in 1990 for receiving. In 1991, again in Queensland, he was convicted of two counts of breaking, entering and stealing and one of aggravated assault upon a female. In 1993 he was dealt with in the Local Court at Nowra for three counts of breaking, entering and stealing. He does not appear to have served any period of imprisonment since his last period expired in 1982. 56 At the time of the robbery and murder he was living with his wife and children in a village not far from Nowra. He was doing the work that I have summarised. His marriage is now at an end and he does not see his former wife or children. 57 Ian Styman offended because of his desire for money. He wanted a car. He took part as an equal of Taber and was involved in every stage of the planning, rehearsal and execution of the offences. His experience with key cutting was important. It was through him that Mr Peake was pressed into service. He recruited Shannon Styman to the enterprise, taking advantage of the hold he had over him as an elder member of their family and by reason of past favours. He told Shannon Styman as they were leaving Mrs Alchin's house that they would not release Mrs Alchin but telephone the police. He made the telephone call. 58 Ian Styman denies the offences and is without remorse. His record does not entitle him to leniency. His commission of earlier offences involving breaking, entering and stealing and assaulting a woman make for sentences which strongly deter him from any repetition. 59 His work history suggests prospects of rehabilitation but I have concluded that they are negligible in view of his repeated offending at what is now a mature age and his refusal to acknowledge his wrongdoing. 60 It was submitted on behalf of the offender that the making of the telephone call to emergency services removed his offence from the worst category of murders. I have already explained why I do not accept that submission. His crime was of great heinousness. There are no mitigating features. I have come to the view that the level of his culpability in the murder of Mrs Alchin is so extreme that the community interest in retribution, punishment and deterrence can only be met by the imposition of a life sentence. For the same reasons the maximum penalty should be imposed for the aggravated robbery. 61 Shannon Styman knew nothing of Mrs Alchin until Taber told him on 4 January that he had a girlfriend who had an aunt who had money and who lived at Greenwell Point. Between then and his abandonment of Mrs Alchin Shannon Styman learned little more about her. He must have realised that she was elderly and not strong and that she lived alone but there was no evidence that he learned anything of the solitary life she led. He had no reason to believe that her plight might not come to the attention of relatives, neighbours, friends or other callers at the house. The jury may well have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, as I am, that there was no substance in Shannon Styman's claim to a suspicion that the police might have been concealing the fact of her rescue, but they were not satisfied that he realised on that account that Mrs Alchin would probably die. 62 The jury were invited to convict Shannon Styman of manslaughter because his act or omission causing death was criminally negligent or unlawful and dangerous. The act or omission causing death was the binding, gagging and abandonment of Mrs Alchin in a significantly disabled condition and the omission, after the failure of the telephone call to effect her rescue, to remove Mrs Alchin from the danger in which she had been put. 63 Manslaughter by criminal negligence required proof, among other things, that Shannon Styman's act or omission involved such a high risk of death or really serious injury that it merited criminal punishment. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the omission to rescue Mrs Alchin involved such a high risk of death or really serious injury that it merited criminal punishment. I am also satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Shannon Styman's act causing death, which incorporated his omission to remove Mrs Alchin from danger, was unlawful and dangerous. I accept that he believed that Mrs Alchin would be found and rescued by others but his failure to lift a finger of his own to help her is a serious feature of his criminality. 64 Shannon Styman was recruited at a late stage of the preparations by his uncle who had done him favours and to whom he felt obligated. Even so, he had no hesitation in responding immediately to the invitation to earn money. He had no doubt that he was about to be invited to do something unlawful. 65 He took no part in making plans. He acted as directed by the others. His smaller share of the proceeds of the robbery reflected his lack of authority and the lesser part he played. 66 He was born on 6 April 1978 and is now twenty-four years old. His father was a cruel man who frequently struck him with weapons such as a cricket bat, a baton and a tyre lever. When he was six years old the family house was burnt and he was taken by authorities into a children's home for some months. When he entered high school he began to use marijuana and occasionally LSD and was constantly in trouble when he was not absent. He missed Year 9 altogether. When he was sixteen his parents separated and he alone went with his father to live in Nowra. He took the school certificate there. 67 After leaving school he obtained jobs at various times as a trolley boy, a backyard mechanic and a tree lopper. In 1996 he was sentenced to a number of periods of imprisonment for nine offences of breaking, entering and stealing or like offences. A number of other offences were taken into account. The effective sentence was of three and a half years, expiring in November 1999, with a minimum term of eighteen months. He was fined for an assault in March 2000. In August the same year he was sentenced to three months' imprisonment for serious traffic offences. It was at the expiration of that period that he returned to Nowra in November 2000. 68 He resumed his relationship with his de facto wife, their child and her child by a previous relationship. Their relationship has now come to an end. 69 Ms Robilliard, a consulting psychologist, carried out tests and provided a report for the Court. She concluded that the offender was of average cognitive ability. She conducted a personality test that yielded results consistent with borderline personality disorder. Persons suffering that disorder, she said, may experience large mood swings. She said that the offender demonstrates such swings, from aggression to passivity and from anti-social to depressive. The offender is not clinically depressed or psychotic. Suicidal thoughts were reported, but Ms Robilliard notes that the offender speaks to the prison psychologists when he needs to. I think that there is no concern that he may harm himself. 