THE STATE OF TASMANIA v MARCOS PHILLIP JAMES BOORMAN
19 SEPTEMBER 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE SHANAHAN CJ
Marcos Phillip James Boorman, you pleaded guilty to one count of arson, one count of assault and another of wounding.
You were born on 3 September 2005. You were 18 years old at the time of the offending and are currently aged 20. I have weighed your comparative youth in arriving at an appropriate sentence.
At approximately 1.30 pm on 1 April 2024, you and Jackson Carn entered the second level of unit 2/13 Surada Place, Glenorchy. The unit was owned by Homes Tasmania and was unoccupied at the time. Unit 2 was a two-storey duplex and shared a wall with unit 1, each unit was one of a group of 13. The bottom level of unit 2 was a garage area, and the second level contained the living space.
Mr Carn left the unit to go outside. During that time, you set fire to the property. Approximately five minutes later, you and Mr Carn left the property. A neighbour observed smoke and flames coming from the address and called triple zero. Police and members of the Tasmanian Fire Service attended the scene. Large flames emerged from the front and side windows. The fire spread into the rear yard of the unit and into the yard of unit 3, spreading to the fence and grass. It took fire crews approximately one and a half hours to extinguish the flames. During this time, a firefighter fighting the fire fell through the floor of the unit and twisted his knee. Members of the Tasmanian Fire Service remained at the property overnight to ensure there was no further fire.
The fire engulfed the unit, causing widespread damage throughout. The estimate of the total damage caused was $400,000 for the structure, and $5,000 for the contents. It was a significant amount of damage.
You were located a short time after the offending at the Northgate Shopping Centre. You were arrested and searched. You had three lighters in his possession. You were interviewed under caution. You told police that you went to unit 2 13 Surada Place to look for your bike. You were told that someone called “Gavin” had taken your bike and you were aware that Gavin had been staying at that unit. You then went to the unit with Mr Carn.
You went inside the unit to look for your bike. Mr Carn went outside. You then set fire to a curtain with a lighter. The curtain was in the hallway and it started going up immediately. You then walked out of the building. Mr Carn heard the fire alarm going off.
You told Mr Carn what you had done and then went back inside to stomp the fire out. You thought you had put the fire out. You then both left the address for a short period. You then went back inside briefly but you did not notice anything still on fire. You both left and started walking to Glenorchy. You later admitted that you had a couple of reasons for your actions and said that it had had something to do with Gavin stealing a little girl’s scooter a couple of weeks prior.
The State accepts that you were subjectively reckless when you set fire to the curtains; that is, you foresaw the possibility that the unit would be set on fire and proceeded regardless of that risk.
The State make an application for a compensation order pursuant to s 68(1) of the Sentencing Act 1997, in favour of Homes Tasmania, with the terms of that order to be adjourned sine die. I make that order.
I was told that you had served 97 days in custody in respect of this offence. On my calculation this means any term of imprisonment would be back-dated 97 days from 15 August 2025, and that would be 10 May 2025. Despite some submissions that 9 May 2025 was the effective date, I will backdate any term of imprisonment to 10 May 2025.
I accept that there are significant risks involved in lighting fires, and those that recklessly do so must be held accountable for the risk that they create. Those risks go beyond just members of the public but include first responders, firefighters and emergency services. In this instance, they also risk the reduction in the availability of public housing, a public facility that is under current significant pressure. In this instance, one of the fire fighters was injured in fighting the blaze.
I have seen photographs showing the damage to the unit and I note the substantial damage to that property.
Assault and Wounding
You have also been committed for sentence on one count of assault, contrary to s184 of the Criminal Code on complaint 1909/2025, and one count of wounding contrary to s172 of the Criminal Code on complaint 1908/2025. On complaint number 1908/2025, you pleaded guilty on your third appearance in the Hobart Magistrates Court.
In respect of the assault and wounding, you were aged 19 at the material time. The complainant in this matter is Hayden Larner, who was born on 26 September 1979. Mr Larner was aged 45 at the relevant time.
The assault occurred when you and the complainant were at Risdon Prison, located at 675 East Derwent Highway in Risdon Vale. There had been ongoing animosity between you and complainant for some months prior. The complainant believed you were responsible for a bike accident the complainant had, which caused him significant injury, and on another occasion for trying to drive him off the road in Lutana. You believed that the complainant was responsible for threatening your mother and threatening to burn down your home.
