Court Determines Sentence for Manslaughter and Theft

DPP v Manuel [2021] VSC 568 (5 November 2021)

The offender started fight with deceased and stole deceased’s car.  An early plea of guilty was made by the offender.  The Court, in determining the appropriate sentence for the offender, considered his mild intellectual disability, long criminal history, and the guarded prospects of rehabilitation. 

Facts:

In the early hours of Tuesday 18 June 2019, Alexander Manuel, killed Ricky Thompson by stabbing him in the head with a knife, during an argument which Mr Manuel started.  After Mr Manuel stabbed Mr Thompson, Mr Manuel stole his car.  On the Monday evening, Mr Manuel had been at a friend’s apartment.  Whilst there,  he took a small, sharp knife from the kitchen knife block, and used it to cut out a graffiti tag that he had drawn on a sketch pad.  Mr Thompson and Mr Manuel's altercation arose from the latter asking the former for a lift and despite having been rejected, got inside the car, refusing to leave and demanding Mr Thompson give him the keys. 

Mr Thompson had suffered a fatal stab wound to the left side of his head, which extended through the left temporal lobe of his brain.  Mr Manuel was initially charged with murder and aggravated carjacking, and have been in custody since then.  As a result of negotiations with the prosecution, Mr Manuel pleaded guilty to manslaughter and theft, after the initial charges were dropped.  Mr Manuel has a very extensive criminal history, which consists primarily of numerous property, drug and driving offences, as well as unlawful possession of prohibited or controlled weapons.  

For the purposes of sentencing, Mr Manuel were assessed by Ms Alison Mynard, clinical psychologist.  In her report, dated 27 August 2021, she described Mr Manuel as having a mild intellectual disability, with a full scale IQ of 67.  Around the time of committal, Mr Manuel first offered to plead guilty to manslaughter and theft.  Mr Manuel formally pleaded guilty to those charges in this court on 1 July 2021, after the prosecution dropped the more serious charges.  The Court treated such as an early plea.

Issue:

Whether or not a total effective sentence of 7 years and 9 months is appropriate. 

Applicable law:

Sentencing Act 1991 s 5 - provides that the only purposes for which sentences may be imposed are—

        (a)     to punish the offender to an extent and in a manner which is just in all of the circumstances; or

        (b)     to deter the offender or other persons from committing offences of the same or a similar character; or

        (c)     to establish conditions within which it is considered by the court that the rehabilitation of the offender may be facilitated; or

        (d)     to manifest the denunciation by the court of the type of conduct in which the offender engaged; or

        (e)     to protect the community from the offender; or

        (f)     a combination of two or more of those purposes.

Analysis:

Mr Manuel's behaviour both inside and outside the hotel was aggressive and verbally abusive.  Mr Manuel had no right to demand Mr Thompson’s car, far less to start a physical fight when he refused to hand it over to Mr Manuel.  Mr Thompson's defensive actions in no way justified Mr Manuel in pulling a knife and stabbing him in the head.  Mr Thompson was unarmed, and there was nothing stopping Mr Manuel from running away, if he thought Mr Thompson was about to tackle him.

Mr Manuel may have been carrying the knife to use in connection with his graffiti activities.  But the fact remains that Mr Manuel was carrying a knife in a public place, and readily resorted to using it, with fatal consequences.  After he stabbed Mr Thompson, he made no attempt to assist him, or call for help.  On the contrary, Mr Manuel stole his car and drove away, leaving him seriously injured on the ground. 

Mr Thompson's family went through an agonising period whilst Mr Thompson was in hospital, not knowing whether or not he would survive, before losing their much-loved son, brother, father and uncle.  Given Mr Manuel's extensive criminal history, his long-term poly-substance addiction, and his intellectual deficits, his counsel conceded that his prospects of rehabilitation are guarded.  Mr Manuel is entitled to a discount on the sentence to be imposed upon him in recognition of his guilty plea, and its utilitarian value, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, when jury trials have been delayed. 

Conclusion:

Given the seriousness of this offending, upon the completion of Mr Manuel's  sentence it is likely that he will be deported and returned to New Zealand.  The Court sentences him to imprisonment of 7 years and 6 months.  The Court will treat such as the base sentence.  For the offence of theft, the Court sentences Mr Manuel to 9 months’ imprisonment and fixes a period of 5 years as the period he must serve before he becomes eligible for parole.