Crown v Accused

2 The maximum penalty for the offence of manslaughter was at the time of the offending, and remains, 25 years' imprisonment.

3 Jake Bradford was born on 16 October 2001 and was 21 years old when he died.

4 He was the youngest child of Genevieve and Paul Bradford, and had an older brother, Joey Bradford, and a half-sister and two half-brothers.

5 Jake Bradford is described as being a loving, intelligent, and cheeky child with a big heart. At primary school, he struggled with ADHD and the associated learning difficulties. Throughout his adolescence, Jake was intelligent, enterprising, and loyal. He could sing and dance and was good with computers, building his first at the age of 13 years old.

6 Sadly, despite having a stable childhood, Mr Bradford associated with what his family describe as the 'wrong crowd', and he began using recreational drugs. He moved out of home at the age of 16, and soon afterwards had his first interaction with the criminal justice system.

7 Despite Mr Bradford's drug use, he maintained a close relationship with his family, who were in contact with him multiple times per week.

8 Mr Hansen, at the time of your offending, you were 25 years old and living in Korumburra with two friends, James Vos and Nakia Steed, who were involved in the events leading up to Mr Bradford's death.

9 At approximately 9:00pm on 23 January 2023, Mr Bradford briefly visited his mother at her home in Rosebud. As he was leaving, Mr Bradford told his mother that he loved her. This was the last time that a member of Mr Bradford's family saw or heard from him.

10 Mr Bradford returned to his Rosebud home at which he resided with his housemate, River Stewart. After spending a short period at home, Mr Bradford woke Mr Stewart and informed him that he would be heading out, but would return. This was the last time Mr Stewart saw or heard from Mr Bradford.

11 Throughout that evening, Mr Bradford had been in contact with a friend, Elly Stockwin, and had arranged to meet with her later that night. Ms Stockwin arrived at Mr Bradford's house at 12:35am on 24 January 2023. Ms Stockwin was driving with her friend, Nakia Steed, in a blue Honda Civic.

12 On the same evening, you, Mr Hansen, were driving around the west Gippsland area in a stolen black GQ Nissan Patrol with James Vos, your close friend. The pair of you were breaking into and stealing from several local businesses.

13 The events that happened across the day of 24 January 2023 can be sufficiently summarised as follows. At 5:00am, a police pursuit of the Honda Civic commenced in the Frankston area but was called off as the pursuit headed towards the city. Later, at around 5:30am, Ms Stockwin was dropped off in Somerville, leaving Mr Bradford and Ms Steed in the car. At approximately 6:00am, Ms Steed sent a series of text messages to Mr Vos referencing Mr Bradford in a disparaging way. She stated that Mr Bradford had drugs and money in his account, and that Mr Vos 'could do whatever [he] want[ed] with him'. Shortly after that, Ms Steed and Mr Vos agreed to meet up at a mutually agreed location in the Bass Coast Shire.

14 Over the remainder of the day, the group, split across the two cars, travelled around the Bass Coast and East Gippsland areas. On occasions the group met with other people, and at one point stopped at a Korumburra hotel. One person visited by the group described them as drug‑affected, and another observed that Mr Bradford was 'a bit all over the place'. Mr Bradford told this person that he had had a big night and was on Xanax. Later that afternoon, you, Mr Hansen, with Mr Vos, and Ms Steed, decided that Mr Bradford was 'too drug affected' to visit another friend and he waited in one of the cars whilst you visited them.

15 At some stage throughout the day, you and Ms Steed discussed the police chase which had occurred in Frankston earlier that morning. Mr Bradford commented that he could obtain airwing footage of the chase, and either you or Mr Vos became agitated, and asked whether Mr Bradford was an 'undercover cop'.

16 Later in the day, Mr Vos and Ms Steed became aware that the Nissan Patrol had been linked to break‑ins at various businesses and that the police were investigating. A decision was made to drive to Turtons Creek and burn out the Nissan. The group, still in two vehicles, headed in that direction, however, they lost sight of each other. Uncertain of where to go, Ms Steed decided to turn the Honda Civic around and leave. Mr Bradford, who was still in the Honda with her, indicated that he wanted to stay and meet up with you, Mr Hansen, and Mr Vos, who were driving in the Nissan. Ms Steed stopped the car and Mr Bradford got out of the vehicle. Ms Steed drove away. This was the last time she saw Jake Bradford.

