DPP v Lindemann [2024] VSC 220

2 Ms Lezsak was 39 years old when you murdered her. Her two children, Lily and Leo, were both 10 at the time.

3 You and Ms Lezsak first met online in 2014 or 2015, when she bought clothing from an online gym clothing store that you had created. Your relationship began in 2018. At that time, Ms Lezsak was single, but you were still living with your wife and two children in Adelaide.

4 After a year of pursuing your relationship with Ms Lezsak, you decided to move to Melbourne to be with her in early 2019. You moved into the home owned and occupied by Ms Lezsak's parents; Ms Lezsak and the twins also lived there.

5 As your relationship progressed, family and friends noticed growing signs of your jealousy, and conflict within the relationship. You were jealous and insecure about Ms Lezsak's interactions with other men. Another considerable source of relationship strain centred around the parenting of Ms Lezsak's children. You took issue with what you perceived to be her lack of structure and routine with the children.

6 By June 2022, conflict about parenting issues had become a significant problem within the relationship. Ms Lezsak was concerned about your attitude towards her children, and contemplated ending her relationship with you because of the parenting tensions. Ms Lezsak tried very hard to encourage a relationship between you and her children. In the past, you had complained about Lily's attitude, which resulted in Lily feeling that you didn't like her very much. You had confided in a friend about the difficulties you experienced in parenting Ms Lezsak's children. You also felt conflicted about being separated from your own biological children in Adelaide.

7 Despite the problems in the relationship, in 2022 you and Ms Lezsak decided to buy a house and land package in another Melbourne suburb. You agreed that the home loan would be in your name only, because you were working, whereas she wasn't and had two dependents. She transferred $100,000 of her money into a bank account in your name, to be used to demonstrate established savings and an ability to service the loan.

8 On 1 April 2023, Ms Lezsak travelled to Queensland with her parents, children, and friend, Jacqueline Schwarcz, to house-sit for your cousin. Whilst in Queensland, Ms Lezsak and Ms Schwarcz attended a local gym to work out. Ms Lezsak posted a photo on her Instagram page of herself working out at the gym; it was seen by a fellow patron of the gym, a man named Jona Jordan. Ms Lezsak and Mr Jordan began communicating, and subsequently met in person during that trip.

9 When Ms Lezsak returned from Queensland, a few weeks later, you started making more effort with the children. However, by then, her feelings towards you had changed.

10 On 1 May 2023, you left on a pre-arranged trip to Germany to visit family. While you were away, Ms Lezsak tried to end the relationship.

11 In your absence, she continued to communicate with Mr Jordan. She also travelled to Queensland for a couple of days, where she met with Mr Jordan, so that they could assess the strength of their feelings towards each other.

12 Ms Lezsak told friends and family that she had feelings for someone else, and wanted to end her relationship with you.

13 After your return from Germany on 24 May, Ms Lezsak discussed her feelings with you. Things became very intense between the two of you. It is clear that you had trouble accepting that the relationship was over.

14 On the morning before you murdered Ms Lezsak, you sent her various text messages, saying that you had broken down at work. She responded by text, praising the support that your work colleagues had offered you. She later called you, and told you again that she wanted to end the relationship.

15 Ms Lezsak sent a text message to a mutual friend, Adrian, advising him of the break up. She told Adrian that you did not appear to be taking it well, and said she was nervous about returning home. She asked Adrian to support you, as she was worried you would "do something stupid".

16 Adrian offered to support both of you. Ms Lezsak responded with a voice note expressing her gratitude. She said that although you had been trying recently, it was too late, and her feelings towards you had changed.

17 You spoke with Adrian shortly after 2pm. You told him that Ms Lezsak had broken up with you, and you felt like "necking" yourself.

18 Early that evening, you sent various text messages to her, trying to find out whether she had met someone else. Shortly before 8pm, Ms Lezsak messaged Mr Jordan, saying "He knows about you."

19 You then found Mr Jordan's social media profiles, and sent him a series of unanswered messages asking about the status of their relationship. You also took screenshots of Mr Jordan's Instagram page, and sent them to Adrian. You spoke with Adrian on the phone, telling him that you could not believe that she had met another man. Adrian could hear Lily in the background, and asked why she was crying. You said you had told Lily everything, including that she had a new step-father who was 26 years old. Adrian reminded you that Lily was innocent, and said you should be comforting her. You told Adrian that Ms Lezsak had ruined everything.

