//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2026] NSWSC 1088
Supreme Court of NSW
2026-09-11
N Adams CJ at CL
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Billings [2026] NSWSC 1088
Hearing dates: 3-4 September 2026
Date of orders: 11 September 2026
Decision date: 11 September 2026
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: N Adams CJ at CL
Decision: Daniel Billings is sentenced to 28 years’ imprisonment commencing on 20 April 2024 and expiring on 19 April 2052, with a non-parole period of 20 years commencing on 20 April 2024 and expiring on 19 April 2044.
Catchwords: SENTENCING — murder — domestic violence — stabbing of former partner after she made allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence to police —assessment of objective seriousness — planning — motive of retribution for police report — element of public justice — no callousness after murder — objective seriousness in high end of the range
SENTENCING — murder — domestic violence — consideration of subjective case — reduction in moral culpability due to depressive illness and adverse childhood events — breach of bail conditions and apprehended domestic violence order — reasonable prospects of rehabilitation — genuine remorse — reduction of discount for early guilty plea — hardship in custody — reference to comparative cases — finding of special circumstances
Original judgment source is linked above.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 18, 23A
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), Pt 4, Div 1A, ss 3A, 21A, 22, 25F, 30E, 33, 35(4), 44, 61(1)
Cases Cited: Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146; [2002] NSWCCA 518
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1
CC v R; R v CC [2021] NSWCCA 71; (2021) 289 A Crim R 453
Christopher Ross v R [2019] NSWCCA 314
Colak v R [2026] NSWCCA 108
Daher v R [2026] NSWCCA 26
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Dorsett v R [2024] NSWCCA 192
DS v R; DM v R (2022) 109 NSWLR 82; [2022] NSWCCA 156
Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209
Evatt (a pseudonym) v R [2025] NSWCCA 130
Harris v R [2021] NSWCCA 322
Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Hilier v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2009] NSWCCA 312; (2009) 198 A Crim R 565
Kovaleff v R [2026] NSWCCA 56
Lloyd v R [2022] NSWCCA 18
Luque v R [2017] NSWCCA 226
Milat v R; Klein v R [2014] NSWCCA 29
Moiler v R [2021] NSWCCA 73
Morris v R [2026] NSWCCA 119
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38
Oliver v R [2025] NSWCCA 227
R v Cherry [2017] NSWCCA 150
R v Gina Kennedy (a pseudonym) [2022] NSWSC 1499
R v Hachem [2023] NSWSC 535
R v Halloun [2014] NSWSC 1705
R v Hamid [2006] NSWCCA 302; (2006) 164 A Crim R 179
R v He [2024] NSWSC 417
R v King [2025] NSWSC 1572
R v Kovaleff [2023] NSWSC 302
R v Ney [2021] NSWSC 529
R v Simon [2025] NSWSC 309
R v Sultana (No.8) [2025] NSWSC 1573
R v Tammajanta [2024] NSWSC 1180
R v Thompson [2025] NSWCCA 133
R v Thompson [2025] NSWSC 419
R v Wang [2020] NSWSC 1335
R v Zafar [2024] NSWSC 1639
RO v R [2019] NSWCCA 183
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54
TL v R [2017] NSWCCA 308
Towers v R [2025] NSWCCA 142
Wood v R [2019] NSWCCA 309
Evans v R [2017] NSWCCA 281
Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Daniel Reece Billings (Offender)
Representation: Counsel:
Mr L Carr SC / Mr M Harper (Crown)
Ms S Talbert (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Offender)
File Number(s): 2024/00149845; 2024/00127213
Publication restriction: Nil.
As of early April 2024, Molly Ticehurst was a childcare worker living in Forbes with her six-year-old son. She was the much-loved daughter of her parents Kate and Tony Ticehurst. She had recently ended a relationship with Daniel Billings which had commenced in early 2022.
On 5 April 2024, Ms Ticehurst attended Forbes Police Station and reported her fears concerning the recent behaviour of Mr Billings. She alleged that he had committed a number of criminal offences in the context of the breakdown of their relationship. Those offences were two counts of damaging her property, one count of killing a co-owned puppy, and two counts of sexual intercourse without consent. A provisional apprehended domestic violence order (“AVO”) was made by police at that time.
Mr Billings was arrested later that day and charged with these offences. He admitted that he had committed them, except for the sexual assault offences which he strongly denied. He was granted conditional bail the following day. It was a condition of both his bail and the AVO that he not approach Ms Ticehurst nor come within 10 kilometres of her home in Forbes.