17 Ms Steed stopped the Honda approximately one to two kilometres away from where she left Mr Bradford, as she decided to wait for you and Mr Vos. Over the next hour, you, Ms Steed, and Mr Vos exchanged messages with respect to your respective locations.

18 At some stage between 8:00pm and 9:00pm, it appears that you and Mr Vos were driving towards where Ms Steed was waiting when you passed Mr Bradford walking on the side of the road.

19 The prosecution case is that between 8:30pm and 9:00pm on 24 January 2023, Mr Bradford was made to strip his clothes and shoes, before being assaulted by you and Mr Vos. The prosecution alleges that you then dropped Mr Vos to where Ms Steed was sitting in the parked Honda, before returning to Mr Bradford and running into him with the Nissan at approximately 10:00pm. This is alleged to have occurred on Dollar-Woorarra West Road in Foster North.

20 When you reached Ms Steed, you stated that you were going to go back and rob Mr Bradford of his bank cards. Mr Vos exited the Nissan and got into the Honda with Ms Steed. You, Mr Hansen, turned the Nissan around and drove back towards the deceased.

21 At approximately 10:00pm, you returned to Ms Steed and Mr Vos and informed them that you had hit Mr Bradford with the Nissan. The three of you drove in the two cars towards Leongatha.

22 The specific details of the interaction between you and Mr Bradford remain unknown.

23 Nine witnesses who were sitting outside at a campsite not far from Dollar-Woorarra West Road in Foster North, where Mr Bradford was dropped by Ms Steed, heard yelling at approximately 8:00pm. One witness heard a male voice, however, could not tell if there were others. The male voice sounded aggressive and agitated, and, as such, the group decided not to investigate the source of the voice.

24 At approximately 9:00pm, two members of that group left the campsite to walk to their nearby home. About 15 metres away from their driveway, they saw a pile of clothes in the middle of the road. The clothes were not folded, and included dark coloured items and dark sneakers. The clothes were not beaten up and did not appear muddy or as if they had been driven over or thrown from a passing vehicle.

25 Following the death of Jake Bradford, you, Ms Steed, and Mr Vos stopped in Leongatha for fuel and cigarettes, after which, you drove away and left the others to drive on to Mr Vos' parent's home in Leongatha.

26 The following day, on 25 January 2023, you abandoned the Nissan near Korumburra. You then phoned a friend who collected you and took you home.

27 Later in the morning, you informed Ms Steed that you had abandoned the Nissan. Ms Steed, who still had your mobile phone, arranged to see you. At some stage during the morning, Ms Steed retrieved Mr Bradford's black cap from the Honda and gave it to a friend.

28 During the same morning, Mr Bradford's clothes were located on the side of Dollar-Woorarra West Road. These were later provided to the police. The abandoned Nissan car was subsequently located by police, seized and examined.

29 On the evening of 25 January 2023, you, Mr Hansen, told an associate that something bad had happened, and that you thought that 'they' had hurt someone badly. It appears that 'they' could refer to either you or Mr Vos.

30 On the following day, 26 January 2023, at approximately 7:00pm, you, Ms Steed and Mr Vos returned to Dollar-Woorarra West Road at your request. Ms Steed and Mr Vos remained in the car, while you exited and walked across to look down an embankment. At the same time, two witnesses pulled over and approached Ms Steed, asking whether she had lost some clothes, which she denied. The witnesses drove away, and you, having heard the conversation, returned to the car in a panic and stated that you had to 'get out' of the area.

31 Over the following days, you told some friends that you had spent the preceding period on a Xanax bender and were unsure of what you had been doing.

32 On 29 January 2023, Mr Vos was arrested by police in possession of the Honda. Police examined the vehicle and located Mr Bradford's gold watch in the centre console.

33 On the same day, Mr Bradford's mother reported her son as a missing person.

34 On 10 February 2023, you showed a friend, BE, a copy of Mr Bradford's missing person report on Facebook. You explained to BE how the four of you ended up in the bush, and stated that Mr Vos struck Mr Bradford over the head multiple times with a breaker bar. You disclosed that you then knocked Mr Bradford over with the Nissan a couple of times, and that Mr Bradford was unconscious. You further explained that you and Mr Vos pushed Mr Bradford's body over the edge of the embankment and that Mr Vos burned Mr Bradford's clothes.

