STATE OF TASMANIA v DWAYNE DAVID JOHN TRIFFETT 4 NOVEMBER 2026
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Dwayne Triffett, you were found guilty by a jury of wounding and assault. Subject to consistency with the verdicts it is for me to determine the facts for sentence. Facts adverse to you must be proved by the prosecution to my satisfaction beyond reasonable doubt. Facts in your favour must be proved by you on the balance of probabilities. In this case, and as the case was conducted, the facts are largely determined by the verdicts.
The crimes were committed during the evening of 17 May 2024 against Savannah Brown. Ms Brown was a person you had known for many years, but had only recently commenced a sexual relationship with. At the time, she was she was 43 and you were 42. She was living in a van parked at Kings Wharf in an area where others without stable housing also were then living. You did not live there but you visited her from time to time. At trial there was no dispute that you were at Ms Brown’s van that evening. Her evidence was that you arrived and, for a time, watched a movie and smoked cannabis with her. She had her own bong and she prepared cannabis for you in a spare glass bong. At one point she stepped into the kitchen area. As she asked you whether you wanted more cannabis, you stepped towards her, grabbed her hair with one hand and, with the other hand, smashed the glass bong straight onto her face. You then dragged her to the ground and punched and kicked her to her head and body. You were wearing boots which she said were steel capped. The photographs of the boots in evidence confirm that they were heavy boots with a toe cap, although there was no other evidence that the cap was reinforced with steel. She said that you then held her face down into the couch by holding her hair and the side of her neck. She was having difficulty breathing but could not say whether it was the pressure to her neck or the fact that her face was in the couch which was the cause. She could not say how many times she was punched and kicked. The force of one blow, I am satisfied a kick, was enough to knock out one of her front lower teeth. She did not realise until later that her tooth had been knocked out, but there is no doubt it was because the tooth was found by the police on the couch.
When you stopped striking her and let her go, she took the opportunity to leave. She took herself to the home of a friend nearby and an ambulance was called.
You did not give evidence, but the defence at trial was that the jury should have doubted Ms Brown’s account and should not exclude the reasonable possibility that she fell and injured herself because she was drunk. It follows from the verdicts that the majority of the jury accepted the truth of at least the essential aspects of her account. I also have no doubt at all about the truth of the substance of her evidence. The medical examination undertaken at the hospital revealed that she had a deep three centimetre laceration to muscle on her scalp, a superficial abrasion to her right eyebrow, a one centre deep laceration on her upper lip below her nose, and a five centimetre laceration to her chin. The photograph of the laceration to her chin showed that it was extremely deep and extended right across the lower part of her chin. It required plastic surgery and many stitches to repair. In addition to those injuries, Ms Brown had a large bruise, and a collection of fluid between the skin and her skull on the right side of her head above her ear.
Consistency with the verdict requires that I sentence you on the basis that the wounds were caused by you striking Ms Brown with the glass bong as she described. In any event, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the truth of the substance of her evidence. Photographs of the scene show a broken glass bong on the ground. Forensic examination and analysis disclosed the presence of her blood on the edge of it. I would, as I think the jury must have, exclude as a reasonable possibility the scenario that all of these injuries could have been caused by a single fall in which she somehow managed to cut herself in this manner and to that extent. Ms Brown acknowledged that she had a long history of abuse of alcohol, but I accept her evidence that she was not so drunk on this night that she would trip or fall so heavily as to cause such extensive injuries. There was evidence of blood spatter on the upper surface of the boots you were wearing which could only have got there by application of considerable force to wet blood. Again, I reject as implausible the suggestion that the blood would have been present on your boots in the form of splatter from walking around on a bloody floor. I believe Ms Brown’s evidence that she was subjected to other blows, kicks and punches. The other injuries to her head including the laceration and bruise to her scalp and the loss of her tooth must have resulted from other force. I cannot determine how many times she was punched or kicked. There was no evidence of other bruising or injury to her body or arms. I am satisfied that you also held her face into the couch. The blood on the couch tends to support her account about this, but I believe her in any event. You are not charged with strangulation. So you are not to be sentenced on the basis that you intended to apply force which made it difficult for her to breathe, or realised that what you did may have had that effect. However, most reasonable and rational people would realise that such an action would have that effect.
I was informed of your personal circumstances by your counsel and in a pre-sentence report. You are now aged 44. In your life you have experienced difficult family relationships and homelessness. Despite this you have held employment from time to time. You have also been troubled by abuse of illicit drugs including methylamphetamine. You are medicated for bi-polar disorder and depression, but there is no evidence that a mental health impairment caused or contributed to these crimes, reduced the level of your culpability or are otherwise in mitigation of sentence. You have a history of heavy abuse of illicit drugs and alcohol. I would infer that when this crime was committed you were heavily affected by illicit drugs. That is what you told the author of the pre-sentence report, although you also said that you had no memory of it because you blacked out. That is not mitigating. There has been no demonstration of remorse and you are not entitled to the mitigation a plea of guilty would have attracted.
Your record includes convictions for common assaults committed in 2013 and 2021. In both cases you were given wholly suspended sentences. You were sentenced for the second of those offences on 15 May 2024, only two days before these crimes. You quickly breached that suspended sentence by committing other offences. Your record also includes many breaches of family violence orders made to protect other women, breaches of bail, driving offences and dishonesty. Since this crime you have been convicted of another common assault and three counts of assaulting a police officer. You were ordered to serve a term of four months from 11 January 2026. The convictions ordered since 17 May 2024 are not prior convictions for sentencing purposes, but indicate that the factors which led to the crimes against Ms Brown are yet to be addressed.
According to your counsel, your personal circumstances are such that you will not be a good candidate for parole. Accordingly, I will suspend part of the term and incorporate into the sentencing orders I intend to make, a period of supervision in the community for a period beyond the term which a parole order might extend.
These crimes are so serious that the only appropriate sentence is a significant term of imprisonment. This was an unprovoked, brutal and terrifying attack with a weapon, and with punches and kicking with heavy boots, which resulted in serious physical and psychological harm. It was committed in Ms Brown’s own home. She, not unreasonably, thought she might die. You were not in a significant relationship with her, and this is not to be formally categorised as a family violence offence. However, you had been friends for years and had recently begun an intimate relationship. The seriousness of violence within relationships is well recognised. You breached the trust inherent in that relationship, and the trust which Ms Brown placed in you by admitting you to her home. The immediate physical impact on Ms Brown included a confronting and traumatic laceration to the lower part of her face. She lost a tooth. The result is permanent scarring to her face which, as she describes in her victim impact statement, adds to her trauma and is a permanent reminder of her injury and this event. She experiences ongoing nightmares and loss of trust in relationships.
Dwayne Triffett, you are convicted on both counts on the indictment. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to imprisonment for three and a half years from 9 September 2026, the day you went into custody. I make no order as to parole, but suspend one year and six months of that term for four years from today 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 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 of your release, you must submit to supervision and comply with the directions given by your probation officer, 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 following your release:
- 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 addiction program and the EQUIPS aggression program as directed by a probation officer.