R v Mathew Aquilina [2013] NSWSC 525

R v Mathew Aquilina [2013] NSWSC 525

The offender's murder of the deceased was above the mid range of objective seriousness: he recruited Comber, took weapons, lay in wait, ambushed the deceased, participated in violence against him, fashioned and used a noose, intentionally killed him by strangulation over 15 to 20 minutes, and helped dispose of and further conceal the body. The Court rejected provocation as a mitigating factor, gave little or no weight to the psychiatric opinion based on untested material, found no causal link between alleged sexual abuse and the offending, found no remorse, but accepted no significant criminal history and some prospects of rehabilitation. Those matters warranted a total sentence of 28...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Murder / Sentence After Jury Verdict of Guilty of Murder
Outcome
The offender was sentenced for murder to a total term of 28 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 21 years.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'manslaughter Plea Not Accepted' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'provocation' 'aggravating Factors' 'mitigating Factors' 'remorse' 'objective Seriousness' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'manslaughter Plea Not Accepted' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'provocation' 'aggravating Factors' 'mitigating Factors' 'remorse' 'objective Seriousness' 'non Parole Period']

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 / Sentence After Jury Verdict of Guilty of Murder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for murder where the offender pleaded guilty to manslaughter but was convicted by a jury of murder.' "Whether the offender's conduct was provoked so as to mitigate sentence." "Whether the offender's history of alleged sexual abuse and asserted insecure attachment to his mother were causally related to the offending." 'Whether the offender had no significant criminal history, prospects of rehabilitation, likelihood of re-offending, and remorse.' 'How the objective seriousness and aggravating features of the murder should be assessed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's murder of the deceased was above the mid range of objective seriousness: he recruited Comber, took weapons, lay in wait, ambushed the deceased, participated in violence against him, fashioned and used a noose, intentionally killed him by strangulation over 15 to 20 minutes, and helped dispose of and further conceal the body. The Court rejected provocation as a mitigating factor, gave little or no weight to the psychiatric opinion based on untested material, found no causal link between alleged sexual abuse and the offending, found no remorse, but accepted no significant criminal history and some prospects of rehabilitation. Those matters warranted a total sentence of 28...

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced for murder to a total term of 28 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 21 years.

Orders

  • ['The offender is sentenced to a non-parole period of 21 years imprisonment commencing on 5 January 2011 and ending on 4 January 2032, with an additional term of 7 years imprisonment, commencing on 5 January 2032, and ending on 4 January 2039.' 'The total term is one of 28 years imprisonment.' 'The offender will be...