35 You asked BE to accompany you to where you had left Mr Bradford's body. You drove him down a track that ran off Turtons Creek Road, at the end of which you got out and proceeded on foot. At some point you stopped and informed BE that you had reached the location at which you and Mr Vos pushed Mr Bradford off the track and over an embankment. Neither you nor BE observed Mr Bradford's body on this occasion.

36 Later in the day, while at your house, BE observed a gold chain necklace on the dining room mantelpiece which belonged to Mr Bradford.

37 Meanwhile, the police investigation into the disappearance of Mr Bradford continued following Ms Bradford's report to police. Ms Steed was arrested on 2 March 2023 and provided statements to police regarding the circumstances of Mr Bradford's death. On 4 March 2023, you were arrested in relation to Mr Bradford's death. You made a no comment interview to the police.

38 On 15 October 2024, a witness walking in the local area discovered skeletal remains in a creek bed at the base of a gully near the Dollar-Woorarra West Road. These remains were later identified as those of Jake Bradford.

39 Due to the passage of time, the forensic pathologist who examined the remains was unable to determine a cause of death.

40 I note that, on 10 February 2023, Mr Vos passed away as a result of an accident at his home. Mr Vos did not provide any statement to police with respect to Mr Bradford's death prior to the accident.

41 Mr Hansen, you were committed to stand trial on 25 August 2023 and the matter proceeded Straight Hand-Up Brief to this Court.

42 Various witness examinations pursuant to section 198B of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) proceeded in this Court in late‑2023 and early‑mid 2024.

43 On 13 December 2024, approximately two months prior to your listed trial date, you filed an application for a sentence indication with respect to one charge of manslaughter, which was not opposed by the prosecution. I granted this application and the hearing of the matter proceeded before me on 5 February 2025.

44 On 12 February 2025, having considered all of the material placed before the Court and the submissions made on your behalf and by the prosecution, I indicated that, in the event you pleaded guilty to the charge of manslaughter, the maximum total effective sentence I would impose was nine and a half years' imprisonment. This figure represented a ceiling, and not a floor, on the head sentence that I may impose if you pleaded guilty to that charge.

45 The Court received six victim impact statements from people close to Mr Bradford. I have read and carefully considered all of them, and listened closely to those which were read aloud to the Court. They were all moving and eloquent statements.

46 Mr Bradford's mother, Genevieve Bradford, speaks about her lack of words to describe how she feels about the loss of her son, and the heartbreaking circumstances of the condition in which his body was found. Ms Bradford described Jake as her best friend and soulmate.

47 Ms Bradford talks about the physical effects of Jake's death on her, including tremors and forgetfulness. She reflects on the impact of Jake's death on his brother, Joey, and the challenges associated with navigating this impact given his disability and difficulty in understanding emotional matters. Ms Bradford also refers to the added tragedy of losing her husband, Paul, to cancer the day before detectives knocked on her door to tell her that her son had died.

48 Jake's older brother, Joey, who suffers from autism, describes how losing his brother has significantly affected his life, especially given that he experiences problems with his emotions, and has found it hard to understand why his brother was killed. He describes how he has lost his best friend and misses him, especially the things that they did together, such as playing video games and talking via the computer. It makes Joey sad when he goes to places which bring back memories of Jake. He misses his brother.

49 Jake's elder brother, Lee, speaks of missing Jake, and notes that he still cries when he thinks of their little brother Joey losing his best mate and brother.

50 Lee reflects on Jake being a kind person, always willing to chat about random things. Lee misses his brother very much and cannot believe he is gone, and explains that it hurts deeply that he will not have the chance to go for beer or to a club with his brother. Lee especially remarks on the effect of his brother being taken away from him, and of not knowing what happened to Jake for so long after he disappeared. Lee still gets angry and upset when thinking about this.

51 Lee states that he misses his little brother, Jake, and always will.

52 Jake Bradford's aunt, Melissa Maier, describes how the death of her nephew has left her completely shattered in ways she never imagined possible. She describes the deep and constant ache that settles into every part of her being. She feels a heavy weight of grief to the point where sometimes it feels impossible to even function.

53 The loss of her nephew lingers in the background of her thoughts and sometimes consumes her. She feels torn apart emotionally and will never be whole again, and that a part of her is missing. She describes every day being a struggle, with the world becoming a little less bright and a little uncertain. She describes how she feels guilt, anger, and grief, and is unable to understand how someone could take her nephew's life away. More than anything, she just misses her soulmate.

