STATE OF TASMANIA v EZRA DANIEL KRZYWOKULSKI 6 JUNE 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE BRETT J
Mr Krzywokulski, you have pleaded guilty to one count of assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. The facts of the case are that on the night in question which was 27 May 2024 you were at home. You had consumed a lot of alcohol and had become intoxicated. I accept that was contributed to and also superimposed on the effects of mental illness, in particular depression that you were suffering at the time. Your mental illness is not only depression but that was what was operative on the night in question. You were yelling loud enough to be heard by neighbours. For one reason or another the neighbours believed that you were there with another person, a female, and quite properly became concerned and rang the police. The police arrived at your premises and during the course of your interaction with them you went into the premises and took possession of a relatively large knife. I accept that the knife had been purchased by you recently for the purposes for domestic use, cooking, but you went and obtained it in order to take it back outside and threaten police, which is what you did.
I accept that you had no intention to actually attack the police with the knife. Your intention, which was formed in your drunken state, was to entice the police to think that you were going to attack them so that they would shoot you. In that way, you were hoping to commit suicide. This is something that had happened at least once before according to the medical material that has been provided to me.
It is, of course, the fact that although you had no intention to attack the police, and therefore they were not actually at risk of being attacked with the knife, they did not know that. In fact, your intention was to have them believe that they were about to be attacked so they would discharge their firearms. They had produced their firearms because of your presence near them with the knife.
I think there was a high risk that things could have developed in a way that ended up with one or more of them discharging their firearm at you. On any view of it, you put the police offices concerned in a terrible position and effectively transferred the depression you were feeling and the effect of your mental illness onto them by putting them in this terrible position. There was a high risk and potential for them to actually discharge the firearm and even to kill you and if that had happened, that would be a shocking thing for someone to have to do and would have caused enormous psychological injury to the police officer concerned. As it is, the pressure they would have been under at the time would have been enormous in any event and even though I do not have a victim impact statement, I am sure there was a great potential for the officer concerned to suffer significant and long-lasting consequences.
I should say before I move away from the facts, that I do accept that there was no other person involved in this. The neighbour called the police saying that they had heard a female voice, but I accept that there was no female on the premises and no female involved in this at all. The problem is what you did outside with the knife.
I think that your conduct has a high degree of objective seriousness. Although I understand why it was selfish because of your mental health issues and your intoxication, your conduct was extremely selfish. I am glad you are nodding when I say that.
You are 48 years of age. I am not going to go through the reports, I have read them. You do have a criminal history, it does involve many examples of breaching family violence orders. I note that you have not been convicted of an offence of actual violence until you committed this one. Further, you had not been convicted of a prior offence since 2018 and I accept that you have not been convicted of any offence since this occurred.
You have had a problematic past. You had a difficult childhood which involved violence within the family home. You had set yourself on a career path which was going well but your mental health issues and associated problems with alcohol caught up with you and have derailed this promising future. Whether or not you can get back on track is still a moot question. I accept that you have the mental health problems that have been described in the reports, in particular the report of Dr Jordan. It is a complicated question as to the extent of mitigation provided by your mental health difficulties, I accept that they were involved in the commission of this offence, but so also was the consumption of alcohol. I am not suggesting for one moment that those two things exist separately, the alcohol use is a product and a symptom of your overall mental health problems, but of course your use of alcohol in this particular night in respect of the commission of the offence cannot be regarded as a mitigating factor. I think it is more relevant to the question of specific deterrence and associated questions such as rehabilitation and what you are going to do in the future, including whether there is a risk that you will commit similar offences in the future. I accept you have insight into this problem, and that you have taken steps to address the problem through medical and psychological assistance, including attendance at Holyoake. I accept that the work you are doing is having a positive effect and there is no reason why that cannot continue in the future. The pre-sentence report has assessed you as a medium risk of committing further offences. The author was also obviously satisfied that you were taking sufficient steps to deal with your underlying problems, and for that reason did not recommend a community-based supervision order.
I should say also that I accept that you have insight into your actions on the night and are remorseful for your actions. That has also prompted you to take the positive steps to deal with your underlying problems. Your plea of guilty was entered at the earliest opportunity. It is not your fault that it has taken this long to get before me. The early plea of guilty means that the police officers concerned did not have to give evidence and is also consistent with your acceptance of responsibility and your remorse. I accept all of that.
I think general deterrence does have a very significant role to play. Police officers have an enormously responsible and difficult task in relation to the protection of the community. They did not ask to be put in this position on the night concerned, you put them in this position. They need to be protected and supported by the Courts. Those who would perpetrate this type of conduct including using a weapon to threaten police, need to understand that the courts will take such a matter very seriously and impose appropriate punishment. I think in this case that general deterrence requires the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment. Having said that, when I have regard to the mitigating factors, your early plea of guilty, your acceptance of responsibility, and the impact of the mental health issues, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to wholly suspend that sentence. That is not necessarily a soft option for you, because that suspended sentence which will be significant will hang over your head for the relevant period. Not only will such a sentence send a message that people cannot act in this way but it will also provide you with appropriate motivation to continue your rehabilitative efforts.
I do not intend to impose any other form of community-based order given the recommendation of the pre-sentence report.
The orders I make are that you are convicted of the crime to which you pleaded guilty. You are sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment. That sentence will be wholly suspended for a period of two years on condition that you are to not commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during that period. I make the forfeiture order sought by the Crown in respect of the knife.