STATE OF TASMANIA v WAYNE MICHAEL LUDBEY 21 AUGUST 2026
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE JAGO J
Wayne Michael Ludbey, you have pleaded guilty to two counts of assault. Both counts arise from an incident which occurred on 12 September 2023 and involved the same complainant. At the time of the crimes, you were aged 29 and the complainant was aged 17.
The background to your criminal conduct is as follows. In the months leading up to this incident, you had come to believe that the complainant was stealing items from your storage container, including hunting knives, boots and tools. On 12 September, at around 12 noon, you saw the complainant walking in Strahan. You believed he was wearing a pair of work boots which belonged to you. This prompted you to send a text message to your partner which read “I just seen [name of complainant] walking, I’m waiting for him, I’m going to get him”. About half an hour later you confronted the complainant as he was walking with another youth along the Strahan Esplanade. You called out to him and demanded the return of your property.
You pulled up adjacent to where the complainant was walking. You were angry. You grabbed hold of the complainant by the scruff of his jumper and pushed him up against your utility. You then pushed his head into the vehicle, causing it to strike the top of the utility. This caused the complainant pain, and blood streamed from his head into his right eye. Seeing the complainant injured did not cause you to hesitate and reflect, rather you started to force the complainant into the front passenger seat of your utility.
Around this time, your brother, Brady Ludbey, pulled up in the vicinity. It is not clear from the facts that have been presented to me whether his attendance there was pre-planned, or entirely coincidental. In any event, he came to assist you and joined in the assault upon the complainant. The two of you continued to physically force the complainant into the front passenger seat of your vehicle.
Once he was in the vehicle, your brother wrapped a seatbelt around his neck. The complainant was struggling to free himself. He felt as though he was choking. Whilst your brother was holding the complainant in the front passenger seat, using the seatbelt to restrain him, you went to the driver’s seat of the utility, and readied yourself to drive away. The front passenger side door was closed, trapping the complainant inside the vehicle. You drove off with the complainant. I have no doubt, given the way in which he was forced into the vehicle, that the complainant was scared and entirely uncertain as to what fate awaited him.
You apparently told your brother that you were going to take him to the police station. You did not but instead drove the complainant to your property at [address redacted]. That is where the storage container, from which items had gone missing, was located. On the journey, you demanded the return of some property from the complainant. He told you he had no idea what you were talking about, nor why you were accusing him.
Upon arrival at [address redacted], the complainant exited the vehicle. You kicked his legs out from under him as he did so. Each time the complainant tried to stand up, you would kick his legs again, forcing the complainant back to the ground. This happened three or four times. At around that point, your brother also arrived at the shipping container. The two of you then tied up the complainant. You used an Atlas strap to tie up the complainant’s hands. He was unable to resist this because you were on top of him as you were doing it. The strap was pulled tight and the complainant’s fingers felt numb. Your brother assisted you in tying the complainant up by handing you several cable zip ties, which you also used to restrain the complainant. You then forcefully pushed the complainant into the shipping container. More zip ties were used around the complainant’s legs to prevent him from moving. You left the shipping container for a moment, but your brother stood between the complainant and the only exit, ensuring he could not leave. By this point, the likelihood of that was all but non-existent given the complainant was restrained with both his hands and legs tied. Your brother standing guard over him, could only have been an additional intimidatory factor.
Shortly thereafter, you returned to the shipping container holding a running chainsaw. You revved the chainsaw and then pushed the chain against the complainant’s neck. The chain was stationary at the time. At this point, your brother told you to put the chainsaw down, and you did. The violence did not stop, however. You picked up a piece of wood and hit the complainant across the face and arm. You told the complainant to turn around. He did so. You continued to strike him with the piece of wood to the wrists, approximately 10 to 15 times. You then collected a hose and sprayed water onto the complainant. You left him trapped inside the shipping container wet, restrained and undoubtedly very frightened. The door to the shipping container was padlocked with a chain, leaving the complainant trapped inside.
Whilst the complainant was locked inside the shipping container, you and your brother went to the residence of a Ms Marosz, with whom the complainant had been living. You told Ms Marosz that you were looking for items that belonged to you. You searched the complainant’s room and some items were removed. Following your departure, Ms Marosz contacted the complainant’s father and reported her understanding of what had happened. The complainant’s father went to the home of Ms Marosz and whilst there, he saw you approaching in your vehicle. He called out to you “where’s my son, come and talk to me, I want my son back”. You just drove away. Obviously very concerned for his son’s welfare, the complainant’s father tried to contact him via his phone. He received no answer. You had possession of the complainant’s phone and at 12.57pm you called the complainant’s father and said, “I want my stuff back or you’ll never see your son again”. Not only did your actions cause harm to the complainant but such was your lack or restraint, that you were prepared to utter emotional threats to the complainant’s father. In my view, your conduct was disgraceful.
Whilst the complainant was trapped in the shipping container, he used a chisel to try and remove the zip ties. He was unsuccessful in doing so. Around 10 to 15 minutes later, you and your brother returned to the shipping container. Your brother used an angle grinder to open the door. The complainant was told to leave and go home. Your brother cut the ties from his arms and legs and returned his phone to him. You said to the complainant, “You’ve got to go home. Your Dad’s schitzing”.
The complainant was left with several injuries. He had significant bruising to his left eye and cuts to the right side of his forehead, below his hairline. He had a scratch on his right cheek and a cut on his right eyebrow. His lip was swollen. He had red marks on his left cheek, bruising and redness on his left ear. There was redness with abrasion to both sides of his neck. He had redness and markings on his wrists from the ties and straps which had been tightened around them. He also had markings on his legs and a long linear mark across his left arm where he had been struck repeatedly with the piece of wood.