54 Ms Maier describes Jake as her shadow and chatterbox companion, with infectious energy. He brought warmth to her even on the coldest days, and she adored him. When he disappeared, she felt like she was trapped in a nightmare, and the agony of waiting to hear news, searching for hope in the silence. She spoke of the phone call that shattered the world and the reality that crashed into her like a wave when she realised that her nephew was gone, and stolen from his family in a way that no family should ever have to endure.

55 Finally, Ms Maier reflects on how the taking of a life destroys more than one person, and how it destroys a family, shattering the people left behind, leaving deep wounds. For her, the world is darker, unsafe, and will never be the same.

56 Jake Bradford's aunt, Daniela Birchley, explains how it has been very hard to accept that she will never see her nephew again. She speaks of the worry that accompanied not knowing where he was, what had happened to him, who he was with, whether he was alive, why he went missing or whether he was dead. She is saddened by the belief that when he died, no family member was by his side and that there were no last words or hugs.

57 She reflects on the weeks passing by when Jake had disappeared, and there being no trail of his movements, not knowing where to start looking for him, and no phone calls to follow up. She is sad that she never got a chance to say goodbye to Jake, and sad that Jake's life and future as a potential father, husband, or grandfather has been taken from him.

58 A family friend of Jake Bradford and his family, Tracy Wiggerink, speaks of the nightmare starting with the knock on the door the day following the death of Jake's father, Paul. She details the gamut of emotions which she has endured since Jake's death, including anger at what happened, the pain of having him taken from the family, and the pain in her heart from knowing that she will never hear his voice again.

59 She misses Jake's laughter, jokes, and seeing the joy that he brought to his mother and brother. Ms Wiggerink speaks of the impact of Jake's death on her, and the heavy emotional toll on her and her family, with the fracturing of some of her own family relationships. She explains watching her friend, Genevieve, changing from somebody who was running a profitable business, to someone who is forgetful, cries a lot, is constantly tired and weary, and missing her son. She details how Jake's mother has been crushed and broken and is nowhere near the person she used to be.

60 Furthermore, she makes special mention of the impact of Jake's death on his brother Joey, who struggles to make sense of losing his brother and his father, with everything being too much to bear for him. She notes that the loss caused by Jake's death is more devastating than one could ever realise.

61 In summary, as I have described, these victim impact statements were eloquent and gave testament to the impact of your crime, not only on the person you killed, but much more widely, with devastating impacts on Jake's family and friends.

62 Mr Hansen, I now turn to your personal circumstances.

63 You were born on 20 August 1997 and were 25 years old at the time of the offending. You are now aged 27. You are the youngest son of Kerrie Hancock and Clinton Hansen. You were raised by your mother in Korumburra and had no contact with your father as a child or as an adult. You have one older brother and five half‑siblings, some older and some younger.

64 You commenced primary school at St Joseph's local catholic school, which you describe as an exceptionally challenging environment, and you report experiencing significant corporal punishment. In your early teens you moved to Blackwood, a specialised support service for troubled children, to assist with your education. You attended Korumburra High School until the age of 14, and then commenced in a Victorian Certificate of Applied Learning (VCAL) program at Leongatha which you completed at the age of 17. You briefly engaged in an apprenticeship as a painter and decorator, however, this was later abandoned by you due to your significant drug use. Your last position of employment was as a casual worker at a tree service company in February 2023.

65 At the time of the offending you were living in Korumburra with your partner, Jacinta Reeves, and your two children. You also have one child from a previous relationship.

66 Your drug and alcohol use commenced at an early stage of your life. You report drinking alcohol heavily at the age of 12, before turning to marijuana. At the age of 14, you began your extensive addiction to ice, which 'exploded' at the age of 17, and you began selling drugs to support your habit. It was at this time that you first interacted with the criminal justice system.

67 You were using illicit substances at the time of the present offending and were heavily affected by such substances throughout the evening and early hours of the morning. Since being remanded in custody in March 2023, you have abstained from both alcohol and drugs.

68 As above, you were using drugs at the time of your most recent offending and it is said you were heavily affected by drugs during the evening and early hours of the morning when these fatal events took place. However, since being remanded into custody, you have abstained from both drugs and alcohol.

69 You have a previous criminal history which began in the Children's Court in 2015 and continued through to 2021. You have prior court outcomes regarding an array of offending, including recklessly causing injury, drug trafficking, driving offences, assault in company, contravening an Interim Family Violence Order, contravention of a Community Correction Order, and wilfully damaging property. Most sentencing dispositions with respect to your offending have been community-based orders occasionally accompanied by an unpaid community work condition. More recently, community-based dispositions have included orders for drug treatment and rehabilitation to address your drug dependency.

