STATE OF TASMANIA v RICKY JOHN IZARD 5 JULY 2019
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Ricky Izard pleads guilty to aggravated burglary, manslaughter and perverting justice. Not long after 9am on 1 January 2017, Mark Jones went to a unit in Newnham occupied by Cody Lee after having received a tip off that Bradley Breward was there. Mr Jones believed that Mr Breward had stolen his car about a month before, and had been obsessively searching for him in the meantime. His aim was to obtain information about the car by means of actual and threatened violence. Mr Izard was a friend and employee of Mr Jones. At Mr Jones’ request he accompanied him for backup and assistance. Mr Izard knew that Mr Jones had been looking for Mr Breward and why he was looking for him. He knew that Mr Jones had offered a monetary reward for information about Mr Breward’s location. Over the course of some weeks he had played an active part in the search. He had been in direct contact with Mr Breward by social media and threatened him about Mr Jones intent. He well knew the seriousness of what was planned for when Mr Breward was found and had made suggestions about that himself. When Mr Jones and Mr Izard went to the unit, both men were disguised. Mr Izard wore a black balaclava and Mr Jones had a cloth over his face. Both wore gloves. Mr Izard armed himself with a screwdriver. When they entered the unit Mr Breward was on the couch in the lounge room and Mr Lee was in his bedroom. Mr Izard used the screwdriver to confront Mr Lee to demand that he stay in his bedroom and not intervene.
By entering Mr Lee’s unit with the common intention of assaulting Mr Breward, Mr Izard committed the crime of aggravated burglary. After entering the unit Mr Jones committed a series of violent assaults of Mr Breward in the nature of an interrogation. Mr Izard assisted this by helping to bind Mr Breward’s hands with tape that the men took for that purpose. Mr Jones’ acts included punching Mr Breward numerous times to his head and body, kicking him forcefully to his torso and, after placing a wash cloth on his face, pouring water onto it so as to make it difficult for Mr Breward to breathe. After coming from the bedroom Mr Izard not only stood and watched much of this conduct, but punched Mr Breward himself several times. Despite Mr Breward repeatedly denying any knowledge of the car Mr Jones continued to assault him. He placed a plastic bag over Mr Breward’s head. On the first occasion he did this Mr Izard said “Let him breathe.” However when Mr Jones put the bag over Mr Breward’s head again, and counted to 40, Mr Breward lost consciousness and died. It was Mr Jones’ act of applying the bag for a second time which killed Mr Breward. Mr Jones was found guilty by a jury of murder.
After Mr Breward died, Mr Jones performed CPR in some form, but no-one called an ambulance or sought medical help. Instead, Mr Izard, over the course of the next day or so, performed a series of acts designed to cover up his and Mr Jones’ crimes thereby perverting justice. Mr Jones and Mr Izard wrapped the body in a tarpaulin and a bean bag someone emptied and put it in the back of Mr Jones’ utility. They went to the supermarket to buy products to clean the unit. They then spent hours driving around northern Tasmania looking for somewhere to dispose of the body. Eventually, unable to find anywhere, they purchased an inflatable raft, drove to Latrobe to collect weights, and then to Lake Eugenana. There, the two men carried the body to the lake, removed the clothes and affixed the weights to it. They inflated the raft and put the body into it. Mr Jones then, while Mr Izard cleaned up, swam the body in the raft to the middle of the lake and then put it in the water. It sank to the bottom. The then drove to George Town where they went to a business premises and burned the evidence, including clothing and the deflated raft. When the police investigation eventually led to the defendant he lied to them during two interviews conducted on 2 February 2017. He eventually admitted his involvement on 3 February 2017. It is a factor in his favour that he told the police where the body could be found.
Mr Izard was 25 when this crime was committed. He is now 28. As a child he was neglected by his parents and exposed to violence, alcoholism and drug abuse. He developed addictions to alcohol and drugs himself which have plagued him through his life and led to crime. He has a long record but it is mostly for dishonesty and driving offences. He committed an aggravated robbery and serious assault on 21 September 2012, and was sentenced separately in 2014 and 2015 to a total term of 23 months, 11 months of which was suspended. He has been given some relatively short terms of actual and suspended imprisonment since then but not for violence. I accept that he now has some appreciation of the harm he has caused. He intends to address his addictions while in prison.
The defendant pleaded guilty to these crimes. He spared Mr Breward’s family of the ordeal of a trial, at least on his account, but it does not indicate genuine remorse, and the extent to which his plea facilitates justice is to be balanced against the benefit of avoiding the real risk to him of a conviction for murder. I accept the submission of the Director of Public Prosecutions that it is a serious example of all of the three crimes of aggravated burglary, manslaughter and pervert justice. He entered a private home intending violence in company with another man. What followed was a cruel and deliberate course of conduct intended to cause pain, suffering and distress. By his plea of guilty to manslaughter, Mr Izard admits that, although he did not cause or intend Mr Breward’s death, he is criminally responsible for it. He accepts that it was a probable consequence of the carrying out of their joint plan to assault Mr Breward until he gave information about the car that Mr Jones would do an act which caused Mr Breward’s death and which was intended to cause serious injury to his health, or which is commonly known to be likely to cause death or or serious injury to his health. Mr Izard is much younger than Mr Jones, and was subject to his direction to some extent, but Mr Izard was a willing participant in cruel and prolonged violence. He played an integral and active part in the events which led to Mr Breward’s death. He provided assistance in rendering Mr Breward defenceless, displayed aggression himself and did not withdraw from the plan at any time even though he watched what was going on. The conduct by which he perverted justice demonstrated an absence of remorse and a disregard for the law and authority. By helping to dispose of the body and destroy evidence as he did, he added to the gross indignity to which Mr Breward was subjected, increased the emotional and psychological impact of his death, and made identification of the cause of his death more difficult. I have read statements from Mr Breward’s, mother, father and step-mother of the terrible impact of his death. Mr Breward has a son who was aged three when his father died. The child’s life will also be profoundly affected by the loss of his father in ways which cannot yet be fully appreciated. The needless taking of a life is the overwhelming sentencing consideration.
I intend to impose one sentence. There is some overlap between the criminality involved in the three charges. The facts underlying the burglary and pervert justice charges could also have been regarded as factors which aggravate the manslaughter. I must avoid duplication of punishment and ensure that the sentence is a just and appropriate reflection of his total criminality. Eligibility for parole should only be permitted after Mr Izard has served the minimum term of imprisonment the Court considers to be required, taking into account all of the circumstances of the offence and the goals of condemnation, prevention, punishment and deterrence. He has been in custody since 2 February 2017 and so his sentence will commence then.
Ricky John Izard, you are convicted on each count on the indictment. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years from 2 February 2017. I order that you not be eligible for parole until you have served 6 years of that term.