20 It is clear that you were extremely angry at the prospect of Ms Lezsak being interested in somebody else, or wanting to end the relationship. That evening, Ms Lezsak's mother heard you yelling at Ms Lezsak, and calling her a "piece of shit".

21 Ms Lezsak left the house a couple of times that night. She drove to the grounds of a nearby school, so that she could call Mr Jordan and discuss how difficult the situation at home had become. On one of those occasions, you sent her a text message, insisting that she come home and saying that you would put the children to bed.

22 Around 10pm, you sent several text messages to Mr Jordan, saying he was destroying your family. Your messages to Mr Jordan became increasingly threatening in tone.

23 Around 11pm, you messaged Ms Lezsak, saying that you had no hard feelings towards her, and that she would probably come to regret her decision.

24 When Ms Lezsak returned home that evening, she went to sleep with Lily, in Lily's bedroom. At some stage during the night, you entered the bedroom and had a heated confrontation with Ms Lezsak about Mr Jordan.

25 Around 6:15am the next morning, you told Ms Lezsak's father that his daughter was crazy, and said you would be removing your belongings from the house.

26 Shortly afterwards, you messaged your employers to let them know you would not be working that day.

27 Around 7:30am, Ms Lezsak sent voice notes and two text messages to Mr Jordan. In them, she discussed what was happening at home, and the difficulties she was experiencing with the breakup.

28 You overheard Ms Lezsak speaking to Mr Jordan. That seems to have been the catalyst for you exploding in a violent, jealous rage. You immediately started attacking Ms Lezsak in the master bedroom. Her screams were so loud that they were recorded on a neighbour's CCTV.

29 Lily and Leo were sitting in the nearby living room, talking with their grandmother. Upon hearing her mother's screams, Lily ran to the bedroom. She saw you stabbing her mother with such force that you broke the knife. You then punched and strangled Ms Lezsak, before dragging her out of the ensuite and bedroom.

30 Ms Lezsak was screaming as you dragged her through the house and into the kitchen. Lily tried to intervene, and screamed "Leave my mother alone". Ms Lezsak's mother, Maggie, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, tried to help Lily stop the attack.

31 You grabbed another knife from the knife block. You yelled "You've ruined my life", as you repeatedly stabbed Ms Lezsak in a frenzied, violent fashion, as she was on the kitchen floor.

32 Lily did not give up trying to defend her mother. She managed to kick you and wrestle the knife off you, discarding it onto the floor. However, you were clearly determined to keep stabbing Ms Lezsak, so you grabbed a different knife and stabbed her in the chest with it. Again, you broke the knife through the force you were using.

33 You grabbed another knife and resumed stabbing Ms Lezsak. Again, Lily somehow managed to wrestle that knife from you.

34 You picked up yet another knife, before dragging Ms Lezsak from the kitchen into the dining room. You continued stabbing Ms Lezsak, even as Lily got between you and her mother, trying to stop the attack. As Lily bravely tried to protect her mother, you caused knife injuries to Lily's hands, elbow and shoulder. That conduct constitutes the second charge, recklessly causing injury.

35 You left Ms Lezsak fatally injured and dying on the dining room floor, and retreated to the bedroom.

36 Lily immediately phoned emergency services. Clearly distressed, Lily told the operator that her mum's boyfriend had stabbed and killed her mum because she was breaking up with him. Whilst she was on the phone, trying to get help, Lily was also trying to comfort her mother and pleading with her not to leave her.

37 Around one minute after ending your attack, you transferred $71,000 from one of your bank accounts to another of your accounts. Three minutes later, you tried, unsuccessfully, to call your wife.

38 At some stage after you entered the bedroom, you stabbed yourself multiple times. When emergency services arrived, they found you naked in the bedroom, with self-inflicted injuries to your chest and abdomen. You told police that you didn't want to be saved, and that Ms Lezsak had "ruined your life".

39 Emergency services tried, unsuccessfully, to resuscitate Ms Lezsak, but she was pronounced dead at the scene. The most serious and life-threatening of her many injuries were stab wounds to her neck and chest, which caused a loss of blood and respiratory compromise.

