Prosecution v Accused

2 At the time she was murdered, Ms Osias was 46 years old. She had four children: a son, Max, and three daughters, Lexy, X, and Y.[1]

3 You and Ms Osias began dating in around October 2022, although you had known her for longer. In late 2022 you moved into Ms Osias' home in Kangaroo Flat, where she lived with eight-year-old X and six-year-old Y**.** You lived there until July 2023, when your relationship with Ms Osias began to deteriorate. According to X, the relationship began to 'fizzle out' when you drank a lot of alcohol. She said that you and Ms Osias had many fights and described your relationship with her mother as 'love, then aggressive, love, then aggressive' - you were the aggressive one.

4 You had a history of being violent towards Ms Osias before 29 October 2023. Late in the evening of 15 July 2023, you attended Ms Osias' home uninvited after you had been asked to leave the previous day. You made various threats to harm yourself if Ms Osias did not come out to speak with you. After forcing entry to her home, you confronted Ms Osias while she was speaking on the phone and ripped the phone from her ear, pulling some of her hair out in the process. You dragged her to the ground, which caused her to hit her head on the floor. The police were called, and Ms Osias made a statement against you. You were later arrested and taken to Bendigo Hospital, where you remained as a voluntary psychiatric patient until you discharged yourself on 4 August 2023. On that day, you were interviewed and an interim family violence intervention order was put in place against you, to protect Ms Osias. That order included conditions barring you from contacting or being in the presence of any of the affected family members or attending at Ms Osias' home.[2]

5 Despite the intervention order in place, between 17 and 23 October 2023 you made a total of 21 calls to Ms Osias, only eight of which were answered. Between 23 and 28 October, you made further calls to Ms Osias, which went unanswered.

6 On 29 October 2023, Ms Osias had arranged for a babysitter to look after X and Y in the afternoon while she was at work. She told the babysitter to keep the blinds down, and the doors and windows locked. She returned home at around 10pm.

7 Meanwhile, that morning you had apparently purchased a 700ml bottle of vodka and consumed half of it before 11am.[3] After passing out and waking up sometime after 6pm, you continued to drink and then consumed 12 olanzapine tablets, apparently to kill yourself.[4]

8 Between 9:05pm and 11:10pm, you sent five text messages to Ms Osias, all of which went unanswered.

9 Shortly after 11pm, you attended Ms Osias' home and entered the yard. You approached the window of X and Y's bedroom. Ms Osias was also asleep in that room - she had taken to sleeping there with her daughters after your previous attendance at her home. You smashed the window, injuring yourself in the process.[5] You then forced entry through the adjacent sliding door.

10 Tragically, much of the detail of your offending in the home is only known through the retelling by X, who bore witness to the fatal assault you inflicted on her mother. You apparently have no recollection of the events that followed,[6] but do not dispute X**'s** account.

11 You dragged Ms Osias out of bed and assaulted her. Her screams woke X, who walked out of her bedroom and observed blood in the hallway leading to the kitchen and dining area. She saw her mother lying on the dining room floor, and watched you strangle her and bang her head on the floor. She watched you grab a large kitchen knife, which you then used to stab Ms Osias multiple times and to cut her neck. X yelled at you to stop. You did not respond, but she overheard you call her mother a 'bitch'.

12 You left through the back door. X followed you and asked where Ms Osias' phone was, and you said it was in the bedroom. You then jumped over the fence, returned to your car, and drove to the Barkers Creek Reservoir.

13 X called 000 using her mother's phone. Attending police found Ms Osias lying in a large pool of blood. Her face was swollen and had visible lacerations. A large knife, covered in blood, was found in the crook of her elbow. Paramedics attempted to perform CPR and traumatic cardiac arrest interventions. Tragically, Ms Osias was declared deceased shortly after her arrival at Bendigo Hospital.

14 Your car was located by police at the Reservoir just before 3am. With the assistance of the police airwing, you were located nearby just before 4:30am. You were found lying on your back, with your legs submerged in the water. You were subsequently arrested and appeared to be substance affected and incoherent. You had several injuries to your limbs, some of which required sutures, and blood on your face. Your phone was never recovered by police.

15 Upon your arrest, you were transported to Bendigo Hospital for treatment. You were interviewed by police upon your release on 31 October 2023 and made a no comment interview.

