AA, AC, SS, Tatchell & Wildsmith v R [2010] NSWSC 495

AA, AC, SS, Tatchell & Wildsmith v R [2010] NSWSC 495

All offenders were party to a joint criminal enterprise to hit James Tautari and knew of weapons. AA and SS physically participated with weapons but had limited involvement and probably helped end the attack; AC substantially facilitated the enterprise. Their culpability for manslaughter was treated as the same, subject to different plea-offer discounts. Luke Tatchell procured and distributed weapons and delivered multiple blows with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, making his murder more serious than Wildsmith's but still below mid range because there was no intent to kill, minimal planning and youth-related immaturity. David Wildsmith joined later, did not strike with an...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Murder and Manslaughter / Judgment on Sentence After Jury Trial Convictions
Outcome
AA, AC and SS were sentenced for manslaughter; Luke Tatchell and David Wildsmith were sentenced for murder.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'manslaughter' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'youth and Immaturity' 'parity of Co Offenders' 'offer to Plead Guilty' 'special Circumstances' 'juvenile Detention Centre']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'manslaughter' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'youth and Immaturity' 'parity of Co Offenders' 'offer to Plead Guilty' 'special Circumstances' 'juvenile Detention Centre']

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 Sentencing for Murder and Manslaughter / Judgment on Sentence After Jury Trial Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What facts relevant to sentence could be found consistently with the jury verdicts for each offender.' 'The relative culpability of offenders convicted of manslaughter and murder within a joint criminal enterprise involving weapons.' 'Whether the murder offences were within or below the mid range of objective seriousness having regard to intention, planning, youth and participation.' 'What mitigation applied by reason of youth, immaturity, remorse, prior character, prospects of rehabilitation and offers to plead guilty to manslaughter.' 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the statutory ratio between the non-parole period and balance of term or retaining young offenders in a juvenile detention centre.']

Ratio Decidendi

All offenders were party to a joint criminal enterprise to hit James Tautari and knew of weapons. AA and SS physically participated with weapons but had limited involvement and probably helped end the attack; AC substantially facilitated the enterprise. Their culpability for manslaughter was treated as the same, subject to different plea-offer discounts. Luke Tatchell procured and distributed weapons and delivered multiple blows with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, making his murder more serious than Wildsmith's but still below mid range because there was no intent to kill, minimal planning and youth-related immaturity. David Wildsmith joined later, did not strike with an...

Court Disposition

AA, AC and SS were sentenced for manslaughter; Luke Tatchell and David Wildsmith were sentenced for murder.

Orders

  • ['AA: imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years 7 months to date from 9 January 2008 and to expire on 8 August 2011, with a total sentence of 6 years 3 months to date from 9 January 2008 and to expire on 8 April 2014; eligible for release to parole on 8 August 2011.' 'AC: imprisonment with a non-parole period...