The offending occurred on 29 October 2024, when both you and complainant were housed in separate units within the Acacia complex at Risdon Prison. The complainant did not know you were in prison at this time and you had no interaction with the complainant whilst in custody prior to that day. The complainant rarely left his unit or went out into the yard for exercise.
On 29 October 2024, complainant was asked by a male inmate that he did not know, whether he wanted to go outside and do laps of the yard. The complainant accepted and walked outside with that inmate at approximately 11.40 am. Shortly after, the complainant walked into the yard, you yelled out to the complainant, “Hey bruv, do you remember me?” and the complainant turned around. The male inmate kept walking. You put your hand out as if to shake the complainant’s hand, and the complainant accepted that. You pulled the complainant towards you and headbutted him with force, causing the complainant to be moved backwards.
Initially, the complainant attempted to protect himself and threw a punch at you but it did not land. The complainant then tried to protect his head throughout the attack that ensued. You punched the complainant six times to the head and body. You pinned the complainant up against a wall by placing your arm against the complainant’s neck, before punching him another three times to the head and three times to the body. The complainant fell to the ground and you followed him. Whilst on the ground, you placed the complainant in a headlock. You were positioned behind the complainant and made a number of attempts to bite his ear. The complainant recalls hearing the snapping of your teeth with each attempted bite. Whist holding the complainant in this headlock, you bit off a 1.5 cm x 1 cm section of the complainant’s left ear.
The complainant immediately began to bleed from his ear, and you spat out the severed piece of the complainant’s ear. You released the complainant from the headlock, and the complainant attempted to get up off the ground. While he was still on the ground, you got to your knees and punched the complainant an additional two times. You stood up and while the complainant was still on his hands and knees on the ground, you used your right leg to stomp on the complainant’s head. The complainant got to his feet and began to walk away, and you pushed him. The assault went for approximately a minute and 15 seconds, and CCTV footage captured the incident. I have watched the two clips of that CCTV footage.
Following your assault and wounding of the complainant, he immediately returned to his cell and another inmate advised him he needed to seek medical assistance, which he did. The complainant attended the inpatient medical unit at Risdon Prison.
The following injuries were noted: he was bleeding from his nose, his left ear had a wedge of helix missing, that being cartilage in the centre segment of his left ear that was unsuitable for suturing. There was tenderness to his mid-thoracic spine midline and the left paraspinal, a lower incisor tooth was loose, and there was tenderness to his maxillary sinuses. The complainant declined a consultation with a plastic surgeon. He received treatment in the inpatient unit. The complainant remained in the medical unit overnight and returned to his unit on 30 October 2024.
On 5 November 2024, the complainant reattended the inpatient unit at the prison, as his ear had become infected. He was treated with antibiotics.
Risdon Prison reported this matter to Tasmania Police and on 1 November 2024, members of Tasmania Police attended the prison to obtain a statement from the complainant. Police took photographs of the complainant’s injuries at this time. The piece of ear was retrieved from the yard by correctional officers and was stored at the prison before it was handed to police.
On 23 December 2024, members of Tasmania Police attended your address where you were arrested and transported to the Glenorchy Police Station. You participated in an interview with police and under caution you stated that the complainant came out of the unit, you saw him, and you walked up to him. You yelled, “Hey bruv, do you remember me?” and you put your hand out to shake it, and as the complainant has done that, you have pulled him in and headbutted him.
You said that when you called out to the complainant, your intention was to hurt him. You could not recall how many times you hit the complainant, but you hit him a few times, and said after those hits, it all went too far. You got on the ground. You tried to put the complainant into a chokehold, but you could not do this properly. You bit his ear off and got up, and you then stomped on the back of his head.
You said that you had a beef with the complainant from when you used to live in Lutana. You said there had been an altercation between the two of you when the complainant thought you were someone else. The complainant made a number of threats to your mother and threatened your house. The complainant smashed the windows out from your mother’s car. Because of this ongoing conflict, you and your mother moved to Brighton. As a result, you had a lot of built-up anger towards the complainant.
You said to police, “It was a bad call on my part”, and that you did not intend for it to go as far as it did, but what happened, happened. You realised it had got out of control afterwards and thought, “Ah fuck, what have I just done?” You conceded that you had let your emotions run wild. You also acknowledged that the first punches you threw were thrown with everything you had. You said that you did not think it was a conscious decision to bite the complainant’s ear. When you stomped on the complainant’s head, you accepted that the purpose of stomping on his head was to cause more injury.
