PENNEYSTON P B

STATE OF TASMANIA v BRADY PETER PENNEYSTON 1 JULY 2019

COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE                           PEARCE J

 Brady Penneyston, you plead guilty to assault and causing grievous bodily harm. Both crimes were committed against Stuart Rainbird in the course of the same series of events on 2 June 2018. Mr Rainbird is the father of your former partner Nikki Rainbird. You and Miss Rainbird were in a relationship for about three or four years until you separated in May 2018. You have one child together born in February 2018 who was then and is still in Miss Rainbird’s full time care. You were upset and angry about the breakup and you thought that you were not being allowed proper access to your child. This came to a head on the day of the crime. Miss Rainbird was back living with her parents in Sandford. During the course of that afternoon and evening you sent Miss Rainbird more than 120 text messages and called her more than 70 times. The messages were highly abusive and threatening. They contain repeated threats of violence against Miss Rainbird and her family and threats to burn their house down. Miss Rainbird was distressed. She had been out and when she arrived home at about 11pm she told her family of your threats. Despite the late hour you sent a message signalling your intention to pick up your child. You drove to the house. Knowing what you planned Mr Rainbird went to the end of the long driveway to keep watch. He saw you get out of your car and approached you. You shouted at him, then grabbed him, wrestled him to the ground and punched him about ten times near his left eye. You then returned to your car and drove it towards the house. Mr Rainbird followed on foot. By this time you had been into the house and come out again. Mr Rainbird drove your car from where you had left it and asked you to get in the car and drive off. His purpose was to ask you to leave, but you perceived is as a threat. Meanwhile, Miss Rainbird’s brother heard the yelling and ran towards you. You picked up a large rock and struck Mr Rainbird to the right side of his face before then driving off.

The police were notified. Mr Rainbird was taken to hospital. His right jaw was broken in three places. That is the grievous bodily harm. He also suffered a laceration to his ear and soreness and swelling to both sides of his face. Fortunately there were no other facial fractures. He had surgery four days later to insert a plate and screws in his jaw. They were surgically removed three months later. In the meantime the injuries were debilitating and painful. He is left with some numbness on the right jaw which has a slight effect on his speech. In all he had five months off work and incurred surgical costs of around $6,000. No doubt the whole affair has been distressing for him. His victim impact statement describes the loss of trust which is a common effect of crimes of this nature. Overall however, it is fortunate for him and you that he seems to have made a good recovery.

It is an aggravating factor that you committed this crime while you were subject to an undertaking to be of good behaviour entered into on 2 August 2017 for a related offence. You pleaded guilty to assaulting Miss Rainbird on 27 December 2016 by, late at night in a public place in central Hobart, pushing her over and then climbing onto her to prevent her from running away.

You were 21 when the crime was committed. You are still a young man. Generally, young persons are entitled to leniency and prison should be a last resort. There is a considerable public interest in keeping youthful offenders who have not been in serious trouble before from the corrupting influence of prison and maximizing the chance of reform. Since leaving school you have consistently held employment and you have recently obtained an apprenticeship in a carpentry business. You have a supportive family. The State accepts that you did not intend to seriously injure Mr Rainbird, but by your plea you admit that you realised that the blow you inflicted was likely to do so and acted regardless of that risk. You pleaded guilty but not until the just before your trial was due to commence. You have not demonstrated any remorse. The State did not dispute your counsel’s assertion that, both before you punched Mr Rainbird, and later when you struck him with a rock, you believed that some force was necessary to defend yourself. However taking into account the number and nature of the blows, you went far beyond what was reasonably necessary.

The factors favouring lenience must be balanced against the need for a sentence which gives weight to general and specific deterrence, denunciation, punishment and vindication of the victim. Courts know that situations of relationship breakdown create high emotion and a real risk of violence. As far as is possible, sentences must make clear that people who commit offences of this type will be punished in the hope that others will think twice before acting in a similar way. You acted after a day of angry and irrational behaviour. You attacked Mr Rainbird in his home and when he was attempting to protect his daughter. You assaulted him by multiple blows and then, after having an opportunity to desist, you struck him with a weapon and caused significant injury. The damage you did could have been much worse. You displayed no remorse. When the police interviewed you two days later you sought to minimise your responsibility for the situation you had created and falsely claimed that Mr Rainbird was the aggressor.

I have decided that, in all the circumstances, it is appropriate to make a home detention order. You have been assessed as suitable for such an order. I would otherwise have sent you to prison. Your crimes are violent offences, but arise from the breakdown of your relationship. With the passage of time, it is not my opinion that you pose a significant ongoing risk of violence during the operational period of the order. Although a home detention order is less onerous and punitive than prison, it is still a significant restriction on your liberty and freedom of movement. You will be required to comply with onerous conditions. A home detention order may be for a maximum period of 18 months. I think that in your case, given the seriousness of what you did, 18 months is the appropriate period. It is relevant to the length of the period that, if I had ordered prison, I would have ordered parole, and no question of parole arises here.

Brady Penneyston, you are convicted on both counts on the indictment. I impose one sentence. I make a home detention order. The operative period of the order is 18 months from today. I specify the premises at which you are to reside during the operational period of the order as Unit 2/15 Taylor Crescent Bridgewater. I order that immediately upon your leaving court you report to the office of Community Corrections at Highfield House, 114 Bathurst St, Hobart, for induction into this order, and an explanation as to its full terms. The order will be subject to all of the core conditions set out in the Sentencing Act 1997, s 42AD(1). They will be set out in the order that you will be given. I specify that you must be at the home detention premises at all times unless for a relevant reason. In short, that means that you must be at those premises unless there is a need for urgent medical treatment, there is a serious risk of death or injury, or you already have the approval of a probation officer to be absent. It will be for the probation officer to determine what to approve so as to allow for your employment, contact with your child or for any other purpose. The conditions will include that you submit to electronic monitoring, that you not commit another offence punishable by imprisonment and that you comply with all directions given to you by your probation officer. I impose special conditions that:

  • you must submit to the supervision of a probation officer as required by that officer;
  • you must not take any illicit or prohibited substances. Illicit and prohibited substances include any controlled drug as defined by the Misuse of Drugs Act 2001, and any medication containing an opiate, benzodiazepine, bupropion, hydrochloride or pseudoephedrine, unless you provide written evidence from your medical professional that you have been prescribed the relevant medication;
  • you must submit to medical, psychological, psychiatric or physical or mental health assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer;
  • you must maintain an active mobile phone service, provide the contact details to Community Corrections and be contactable at all times.

This order comes into effect immediately. You must understand that if you do not comply with the conditions, imprisonment is likely. If you breach the order by committing another offence, the order must be cancelled unless there are exceptional circumstances, and in that case imprisonment would be highly likely.

I record that I am satisfied on the admission of the defendant that he failed to comply with terms of the undertaking given to a magistrate on 2 August 2017, however given the sentence that I have just imposed, and that the undertaking has now expired, I make no further order.