70 You have never previously been sentenced to a period of imprisonment.

71 Your counsel submits that your guilty plea to the offence of manslaughter should be regarded as relatively early, although it is conceded that the plea was not made at the earliest possible time.

72 As I have noted above, you entered your plea following a sentence indication regarding the offence of manslaughter, having originally been indicted on the charge of murder. Your counsel emphasises that your plea spared Mr Bradford's family and friends from the agony of a contested trial and carries with it utilitarian benefits to the community in general. It is further submitted that your guilty plea can be viewed as a limited expression of remorse.

73 Your counsel draws the Court's attention to your young age at the time of the offending, namely 25 years old, and submits that you were a young man when the events occurred. However, it is conceded that the mitigatory impact of your youth is somewhat diminished given that you are now aged 27.

74 As to sentencing considerations, it is acknowledged that your offending is serious, and that the abandonment of Mr Bradford's body is an aggravating feature of this offending. Accordingly, it is conceded that the sentencing considerations of punishment, general deterrence and denunciation must form significant components of the sentence to be passed.

75 However, your counsel contends that specific deterrence and community protection are less prominent considerations. Whilst it is acknowledged that you have a prior criminal history which involves aspects of violence, it is submitted that these matters should not eclipse your prospects of rehabilitation provided that you address your drug addiction issues, which your counsel posits are intricately connected to your offending behaviour.

76 With respect to the non-parole period to be passed, it is submitted that whilst your offending might justify a stern total effective sentence, there is scope for the Court to provide you with the opportunity for a lengthy parole period to foster your rehabilitation. In this regard, it is argued that if you access treatment for your addiction, and you remain abstinent, then the Court should have confidence that similar offending by you in the future is unlikely. Further, it is contended that your offending does not reflect deeply entrenched anti-social tendencies, nor is it reflective of a malicious character from which the community needs to be protected.

77 The prosecution submits that your offending represents a 'relatively serious' case of manslaughter given that Mr Bradford was particularly vulnerable at the relevant time, and was described as 'disorientated', and 'highly drug affected'. Further, just prior to bring struck by your vehicle, Mr Bradford had been robbed, assaulted, stripped of his clothes and left abandoned on the side of the road, at night time. After this initial interaction, you returned to him and proceeded to drive your car at him intending to put him in fear. I am not able to be satisfied as to the exact reason why you returned, and your motivation in then driving your car to hit him in the way you did.

78 Having struck Mr Bradford with your car, you left him either dead or dying, abandoned on the side of a remote bush road, and you did not provide or seek assistance for him. Accordingly, it is ultimately submitted that the objective gravity and your moral culpability should be regarded as similarly relatively high. In leaving Mr Bradford in the way you did, you acted deliberately and cruelly.

79 The prosecution submits that the objective circumstances of your offending, and your personal circumstances, require general deterrence, denunciation, community protection, specific deterrence and just punishment to assume prominence in the sentencing calculus.

80 As to rehabilitation, it is submitted that your prospects should be considered as guarded, and contingent on your ability to abstain from drug and alcohol consumption.

81 Whilst accepting that your plea of guilty has a clear utilitarian benefit, the prosecution disagrees that your plea should be regarded as early, and therefore should attract only a modest mitigation of sentence. Furthermore, the prosecution highlights that you have not sought to rely on the Bugmy or Verdins principles.

82 Finally, it is submitted that, with respect to the relationship between the head sentence to be passed and non-parole period to be set, your prospects of rehabilitation are not so immense as to warrant the Court deviating from the orthodox approach of setting a period between the head sentence and the non-parole period.

83 The maximum penalty for the offence of manslaughter is 25 years' imprisonment. Manslaughter is not a standard sentence offence, however, is a category 2 offence under the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) ('the Act'), and section 5(2H) requires the Court to impose a custodial order unless one of the exceptions set out in the Act applies. None of those circumstances are relevant in this case, and no party argues that any penalty other than a custodial order be imposed.

84 It is beyond question that the offence of manslaughter is serious, as it involves the taking of a human life. With that much stated, I am required to make some assessment of the gravity of the particular offence of manslaughter you committed.

