STATE OF TASMANIA v TODD MICHAEL WALKER 18 DECEMBER 2024
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE JAGO J
Todd Walker, you have been found guilty by a jury of the crimes of aggravated burglary and demanding property with menaces with intent to steal. The primary issue on the trial was that of the identify of the perpetrators of the crimes, thus although it is my responsibility to make findings of fact for sentencing purposes, the facts substantially follow from the verdict. The jury must have been, at least in all essential respects, satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the truthfulness and reliability of the evidence of the complainant, Kim Henricks.
Sometime on or shortly before 10 June 2020, you went to a residence at Lillico. The complainant lived at that address. Another person, a Stephen Douglas, was also regularly at that address. He would use that address to conduct drug transactions. You attended there to meet with Mr Douglas. You provided Mr Douglas with some money, most likely between $5,000-$7,000, and made an arrangement for Mr Douglas to purchase drugs for you. Ms Henricks observed this transaction and was also present when Stephen Douglas made arrangements to travel to Hobart to purchase drugs on your behalf.
Mr Douglas was arrested on 10 of June 2020 and thus was never able to fulfill the arrangement that he had entered into with you. On the evening of Sunday, 14 June 2020 you and another associate, Daniel Clarke, attended the Lillico residence. Ms Henricks was there but Mr Douglas, obviously, was not. It is unclear from the evidence whether you appreciated Mr Douglas would not be at the residence. In any event, consistent with the jury verdict, I am satisfied you entered the premises intending to steal money to make good the loss you had suffered by Mr Douglas not fulfilling the arrangement. You forced your way into the residence and proceeded to a bedroom. You kicked open the bedroom door and entered. Ms Henricks was on the bed. You leant over her. You were wearing a set of brass knuckle dusters. You pushed those knuckle dusters into her cheek and said to her “where’s the money”. She told you she did not know what you were talking about. You nevertheless insisted that she make payment to you. You said to her that you would bash her and put her in the ICU if she did not provide you with the money. Again, Ms Henricks told you she did not know what you were talking about and invited you to search the residence. You declined to do so. You said to her that she had until Wednesday to come up with the money or you would burn the house down with her in it.
Mr Clarke encouraged you to settle and the incident came to an end. You and Mr Clarke left. Ms Henricks was scared as a consequence of your behaviour but she was not injured. She reported the matter to police the following day. When you attended at Ms Henricks residence you were wearing a Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Club t-shirt. At that point, you were a long-standing member of the Club. I am satisfied that your wearing of the t-shirt was a deliberate attempt to convey an additional level of threat to Ms Henricks. You wanted her to believe (irrespective of the truth of it) that she needed to act upon your demands as you had the backing of a notoriously unlawful motorcycle club. The presence of your accomplice in the room would also have had the effect of exacerbating the fear and apprehension felt by Ms Henricks.
Ms Henricks declined to provide a victim impact statement. That, of course, does not mean that she has not suffered adverse consequences. Indeed, it was apparent from the manner in which she gave her evidence that she remains badly affected by your crimes. In my assessment, she presented in a manner that is consistent with someone who has had her home invaded in such a gratuitous, violent and threatening manner. She was alone at the residence. She was vulnerable and defenceless. I have no doubt that she was gravely concerned and scared by your conduct and given the intensity of it, it is reasonable to infer that she would have believed that you may carry out some or all of the threats you made. That is particularly so, given you sent a message to her the following evening, essentially reiterating your demands and the threats to cause her harm.
You are 40 years of age. You currently reside with your parents and have their ongoing support. You also have the support of a partner. You are not currently employed although you have a solid employment history having pursued many different types of employment over the years. You are hopeful of returning to work in the landscaping industry. You have a reasonably substantial record of prior convictions, including numerous examples of alcohol-related driving offences, some anti-social offending and a number of prior convictions for matters of violence. You also have a conviction for trafficking in firearms in 2018 and further convictions for offences contrary to the Firearms Act in 2021. You have convictions for common assaults in 2003, 2004 and 2005 and a conviction for a Criminal Code assault matter in 2007. You were sentenced to actual imprisonment in 2008 for common assault, two counts of assault with indecent intent and a count of threatening a police officer.
Significantly, on 17 August 2021, you were sentenced by this Court for the crimes of aggravated burglary and assault. Those crimes occurred in June 2018, and whilst you had not been sentenced for those crimes when the incident with Ms Henricks occurred, you obviously had not reflected upon your behaviour and made any changes. The circumstances associated with the 2018 matter are not dissimilar to this incident. In respect to that matter, you demanded money from a person who apparently owed a debt to the motorcycle club. When that debt was not repaid in accordance with your demands you attended his residence, with others, and assaulted him to secure repayment. Your use of violence to recover perceived debts is very concerning. It is demonstrative of an attitude of thuggery and lawlessness. You have demonstrated no insight or remorse for your conduct and whilst, of course, you must not be punished for exercising your right to trial, you are not entitled to the mitigation a plea of guilty would have attracted.
I take into account that these crimes occurred over four years ago and in more recent times there does appear to have been a slowing in your offending. I am told that the motorcycle club in which you were heavily involved has now disbanded. There appears to be a correlation between that event and the abatement in your criminal offending. That is a positive. It can only be hoped that now that association has come to an end, you will move to a more law-abiding lifestyle. Because of that prospect, I will allow for parole at the earliest opportunity.
In my assessment these are very serious examples of the crimes of aggravated burglary and demand property with menaces with intent to steal because the crimes involved an invasion of Ms Henricks’ home, they were committed in the company of another person, a weapon was used, and the crimes were committed in circumstances where unlawful criminal activity, namely a drug deal, was the motivation for the crimes. Ms Henricks had nothing to do with whatever arrangement you had with Mr Douglas but you would not listen when she told you she knew nothing of your grievance, and you were prepared to subject her to what must have been a terrifying and traumatic experience. She was entitled to feel safe within her own home. You invaded that home for the purpose of demanding payment of a spurious debt and threatened to inflict serious violence upon her if it was not paid. Such behaviour must be strongly condemned and punished, and others who may be minded to behave in a similarly lawless manner, must understand serious consequences will flow.
Todd Walker, you are convicted on each count. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to imprisonment for 21 months from 12 November 2024, to take into account time already served in custody. I order that you not be eligible for parole until you have served one half of that period of imprisonment.
I make a forfeiture order in respect to the knuckledusters.