STATE OF TASMANIA v GRANT DOUGLAS LINDSAY 26 MARCH 2026
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE BRETT J
Mr Lindsay, a jury has found you guilty of one count of assaulting your daughter. You were acquitted of two other counts of assault. You have pleaded guilty to one count of unlawfully injuring her property arising from the same incident.
That incident took place on 15 July 2023. You were affected by alcohol and angry with your daughter because she had stored her personal property in a shed at the back of your mother’s house at Hadspen. She had refused to move that property despite you asking her to do so. You regarded that shed as yours, and you wanted her property out of there. She and her sister were in the Low Head for the day when you called to seek a lift to Hadspen. You made it clear that you were angry with the complainant and told her sister that you intended to set her belongings on fire. In the end, you made your own way to your mother’s house. Your daughters arrived there soon after you. By that time, you had put all of your daughter’s property in a pile outside the shed and you were pouring petrol over it, obviously with the intention of setting it on fire. Dousing the property in petrol constitutes the count of unlawfully injuring property.
What happened next was the subject of contested evidence on the trial. It is clear that your daughter ran towards you as you were dousing her property in petrol, but there is a dispute as to what happened next. Given the verdicts, I think it is highly probable that the jury acted on the evidence of your other daughter. I also accept her evidence, she was a considered and patently honest witness. She saw you commit the assault. In particular, she saw you and her sister arguing. At some point in the argument, you grabbed the complainant by the hair pulled her to the ground and then stood over her with a clenched fist, as if poised to punch her. The witness did not see you deliver the punch, and I must accept in the light of the other verdicts that you did not punch her at this time. I am satisfied that this was an act of violent intimidation which arose from your uncontrolled anger and was not triggered by a physical attack on you by her. However, it is clear that shortly after this, she suffered an injury to her mouth which caused bleeding. In the light of the verdicts, I must accept that this injury was caused when you struck her in lawful self-defence, specifically because she had grabbed you by the testicles and you slapped her in the face as a defensive reaction. You are not criminally responsible for this blow or the resulting injury.
Notwithstanding the role played by the complainant in these events, it is clear that you bear a significant degree of culpability for the whole incident and the crimes committed by you. You caused the confrontation by your drunken and aggressive actions. It can be inferred from the state your mother was in when she rang your daughters shortly after your arrival there, that you were in an aggressive and angry state at that time. Pouring petrol over your daughter’s belongings even with the appearance of an intention of setting them on fire was a disgraceful thing to do. Her distressed reaction upon seeing this can be well understood. The assault perpetrated by you was intimidating and the actions of a bully. Having you hold her down by the hair while you stood over her with your fist clenched, clearly on the brink of punching her, would have been a demeaning and frightening experience. These comments apply equally to the act of dousing her property in petrol with the intention of burning it. There was a clear imbalance between you both in age and physical strength. Your actions in my view constitute a clear repudiation of your parental responsibility.
It would seem from your criminal history that you have a propensity for conduct of this nature. There are a number of convictions related to crimes of violence, including family violence. You have been sentenced to both suspended and actual imprisonment for such offences. In 2013 and 2015, you were convicted of common assaults. In 2019, you were sentenced to imprisonment for various offences which include breaches of a family violence order and four counts of common assault. On 20 June 2022, you were sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for offences which included a number of breaches of a family violence order and a common assault. You were subject to that sentence at the time you committed these crimes but clearly, you were not deterred by that sentence from acting in the way you did on this day. The suspended sentences have since been activated for further breaches of a family violence order. Your prior convictions, including for a number of drink-driving offences, are also consistent with your long-standing problem with alcohol abuse. It is clear to me that specific deterrence is a significant sentencing factor in this case. In other words, by the sentence, you need to learn to keep your hands to yourself.
In all of the circumstances, I am satisfied that a term of imprisonment is the appropriate sentence in this case. I will take into account your plea of guilty to the property crime when assessing the term of the sentence. I will also take into account the delay in having this matter come to trial. You are convicted of the crimes of assault and unlawfully injuring property and sentenced to imprisonment for a global term of five months. That sentence will be backdated to commence on the date you were remanded in custody, plus one day which is 19 March 2026.
I make a compensation order in favour of Erika Lindsay in a sum to be assessed and I adjourn assessment of that sum sine die.