Police asked you how you felt after the assault, and you said, “Aside from the ‘Why the fuck did I just bite someone’s ear off’, relief, I guess, because of all the shit that had fucking gone on between us.” You agreed it was relief that your anger had been spent, and whilst the attack was not pre-planned, you acknowledged you had a motive for the attack and that you did not regret it. You regarded it as standing up for your family. You also said you purposely went for the back of the skull, but agreed it was the kind of action that could result in death or paralysis.
I have read the victim impact statement from the complainant, Hayden Joel Larner.
There has been some relevant prior conduct, much of it dealt with without recording a conviction. You have a prior for evading police; when you were sentenced to a release and adjourn order. In 2023, you were dealt with for one count of destroy property and no conviction was recorded. As an adult, there are two priors for driving whilst a prescribed drug present in your oral fluid, four convictions for breaching an interim family violence order, one conviction for possess a controlled drug, one conviction for breaching bail, and two counts of stealing.
The assault and the wounding matter for which I am to sentence you today, occurred whilst you were subject to two separate undertakings to be of good behaviour in the Magistrates Court. The offending occurred in the prison, and in general view of the then present prison population. Such offending undermines the proper management and discipline within prisons. It had a lasting impact on the complainant’s mental and physical health, and caused serious injury to the complainant, which resulted in the permanent disfiguration of his ear, of which I have seen photographs.
I have noted your motivation for the assault and wounding and your lack of remorse in the aftermath of the incident. This offending requires specific and general deterrence, denunciation, and vindication of the complainant.
Reports
I have received a forensic psychiatric report from Dr Jordan, dated 7 August 2025, a report prepared for your legal representatives. I have also received a Home Detention Assessment Report dated 13 August 2025.
In mitigation it was put that this is a particularly difficult sentencing exercise. It was acknowledged that these type of offences would ordinarily require the imposition of an immediate term of imprisonment.
The heart of the plea in mitigation put on your behalf was that in light of your age, limited criminal history in terms of serious matters or relevance, your concerted efforts at rehabilitation and for reasons related to your mental health, that the Court ought to consider sentencing falling short of an immediate term of imprisonment, or at least a further immediate term of imprisonment.
Starting with the Home Detention Assessment Report. Your counsel accepted that it provides a detailed account of your background and, in particular, many of the efforts that you have made towards your rehabilitation. The Home Detention Assessment Report identifies the sources of information relied upon which included an interview with you and an interview with your mother. Both interviews were conducted on the same day, it is unclear if they were conducted together.
Your background is described in the following terms. You were born in Adelaide, South Australia. At age six you moved to Brisbane, before returning to Adelaide at age ten. You relocated to Tasmania at age 11. You disclosed that you were exposed to family violence perpetrated by your father who had a severe alcohol and drug addiction, and that prompted the family’s return to Adelaide to escape the domestic violence. I am told that you reported a positive and supportive relationship with your mother, with whom you live. You had a strained relationship with your father until his death in or about 2020/2021. Your mother is your primary support, you have some support from her boarder, and two other older male acquaintances.
You are not currently in a relationship and you are content with that status. You have previously been in an intermittent significant relationship. A Family Violence Order for 12 months was imposed upon you in respect of a former partner, it is dated 22 October 2024. The SIMS (Safe At Home Information Management System) indicates seven family violence incidents with that ex-partner between September 2023 and October 2024. There is also a report of a family violence incident with a second ex-partner in March 2024. I note that the offending for which you are being sentenced occurred in April and October 2024, so during approximately the same period.
You have been living with your mother at [address redacted] since February 2024, and your mother has a two-year lease on that property. You are also to be added to the lease as an approved occupant.
You completed school to Grade 10 at St Francis Flexible School in Chigwell. You attended part of Years 11 and 12 at Claremont College. You lacked positive relationships with teachers during your education. You self-report as literate, in your assessment, as 7/10. You were expelled in Grade 9.
It is reported that at the age of 16 you were diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome. Asperger’s syndrome is now classified under autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and is characterized by difficulties in social interaction and communication, along with restricted interests and repetitive behaviours. You are currently unemployed and in receipt of a Disability Support Pension due to your diagnosis with Asperger’s.