70 Ms Robilliard thought that the offender's expressions of remorse were genuine, as I do. 71 The offender's repeated resorts to the kinds of offence he has committed in the past do not assist him. The Court was informed without objection, however, that the previous offences of breaking and entering were carried out in vacant premises. I accept that the only conviction for assault arose out of a domestic argument with the partner I have mentioned and that, that relationship having come to an end, conduct of that kind is unlikely to be repeated. 72 Some features mitigate his criminality. Not only did he play a subservient role in the robbery and know less about Mrs Alchin. He wished to release Mrs Alchin when the offenders left the premises. In the absence of any other credible explanation about how the telephone call came to be made, he is entitled to be regarded as having played a part in the decision to make it. 73 Like the other offenders, Shannon Styman was arrested and interrogated. He denied any knowledge of these matters. Unlike the other offenders he was overcome by remorse and during his third interview with police officers withdrew his denials and gave a substantially reliable version of events. He refused to name his two companions, however, and falsified facts so far as was necessary to protect their identities. One important thing he told police was the time and the place at which the call was made to emergency services. Police were able to use that information to identify the voice of Ian Styman. The police case against Ian Styman, and indirectly against Taber, thereby became stronger. 74 During a pre-trial hearing on 27 June 2002 counsel for Shannon Styman offered on his behalf that he would plead guilty to manslaughter and aggravated robbery but not guilty of the offence of sexual intercourse without consent in circumstances of aggravation if the Crown would accept those pleas in discharge of all offences in the indictment. The last charge was based upon evidence of internal injuries found on the body of Mrs Alchin. The Crown refused the offer. On 3 September 2002, before the commencement of the trial, he pleaded guilty to the aggravated robbery count. His and the Crown's attitudes were unchanged on the other counts, so he went for trial on them. The jury's verdicts accorded exactly with the pleas he had offered in June. As it turned out, no hearing time was saved because of the need to try all offenders jointly, but Shannon Styman is entitled to consideration in his sentence for his willingness by making his pleas to facilitate the course of justice by containing the trial by reducing the issues. Also to be regarded as facilitating the course of justice is the manner in which his truthful evidence at trial assisted the Crown case against the other offenders. He is entitled to consideration for the economical and realistic way in which his counsel conducted his case. 75 He is entitled to a reduced sentence for the assistance he gave the police in the account he gave under interrogation, particularly because of what he said about the telephone call to emergency services. 76 His offer to plead guilty before trial to the offence of manslaughter supports his expressions of remorse. It is to be noted that his counsel never invited the jury to find him not guilty. 77 I find these matters persuasive in assessment of the offender's prospects of rehabilitation. I accept that he is genuinely sorry for what he has done and I think, notwithstanding his troubled past, that there are good prospects that he will genuinely try to live a responsible life when released from prison. I think that during the custodial part of his sentence he will work towards that end. 78 He, too, will serve his sentence harder. The nature of his offences and the fact that he has given evidence assisting the Crown have put him in danger in the gaol system. It will therefore be necessary for him to be kept in protective custody, making it difficult for him to engage in all programs and facilities within the corrective services system. 79 I have reduced the sentences to take account of all these matters. 80 Victim impact statements were received from Mrs Rutter, Mrs Alchin's daughter, and Mrs Gale, her sister. They do not speak of the aggravated robbery, but the death of Mrs Alchin has badly affected them. The Court extends its sympathy to them and their families in their loss. Of course, these matters, important though they are, may not be taken into account in determining the sentences to be imposed. 81 The fact of the theft of Mrs Alchin's money can be considered only in sentencing for the aggravated robbery and the fact of her death only in sentencing for murder or manslaughter. Otherwise, however, the two offences comprise for the most part a number of common features which contribute to an assessment of their seriousness. They may broadly be described as the preparations, the attack on Mrs Alchin and her restraint. Since it is inappropriate to punish an offender more than once for criminal conduct, even though it may constitute or contribute towards more than one offence, there must be a substantial degree of concurrency in the sentences imposed. It would be wrong to think, in view of the sentences I intend to impose for murder, that this is only of academic interest. A proper sentence must be imposed for each offence. The partial accumulation of the resulting sentences takes account of each offender's overall criminality. 82 Peter David Taber, for the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing therein a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation I sentence you to imprisonment for twenty years. Your sentence will be taken to have commenced on the day of your arrest, 26 March 2001. In view of the sentence I am about to impose I decline to fix a non-parole period. 83 For the murder of Joy Golbie Alchin I sentence you to imprisonment for life. Your sentence will commence on 26 March 2003. 84 Ian Craig Styman, for the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing therein a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation I sentence you to imprisonment for twenty years. Your sentence will be taken to have commenced on the day of your arrest, 26 March 2001. In view of the sentence I am about to impose I decline to fix a non-parole period. 85 For the murder of Joy Golbie Alchin I sentence you to imprisonment for life. Your sentence will commence on 26 March 2003. 86 Shannon Troy Styman, for the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation I sentence you to imprisonment for eight years. Your sentence will be taken to have commenced on the day of your arrest, 26 March 2001. In view of the sentence I am about to impose I decline to fix a non-parole period. 87 For the unlawful killing of Joy Golbie Alchin I sentence you to imprisonment for fourteen years. Your sentence will be taken to have commenced on 26 March 2002. I fix a non-parole period of nine years, expiring on 25 March 2011. You will become eligible for parole on that day. 88 I have reduced the non-parole period of this sentence to take account of the partial accumulation of the sentences and to promote your rehabilitation by extending the period of parole. ************ Last Modified: 04/22/2003 DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.