16 An autopsy and post-mortem CT scan conducted on Ms Osias' body revealed the brutality of your attack on her. She had extensive bruising to her scalp, and fractures to her cheek, eye socket, and both sides of her jaw. She had two stab wounds in her neck, one of which cut her carotid artery, along with various bruises, abrasions, lacerations and incised wounds to her head, face, neck, collarbone, and arms. She had defensive injuries to her hands, and severe bruising on her temples. There was evidence of injuries consistent with neck compression from manual strangulation. Ms Osias' cause of death was determined to be head and neck injuries, including exsanguination from a stab wound to the carotid artery.

17 Before I continue, it is important that I say something about the effect your offending has had on Ms Osias' loved ones.

18 Ms Osias was a single mother to X and Y, following their father's tragic passing in 2020. In taking Ms Osias' life, you have deprived her two young girls of their only parent. You have also robbed her elder daughter, Lexy, of her young adulthood. At only 20 years old, she became the guardian of her two younger sisters - a role she has taken on with admirable strength.

19 Lexy's victim impact statement is harrowing and incredibly moving. Her pain and sadness is palpable. She describes herself as living in her 'worst nightmare', engulfed by indescribable pain, heartbreak, and numbness. The loss of her mother, her favourite person, has torn apart her family, friendships, and any life aspirations she once had. She speaks of the impact Ms Osias' death has had on X and Y, and the unfathomable trauma they have endured. Their mother's death in such tragic and incomprehensible circumstances has affected them in ways they are still too young to understand. They are scared to lose the people they love, because that loss is all they have known. At only seven years old, Y struggles to understand healthy relationship dynamics, and assumes that any disagreement between a couple will lead to someone getting hurt. Nine-year-old X blames herself for things beyond her control. The lives of three daughters have been irrevocably changed.

20 While the Court did not receive a victim impact statement from Ms Osias's son, I pause to also acknowledge his loss.

21 Ms Osias' sister in law, Ms Helen Turley, described Ms Osias as a caring, resilient, and hardworking woman who had already endured more hardship than many others. She thinks of Ms Osias daily and saw her as an inspiration. Her heart is broken for Ms Osias, her children, and all that she had worked so hard to achieve.

22 The victim impact statements of Ms Turley and Lexy spoke proudly of the woman Ms Osias was. She was born in the Philippines as one of seven children and was often beaten and left to sleep in the streets. Despite this, she continued to support and provide for her family back in the Philippines, in addition to raising her own family in Australia. She migrated to Australia in the early 2000s, and experienced further hardship through the breakdown of two relationships and the tragic death of her former partner. She was incredibly resilient and worked hard to educate herself and gain employment. She was described as a kind, courageous, and loving mother.

23 I have had regard to the impact Ms Osias' death has had on her loved ones in considering the appropriate sentence. No sentence I impose could ever fully compensate for the loss of Ms Osias. Rather, the sentence must reflect a number of factors which I am required by law to consider, only one of which is the impact of the offending on the victim's family and friends.

25 You were 44 years old at the time of the offending. You are now 45.

26 You are the eldest of five children. Your parents separated when you were a young child, and you were largely raised by your maternal grandparents. You spent a short period in foster care.

27 You have two children of your own with your former partner, who I will refer to as MP.

28 Your childhood was traumatic and dysfunctional. You were a witness and victim of family violence, including physical and sexual abuse.

29 The violence and instability of your home life disrupted your education. You changed schools frequently, and overall found engaging in schoolwork challenging. You left school part-way through Year 11 and obtained employment in various unskilled roles.

30 You were exposed to alcoholism through your father and maternal grandfather, and you began using illicit substances at a young age as a means of self-medicating. As an adolescent, you began using cannabis daily. At the same time, you began using alcohol and consuming excessive amounts of benzodiazepines. This substance use affected your behaviour.

31 During adulthood, your addiction largely manifested as alcohol dependence and use of unprescribed sedatives. You reported drinking excessive alcohol during your relationship with Ms Osias, but nevertheless reported that the period between January and June 2023 was 'generally very positive'.

32 You have previously engaged in voluntary and mandatory drug and alcohol rehabilitation, most recently in 2021, and you have indicated an ongoing desire to achieve sustainable rehabilitation.

