R v BURNS, Renae [2013] NSWSC 1851

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v BURNS, Renae [2013] NSWSC 1851 Hearing dates: 30 October 2012 & 31 May 2013 Decision date: 06 June 2013 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Hidden J Decision: Offender sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years, NPP 2 years and 9 months, from 23.9.10. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - accessory after the fact to murder - plea of guilty - murder committed by offender's lover - lies told to protect her from being brought to justice Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: - R v Scowen [2007] NSWSC 792 - R v Farroukh (CCA, Unreported, 29 March 1996) - R v Dileski [2002] NSWCCA 345, 132 A Crim R 408 - R v Galea [2003] NSWSC 465 - R v Almirol (No 2) [2007] NSWSC 323 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Renae Burns (offender) Representation: Counsel: C Maxwell QC (Crown) M Ramage QC (offender) Solicitors: S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown) Mitchell Cavanagh - Bossher Lawyers (NSW) (offender) File Number(s): 2010/317167 Publication restriction: Yes

REMARKS ON SENTENCE 1HIS HONOUR: The Crown alleges that Tanya Lane murdered Steven Quire in the evening of 20 February 2010 at Rutherford by shooting him at close range with a flare gun which she had purchased early in that month. His body was found buried in bushland in the Watagan State Forest on 13 March 2010. The offender, Renae Burns, has pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to that murder. She stands for sentence for that offence. 2Senior counsel for the offender, Mr Ramage QC, told me that it is not agreed that the murder occurred on 20 February, although it is accepted that it was on or about that day. Nor is it agreed that the murder occurred at Rutherford. For present purposes, however, nothing turns on those matters. Subject to them, I have been presented with a lengthy statement of agreed facts, containing a comprehensive summary of the evidence against the offender. It is not necessary to recite them in these remarks. A brief summary will suffice. 3The offender had been in a relationship with the deceased, Steven Quire, for some years prior to his death. They had a daughter and she had a daughter from a previous relationship, whom Mr Quire treated as his own. Over a period prior to the murder their relationship had soured. The offender formed a relationship with Tanya Lane, which became intimate. They conducted this relationship in such a way as to conceal its full extent from Mr Quire. 4By her plea of guilty the offender admits that over a period after the murder, knowing that Ms Lane had committed that crime, she told lies on a number of occasions about material matters in an effort to conceal Ms Lane's crime and prevent her being brought to justice. In conversations with some people in the period immediately after the killing, before Mr Quire's body was found, she advanced various explanations for his disappearance: that he was fruit picking in Cessnock, that he had gone to Mackay with friends, or that he had gone "up north" to work in the mines. 5After the body was found she denied to investigating police that she had been in an intimate relationship with Ms Lane, and claimed that she had maintained a loving relationship with Mr Quire. She also falsely claimed that Ms Lane had been "like a sister" to Mr Quire and that the three of them were close friends. These falsehoods were designed to avoid any suggestion that her relationship with Ms Lane might have provided a motive for the murder. 6She also falsely claimed to police and to a number of other people, including the mother, grandmother and sisters of Mr Quire, that he had been involved in drug dealing and owed a substantial amount of money to bikies who were his suppliers. She made up a story that on 20 February 2010 he had been confronted at his home by two men who threatened him with violence if he did not attend to the matter, and that thereafter he went into hiding. She suggested that his criminal associates might have killed him. 7The offender was arrested on 23 September 2010, and at that stage was charged with complicity in the murder of Mr Quire. Both she and Ms Lane were put on trial for the murder in October of last year. However, on 30 October, while pre-trial issues were being determined and before a jury was empanelled, an alternative count of accessory after the fact in her case was added to the indictment. She pleaded guilty to that offence on that day. 8The Crown prosecutor tendered victim impact statements by Mr Quire's mother and brother, and by the offender's older daughter. Mr Ramage objected to them and, after hearing argument, I indicated that I would consider their admissibility. I have decided that they are not admissible in these proceedings, given that the offender is being sentenced not for the murder of Mr Quire but for being an accessory after the fact to that offence. As his death is not the result of her offence, the relevant provision of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, s 27(2)(a), is not applicable. This was the approach taken by Grove J in R v Scowen [2007] NSWSC 792 at [3] - [5], an approach with which I respectfully agree. 