STATE OF TASMANIA v TAYDEN PAUL COONEY 13 MAY 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PORTER AJ
Tayden Cooney, the defendant, has pleaded guilty to one count of causing grievous bodily harm. I am also dealing with his pleas of guilty to summary offences of destroy property and unlawfully possessing a dangerous article in a public place. The defendant was 18 years old at the time of this offending. He was living in a unit in a large unit complex in Devonport. On the afternoon of 11 September 2024, he was with another man at his unit, the pair were outside, shooting cap guns. The complainant, Scott Wyllie, approach the two and asked them to stop doing what they were doing as it was bothering him. The two stopped for a while but, after resuming, Mr Wyllie again approached them and asked them to stop. There was some verbal abuse exchanged during which the defendant pushed past his friend, walked into his unit and retrieved a hatchet. This was about 30 centimetres in length. He then went to the complainant’s unit and broke the front window. Mr Wyllie went out of his unit and asked the defendant why he had done that. The defendant then said words suggesting that they fight, and then swung the hatchet at Mr Wyllie, two or three times. Mr Wyllie raised his arms to defend himself and was struck to the left forearm with the blade of the hatchet. As a result, he suffered a large laceration, which exposed muscle and tendons, with arterial bleeding. The defendant walked away and was yelling abuse towards Mr Wyllie. When he got to his unit, he went outside to sit with his friend, who told him that he did not have to do what he had done. The defendant replied, “I know, I’ve done the wrong thing”. Emergency services were called and at about 4.30pm, police attended and arrested the defendant. The hatchet was found and seized. At this time, Mr Wyllie was in the company of a number of other residents. He was falling in and out of consciousness and police had to apply a torniquet to his arm to stem the arterial bleeding. He was later transported to the Launceston General Hospital.
When interviewed, the defendant made admissions about what he had done. He said some unflattering things about Mr Wyllie. He said that before the incident, Mr Wyllie had said something that he considered “over the line” and which made him “skitz out” so that he was not in control of his actions. Apparently, he and Mr Wyllie had had a good relationship until a few days beforehand. He said he stopped attacking Mr Wyllie after he saw he was bleeding. He was not trying to kill him, or trying to cause any lacerations but, at the same time, said he just wanted to “bash him” and “flog him” as he was “angry as fuck”. He said Mr Wyllie deserved to get bashed. In medical terms, Mr Wyllie suffered a fractured ulna bone in his arm, and the laceration transacted his ulnar nerve a nerve and artery. He had to undergo surgery and has ongoing sensory and motor deficits. I have a victim impact statement in which Mr Wyllie said he really only has one arm and hand that works. If effects everything in his life, that includes minor domestic and personal tasks. It upsets him, makes him feel useless and he gets really angry about it. He is in pain every day. He has been told that his hand will never work the same. Although still living in the property where the events happened, he does not feel safe and is scared. He was depressed and drinking a lot more than he was. He is frightened to go anywhere and does not like leaving Devonport. He suffers a lot emotionally and does not understand why it happened.
As noted, the defendant is still a young man. He has a recorded history of offending, which includes a number of destroy and injure property charges, as well as an assault charge in 2018, through to 2022, for which he was dealt with by way of informal youth procedures. He appeared in this Court on 15 December 2022 on a charge of aggravated armed robbery. He was not convicted but sentenced to a ten month youth detention order, wholly suspended on conditions. Again, as a youth, in November 2023, he was dealt with for assault, and without conviction, released on conditions under the Youth Justice Act. Not to diminish it but that offending was more of a sexual nature by touching rather than forceful violence. Further offending followed in the form of threatening police officers, and again he was dealt with, without a conviction recorded, with the orders heavily biased towards rehabilitation. I note he has now been in custody in respect of this matter for 205 days.
I was provided with a psychological assessment, prepared by Dr O’Donnell, with the report dated 29 April 2025. It is a lengthy and comprehensive report. It emerges that the defendant is in receipt of NDIS funding because of a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. He had an extensive trauma history, having been removed from the care of his mother as a child, and experienced numerous failed placements under a Care and Protection Order, until he turned 18. After that, he seems to have been left to his own devices and no one seems to have been assisting him with his accommodation requirements. He found himself in the unit complex. The report also reveals that there was in utero exposure to methylamphetamine because of use by his mother, and he has experienced complex mental health issues throughout childhood and adolescence; that is, there is probably neuro-developmental trauma from drug exposure in utero, further complicated by his own alcohol and drug use through critical neuro-developmental periods in childhood and adolescence.