33 As was put by your counsel, your mental instability has been a pervasive factor in your life. Throughout your adolescence into adulthood, you have reported paranoia and depression. You have engaged in self-harm. Despite this, you have demonstrated periods of mental and social stability. These stable periods largely coincide with your relationship with MP.

34 As early as 1995, at the age of 19, you had a provisional diagnosis of 'prodromal psychosis'. In late 1996 or early 1997, you were diagnosed with 'schizophreniform psychosis'. Your diagnoses have varied in the subsequent decades; however, you were recently assessed by Associate Professor Andrew Carroll, who opines that you present with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder ('Complex PTSD') and Schizotypal Disorder. These conditions are trauma related and genetically based. I will return to Dr Carroll's opinion later in these reasons.

35 The evidence before me suggests that although your criminal priors are limited, you have a concerning history of resorting to violence.

36 In 1999, at the age of 20, you were found not guilty by reason of mental impairment by the New South Wales District Court of one charge of malicious wounding with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm. During that incident, you stabbed the victim three times, with one stab wound puncturing his lung. You were subsequently placed in secure psychiatric units between 1999 and 2003.

37 In 2011, you received a suspended sentence of four months' imprisonment on a charge of recklessly causing injury. The victim was a male stranger, and the offending was temporally connected to the breakdown of your relationship with MP.[7]

38 At the time you murdered Ms Osias, there were pending charges in relation to the assault of her on 15 July 2023. Further, there are other notable instances of family violence during your relationship with MP. After your relationship with MP ended, MP recalls that there was 'a lot of verbal abuse and some stalking' on your part, including one incident where you attended and entered her home unannounced.[8] She recalls that you 'punched the car once, and punched the fridge once'.[9] In May 2010, you threatened violence against MP.[10] The police were not involved in any of these incidents, and you instruct that they did not contribute to your separation from MP.[11] Reportedly, the separation was largely amicable and prior to your remand, you continued to co-parent your children.[12]

39 You have previously made limited attempts to engage in offence-specific treatment, including anger management and Men's Behaviour Change programs.

40 I now turn to the sentencing considerations, beginning with the objective gravity of your offending. The offence of murder is the most serious offence in our criminal justice system and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

41 I am satisfied that at the time of the murder you lost your self-control, driven by what Dr Carroll described as a 'strong subjective sense of moral indignation and rage' towards Ms Osias, who in your mind had abruptly and unfairly abandoned, betrayed, and deliberately hurt you.[13] The ferocity of the physical assault and the number and location of the stab wounds is indisputable evidence that you could only have intended to kill her.

42 You attended Ms Osias' home late at night when she was asleep. You knew no other adult was likely to be present. You knew the layout of her house, and knew that you were not welcome there. You violently forced entry to her home and set upon her without hesitation, dragging her from her bed. Although it was not a carefully planned attack, there was a degree of forethought implicit in your behaviour.

43 You totally overpowered Ms Osias. At almost half your weight and more than a foot shorter, she was completely defenceless against you. Your presence in these circumstances must have been terrifying as she vainly tried to defend herself.

44 You strangled Ms Osias and repeatedly beat her head against the ground. Once you had disabled her, you proceeded to arm yourself with a knife from the kitchen and continued the attack. Having inflicted the fatal stab wounds, you left Ms Osias severely wounded and dying. Before leaving, you referred to Ms Osias as a 'bitch'. Your offending was cruel, vicious, and entirely merciless.

45 There are a number of features which aggravate your offending. The assault was an unprovoked attack against your former partner. It escalated to the use of a weapon, despite Ms Osias being unarmed and, by that stage, immobilised and utterly defenceless. In what is almost impossible to imagine, Ms Osias was killed in the presence of her young daughter, while her youngest daughter lay in bed metres away. In acting upon your intention to kill, you knew full well that you would leave her four children motherless, and given the death of their father, would leave X and Y orphaned.

46 Ms Osias was killed in her own home, where she and her children were entitled to feel safe. Your conduct brazenly flouted the intervention order put in place to protect Ms Osias.

47 Ms Osias was entitled to end her relationship without fear of harm. Yet, you attacked and killed her simply because she had expressed a desire not to speak to you and had made it clear that the relationship was over.

48 For the reasons that I have outlined, objectively, Ms Osias' murder at your hands was a most serious instance of that criminal offence.

49 In assessing your moral culpability, I have considered Dr Carroll's evidence and your background and personal circumstances.