9Ms Lane is yet to face trial for the murder and, if she is found guilty, these victim impact statements would properly be received in her sentence proceedings. That said, I think it appropriate at this stage to acknowledge the pain and loss no doubt suffered by Mr Quire's family, and to express my deepest sympathy to all those affected by his violent death. 10The offender was 31 years old at the time of the offence, and is now 34. She has a minor criminal history, of no significance for present purposes. She has been in custody since her arrest, having never before been in prison. 11Her background is sketched in a statement which she made for the purpose of the sentence proceedings, together with a psychological report of Mr John Machlin. Given the view I have formed of the matter in the light of the period she has been in custody, it is not necessary to examine this material in any detail. It is sufficient to say that she had a difficult upbringing because her father left the family when she was very young, leaving her mother to care for her and her three siblings. She left school after year 9, but appears to have had a satisfactory employment record thereafter. 12Her older daughter was the product of a relationship which came to an end when her partner left her after she had told him she was pregnant. As I have said, her relationship with Mr Quire proved not to be a happy one, but she acknowledged that he had always been a father to her older daughter. Her relationship with that young lady has been fractured by her criminal behaviour, but she hopes eventually to restore it. 13Mr Machlin, who interviewed her in prison recently, found her to be suffering from a major depressive disorder. She has been undergoing treatment for that condition while in custody. Fortunately, she has the continuing support of her family. 14Her offence is a serious one, involving a sustained pattern of falsehood. Clearly, however, it was the product of her relationship with Ms Lane and was emotionally based. By way of explanation of her behaviour to Mr Machlin she said, among other things, that she wanted to protect Ms Lane and could not bear the thought of losing her. No doubt, that relationship has also come to an end. 15In her statement she expressed remorse for her crime, and I have no reason not to accept it as genuine. She will need a deal of support and supervision to readjust to life at liberty upon her release, and to that end I find special circumstances justifying a departure, albeit a modest one, from the statutory proportion between sentence and non-parole period. 16Counsel supplied me with details of twenty-two cases of sentence for accessory after the fact to murder. Two of them were sentences imposed by the Court of Criminal Appeal after an appeal was allowed: R v Farroukh (CCA, Unreported, 29 March 1996) and R v Dileski [2002] NSWCCA 345, 132 A Crim R 408. The others were sentences passed at first instance. In all but two of the cases there had been pleas of guilty. Nine of them were disposed of other than by full time custodial sentences (in which I include suspended sentences and periodic detention). 17Of the remaining thirteen cases, the lowest head sentence was (in round figures) 1 year, 4 months (with a non-parole period, again in round figures, of 12 months): Scowen (supra). The highest head sentence was 5 years (with a non-parole period of 2 ½ years): R v Galea [2003] NSWSC 465. The lowest non-parole period was 12 months: Scowen, and the highest was 3 years and 2 months (with a head sentence of 4 years and 3 months): R v Almirol (No 2) [2007] NSWSC 323. 18Of course, all these cases turned on their own facts, as does the present case. Nevertheless, the sentence I propose for this offender falls within such pattern of sentence as emerges from them. But for her plea of guilty, I would have imposed on her a head sentence of the order of 5 years. In recognition of the utilitarian value of her plea, the sentence will be 4 years. I shall set a non-parole period of 2 years and 9 months, which is only a little more than the period she has been in custody. The sentence will commence on the date of her arrest, 23 September 2010. Accordingly, she will be eligible for release on parole on 22 June 2013, and the sentence will expire in its entirety on 22 September 2014. 19Renae Burns, for the offence of accessory after the fact to the murder of Steven Quire, you are sentenced to a non-parole period of 2 years and 9 months, commencing on 23 September 2010 and expiring on 22 June 2013, and a balance of term of 1 year and 3 months, commencing on 23 June 2013 and expiring on 22 September 2014.