Regina v Suteski [No 6] [2002] NSWSC 457

Regina v Suteski [No 6] [2002] NSWSC 457

The court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Ms Suteski procured an assault on Mr Peich involving grievous bodily harm, that weapons including dangerous weapons were within her instructions, and that her purpose included keeping him away from work so she could continue fraud. Although this was not a contract killing, it was a contract to inflict very serious injury on an unsuspecting and blameless victim and it led to his death. Her criminality was at least that of the killer, but a starting point exceeding 30 years for the murder was considered excessive. Applying parity, totality, the guilty pleas for deception offences, lack of real remorse and no special circumstances...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Murder and Obtaining a Financial Benefit by Deception / Sentence After Jury Verdict of Guilty of Murder and Pleas of Guilty to Nine Deception Charges With 68 Form 1 Offences Taken Into Account
Outcome
Ms Suteski was sentenced to an overall term of imprisonment of 24 years with a non-parole period of 18 years, allowing for 36 days previously spent in custody.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'obtaining a Financial Benefit by Deception' 'procuring Assault' 'contract Assault' 'alternative Bases for Murder' 'parity in Sentencing' 'form 1 Offences' 'totality']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Practice and Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'obtaining a Financial Benefit by Deception' 'procuring Assault' 'contract Assault' 'alternative Bases for Murder' 'parity in Sentencing' 'form 1 Offences' 'totality']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence for Murder and Obtaining a Financial Benefit by Deception / Sentence After Jury Verdict of Guilty of Murder and Pleas of Guilty to Nine Deception Charges With 68 Form 1 Offences Taken Into Account

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What facts relevant to sentence were consistent with the jury's murder verdict and proved to the required standard." 'Whether the accused procured an assault involving grievous bodily harm or only a lesser assault.' 'The objective seriousness of procuring a serious assault which led to death.' "The relevance of the accused's fraud offences, pleas of guilty, subjective circumstances, remorse, special circumstances, parity and totality to sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Ms Suteski procured an assault on Mr Peich involving grievous bodily harm, that weapons including dangerous weapons were within her instructions, and that her purpose included keeping him away from work so she could continue fraud. Although this was not a contract killing, it was a contract to inflict very serious injury on an unsuspecting and blameless victim and it led to his death. Her criminality was at least that of the killer, but a starting point exceeding 30 years for the murder was considered excessive. Applying parity, totality, the guilty pleas for deception offences, lack of real remorse and no special circumstances...

Court Disposition

Ms Suteski was sentenced to an overall term of imprisonment of 24 years with a non-parole period of 18 years, allowing for 36 days previously spent in custody.

Orders

  • ['On Count 2, including the Form 1 offences, imprisonment for 4.5 years commencing on 25 February 2002 and ending on 24 August 2006, with a non-parole period of 3 years commencing on 25 February 2002 and ending on 24 February 2005.' 'On Counts 3 to 10 inclusive, a fixed term of imprisonment of 3 years commencing on...