You self-report as being in good health. The Home Detention Assessment Report paints a different picture. It indicates that you have suffered from chronic back pain since 2021. It notes an admission to the Emergency Department at Royal Hobart Hospital for that reason in May 2023, and records a motor bike accident in May 2025.
You have been diagnosed with a number of psychological conditions, including Asperger’s Syndrome, bi-polar disorder, depression, anxiety, and anti-social personality disorder. You are medicated for these conditions. You report that you have had mental health issues since around 15 years of age following your father’s suicide and the deaths of two close family members. Whilst you report that you do not currently struggle with feelings of anger because of your engagement with a psychologist, there is no doubt that you have done so in the past.
You have been treated by a psychologist since January 2025. Mr Spaulding, your psychologist, reports that you have demonstrated good engagement except for one session when you appeared distressed. Treatment has focused on aspects of anger management, including reality checking, identifying unhelpful thinking patterns and assumptions, emotional regulation skills, and learning and choosing alternative behavioural responses to anger. Your GP has recently approved additional sessions with your psychologist.
You have been a heavy drinker, but self-report as abstinent for the last two years. You were injecting approximately 1.5 grams of methylamphetamine a day in May 2024 but, again, you self-report as abstinent since October 2024. You commenced the Bridge Program on 10 December 2024 and entered the 10-week residential program in May 2025. Whilst that program is described as residential, it appears your attend on a daily basis on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. You also attend the Matrix Program, an advanced group therapy program, on Thursdays. You are eligible to continue the Matrix Program for a further 12 months. Mr Spaulding, your psychologist, reports that you have never attended a session under the effects of methylamphetamine.
You attribute your offending to your grievance with the complainant, your anger management issues and being incorrectly medicated.
The Home Detention Assessment Report makes a positive recommendation for a home detention order. You are assessed as suitable for community supervision but as unsuitable for community service.
Turning to the psychiatric report by Dr Mike Jordan. There is a submission that the Verdins principles operate in your case. R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269 sets out the circumstances in which temporary or permanent impaired mental functioning can be relevant to sentencing. Dr Jordan has considered the six parameters set out in Verdins from a psychiatric perspective. He discounts the first proposition that your mental health issues might reduce your culpability for the offending conduct, both in respect of the arson and the assault and wounding.
In respect of the second parameter of whether your diagnosed conditions may have a bearing on the sentence that is imposed and the conditions in which it should be served, Dr Jordan states, at page 10 of his report, that “It is considered that ongoing successful rehabilitation … will be the most likely structure through which … [you] … can avoid legal transgressions into the future”.
Dr Jordan discounts the third proposition that general deterrence as a sentencing consideration should be moderated because of the nature and severity of your symptoms.
Dr Jordan provides an assessment in respect of the fourth parameter, ie whether specific deterrence as a sentencing consideration should be moderated because of the nature and severity of your symptoms. I did not find his assessment wholly responsive to that parameter as it focused almost exclusively on your attempts at rehabilitation and not on your offending.
In relation to the fifth principle, Dr Jordan states that your depression would have the “effect of making any given sentence weigh more heavily upon … [you] … that it would on a person of normal health”, and “particularly, any return to custody would halt or have a retrograde effect upon progress [in your rehabilitation] … made so far”.
In respect of the sixth parameter, that is whether there is a serious risk of imprisonment having a significant adverse effect on your mental health, Dr Jordan states, at page 11 of his report, “It is likely that any return to incarceration would bring about a deepening with his low mood and propensity for self-harm and also increase the chances that he may become reacquainted with illicit substances …”.
The Verdins principles have some operation in this matter, on the basis set out in Dr Jordan’s report, but they are limited in the manner in which I have described.
Disposition
Sentencing in this case is a particularly difficult exercise because of the seriousness of your offending which has to be balanced against your steps towards rehabilitation and your mental health. The arson was reckless conduct that led to significant damage of over $400,000, and created substantial risks to those responding and the public. It merits denunciation and both general and specific deterrence. Your culpability in respect of the assault and wounding is clear and your account of the outstanding beef that you had with the complainant, is an aggravating factor rather than an explanation,
Marcos Phillip James Boorman, you are convicted on all counts.
Arson is a serious crime. It involves the destruction or damage of structures, often at great cost, and the commission of the crime itself is often difficult to detect. This is a serious instance of that crime. The setting of the fire was intentional not reckless. Public housing is an important public resource. You have serious mental health issues as described in the Home Detention Assessment Report and by Dr Jordan. In my view, this case calls for a tailored sentence and the considerations I have referred to are reflected in the sentence that I am going to impose.