40 Lily was transferred to the Monash Children's Hospital for treatment of her injuries. She suffered five lacerations to her hands, elbow and shoulder, three of which needed stitches. She was discharged from hospital that same day.

41 You were transported to the Alfred Hospital, where you underwent emergency surgery. On the way to the hospital, you told paramedics that Ms Lezsak had "ruined your life". On 12 June 2023, you were discharged from hospital and remanded in custody.

42 In later phone calls from prison to your parents, you continued to blame Ms Lezsak for your actions. You also expressed concern about money, saying that your wife had to make sure no one could access your accounts and take your money.

43 These are very serious examples of each offence, having regard to the circumstances of the offending. There are a number of matters that are relevant to assessing the objective gravity of your offending.

44 You attacked and killed your partner, in a gross breach of trust. Domestic homicide is not a less serious category of murder because of the pre-existing relationship.

45 As Lily and Leo's stepfather, it was your duty to protect them from harm. Instead, you subjected them to a terrifying ordeal, forcing them to witness you brutally attacking and killing their mother.

46 The reckless infliction of injury on a child as young as Lily, as she tried to protect her mother from your savage attack, is a particularly serious example of the offence of recklessly causing injury. Given your relative sizes and strength, and the persistent and frenzied nature of your stabbing movements, it is only by sheer luck that Lily was not more seriously injured.

47 Both victims were subjected to violence in their family home, a place where they were entitled to feel safe and protected.

48 You attacked Ms Lezsak without provocation or warning, in circumstances where she was in a confined space, and had no real opportunity to flee or defend herself. Even though Ms Lezsak was a fit bodybuilder, you were considerably bigger and stronger than her.

49 Your brutal, frenzied attack lasted around three minutes in total. During that time, you dragged Ms Lezsak around the house, punched and strangled her, and repeatedly stabbed her. You ultimately used six different knives to stab her. You stabbed her 17 times in the face, neck, chest, back, abdomen, wrist and hands. You were not deterred by breaking two of the knives, or having another two of them removed from you; each time that happened, you simply got hold of another knife. You were not deterred by the repeated and heroic attempts of others to intervene in the attack, or their pleas for you to stop. You were not deterred from engaging in a terrifying display of violence by the presence of two young children and your frail mother in law. This was not a momentary loss of self-control. You were clearly determined to kill Ms Lezsak.

50 After inflicting your final stab wound, you left Ms Lezsak on the floor, fatally injured. You left Lily distraught and injured, covered in her own and her mother's blood. Even after you had finished your vicious attack, you didn't show the slightest concern for the woman you claimed to love, or the children you were supposed to protect.

51 Your decision to transfer $71,000 between bank accounts, only one minute after stopping your attack, is particularly calculated. It demonstrates a concern for the financial position of yourself or your children, rather than the welfare of Ms Lezsak, Lily or their family members.

52 Your counsel sought to minimise the significance of the transfer by suggesting that it happened because you were not thinking clearly and were "frazzled". I reject that submission. It was an entirely rational act, motivated by personal interest, and requiring a series of logical steps to log onto a device and make the transfer.

53 Your offending was motivated by jealousy, and an unwillingness to allow your partner to move on with her life. You had cheated on your own wife, and eventually left your wife and children to be with Ms Lezsak. However, your hypocrisy and sense of entitlement were such that you became enraged by the thought that Ms Lezsak might choose to leave you and start a relationship with someone she had recently met.

54 You had clearly been in a highly emotional state over the previous day or so, after it had finally sunk in that Ms Lezsak wanted to end her relationship with you and start one with somebody else. But there is no evidence that your attack on her was premeditated. I accept that it was a relatively spontaneous outburst.

55 Before I consider your personal circumstances, I want to say something about the effect your offending has had on others.

56 Ms Lezsak had been a sole parent to the twins since their father left, when they were about 3. Not only did you take away Ms Lezsak's most precious right, her right to life, but you also deprived her children of the only parent they have known, her parents of their only child, and all of them of their future lives with her.

57 Very moving victim impact statements were filed by Ms Lezsak's parents, and on behalf of Lily and Leo. The statements were not read out, and I do not propose to discuss their contents in open court, so as to avoid embarrassing or further traumatising family members. It is self-evident that an horrific event such as this would be profoundly traumatising to Ms Lezsak's children and parents, who all lived together with her as a loving, close-knit family.