The complainant was transported to the Northwest Regional Hospital. He underwent x-rays and CT scans. Ultimately, his injuries were treated conservatively.
Whilst the physical injuries were not severe, I have no doubt the psychological harm occasioned by your violence was significant. To drag a youth from the street, force him into your car, and leave him trapped inside a shipping container, after tying him up, threatening him with a chainsaw, hosing him down and striking him repeatedly with a stick, would, without doubt in my view, leave the complainant deeply traumatised. I note the submissions of your Counsel, presumably based upon your instructions, to the effect that the complainant’s trauma could not have been particularly significant given some posts he made on social media and his attendance at a social function following the incident. I reject that submission. Trauma manifests in a number of ways, and there are particular complexities associated with how young people manage and reveal trauma. I have received an impact statement from the complainant, and I am satisfied that he was, quite understandably, terrified during the ordeal and the experience continues to adversely impact him in several ways. For you to suggest otherwise, demonstrates in my view, a serious lack of insight into the gravity of your offending and the harm you caused.
You are now 32 years of age. You have no recent relevant prior criminal history, although there is a somewhat dated matter relating to offences committed against police in 2016. There has been no further offending since the commission of these crimes, which is now all but three years ago. You were born and raised in Strahan and have lived there your entire life. You grew up in a happy and supportive family. You are in a stable relationship to which there are two children, a five-year-old and a one-year-old. You have a strong industrial history. Following completion of your schooling, you undertook an apprenticeship in your father’s building business. You are a qualified carpenter and joiner. You have also worked in the mining industry and as a deckhand in the fishing industry. In 2018, you started your own building firm. You have one fulltime employee and sub-contract a number of other trades people. You are an active participant in the community. You donate both time and money to a number of sporting organisations. Prior to the commission of these crimes, you were a member of the clay target club. After these events, however, your firearm licence was seized, and your involvement in that club came to an end.
I take into account, generally, the 49-character references that have been provided. They all attest to your good character, describing you variously as being honest, respectful, reliable, courteous, kind, hardworking and generous towards others. They speak of this incident as being out of character for you and not consistent with the personal attributes that the respective authors have observed.
To be frank, I find it difficult to reconcile many of the comments contained within the character references with this egregious behaviour. Generally speaking, individuals who are described as “a community leader, kind, responsible, respectful, trustworthy and friendly” do not behave in this way.
The comments contained in the various character references are, however, consistent with the absence of relevant prior criminal history, and the absence of any further wrongdoing since the commission of these crimes. I accept that your behaviour on this day was out of character, but I am not in a position to conclude that specific deterrence has no work to do. The gravity of the offending, the premeditated nature of it and what I perceive to be a lack of appreciation of the seriousness of your conduct, strongly suggests otherwise.
I take into account your plea of guilty, but it was not an early plea. The matter proceeded through preliminary proceedings and was awaiting trial in this Court for some time before the plea of guilty was indicated. I do not consider the plea of guilty to be reflective of remorse. In my view, it reflects a reluctance acceptance of the inevitable. There are a number of aggravating features associated with this crime. The complainant was a youth. Although you claim you did not appreciate his age, given you knew who the complainant was and you knew the complainant’s father, you must have appreciated, at the very least, that he was quite a young person. Further, this was a joint attack. Both you and your brother joined in depriving the complainant of his liberty and inflicting violence upon him. Your conduct involved an element of vigilantism. The conduct went on for some time and there was plenty of opportunity for you to reconsider your actions. Even when confronted by the complainant’s upset father, you did not desist, instead you escalated your behaviour and suggested he would never see his son again.
I note the sentence that I imposed on your brother. It is broadly relevant, but he was sentenced on a somewhat different factual basis. The State accepted that his criminal responsibility ended when he handed the cable ties to you at the shipping container and thus he was not to be sentenced for the violence that occurred within the container, which is obviously a very grave part of your conduct. Parity is not strictly applicable.
Whilst I accept you may have believed that the complainant had stolen from you, that in no way justifies what you did. I am told you had reported the thefts to police. You needed to let the police investigation run its course. Instead, you set upon a plan to extract retribution. Those who think it is appropriate to take the law into their own hands, need to very clearly understand, it is not. The Court needs to send a very clear message to both you and others who may be minded to behaving in this way, that such conduct is unacceptable.
I had you assessed as to your suitability for home detention, but after very careful reflection, I have determined that given the gravity of the offending, home detention is not appropriate. Clearly, a period of imprisonment is warranted. The question I have grappled with is whether I ought to suspend any part or all of that sentence. As noted, I regard the objective seriousness of your offending, and your moral culpability, as high. This was pre-meditated violence, carried out for vindictive reasons. This was not a spur of the moment emotive reaction to an unfolding scenario. Whist I accept the physical harm caused to the complainant was not overly significant, that is only one part of the harm caused. This was, quite frankly, outrageous conduct and I have determined that the need for general deterrence and denunciation is such, that it would be inappropriate to suspend the entirety of the period of imprisonment I intend to impose.
I make the following orders. You are convicted of two counts of assault. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 14 months from today. The last 10 months of that sentence will be suspended for a period of two years, on condition that you commit no offence punishable by imprisonment during that time. I make a compensation order in favour of [name of complainant], in an amount to be assessed.