50 As I have said, Dr Carroll assessed and diagnosed you with Complex PTSD and Schizotypal Disorder. In his opinion, these conditions have their genesis in your adolescence.

51 According to Dr Carroll, your Complex PTSD largely manifests itself through severe problems with affect and emotional regulation, especially in the context of intimate partners. You often resort to heavy alcohol use, violence, or suicidal actions as a means of emotional regulation during times of stress.

52 Your mental state at the time of the killing was characterised by an intense rage directed towards Ms Osias. You were severely emotionally dysregulated and may have been experiencing a degree of psychosis which was a secondary factor fuelling your anger. Dr Carroll was of the view that you were in an actively suicidal state, and that your offending could be classified as a murder-failed suicide. It is difficult to be satisfied either way on the available evidence, but in any event, I agree with your counsel's submission that this is neither a mitigating nor aggravating factor.

53 In his evidence, Dr Carroll expressed the view that an individual without your mental health profile would be unlikely to have reacted in the same disproportionate manner. Further, your extreme reaction was influenced by your intoxication with alcohol and sedatives.

54 Crucially, Dr Carroll's evidence is that it was the tandem effects of your Complex PTSD and your intoxication which led you to behave in the way that you did.[14] Put another way, either of those factors on their own would not have been sufficient to enliven the 'rage' which led you to murder Ms Osias. Had you not used alcohol that day, it is unlikely Ms Osias would have been killed.[15]

55 Accepting Dr Carroll's evidence as I do, there is a degree of casual connection between your Complex PTSD and your offending. However, the degree of mitigation requires consideration of the nature and severity of both the impairment and the offending behaviour.[16] Through your plea of guilty, you accept that you intended to kill Ms Osias. I accept that your mental impairment had a bearing on the magnitude of rage you felt towards her, and possibly on your capacity for self-control. However, it did not impact your understanding of what you were doing, the seriousness of your conduct, and its consequences. I am prepared to accept that your Complex PTSD compromised your capacity to control your temper, and to that limited extent, played some role in your offending.

56 Your counsel submitted that given your mental impairments, you are not an appropriate vehicle for general and specific deterrence. Although there may be a limited reduction in its relevance, there is no reason general deterrence should have no role to play in determining the appropriate sentence. There is nothing to indicate you did not have a full appreciation of the wrongfulness of your conduct. As for specific deterrence, submissions on this point did not assume much significance.

57 I have also had regard to your significant history of trauma, including an unstable and unsettled childhood and adolescence. The law states that in light of this, your moral culpability could not be equated with that of a person who had the advantage of a normal, stable, and regular upbringing.[17]

58 For the reasons set out above, I am prepared to accept that your mental impairment and your disturbed childhood are relevant factors that mitigate your moral culpability for Ms Osias' murder. I repeat, however, that the extent to which they do so must be limited. Taking these matters into account, I nevertheless consider that your moral culpability can only be characterised as high.

59 You offered to plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity, fully acknowledging responsibility for your actions not long after your admission into custody. Your plea is of great utilitarian value, and has spared the witnesses, including young X, from giving evidence at a trial. This is an important matter in mitigation. I am also satisfied that your plea is reflective of genuine remorse, which again manifested at an early stage.

60 Consideration of your prospects of rehabilitation is a somewhat vexed exercise, noting that the inevitable consequence of your offending is the imposition of a lengthy head sentence and non-parole period.[18]

61 I have considered your criminal history and the letter from MP indicating that she and your children continue to support you.

62 You have attempted to use your time in custody productively and have remained a model prisoner. Given the nature of your offending, you are being held in a protective unit, which has impacted your ability to access services and courses. You have also been assaulted by another inmate.

63 Importantly, Dr Carroll's evidence is that your risk of re-offending is linked to the effective management of your mental health conditions, which are permanent but treatable. In his view, your conditions would be best managed by life-long medication overseen by a psychiatrist, and further long term psychotherapy treatment.

64 Justice Health records demonstrate that you are compliant with treatment, and your response to that treatment is encouraging. Your Schizotypal Disorder is now under control with prescription medication. Concerningly, Dr Carroll's evidence is that the long-term psychotherapy required to manage your Complex PTSD is not readily available in custody. You are also on the waitlist for drug and alcohol treatment programs. Your rehabilitation critically relies on you receiving all of this treatment.