58 The trauma of what happened is presently overwhelming for Lily. What she did to try to save her mother was unbelievably brave; it was more than most adults would have been able to do in such terrifying circumstances. Hopefully, as she grows up, Lily will come to understand that there was nothing more that she could have done to save her mother, who would have been so very proud of Lily's courage and determination.

59 Likewise, the bravery and love shown by Ms Lezsak's mother, Maggie, who tried to save her daughter notwithstanding her own physical frailty, should also be publicly acknowledged.

60 Victim impact statements were read out on behalf of Ms Lezsak's close friends, Jacqueline Schwarcz and Donna Brown. Mr Jordan also provided a statement.

61 It is clear from all of the victim impact statements that Ms Lezsak was a kind, caring and loving mother, daughter and friend, who is greatly missed by many people. She was funny and passionate, and loved spending time with her loved ones. She worked hard to provide a bright future for herself and her children. She was a passionate and talented bodybuilder, who enjoyed keeping healthy and fit.

62 Ms Lezsak's death, and the circumstances in which she died, have profoundly affected her loved ones emotionally, physically, socially and financially.

63 Ms Lezsak's friends have provided tremendous practical and emotional support to her family since her death. Assisting with the children's many and complex needs has been particularly time-consuming and onerous, and has adversely affected her friends' ability to work and care for their own families.

64 There is nothing this court can say or do that will bring back Ms Lezsak, or heal her loved ones' terrible grief, pain and anger. The sentence I am going to impose is not a reflection of the worth or value of Ms Lezsak's life. Rather, it reflects a large number of factors which judges are required by law to take into account, only one of which is the content of the victim impact statements.

66 You were 51 at the time of offending, and are now 52 years old. You were born in Adelaide, to German parents. When you were 18 months old, your family returned to Germany. You lived in Germany until you were 16, at which time your family returned to Adelaide, where you completed your schooling. You have lived in Australia ever since.

67 You had a stable and comfortable upbringing, raised by loving and hardworking parents. Although you were occasionally lonely as an only child, you have described it as "the best childhood". Your parents' relationship was a harmonious one, and you continue to enjoy a positive relationship with them.

68 You had no significant academic, behavioural, disciplinary or social problems during your schooling.

69 You decided to repeat year 12, after being dissatisfied with your final school marks. You funded that year of private schooling by working as a cleaner at a local school.

70 You subsequently enrolled in an undergraduate applied science degree. You did not complete that degree, and swapped to a diploma course in marketing and business instead. You worked at several jobs whilst completing your tertiary studies.

71 After graduation, you spent about 15 years working in the wine industry, including in managerial positions.

72 When you were 22, you met the woman who you later married. You were together for 23 years, and had two children together.

73 Your son received a significant medical diagnosis when he was two years old, which required surgery and ongoing monitoring. You changed careers to earn more money, in order to pay his medical bills. You undertook "fly in fly out" work in the oil and gas industry, and obtained various certificates during that period. You eventually became a safety and training coordinator. You spent about 10 years doing FIFO work.

74 After you were made redundant during the pandemic, you tried to utilise your time effectively by upskilling in other areas. You obtained qualifications in occupational health and safety, and real estate.

75 There is no doubt that you have been a very hardworking person throughout your life, in order to support yourself and your family. You have continually pursued further qualifications, in order to improve your employment prospects. Whilst you have been in custody, you have continued to undertake courses in various areas.

76 During your time as a FIFO worker, you often used your three week breaks to pursue your interest in personal fitness and bodybuilding. You also obtained various qualifications in personal training. You have participated in many bodybuilding competitions over the years.

77 When you lived in Adelaide, you were able to get prescription steroids from a doctor, to assist your bodybuilding. However, after you moved to Melbourne, you could not find a doctor who was willing to prescribe steroids to you, so you started illegally administering growth hormones and steroids to yourself.

78 For the purposes of sentencing, you were assessed by Mr Patrick Newton, a clinical and forensic psychologist. He noted that you have no history of psychological or psychiatric problems, and no diagnosis of any mental health condition.

79 Mr Newton believes that your offending occurred within the context of what he referred to as a "situational crisis", in which your "behavioural control broke down in a catastrophic fashion". That situational crisis arose in the context of a number of factors, including the following: your underlying personality; your attitudes towards women in general, and Ms Lezsak in particular; and your use of anabolic steroids.