85 Your offending occurred after a lengthy period of drug and alcohol use in the company of others, including Mr Bradford. As explained earlier, this group spent much of the previous day generally driving around the Bass Coast region both using and selling drugs. During this period, it appears that some members of the group spoke of robbing Mr Bradford of his money and drugs. Subsequent events make clear that this idea was carried out.

86 There is an indication that, at one point, some members of the group challenged Mr Bradford about whether he was a police informer. For the sake of clarity, it is not suggested that this was the motive for robbing and killing him, and I make no finding that this was the motivation.

87 Having robbed Mr Bradford of his personal possessions, money, and drugs, assaulted him, and stripped him of his clothes, you left Mr Bradford abandoned on the side of the road at night time. Shortly afterwards, however, you returned to his location in the Nissan Patrol vehicle. The prosecution case is, and I accept, that you drove at Mr Bradford in order to scare him and struck him with the car. He was killed as a result of this conduct. In driving at and striking Mr Bradford, you performed an unlawful and dangerous act. Mr Bradford was disoriented and significantly affected by drugs, he was naked and alone, and in a remote location; clearly, he was particularly vulnerable at the time you returned in the Nissan Patrol. One can only imagine how frightened he must have been, having been attacked, robbed, stripped, and left alone. The possibility that he may still have been alive and injured when you fled would have likely increased his suffering. It is unable to be determined exactly when Mr Bradford died.

88 After Mr Bradford was struck with the car, you did not render or seek assistance for him. Instead, you abandoned him in his dead or injured condition. Furthermore, it appears you then rolled him off the road and down an embankment, where you left him to die, if he was not already dead. Abandoning Mr Bradford in the circumstances is clearly a factor that aggravates the seriousness of your offending conduct.

89 In all the circumstances, I accept and conclude that your offending represents a relatively serious example of the offence of manslaughter.

90 I turn now to consideration of your moral culpability.

91 As discussed, Mr Bradford's vulnerability, and the fact that you left him alone, did not seek assistance for him, or even anonymously contact the authorities to inform them where he was, heightens your moral culpability with respect to this offending. Furthermore, you returned to the scene the following day but were unable to locate his body when you did so. Again, at this point, you could have informed the authorities of Mr Bradford's general location. As a result of your failure to take any action in this regard, Mr Bradford's family, relatives and friends had to wait almost two years before his remains were found. A number of people who gave victim impact statements eloquently described their agony in not knowing what had become of him for such a lengthy period of time. Your actions, which became tantamount to disposing of Mr Bradford's body, again elevate your moral culpability for your offending. Doubtless, you hoped that Mr Bradford's body would never be found, and you would never be held responsible for his death and disappearance.

92 I note that you twice returned to the location of the assault on Mr Bradford after it happened. I am unable to articulate why you did this, and no explanation has been offered by you. In the circumstances, I am unable to make a finding as to why you returned and, thus, do not make any adverse finding against you with respect to this conduct.

93 By way of mitigation, I take into account that you have pleaded guilty to the offence of manslaughter. Your plea followed a sentence indication given by me on 12 February 2025. As noted, your application for a sentence indication occurred approximately two months before your listed trial date and followed a series of section 198B examinations in this Court. It is conceded by your counsel on the plea that these examinations proceeded on the basis that an alternative suspect in the death of Mr Bradford was postulated.

94 It is submitted that the resolution of this matter represented a relatively early plea, whilst at the same time acknowledging that it was not the earliest plea possible. It is my conclusion that, given your plea followed a sentence indication and was made such a short time before your trial in this Court, your plea cannot be considered an early plea.

95 I do take into account that you have pleaded guilty to the offence of manslaughter, and accept that in the particular circumstances of this case there is considerable utilitarian value in your plea. It meant that Mr Bradford's family were spared the ordeal of a contested jury trial, and the community was spared the expense of what most likely would have been a reasonably lengthy trial. I have taken into account your plea of guilty as I am required to do.

96 As to the question of remorse, however, the prosecution submits, and I accept, that there is a paucity of evidence that you have shown remorse for your conduct. In the circumstances, I am unable to conclude that you have shown genuine remorse for your actions.

97 On your behalf, it was put that your failure to indicate remorse was a consequence of you being unable to give any information about your offending due to your level of intoxication at the relevant time. I find it difficult to accept that submission and do not consider that an expression of remorse or regret for having committed an offence is dependent on being able to recall having committed the relevant acts.