On 21 April 2024, in breach of both his bail conditions and the terms of his AVO, Mr Billings drove from his home in Parkes to the town of Forbes and broke into Ms Ticehurst’s premises late at night by smashing through her bedroom window armed with a hunting knife. He stabbed her multiple times to her face and neck, causing her almost immediate death.
Mr Billings was arrested that night and made full admissions to Ms Ticehurst’s murder. He pleaded guilty in the Local Court, and his matter was committed to this Court for sentence. The delay in that plea being entered was due to a Forensic Psychiatrist providing an expert report opining that the severity of Mr Billings’ depressive illness at the time of the killing meant that he had the partial defence of substantial impairment available to him. [1] Despite this, Mr Billings pleaded guilty to murder. When he did so, the relevance of his depressive illness, in particular, whether it contributed to his offending in a material way, became a matter to be considered on sentence.
Murder carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of 20 years’ imprisonment. [2] It is the most serious criminal offence dealt with by this Court. In sentencing Mr Billings, he has asked that the Court take into account four further offences on a Form 1, [3] namely an offence of committing an act of cruelty on an animal, two counts of damaging property belonging to Ms Ticehurst, and one offence of contravening an AVO.
Ms Ticehurst’s death attracted and continues to attract significant media attention. Regrettably, it is not uncommon for women to be killed by their estranged partners, as evidenced by the numerous sentencing decisions of this Court in such cases. As Bell CJ observed only last year, [4] domestic violence is a scourge that afflicts modern Australia and it is not a new problem. [5] His Honour went on to observe that it has been described, more recently, as a “national emergency – and an ongoing national priority”. [6] As I observed when sentencing for a domestic violence murder in 2024, [7] it cannot be doubted that the community has become increasingly concerned in recent times at the levels of domestic violence being inflicted on women by men who are supposed to love them or have loved them.
One feature of Ms Ticehurst’s murder which distinguishes it is that neither of the parties were able to identify a murder in which an estranged partner has killed a witness because she made an allegation of sexual assault against them. I shall return to the significance of that aspect of the murder later in these reasons.
The family and friends of Ms Ticehurst undoubtedly seek a sentence reflecting the sentencing purposes of retribution and denunciation. It is understandable that their focus is on the objective seriousness of the offending and its impact on those who loved Ms Ticehurst. On the other hand, I am required by law to consider a broad range of factors on sentence, many of which are personal to the offender. If one or more of these factors are established, they can act to reduce any sentence which would otherwise be imposed as part of the instinctive synthesis undertaken by sentencing judges. In this regard, it was common ground that, as in many other cases of domestic violence, Mr Billings suffered from a depressive illness at the time of the murder which, consistent with well-established legal principle, can act to mitigate a sentence imposed.
It is in this context that I must arrive upon the appropriate sentence to punish Mr Billings for his actions in murdering Ms Ticehurst. I must make a number of evaluative findings in the face of disputed evidence. I am required to identify and consider all factors relevant to the sentence and ultimately make a value judgment as to the appropriate sentence. I may not make any findings adverse to the interests of Mr Billings unless they are established beyond reasonable doubt, whilst it is sufficient if facts that are favourable to him are established on the balance of probabilities. [8]
Mr Billings was born on 16 January 1995. He was between 28 and 29 years old at the time of the offences.
Ms Ticehurst was born on 12 April 1996. She was 28 years of age at the date of her death.
Ms Ticehurst lived at 24A Young Street, Forbes NSW. She had a son from a previous relationship, and she co-parented him with her ex-partner who also lived in Forbes. Her son was 6 years old when she died.
Ms Ticehurst and Mr Billings did not reside together. He worked as a trainee exploration driller at different locations at a company based in Parkes where he resided.
Mr Billings and Ms Ticehurst were in a relationship from about early 2022 until around June 2023, when they separated. They recommenced their relationship a short time later and separated on a final basis on 18 December 2023; however, they continued to see each other after they separated.
Ms Ticehurst gave an account about the events in the months following their separation to police on 5 April 2024 when she made a complaint of sexual assault and domestic violence offences against Mr Billings. Some of her account was taken in the form of a Domestic Violence Evidence in Chief interview (“DVEC”) and supplemented by notes that she gave to police, which police photocopied (“the notes”). In relation to the sexual assault allegations, police did not take a statement from Ms Ticehurst on this date nor any other date prior to her death.
… & we had recently bought a dachshund puppy a month prior. The night I ended things Daniel Billings packed his belongings & was leaving my house, around 10:30 – 11pm. He left taking the pup. …
In December 2023 Daniel Billings had told me he had killed the pup the night he left where the trucks park as you go into parkes [sic].
