STATE OF TASMANIA v KENT DAVID THOMAS 16 SEPTEMBER 2019
and JESS KENT THOMAS
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Kent Thomas and Jess Thomas, you both plead guilty to aggravated burglary and assault. Jess Thomas, you are Kent Thomas’s son. The crimes were committed late in the evening on 24 December 2017 against the partner of Davena Thomas, Kent Thomas’ sister. At about 10.15 pm on that day, you went together to the unit in Youngtown where the man and Davena Thomas lived. They were asleep in different rooms. You kicked in the front door and went to the complainant’s bedroom. Kent Thomas, you punched the complainant to the head a number of times and then, when the complainant tried to hold you down, you bit him on the chest and arm. Jess Thomas, you followed your father into the room and punched the complainant in his kidney area, back and the back of his head, and scratched at his face. You continued to punch as the complainant attempted to push you out of the bedroom onto the landing, and then bit the middle and index fingers and thumb on the complainant’s left hand. Kent Thomas, you re-entered the fray with more punches which eventually caused the complainant to fall over the balcony railing onto the lawnmower below. Davena Thomas called the police and they arrived soon afterwards. They saw the damage to the front door lock.
As a result of the assault the complainant, who was then aged 54, went to the hospital. Fortunately his injuries were largely superficial. He suffered multiple superficial skin abrasions on his face and left chest wall, a deep bite mark on the inner surface of his right shoulder without the skin being broken, a bite mark to the left middle finger with a superficial laceration, and a deep laceration to the left second toe. In the photographs none of the abrasions appear serious. His finger did not require treatment but he later lost the fingernail. The laceration on his toe was seemingly caused by the fall and required some stitches after which he was sent home from hospital with some pain relief. His physical injuries have largely resolved. His victim impact statement is to be treated with circumspection, but describes the type of psychological impact which might be expected to result from a crime of this nature, including anxiety, feelings of insecurity and interrupted sleep.
Davena Thomas was also scared by what happened, and has been affected psychologically. She sold the unit because she did not wish to remain there, although she now regrets having done so, at least financially. In her case the impact is complicated by relationship and family issues.
The background to this incident is a deeply held and long standing feeling of ill will you both have towards the complainant arising from concern for Davena Thomas and the complainant’s conduct towards the rest of your family. The complainant has not, of course, had the opportunity to give his side of the story and it is unhelpful and unnecessary for me to determine whether there is a just reason for your concern. I am satisfied that your feelings, justified or not, are genuine. Of course, none of that excuses a violent home invasion.
You are in partnership together as bricklayers. I accept that you are busy and hardworking. Kent Thomas, you are 49. You are not in a relationship and your two children are adults. Jess Thomas, you are 29 and engaged. You are step father to your partner’s two children and you have a new baby together. Neither of you have any record for violence but you both have a record for alcohol related driving offences and you were both intoxicated when this crime was committed. That does not make it less serious in any respect. Your sentence will be reduced because you both pleaded guilty. It saved the complainant and Davena Thomas from having to give evidence, although the reduction will be modest because the plea came so late; not until after a jury was empanelled. Preparation for trial did not impose a significant burden on the State although it was no doubt nerve wracking for the complainant and his partner. You have not expressed any remorse. Davena Thomas has, through counsel for the State, said that she does not want you sent to prison. Her views are relevant but do not carry much weight. That is because crimes are not a private matter between citizens but are committed against the community at large. At least in her case, a lenient sentence is not likely to aggravate any feelings of distress and violation suffered by her, and is less likely to be demeaning to her. The complainant has given no such indication.
These crimes, in each case, require a sentence of imprisonment. It is a serious matter to break into someone’s home intending violence. There is no reason to distinguish between you when it comes to the appropriate sentence. Each of you played an equal role and there is nothing in your personal circumstances which would justify any disparity. I do not think that either of you pose any risk to anyone else, but you still harbour feelings of resentment towards the complainant. It is aggravating that you acted together against the complainant so that he was confronted by your combined force. You, and others, must understand that resort to violence of this nature motivated by personal grievance requires punishment. I have, however, decided to suspend the sentence to encourage you to not offend again, but add to the punishment by imposition of community service. You must understand that the law makes it a condition of a suspended sentence that you not commit any offence punishable by imprisonment while the order remains in force. If you breach that condition by committing another offence of any type which is punishable by imprisonment you are very likely to have to serve the sentence.
Kent Thomas and Jess Thomas, I impose the same sentence on each of you. You are convicted on each count. You are sentenced to imprisonment for eight months, wholly suspended for 18 months from today. It is a condition of that order that while it is in force you do not commit any offence punishable by imprisonment. If you breach that condition then a court must order that you serve that term unless it is unjust. In addition, I make a community corrections order for a period of 12 months from today. The core conditions of that order will be specified in the order that you will be given and include that you not commit an offence punishable by imprisonment, that you report to and comply with the directions of a probation officer, that you must not leave Tasmania without permission and that you must notify of any change of address. I impose a special condition that you must, within the operational period of the order, satisfactorily perform 84 hours of community service, as directed by a probation officer or a supervisor. If you breach any of those conditions you may be brought back to court and re-sentenced. In accordance with the community corrections order you must report back to Community Corrections by the close of business tomorrow.