65 I accept that, provided you have access to appropriate mental health care and you remain abstinent from substances, your prospects of rehabilitation are reasonable.

66 There are a number of other factors I am required by law to take into account in determining the appropriate sentence.

67 I have considered the principle of parsimony,[19] which requires that I must not impose a sentence more severe than that which is necessary to achieve the sentencing purposes. I have also had regard to the comparable cases provided by the parties, and current sentencing practices.

68 As your crime was committed after 1 February 2018, the standard sentence scheme applies. I have had regard to the standard sentence of 25 years in determining the appropriate sentence. The standard sentence is not a mandatory sentence. It is to be treated as a legislative guidepost and is only one factor that must be considered as part of the instinctive synthesis.[20]

69 It is necessary that the sentence that I impose on you adequately express the condemnation by the Court, and by the community, of your offending, and to vindicate the value of each individual life.

70 The sentence must send a clear message to all men. Ms Osias' death is yet another example of the murder of a woman at the hands of an enraged male partner. This type of crime has become distressingly familiar. In the last two months alone, this Court has sentenced three other men for murder in the context of family violence.[21] Women are being killed by their male partners at a disproportionate and utterly terrifying rate. Ms Osias should have been free to remain in or leave her relationship with you as she saw fit. Her life was precious to her, her children, her family, her friends, and to the community as a whole.

71 At the time she was murdered, an intervention order was in place to safeguard Ms Osias. Yet, the full force of the law was still not enough to protect her. Your offending undermines our confidence in the ability of the law to adequately protect women and children. The ripple effect is wide-reaching: it impacts first responders; it creates fear for other women and children protected by intervention orders; it leaves each of us with a feeling of helplessness. The message must be heard loud and clear: committing serious violence in a domestic setting, and taking the life of another, will be met with extraordinarily strong punishment.

72 Mr Pualic, please stand. For the murder of Analyn Osias, I sentence you to imprisonment for 24 years and six months.

73 I order that you serve 19 years before becoming eligible for parole.[22]

74 I further declare that you have served 417 days of pre-sentence detention, not including this day.

75 Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that but for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to 29 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 24 years.

[1] Pseudonyms have been used for Ms Osias' youngest children, pursuant to the non-publication order made by me on 9 December 2024.

[2] I note there was some contention as to whether the relationship between the accused and Ms Osias was ongoing at the time of the offending. I do not accept that the relationship had rekindled following the assault in July 2023. There was an intervention order in place. Ms Osias told a number of people that she had ended the relationship. Her behaviour in the days and hours prior to her death are suggestive of a woman in fear, and someone who did not want to have any further contact with the accused.

[3] Report of Associate Professor Andrew Carroll dated 3 October 2024, 40 [240] ('Carroll Report').

[5] There were submissions made at the plea as to whether the accused's injuries were caused by his breaking and entering through the window or were self-inflicted as a means of suicide attempt. I accept based on the evidence presented at plea, and in particular, the photos which formed Exhibit P11 at the plea, that the injuries were at least in part caused by his breaking and entering.

[6] This self-report was accepted as truthful by Dr Carroll. He considered that a number of factors may have led to the 'anterograde amnesia', although it was most likely the effects of the alcohol and sedatives: T66.4-67.27.

[7] Outline of defence plea submissions dated 25 October 2024, 11 [70] ('Defence plea submissions').

[8] Statement of MP dated 10 November 2023 (Depositions, 147 [6]); Carroll Report, 19 [140].

[9] Statement of MP dated 10 November 2023 (Depositions, 147 [5]); Carroll Report, 14 [106].

[11] Defence plea submissions, 8 [42].

[16] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269, 275 [25]-[26].

[17] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571.

[18] Murder is a Category 1 offence requiring the imposition of a custodial sentence: Sentencing Act 1991 ss 3, 5(2G) ('the Act').

[20] Brown v The Queen [2019] VSCA 286; (2019) 59 VR 462.

[21] DPP v Barbaro [2024] VSC 667 (1 November 2024); DPP v Lo Bianco [2024] VSC 681 (7 November 2024); DPP v Kurera [2024] VSC 809 (19 December 2024).

[22] As required by s 11A(4)(b) of the Act, the non-parole period is at least 70% of the head sentence. I do not consider that it is in the interests of justice to order otherwise.