On the arson charge, a lengthy term of imprisonment is necessary, but I note you have already been in custody for over four months. You are convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, backdated to commence on 10 May 2024. The operation of the balance of that sentence from today is suspended on condition you commit no offence punishable by imprisonment for a period of two years.
I would have imposed a community corrections order with the suspended sentence, but there is no need as I have imposed such an order upon your conviction for assault and wounding.
I stress in respect of the suspended portion of the sentence imposed for arson, that if you commit any offence punishable by imprisonment, and that means any such offence, you could be brought back to this Court and the balance of the suspended sentence must be activated unless it is unjust.
On the assault and wounding, I make a home detention order and a community corrections order. In not ordering an actual term of imprisonment, I have had regard to your extensive attempts at rehabilitation, the need to preserve the momentum you have created in that regard, the other matters raised in mitigation and the application of the Vermins principles with regard to your mental health. If I did not make a home detention order in respect of your offending in this matter, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment in relation to these offences, and whilst I have proceeded in the manner indicated, I have done so with some significant reservations. However, having considered the pre-sentence report as to whether you are suitable for a home detention order, I have noted the positive recommendation for such a disposition. You consent to that order being made.
First, I sentence you to a home detention order for an operational period of 18 months, commencing today. During the operational period of the order, all of the core conditions contained in s 42AD(1) of Part 5A of the Sentencing Act 1997 will apply, including but not limited to the condition that during the operational period of the order, you do not commit an offence punishable by imprisonment. In addition, the following special conditions will apply:
(i) You must during the operational period of the order remain at [address redacted] at all times, except during the times of 9:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday to Thursday, unless approved by a probation officer.
(ii) You must attend the Community Corrections office at Hobart for induction onto this order. You must attend for induction during normal business hours but no later than 10:00 am on the business day after this order is made.
(iii) You must during the operational period of the order maintain in operating condition an active mobile phone service, provide the contact details to Community Corrections and be accessible for contact through this device at all times.
(iv) You must submit to the supervision of a Community Corrections officer as required by that officer.
(v) You must not during the operational period, take an illicit or prohibited substance, including:
(a) any controlled drug as defined by the Misuse of Drugs Act 2001, or
(b) any medication containing opioid, benzodiazepine, bupropion hydrochloride or pseudoephedrine unless you provide written evidence from your medical professional that you have been prescribed the relevant medication.
(vi) You must not during the operational period of the order consume alcohol and you must if so directed by a police officer or Community Corrections officer, submit to a breath test, urine test or other test for the presence of alcohol.
(vii) You must during the period of the operation of the order submit to electronic monitoring, including by wearing or carrying an electronic device.
(viii) During the period that you are required to submit to electronic monitoring:
(a) you must not remove, tamper with, damage disable or interfere with the proper functioning of any electronic device or equipment used for the purpose of electronic monitoring;
(b) you must not allow anyone else to remove, tamper with, damage, disable or interfere with the proper functioning of any electronic device or equipment used for the purpose of electronic monitoring;
(c) you must comply with all reasonable lawful directions given to you in relation to electronic monitoring, including in relation to the installation, attachment or operation of device or a system used for the purposes of electronic monitoring by:
(1) a police officer;
(2) a probation officer or a prescribed officer; or
(3) another person whose function involve installation or operation of device or a system used for the purposes of electronic monitoring.
In addition, I make a community correction order for a period of 18 months. The conditions of that order include the core conditions provided for at s 42AO of the Sentencing Act 1997. In addition, the following special conditions apply, ie that:
(i) Pursuant to s 42AP(e) you must during the operational period of the order, undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency as directed by a probation officer; and
(ii) Pursuant to s 42AP(j) you must during the operational period of the order, submit to medical, psychological, or psychiatric assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer.
It is also a condition that you report to a probation officer at Community Correction office at 75 Liverpool Street, Hobart by 5.00 pm Monday, 22 September 2025.
The two sentences I have imposed are intended to work together. These sentences are intended to support your rehabilitation in circumstances where I recognise that your offending has been serious and on two separate occasions. Your future is now in your own hands. If you have occasion to come before this Court again you are unlikely to have the same opportunity to pursue rehabilitation outside of the prison system.