80 As far as your underlying personality is concerned, Mr Newton described you as an "emotionally expressive person". He said that, in times of stress, you are prone to episodes of moodiness and despondency, and find it difficult to look beyond your own feelings, to consider broader factors of relevance.

81 You have what Mr Newton describes as "a range of problematic gender-based beliefs." At the start of a relationship, you tend to idealise your female partners, placing them on a pedestal, and speaking of them in unrealistic, perfectionistic terms. He says that when the challenges of a real relationship intrude, and the women inevitably fall short of your impossibly high standards, you are ill-equipped to manage your disappointment and to transition to a reality-based perspective. That leads to you experiencing a sense of deep frustration, and strong feelings of disappointment. Typically, you respond to that disappointment by pointing out what you perceive to be your partner's faults, and encouraging them "to do better" by conforming to your expectations. In turn, that undermines the intimacy in the relationship, increases the distance you feel, and provides a fertile ground for more serious conflict. Mr Newton describes your relationship with Ms Lezsak as exemplifying the outworking of those dynamics in a particularly tragic fashion.

82 You have described your relationship with Ms Lezsak in starkly varied terms. On the one hand, you described the relationship in idealistic terms, saying that meeting her was "like the universe had brought you together". You have also said that she was a beautiful, kind and loving partner to you. On the other hand, you are highly critical of her parenting style, telling Mr Newton that you felt you needed to "remind her how to be a mother." You also repeatedly referred to the fact that you "uprooted your life" to move from Adelaide to be with her, and expected the same level of reciprocity from her in terms of her commitment. You said that "being cheated on" was the reason why your mind "blacked out" and you lost control of yourself.

83 As far as your steroid use is concerned, Mr Newton was unable to get a clear history from you as to the pattern and amount of your use at the time of the offending. From the information he could glean he said that, at a minimum, your steroid use would have met the diagnostic criteria for "harmful use of anabolic steroids"; more likely, it was sufficiently severe to warrant a diagnosis of "anabolic steroid abuse". He said that the effect of anabolic steroids on your underlying personality tendencies would have potentially resulted in volatile anger and an increased risk of aggression.

84 Whilst these matters may offer some explanation for your offending, they are not in any way an excuse for it.

85 Your moral culpability for this offending is very high. You do not have any cognitive deficit, mental impairment, or difficult upbringing, that might have obscured your judgment or affected your capacity to control your actions.

86 You were motivated by jealousy, rage and a sense of entitlement. You were unable or unwilling to accept that Ms Lezsak was entitled to end her relationship with you, and move on to a new relationship. Tensions had been simmering since at least the previous day, but you exploded with extreme rage as soon as you heard Ms Lezsak speaking to Mr Jordan that morning. The violence and persistence of your attack, with multiple dangerous weapons, in the presence of vulnerable witnesses, and in spite of numerous opportunities to desist, bespeaks a high level of moral culpability.

87 Your counsel submitted that this offending was completely out of character, and a total aberration from an otherwise unblemished life.

88 You have no prior criminal convictions, and have never been in trouble with the police before. You have studied and worked hard throughout your life, to support yourself and your family. There is no evidence, or suggestion, that you had been physically violent towards Ms Lezsak, or anybody else, before this offending. Those matters have a mitigatory effect on your sentence.

89 However, the weight to be given to previous good character will vary according to the circumstances of the case and the offender. An offender's previous good character may carry less weight in circumstances of extremely serious offending, such as this. It may also carry less weight in circumstances where the offending itself stems from other aspects of the offender's character - in this case, your tendency to focus on your own feelings and needs in times of stress, your problematic attitudes towards women in general, your victim blaming attitude towards Ms Lezsak, and your increased potential for volatile anger and aggression when using illegal steroids.

90 I turn to consider your prospects of rehabilitation and the issue of specific deterrence.

91 Mr Newton conducted formal testing to assess your risk of future offending. He assessed you as posing a moderate-low risk of further intimate-partner violence; he described that as being "about average" compared with other offenders in the area. He recommended that future treatment to reduce the risk of reoffending should focus on improving your communication skills (to reduce interpersonal instability), addressing your problematic gender-based beliefs, and preventing a relapse to the abuse of steroids. He noted that such treatment should be readily available in both custodial and community settings.