98 I have taken into account the matters raised by your counsel regarding your background, and your difficult upbringing. You were, at the time of your offending, 25 years old, and still a relatively young man. At the same time, it is conceded that you cannot rely on the kind of mitigation that would apply to someone of a significantly younger age.

99 You are now 27. You have some prior criminal convictions, however, it appears that this is the first period of incarceration you have faced. I acknowledge that you have a partner who supports you, as well as the support of your mother, and that you have children.

100 I note that no expert material was placed before the Court which demonstrates that there are any mental health issues which may have impacted you at the time of your offending, or which may be exacerbated or affected by a period of imprisonment. Accordingly, I am required to sentence you on the basis that compromised mental health has no part to play in this case.

101 With respect to current sentencing practices, I have had regard to a number of past sentencing decisions as well as cases which discuss the application of the relevant sentencing principles. Some of these authorities were detailed in the written plea submissions filed on your behalf. Further to those listed in the submissions, I have had regard to sentences passed in the matters of R v Scott;[1] R v Sharif;[2] and Director of Public Prosecutions v Blake ('Blake'),[3] and cases discussed in the matter of Blake.[4]

102 It is obvious that there are similarities and differences between these matters and the present case. I will impose a sentence upon you that has been determined with regard to the particular circumstances of your offending and your personal circumstances.

General deterrence, denunciation and punishment

103 I turn to the sentencing purposes of general deterrence, denunciation and punishment. It is conceded that these three factors have clear application in this case. Despite the exact circumstances of Mr Bradford's death being unknown, your offending was nevertheless at a level of seriousness warranting the imposition of a period of imprisonment. The law requires that you be justly punished for your actions in a manner the community would consider fair in all the circumstances.

104 The sentence imposed must also serve the purpose of deterring others who may be like-minded in the general community from engaging in similar behaviour. There is no dispute that you are an appropriate vehicle for general deterrence. There can be no reduction of the weight of this factor on the basis of compromised mental health.

105 Further, it is important that the Court denounce your actions. You cut short Mr Bradford's life in a violent and senseless act, and because of your actions, a family has lost their loved one. Your failure to assist Mr Bradford after you struck him with the vehicle, and you allowing his body to remain undiscovered for almost two years, served to increase the trauma inflicted on Mr Bradford's family and friends. Such behaviour is a significant aggravating factor and cannot be tolerated by the community. It requires strong denunciation.

Specific deterrence, rehabilitation and protection of the community

106 As to the questions of specific deterrence, rehabilitation and community protection, I have had regard to your criminal history in considering the application of specific deterrence as a sentencing factor.

107 You have a criminal record but have not previously served a sentence of imprisonment. Whilst your offending on this occasion represents a significant increase in gravity, I also accept that your plea of guilty, though not coming at a particularly early stage, still lessens, at least to some extent, the emphasis to be placed on specific deterrence. I do not regard you as being beyond hope for rehabilitation, provided you are able to address your substance abuse issues.

108 With respect to rehabilitation, the Court has not been provided with any expert reports regarding your level of risk of violent future offending. However, it has been submitted that you are still a relatively young man. In all the circumstances, I regard your prospects of rehabilitation as somewhat guarded, but nevertheless open.

109 Community protection is also relevant but to my mind does not weigh heavily in the sentencing process. However, I make the comment that your substance abuse issues are strongly linked to your future rehabilitation, and thus the safety of the community upon your release. I accept that you appear to be making some progress in this area whilst in the prison setting. I also note that you appear to be using your time in custody in a constructive manner, and have engaged in work building cabinetry and furniture.

110 Having taken all the facts and circumstances into account which I have discussed, I sentence you to be imprisoned for 9 years and 6 months.

111 I order that you serve 6 years and 6 months' imprisonment before being eligible for parole.

112 As I am required to do pursuant to section 89 of the Act, I cancel your licence to drive a motor vehicle and disqualify you from driving a motor vehicle for a period of two years, the period of disqualification to commence from the date of your release from the sentence of imprisonment you will serve.

Section 6AAA declaration

113 I have imposed upon you a less severe sentence than I otherwise would have because you have pleaded guilty to this offence. Pursuant to section 6AAA of the Act, I declare that but for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to 12 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 9 years and 6 months.

114 I further declare that you have served 908 days of pre-sentence detention, not including this day.

[1] R v Scott [2012] VSC 514.

[2] R v Sharif [2020] VSC 226.

[3] Director of Public Prosecutions v Blake [2024] VSC 592.