The defendant’s presentation is consistent with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, borderline personality disorder and polysubstance abuse disorder. It seems that when his guardianship expired when he turned 18, as I noted earlier, he left departmental care and was placed in the unit with little support, apart from some from NDIS personnel. Whilst it seems that he is trying to better himself whilst in prison and is engaging with a number of programmes, including substance use recovery. He has a history of self-harm and suicidal behaviour, including medication overdoses, and while in prison, he was on suicide watch a few days after his initial incarceration when his mental health deteriorated. His condition stabilised due to medication. In Dr O’Donnell’s view, the defendant’s mental health conditions causally contributed to him lacking behavioural control when angered in the conflict with Mr Wyllie. He has an impaired ability to make calm and rational choices. He has had long standing difficulty in relationships with others, which has previously resulted in aggression. His impaired mental functioning also has relevance in relation to other sentencing considerations. Dr O’Donnell points out there is a heightened risk of suicide in custody, together with a risk of general further mental health deterioration. This is exacerbated by long periods of isolation in prison. Having carefully examined these unchallenged views, I am satisfied that they can be acted on. And, of course the defendant is a youthful offender, albeit facing a serious charge.
I was told that the complainant had been making remarks and engaging in other behaviour which the defendant found quite offensive. I can make no findings about the truth of that. Apparently, the defendant just snapped after the confrontation. I was provided with a lengthy letter, hand written by the defendant, and addressed to the Court. He speaks of a lot of time for self-reflection. Although he disagrees with Mr Wyllie’s views, he acknowledges that it was not at all within his rights to harm him. He speaks of the difficulties of being in prison and says that he is willing to do whatever it takes to better himself and not to re-offend. He hopes to engage in courses on his release to better himself. He expresses regrets for his actions and acknowledges his drug habit may have influenced his behaviour, and he is intent on programs that address his substance abuse. He seems to have insight into his mental health problems and understands the need for help and support. Finally, a screening report for community corrections shows the defendant as having maximum risks and needs, and as suitable for community based supervision. He has been assessed as eligible for referral to the EQUIPS aggression programme. I am told that suitable accommodation has now been found for him through his NDIS funding.
Clearly, this is a serious incident of violence. It was not a completely spontaneous action. A weapon was obtained and used with serious injuries resulting. They have long-term physical and emotional consequences on the victim. It seems the resentment and ill-feeling on the part of the defendant to Mr Wyllie suddenly found expression after a petty argument, and serious violence was engaged in. I cannot be satisfied that the defendant intended to cause grievous bodily harm but the degree of recklessness in the use of the hatchet was high enough to make the distinction irrelevant. Attempting to deter other people from similar behaviour is very important. At the same time, the defendant’s mental health difficulties over a very long period of time, effectively starting from infancy, have to be given due regard. I accept that there is a causal relationship between the constellation of symptoms from his mental health issues and the offending, and I accept that he is at greater risk of exacerbation of his difficulties if there is any further extended period of imprisonment. I note the relatively early plea of guilty and I accept the aspects of the personal letter sent to the Court.
Mr Cooney, I have set out the facts, your personal circumstances and what I see to be the relevant considerations. I repeat, that this was a completely unacceptable act of violence which needs to be condemned. You now seem to recognise the seriousness of what you did. I note the time you have spent in custody and I note the factors which operate in your favour. In my view, a term of imprisonment is plainly necessary but, in your case, because of those factors which do operate in your favour, I will backdate the relevant term and suspend the balance of that term from today on conditions, and make you the subject of a Community Correction Order. You are convicted of all offences and sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment to commence on 20 October 2024 with the balance from today suspended on condition you commit no offence punishable by imprisonment for a period of two years. I make a Community Correction Order for 18 months. Conditions of that order are that you be under the supervision of a probation officer, that you attend educational and other programmes, including the EQUIPS aggression programme, as directed by a probation officer, and that you undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency as directed by a probation officer. You will have to report to a probation officer at 8 Griffiths Street, Devonport by 5.00pm on 15 May 2025. I make a compensation order in favour of the agency known as “Homes Tasmania” in the sum of $655.01, and I order the forfeiture of the hatchet, the value of which I declare to be $10.