92 It is unsurprising, given your age and history, that you have found it difficult to adjust to life in prison. However, I accept that you have used your time in custody productively. You have worked as a laundry billet and hairdresser. You have undertaken various courses, and are interested in studying further.

93 On the one hand, the following matters all suggest you have positive prospects of rehabilitation: your lack of previous convictions or any history of violence; your hard-working history and ethos; your willingness to undertake further studies to improve yourself; and the ongoing support of your parents, cousin, wife and children. On the other hand, your prospects of rehabilitation are tempered somewhat by your limited insight into the impact of your offending on Ms Lezsak, Lily, and members of their family, and your continuing victim blaming mentality. However, you will have ample time in custody to address the various treatment needs identified by Mr Newton, with the prospect of parole at some future date as an incentive to address them.

94 Given those matters, and the age you will be when you eventually become eligible for release, I accept that there is no great need for specific deterrence in your case.

95 Family violence is a serious problem in our community. The Court of Appeal noted a decade ago that "the shameful truth is that domestic violence is the leading cause of illness, disability and death among Victorian women aged between 15 and 44."[2] Tragically, that remains the case today.

96 All too frequently, courts are faced with male offenders like you, who are unable or unwilling to accept that their relationship is over, or that their partner has a right to move on with their life, and who respond with anger, jealousy and violence. The murder of a domestic partner is the most extreme form of family violence.

97 Family violence is a complex problem, which needs to be addressed in multiple ways; there is no single, simple solution.

98 As appeal courts have repeatedly stated, the principles of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment will ordinarily be given primacy in sentencing for the murder of a partner in a domestic setting, even where there are circumstances of provocation or great emotional stress.

99 There are a number of other matters that are relevant to sentencing you.

100 You indicated your intention to plead guilty in December 2023, before the third committal mention. You formally entered a plea of guilty in this court on 1 February 2024. I accept that your plea was made at the earliest reasonable opportunity.

101 You are entitled to a discount on the sentence to be imposed, in recognition of your plea, and its utilitarian value. Your plea has facilitated the course of justice. The community has, by your plea, been spared the time and cost of a trial. The family and friends of Ms Lezsak have been spared what would, undoubtedly, have been a traumatic trial for all involved.

102 In the course of oral submissions, your counsel sensibly abandoned the suggestion made in her written outline that you should also be entitled to what is known as a Worboyes[3] discount.

103 In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, the criminal justice system became severely congested, and jury trials were unable to proceed at all, or were delayed. In a case called Worboyes, the Court of Appeal said that there were several reasons why a plea of guilty should be given additional weight during the pandemic, because it carried a greater utilitarian benefit than at other times. Even though the Supreme Court cleared its backlog several years ago, the Court of Appeal held that, for the sake of consistency, Worboyes discounts (even if modest) must continue to be given in all courts, for so long as any of them were experiencing pandemic-related delays.[4]

104 You were arrested in June 2023, long after any pandemic-related custodial conditions had ended. You pleaded guilty after all Victorian state courts had cleared their pandemic backlogs. There was no evidentiary basis for ever seeking an additional Worboyes discount in this case.[5]

105 Apart from any remorse which is inherent in your plea of guilty, I do not accept that you are genuinely remorseful for your terrible actions. Although you have made several statements about being sorry for what happened, on close analysis they are not evidence of genuine contrition, because you still lack insight into your actions or genuinely accept responsibility for them.

106 You are clearly sorry for finding yourself facing a very long prison sentence. You are also sorry for robbing your own children of their father, and your elderly parents of the support of their only child. I accept that you genuinely regret the effect that your actions have had on yourself and your family.

107 What is missing from your various statements is any real empathy for the impact of your actions on Ms Lezsak's family and friends and, in particular, her children. Whilst you have in recent times said that you would "trade your life" for Ms Lezsak's, your insights into your offending have tended to centre around avoiding your own pain, rather than facing the consequences of what you have done. That is consistent with your actions in attempting to end your own life following the attack, to avoid the consequences of your actions.

108 In your conversations with family and friends, and your statements to police, you have repeatedly blamed Ms Lezsak for what happened, accusing her of "ruining your life". You have also repeatedly tried to suggest that what happened was outside your control in some way, that she "made you" black out and lose control.