In her notes, Ms Ticehurst said that on about 3 January 2024, Mr Billings attended her house to collect some of his belongings after they had broken up again in December 2023.
Ms Ticehurst said during the DVEC that on this occasion Mr Billings “got really aggressive” and said, “I will get in your window and get to you”, which she understood as a threat relating to her making a complaint to the police. The notes state:
I said “if you don’t leave I will ring the police”. Daniel says to me as he comes up in my face “If you ring the police I can get in your window and get to you quicker then they will be here”.
Ms Ticehurst also said that Mr Billings had sexual intercourse with her without her consent on 3 January 2024. This allegation was the subject of one of the two charges of sexual intercourse without consent which Mr Billings denied.
On 19 January 2024 and 1 February, Ms Ticehurst made Mr Billings aware via text messages, in which she asserted he sexually assaulted her. He did not engage in this discussion with her. [10]
On 19 January 2024, Mr Billings and Ms Ticehurst exchanged the following text messages:
Mr Billings: Give me closure and it’ll be like I never existed
Ms Ticehurst: What more do you want
Mr Billings: My head needs it
Ms Ticehurst also complained on 5 April 2024, during the DVEC, that when Mr Billings was at her house on 3 January 2024, he broke her pedestal fan by throwing it across the room and “got all emotional in my lounge room”.
On 6 April 2024, Mr Billings made an admission to his friend, Amy Baker. She recounted in her statement to police that he said, “I’ll cop the damage of the property of the car window and the pedestal fan on the chin, cause that’s what I did” and “I don’t want to take the blame for the rape”, “I don’t want to take the blame for something I didn’t do”.
On 3 January 2024, the same day, Ms Ticehurst sent text messages to her father, Tony Ticehurst, asking him to change the locks at her home. The locks were changed the next day. Pieces of dowel were placed in window frames for additional security.
On 4 January 2024, Ms Ticehurst complained to her mother, Kate, about the events of 3 January 2024. Her mother advised her to go to the police. Ms Ticehurst did not want to go to police, and she told her mother that she feared that Mr Billings would kill her as he had told her on previous occasions that he would “get to her before the police could” and that he would “come through the window and kill her”.
Ms Ticehurst also complained to her friend Meg Sladek about the events of 3 January 2024.
On 4 January 2024, Ms Ticehurst and Mr Billings had the following conversation via text message:
Ms Ticehurst: Why did you put money into my account?
Mr Billings: The fan
Ms Ticehurst: … But you really scared me last night.
Mr Billings: Girls are asleep?
Mr Billings: [Your son]’s not there?
Mr Billings: Your dads not there?
Mr Billings: I’d never harm you
Ms Ticehurst: Honestly I thought you could have last night. I’ve never seen that side of you and you frightened me.
Mr Billings: I’ve told you before, I don’t beat women.
Mr Billings: Yeah I was angry no doubt. When you lose everything it’ll make you a bit mad
Ms Ticehurst: Okay..
Mr Billings: You must not have ever known me then if you think I’d be capable of throwing my hands at you
Ms Ticehurst: Didn’t know what you were capable of last night.
Mr Billings: I’d never hit a woman. I’m not a fuckin coward like some.
Ms Ticehurst: Don’t come near me again
Mr Billings: … 1 more night together and it can end peacefully and calmly
Mr Billings: We need to talk in person and clear shit over
Mr Billings: For both our sakes
Mr Billings: We both need closure
Mr Billings: It’ll end peacefully that way for everyone’s sake even the animals
Ms Ticehurst and Mr Billings continued to remain in contact with each other.
During the DVEC on 5 April 2024, Ms Ticehurst said she met with Mr Billings at Lions Park, located in Parkes, on 14 January 2024.
Ms Ticehurst arrived in her own utility and remained seated at the back of her utility until she was joined by Mr Billings. They had a conversation about the dissolution of their relationship. During the conversation, Mr Billings said he wanted to continue to have sex with Ms Ticehurst which she refused and suggested he leave.
Ms Ticehurst recorded an account relating to the events on 14 January 2024 in the notes and said the following:
I open my door and he becomes very angry, then punches my window of my ute (drivers door) causing my window to shatter & fall out onto the ground. I yell at his ute & I kicked his passenger back door a couple of times. [As] this [was] happening Daniels ute wouldn’t start so he got a thing you charges the batteries with then realized what I had done he came up to me, got up in my face … I quickly jumped into my ute & took off while Daniel was still having car trouble.
