STATE OF TASMANIA v DEEKAN FRANK JACKSON 23 JULY 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PORTER AJ
Deekan Jackson, the defendant, has pleaded guilty to one count of assault and two counts of strangulation, all committed during one incident on 3 August 2023. The complainant is his partner as at the time of the offending, and the woman with whom he has a daughter, then three months old. It seems the relationship had been a little problematic in that a police family violence order was made against the defendant on 23 October 2022, the primary condition of which was that he was not to threaten, harass, abuse or assault the complainant. The immediate background to the offending is that on the evening of 2 August 2023, the complainant and her mother picked up the defendant from work and they went to where the defendant and the complainant were then living. Alcohol was purchased along the way. At some early point, the mother left. The defendant started drinking and playing loud music. He then became rude and abusive to the complainant, calling her a dog and telling her she was stupid. The child was present. The defendant continued to drink and abuse the complainant, at one stage becoming angry when she asked him to turn the music down.
At around midnight, the complainant went to bed and was lying next to the child, who had been put into that bed earlier. Shortly after, the defendant went into the bedroom, pushed a mobile phone into the complainant’s face, striking her left eye causing her pain and a red mark. They went to the lounge room. The complainant told the defendant to stay there, and she went back to the bedroom and lay down to sleep. He stayed on in the lounge room and continued to drink and play loud music. At about 1.00am he returned to the bedroom and after yelling loudly at the complainant, got onto the bed, grabbed her from behind and wrapped his right arm around her throat in a headlock. He pulled her back towards him and tightened his arm. The complainant struggled to breathe and as she tried to escape, she hit her lip causing it to bleed. After managing to get free from the headlock, the defendant pushed her head face down into the mattress with both hands. He pressed a pillow into the back of her head and held her face down on the mattress. The complainant estimates this went on for about a minute. She was concerned about the child next to them. She told him she could not breathe and pinched him to make him let her go. After he left the bedroom, the complainant contacted police on the emergency number. When officers arrived he told them that he had “fucked up”, that he should not have done what he did, and that he should not have got alcohol. The complainant did not receive medical treatment, but photographs of injuries show facial bruising to the left side under the eye and a cut right lower lip.
The defendant is now 27 years old, 25 at the time. He has a recorded history of offending which includes convictions for summary drug matters and an associated driving with a prescribed illicit drug present in the system; in this case MDMA. A more recent drink driving offence committed in December 2022, saw him fined the sum of $2,000. Of some greater relevance is a conviction and moderate fine in January 2023 for injuring property, the property being an internal door at the premises where the two parties lived. Of course, this present incident happened only about seven months after that court appearance. Since this incident, on 9 May 2025, he was convicted of a breach of family violence order by entering accommodation where the complainant was then staying. However, this was described as a technical breach which arose due to a misunderstanding.
I have the benefit of counsel’s submissions and report from Community Corrections dated 22 July. As to the defendant’s other personal circumstances, he and his five siblings were raised by his father, his parents having separated when he was three. His mother is interstate; their relationship is strained, and he has had little to do with her. He was raised and schooled on the northwest coast. Quickly after school, he became involved in the fishing industry. He is presently employed by a major fishing enterprise. He was brought up with fishing, and the sea is very much a part of his life. He has recently purchased a yacht and wants to sail with his family. He is undertaking a boat skipper’s certificate course. Ultimately, he would like to operate his own fishing boat. Excessive drinking seems to be at the heart of the offending, although he also claims a lack of sleep contributed. His history of drinking starts when he was 15. I was told that he has now not consumed alcohol since this incident. The defendant suffers from a depressive/anxiety disorder and a psychiatric evaluation is pending. He and the complainant have been together for about three years. He wants to continue the relationship with the complainant and to have his family with him. In this respect, I note the terms of the victim impact statement, a prominent part of which is that the bail conditions imposed after the charge, and which meant the two had to stay apart, have been detrimental to the complainant rather than helpful to her as a victim. She found it extremely difficult for her as a mother and as a partner without the defendant’s presence. Since the offending, she has had to raise their daughter entirely on her own, which emotionally she has found incredibly challenging. She describes the defendant as a caring, loving and devoted father and partner, and believes she would benefit greatly, emotionally and mentally, from having him present in their lives. To her, since the incident, he has shown he understands the seriousness of his action and she confirms his abstinence from alcohol. In fact, I was told that as the bail conditions and the family violence order then in force permitted it, she has been living with the defendant at his family home in Stanley. The defendant has acknowledged unacceptable behaviours in this, and a previous relationship. That of itself has some significance both for the fact of it, and his acknowledgement. I was told that the defendant is extremely remorseful. He is determined to maintain his abstinence from alcohol and to demonstrate that he is capable of behaving responsibly in a relationship. Counsel suggests that the child did not wake up during the incident and although there may have been some risk of physical harm, I must say her age and state of sleep would suggest an absence of perception. Counsel acknowledged that the plea came very late in the proceedings, in fact after a jury had been empanelled but before evidence commenced, but the stance taken until that point was explained on the basis that there was an indication the complainant was resiling from her assertions of being unable to breathe and to his generally high anxiety levels. Community Corrections has assessed the defendant as unsuitable for home detention for a number of reasons including employment difficulties and his mental health issues. He is also deemed unsuitable for community service but is suitable for a community correction order involving supervision with focus on his anger and the relationship with alcohol consumption and offending, and on his mental health issues.
Mr Jackson, as courts have said many times, violence within a relationship is an insidious, prevalent and very serious problem in society. It involves a significant breach of trust and can have devastating impacts on the victim, physically and emotionally. Strangulation is a serious form of violence because of the inherent dangers in it. It carries with it high risks. It is common in the domestic abuse context and is indicative of an exercise of power and control. This must have been a very frightening experience for your partner. Condemnation of this sort of behaviour and attempting to deter others from behaving similarly, are paramount considerations. You have also shown that the sentence must be one which is designed to deter you from this sort of conduct and defending generally. At the same time, I take into account your age, personal circumstances, your employment situation, and your, so far at least, successful attempt to stop drinking, together with your stated desire to behave in a way that keeps your family together. The seriousness of what you did warrants detention of some description and in this case, imprisonment is the appropriate sanction, but the execution of the relevant term can be properly suspended on conditions. You are convicted of the crimes and sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment which is wholly suspended on conditions; first, that you not commit any offence punishable by imprisonment for a period of two years, and second, that you be subject to the supervision of a probation officer for period of 12 months on the following terms:
a) you must, during the 12 month period, undergo assessment and treatment for alcohol dependency as directed by a probation officer;
b) you must not consume alcohol during that period and must submit to testing for alcohol use as directed by a probation officer; and
c) you must, during the 12 month period, submit to medical, psychological or psychiatric assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer.
As part of this order, I need to direct you to report to a probation officer at 46 Mount Street, Burnie, by 5.00 pm tomorrow.