STATE OF TASMANIA v HAMISH LIAM REDDY 18 SEPTEMBER 2026
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Hamish Reddy, you were found guilty by a jury of two counts of strangulation and one count of assault. You were acquitted of one count of assault but pleaded guilty to a further count. The crimes were committed during the same series of events on 25 June 2024 against your mother Jacqueline Saunders. At the time you were aged 24 and she was 60. It is for me to determine the factual basis of sentence, but the facts must be consistent with the verdicts. Facts adverse to you must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Facts in your favour must be established by you on the balance of probabilities. In this case, much of what occurred was not in dispute. To the extent that there were differences in the account given by your mother and the account given by you, the jury must have been satisfied of the truth of your mother’s account in almost all essential respects.
For a long time your relationship with your mother had not been a stable and affectionate one. You blamed her for things which had gone wrong in your life. Nevertheless, in early 2024 she agreed that you could stay with her when you returned from New South Wales, where you had been living. Your sister and her then partner also lived in the house but were not home at the time.
During the late afternoon on that day your mother was in the living room when you asked her for tobacco. When she said she had none you did not believe her and became annoyed and agitated. She was apprehensive about your reaction. She decided to leave and looked for her car keys in the adjacent sunroom. You stood in the doorway and told her that she was not going anywhere. She sat on the bed in that room. She told you that she wanted you to leave the house. In response you approached her, pushed her back onto the bed, grabbed her around the throat from above her and applied pressure. While doing so you told her that you hated her, you wanted to kill her and it would be easy to just snap her neck. She was struggling to breathe. You eventually let her go. She said that the pressure was applied for about a minute. Although it may not have been for quite that long the result was that she was short of breath when the pressure was released.
She began to look for her keys again. Still agitated you again approached her, pushed her down onto the bed again and applied pressure to her neck with your hand. She described a pressure with your fingers to one side of her neck, with the result that she again struggled for breath. She thought that this was for about a minute as well, during which time you were ranting at her. After you released her this time you punched her face near her jaw. There was conflict in the evidence about which side of her face was punched. However, the jury accepted that she was punched. I also had no reservations about her evidence. I believed what she said, and, to my observation, the photographs revealed injuries to both sides of her jaw, each consistent with the type of punch she described. She gave evidence of a further blow near her eye. You were acquitted of the charge arising from that evidence. In my view, nothing of consequence is to be inferred from that acquittal. Her evidence about that blow was less certain.
When she returned to the living room you followed her and pushed her to the ground. This was the assault you admitted by your plea of guilty. She heard you ranting in other parts of the house before you eventually left. She also left the house until she could be certain that your sister’s partner had returned and she was safe. She told him what had happened and the police were notified without delay. She also told her daughter when she arrived home. She sought medical attention from her general practitioner that evening and left early the following morning to stay with her sister in Hobart, where she made a statement to the police and attended the hospital for further examination.
You are not entitled to the mitigation a plea of guilty to all counts would have attracted. You were acquitted of one count but it was of marginal consequence and a trial was necessary in any event. Your personal circumstances were outlined by your counsel and in a pre-sentence report written by a probation officer. At the time of these crimes you were 24. You are now aged 26. Your parents separated and your father left when you were very young. Some of the ill felling you harboured towards your mother originated from this circumstance. You claim that she did not properly care for you but that claim is not accepted by the State and I treat it with great scepticism. In any event, it does not mitigate your crimes. As a young man, when you were 17, you served a short period of detention for assaulting her. Since then there have been no convictions of any relevance. You disengaged from education at an early stage. You lived with your father in Sydney as a young teenager, but you returned. When you were in Sydney at a later stage you held some employment, but your return was prompted by loss of that job. Since these crimes were committed you have been without stable accommodation. However you have a daughter who was born in Victoria some months ago. She is not in your care, but also not in the care of her mother. The pre-sentence report assesses you as requiring a high level of intervention. I will fashion a sentence which permits structured support in the community following your release so that you may be directed to programs and services. Hopefully the factors which contributed to this crime may be addressed.
Strangulation is regarded as a serious and particularly dangerous form of assault. It is commonly considered in a family violence context as indicative of domination and control. These crimes are not in that same context, but similar considerations apply. The type of force you applied carried a real risk of serious injury or even death, even if that was not what was intended. You are a large and strong man and you had a physical advantage over your mother. Fortunately, the injuries she received were restricted to relatively transient soreness and bruising, but the experience must have been highly traumatic. Everyone who saw her in the aftermath described her as profoundly distressed. The force you applied was accompanied by threats of serious harm. She feared a much more serious consequence. It is aggravating that you breached the trust inherent in the relationship between a son and mother, and the trust she placed in you by allowing you to live in her home. Her victim impact statement describes continuing feelings of fear and lack of safety.
You are convicted on the indictment, counts 1, 2, 3 and 5. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 18 months from 7 August 2026. I make no order as to parole, but suspend nine months of that term for 18 months from your release on the following conditions:
- You are not to commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during that period. If you breach that condition you will be required to serve the term unless that is unjust.
- During the 18 month operational period of the order, commencing on your release, you will be subject to the supervision of a probation officer. The conditions referred to in s 24(5B) of the Sentencing Act apply to this condition and will be set out in the order you will be given. These include that you must report to a probation officer at the office of Community Corrections in Launceston within three clear working days, you must submit to supervision and comply with the directions given by your probation officer, and you must not leave Tasmania without permission and you must notify of any change of address.
- In addition to the core conditions, the order will also include the following special conditions that you must, during the operational period of the order:
- submit to the supervision of a Community Corrections officer as required by that officer;
- attend educational and other programs, undergo assessment and treatment for alcohol or drug dependency, submit to testing for alcohol or drug use and submit to medical, psychological or psychiatric assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer;
- attend and complete the EQUIPS domestic abuse program as directed by a probation officer.