Ms Ticehurst also alleged on this occasion that Mr Billings made threats to harm her father.
On 5 April 2024, Mr Billings had an interview with police which was recorded on body worn video. During this interview, he said that Ms Ticehurst kicked his car first. He said:
I was like “Can you fucking stop that? Please?” … And then, I hit the window. That, I, hundred percent, I admit to that. I did damage her car window.
After this incident, Mr Billings and Ms Ticehurst remained in contact via text message including discussing the cost of the damage they inflicted on each other’s vehicles.
On 1 February 2024, Mr Billings and Ms Ticehurst had the following conversation via text messages:
Mr Billings: I still absolutely fuckin [sic] love you
Ms Ticehurst: Why? You don’t treat someone you live [sic] the way you’ve treated me.
Ms Ticehurst: Breaking my belongings really shows you love me, threatening my loved ones is another way apparently too … and speaking to me like I’m nothing is also a great way to show you love me.
Mr Billings: We both did wrong in moments
Mr Billings: I was pretty angry when my whole world told me to get out
On 4 March 2024, Ms Ticehurst and Mr Billings met in the car park at Harvey Norman, Parkes. They went for a drive in his utility to soccer fields in Parkes. Ms Ticehurst alleged in the notes that Mr Billings had sexual intercourse with her, in his vehicle, without her consent.
In the notes, she also said that he produced a knife from the driver seat console and threatened to kill her.
In relation to the above incident, Ms Ticehurst wrote in the notes provided to police:
I truely believe he will hurt me & he will not stop contact me, I live in fear for my life, my son, my family and my animals.
Mr Billings was charged with sexual intercourse without consent as a result of this note being provided to police. He denied any sexual assault took place.
In a statement taken after Ms Ticehurst’s death, Meg Sladek said that on 4 March 2024 Ms Ticehurst, after leaving Mr Billings, complained to her about his alleged conduct.
On that night, Ms Ticehurst and Meg Sladek had a text message conversation during which Ms Ticehurst expressed her fears about Mr Billings coming to her home that evening. They discussed contacting police and during the conversation Ms Ticehurst said, “If I end up dead he 100% did it”.
On the same night, Mr Billings and Joshua Miller exchanged text messages. Joshua Miller wrote that he had been contacted by Ms Ticehurst about something happening that evening to which Mr Billings replied:
I rooted her, then she got attitude and then I said some stuff and she said some stuff and I kinda drove to Forbes and was gonna slap her father around to piss her off but decided getting locked up wouldn’t have been good so I didn’t do that. Been a cunt of a day to be honest with ya.
Ms Ticehurst: Why do you want to see me?
Mr Billings: I can’t cope without you
Ms Ticehurst: Why did you want to kill me? Why do you do all the bad stuff to me?
Mr Billings: Maybe my thought process was if I couldn’t have you then I didn’t want anyone to
Mr Billings: I just wanted to hold you and feel something for a hour (crying emoji)
Mr Billings: I honestly feel like a ghost just empty floating around
Mr Billings: I can’t let you go tho…
Ms Ticehurst: How do you expect me to ever trust you
Ms Ticehurst: You think there is still a chance for us?
Ms Ticehurst: It was hard enough trusting you after knowing you killed our dog and I had to lie to people about it.
Ms Ticehurst: Threatened my family and animals
Ms Ticehurst: Smashed my window
Ms Ticehurst: And was going to stab me in the neck
Ms Ticehurst: So please, for the last time. Leave me alone
Mr Billings: I don’t know what to do without you
Mr Billings: I just wanna be cuddled to sleep one last time please
(a) “I will come in the middle of the night & cut your head off” (b) “I will get to you if that is the last thing I do” (c) “the police won’t stop me, I will get to you quicker then they will” (d) “This isn’t over, I have only just begun”
In the morning on 5 April 2024, Ms Ticehurst attended Forbes Police Station and reported Mr Billings to police. She provided the notes to Senior Constable Felicity Baird-Jones to copy.
Ms Ticehurst participated in a DVEC; however, she was told by police at the time not to give fulsome evidence about her allegations of sexual assault as that would be dealt with by detectives. She also advised police that Mr Billings contacted her via the phone on multiple platforms including text messages, SMS, Facebook and others.
The AVO was made with mandatory conditions and three additional conditions not to approach or contact Ms Ticehurst or her son in any way, unless the contact is through a lawyer, not to try to find her or her son except as ordered by a court and not to go within 10 kilometres of a place she or her son lived or other specified addresses including 24A Young Street, Forbes.
