STATE OF TASMANIA v JOHN MAXWELL TATNELL 5 MARCH 2021
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PORTER AJ
The defendant, Mr Tatnell, has pleaded guilty to one count of wounding and one count of assault. These charges arise out of the one incident on 1 February 2020, and involve the same complainant, Nicholas Horne. At the time of the incident, Mr Horne had known the defendant for about three days. The defendant was staying at the home of a Ms Wright. The complainant had also been staying there. At some time in the early evening, an argument developed between the two men. The defendant threatened Mr Horne that he was going to kick his head in. Later, Ms Wright left the house leaving the two men alone. They argued over some drugs that Mr Horne had arranged for the defendant to purchase a few days beforehand. The defendant said he wanted his money back, at which point Mr Horne laughed and walked away into the kitchen. It seems that a scuffle developed, during which the defendant used a steak knife to stab Mr Horne in the chest. During all of this, an oil pot landed on the floor resulting in oil spreading. Both men slipped and ended up scuffling on the ground. The defendant put Mr Horne in a headlock and punched him to the head. He also stabbed Mr Horne twice in the left side. Mr Horne tried to escape the attack but was unable to. I was told that the knife blade broke from the knife handle at some stage. Ultimately, Mr Horne ran from the house and alerted a person living nearby to the fact of his injuries. Police and an ambulance were called. Police investigations revealed the defendant had been effectively badgering Mr Horne by way of various remarks. The police found a knife handle on the floor of the kitchen and a blade on the kitchen bench. DNA sampling of the handle effectively showed a match for the defendant, while a DNA profile found on the blade effectively matched Mr Horne. The defendant was arrested shortly after police were called and taken to the police station where he was interviewed. He admitted that he had been using methylamphetamine. He denied speaking to Mr Horne throughout the day. He said he was in the kitchen when Mr Horne came up behind him, took his, the defendant’s shorts and underpants off and described an apparent attempt at penile anal penetration. He said he had been having thoughts that people could hear. He said someone kept having anal sex with him, and he made a number of references to having been anally raped. He agreed that there was a discussion about the cost of some methylamphetamine as a result of the defendant being told Mr Horne had “ripped him off”. He agreed there was a knife involved but did not remember stabbing Mr Horne. He said he had been using methylamphetamine every day for the past month. Mr Horne sustained three wounds, one in the right anterior chest, two on the left posterior chest. The first wound was some 6 centimetres deep and caused a lung to collapse. This required an intercostal catheter to be inserted to drain a build-up of blood. The other two wounds were several centimetres deep. I have a victim impact statement from Mr Horne dated 25 February 2021. He was in hospital for five days during which he had to have a catheter inserted because he could not urinate. He could not move or sleep properly for about six weeks and had difficulty breathing. Breathing, he says, is still a problem for him. He easily becomes out of breath. He gets a stinging sensation in his chest which affects his ability to play with his children. After the event, he says he thought he was going to die. He could not breathe properly and could not move. He was lying helpless on the ground and coughing up blood. He still has dreams about what happened. He is now anxious and paranoid about his safety. He had to stop work as a tattooist as he found himself too shaky and nervous to do the work properly.
The defendant is now nearly 42; 40 at the time. He has a lengthy record of offending both here and interstate. That record includes crimes of violence. In New South Wales he has convictions in 1997 for assault, in December 1999 for two counts of assault committed on the one day, in February 2000 for two counts of assault again committed on the one day, in March 2004 for assault causing actual bodily harm in 2002 for which he was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, in 2006 for another count of the same crime, in 2013 for assault and in 2014 for two assaults. The last of those resulted in eight months’ imprisonment. These matters are interspersed with drug offences and ones of dishonesty. In Queensland, in February 2018 he was convicted of three counts of assault and one of going armed in public, but all committed in 2002, for which he received a partially suspended term of imprisonment. In this State there is a record from 2006 up to 2012, mostly for drug and dishonesty offences. I was told the defendant struggled with dyslexia during his primary school years. Due to literacy and concentration difficulties he left school before completing level 8. He had various types of employment over some years, including jobs in meat processing, seafood processing and on the carnival circuit. He has mental health problems of some long-standing, as well as what seems to be an intermittent but significant substance abuse issue. He first saw a psychiatrist in his early 20s, with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder being made about five years later. He is medicated for those conditions and receives a disability support pension as a consequence. He has not had any significant employment since the diagnosis. From about the same time as he saw the psychiatrist, he was using methylamphetamine heavily and experiencing visual hallucinations. This generally coincides with the commencement of the record of violence in New South Wales. I was told that he had not used methylamphetamine for a period of about six years up until shortly before this incident. He had returned to Tasmania to see his parents in George Town and was in Hobart staying with Ms Wright who was a friend. He started again using in the weeks before this incident, having been reintroduced to the drug by an associate in New South Wales. I was told that a psychiatric assessment had been carried out for the purposes of a determination of fitness to stand trial, and to address any possible psychoses present at the time. Apparently the report confirms the previously diagnosed schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and refers to admissions to hospitals and institutions due to mental health problems, both in New South Wales and Tasmania. It is not, however, asserted that these disorders had any bearing on this offending. A fixation with having been anally penetrated against his will in the past seems to be connected with methylamphetamine use. I was told that the psychiatric report says there is no suggestion of a drug induced psychosis on this occasion. However, the mental health and drug use are matters that provide relevant background. I note that the history of violence seems to coincide with drug abuse. The last violent offending was committed in 2014. In the time spent on remand since 1 February 2020, the defendant has been unable to access programs in prison. Due to COVID-19 restrictions and his parents’ lack of technology, he has had no contact with them. When his liberty is available to him he intends to see his family and to continue to travel. Ordinarily he leads a somewhat nomadic lifestyle in a 4-wheel drive vehicle out of which he lives. As to the wounding, the Crown does not accept that the complainant behaved in any way as described by the defendant, but accepts that the defendant’s condition was such that he believed the complainant was about to sexually assault him, in particular by way of an anal rape. What the defendant thought Mr Horne was doing provides some explanation but because it comes from a state of mind caused by illicit drug use, it is not otherwise of any real significance. Even if the mental state amounted to a psychosis, it does not give rise to mitigation; see R v Martin [2007] VSCA 291, 20 VR 14. The defendant accepts that the stab wound to the chest was intentional. It is also common ground that the subsequent two wounds were recklessly inflicted in the struggle that ensued. Obviously, this is a serious instance of the crime of wounding. It is most fortunate the injuries were not much more serious. There is also the assault by placing the complainant in a headlock and punching him. All of this must have been a terrifying experience. There have been some long-lasting effects. General deterrence is a prominent factor. Nothing has been suggested that would moderate the factor of specific deterrence, and public protection should be given some weight.
Mr Tatnell, I have set out the facts and what I see to be the relevant considerations in your case. You are convicted of the crimes and sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment to commence on 1 February 2020. There may be some benefit in parole eligibility, and I order that you not be eligible for parole until you have served 21 months.