109 Mr Newton believes that your insight into your conduct remains at an early stage. He says you are struggling to accept responsibility for your actions; instead, you focus on Ms Lezsak's actions. You continue to focus on the sense of rejection you felt when she expressed her desire to leave the relationship, and the apparent presence of another man in her life. Mr Newton says that your feelings of rejection and hurt overwhelm your ability to experience empathy for Ms Lezsak, and hence compromise your remorse. Those beliefs constitute a victim blaming mentality, and serve as a barrier that prevents you from confronting the full enormity of your conduct.

110 You have spent all of your time on remand in protective custody. That is because prison authorities have assessed that your safety could be significantly compromised if you were placed in mainstream custody.

111 At any given time, a significant proportion of Victorian prisoners are held in protective custody of one sort or another. It is therefore necessary to have regard to the actual conditions in which a prisoner has been, or is likely to be, held.

112 For the first 10 days in custody, you were in a very restrictive form of protection, which included only one hour per day out of your cell. Since then, you have been in a less restrictive protection unit, in which you are able to be out of your cell during all unlock hours, and to mix with other prisoners in your unit. You have also been able to access the gym and running track, undertake a range of courses, and participate in employment (albeit with a narrower range of options than for mainstream prisoners).

113 I accept that there is a realistic prospect that you may need to remain in some form of protection, for some period of time after sentencing. However, the conditions and duration of further protective custody may vary greatly, depending on where Corrections Victoria chooses to place you after sentencing.

114 I have taken your protection status into account in sentencing you.

115 The maximum penalty for murder is life imprisonment. The maximum penalty for recklessly causing injury is 5 years' imprisonment.

116 Murder has a standard sentence of 25 years' imprisonment. The standard sentence for an offence is the sentence that, taking into account only the objective factors, is the middle of the range of seriousness for that offence. The objective factors look only at the offending conduct, and exclude any matters personal to the offender.

117 A standard sentence is not the same thing as a mandatory sentence. Nor is a standard sentence the primary sentencing consideration, or the starting point from which to add or subtract time. It is just one of the many matters to be taken into account by a court in performing the instinctive synthesis method of sentencing.

118 I have also had regard to current sentencing practices, bearing in mind that they are not determinative; they are no more or less important than any of the other factors which the sentencing court is required to consider.

119 Every case is different and needs to be decided on its own facts, having regard to the particular circumstances of the offence and the offender. It is common for cases to involve a mixture of aggravating and mitigating factors, which pull the sentencing court in opposite directions; this case is no different in that regard.

120 There is no question that your offending falls well above the mid-range for each offence. But, terrible as this offending was, and devastating as it has been for Ms Lezsak and her loved ones, having regard to all the matters I have discussed, this case does not warrant the imposition of the maximum penalties.

121 Balancing as best I am able the competing considerations laid down in the Sentencing Act 1991, and having regard to the matters I have just discussed, for the charge of murder, I sentence you to 30 years' imprisonment. This will be the base sentence.

122 On the charge of recklessly causing injury, I sentence you to 3 years' imprisonment.

123 As far as the question of cumulation of sentences is concerned, the two offences were committed within the same incident, and there is a considerable overlap in the facts. It is an aggravating feature of the murder that you viciously attacked Ms Lezsak in the presence of her vulnerable children and mother. That you also recklessly injured Lily with the knife, as she tried to physically defend her mother, gives rise to separate criminality, and requires some cumulation of the sentences. Having regard to those matters, as well as to the principle of totality, I order that 1 year of the charge of recklessly causing injury be served cumulatively on the base sentence.

124 This makes a total effective sentence of 31 years' imprisonment. I set a period of 25 years as the time you must serve before you are eligible for parole.

125 Had you not pleaded guilty I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of imprisonment of 37 years, with a non-parole period of 31 years.

126 Further, I declare that the period to be reckoned as already served under this sentence is 358 days, not including today's date. I direct that there be noted in the records of the court the fact that such declaration was made and its details.

[1] Pseudonyms have been used for Ms Lezsak's children, to protect their identities.

[2] Filiz v The Queen [2014] VSCA 212, [23].

[3] Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169.

[4] Biba v The Queen [2022] VSCA 168, [26].

[5] Unfortunately, too many practitioners are still seeking Worboyes discounts as a matter of course, without any proper evidentiary basis for doing so.