At 3:10pm on 5 April 2024, Mr Billings was arrested by police at his workplace.
At 5:32pm on 5 April 2024, he was questioned by police at Parkes Police Station in relation to several incidents that occurred on 3 January 2024, 14 January 2024, 4 March 2024 and 3 April 2024. During the interview, he said:
He believed he was being questioned about an incident where he had punched the window of Ms Ticehurst’s vehicle.
When asked about the first allegation of sexual assault made by Ms Ticehurst, which involved the breaking of a pedestal fan, he said that he only ever had consensual sex with Ms Ticehurst and denied the allegation. He said that he broke up with her in June or July 2023, but they continued “on and off” until 18 December 2023. He denied ever making threats to her.
When asked about the incident that occurred at Lions Park, he admitted that he punched the window on Ms Ticehurst’s vehicle and that his temper was elevated on that day. He denied asking her for sex or making threats to her or her father. He also said that he was still engaging in casual sex with Ms Ticehurst at that time.
When asked about the incident in March at the soccer fields car park, Mr Billings confirmed that he met with Ms Ticehurst and said they had consensual sex on that occasion. He confirmed that he made a bank transfer of $150 to Ms Ticehurst on that day as compensation for breaking her window. He said that she took off her clothes and they each performed oral sex on the other. He said they also had sex on this occasion. He denied using a knife to threaten her. He denied making any threats to her or making threats that he would kill himself.
When asked about the alleged threatening call that occurred on 3 April 2024, Mr Billings confirmed he recalled receiving a missed call from Ms Ticehurst, which he returned. He recalled that she told him that if he called her again that she would go to the police. He denied making any threats during the call.
Mr Billings admitted that he had killed the dog that he jointly owned with Ms Ticehurst because after they broke up, he had nowhere to put the dog. He believed that he killed the dog using a hammer.
Around 10:45am on 6 April 2024, Mr Billings was granted bail by Dubbo Local Court. Sometime on the same day he was picked up by his friends Joshua Miller and Nicole Sunderland. They collected him from Parkes Police Station, took him shopping for clothes and later in the day he read the charge sheet and court paperwork to them. During that conversation, he said, “I didn’t rape her, I did smash her car window, I did kill the dog, but I didn’t rape her … I am innocent, they will never believe me anyway”. He also expressed concerns about how much a lawyer would cost and said, “Molly has already won”.
In the afternoon on 6 April 2024, Ms Ticehurst rang her mother extremely upset and told her that Mr Billings had been granted bail.
About 6 April 2024, Mr Billings, Joshua Miller, Nicole Sunderland and Amy Baker were at the Fifield Hotel. In conversation, Mr Billings denied sexually assaulting Ms Ticehurst.
On 11 April 2024, Ms Ticehurst and her son returned to Forbes after being away for a week.
On 11 or 12 April 2024, Amy Baker and Mr Billings were at his property in Parkes. On this occasion, Mr Billings started to talk about Ms Ticehurst. He said the following:
I’ve never felt so angry before. I didn’t do the crime, so I don’t want to do the time … If I’m going to do the time, I may as well do the crime.
Mr Billings: How do I go about seeing my son in Queensland?
Police Officer: Well you can’t, you should’ve been a good boy
At about 10.30am on 20 April 2024, Mr Billings was captured on CCTV footage at CTC Tobacconist Parkes purchasing a hunting knife.
In a statement to police provided by Nicole Sunderland, she said that they went hunting on the evening of 20 April 2024 with Joshua Miller. It was planned that Mr Billings would come out with them. Mr Billings said that he had got a knife at the smoke shop in Parkes. He had it on his side in a sheath. It was a pig sticking knife. They did not get any pigs that night. When they returned, Nicole said to him he should leave the knife at the farm. Mr Billings said, “It’ll be right”.
On Saturday 20 April 2024, Nicole Sunderland had a conversation with Mr Billings as follows:
Mr Billings: When are you going to Forbes next?
Nicole: Probably on Saturday for football, why?
Mr Billings: Can you drive past Young St to see if she’s still there?
Joshua: Don’t be stupid, you don’t want to know where she is
Mr Billings: I won’t go over there
On 21 April 2024, Mr Billings transferred his ex-partner $968.89 with the description being the name of their son.
At about 5.30pm, Ms Ticehurst’s son was picked up by his paternal grandmother from Ms Ticehurst’s home as he wanted to spend time with his father. Sometime after 9.00pm that evening, Mr Billings and Amy Baker had a conversation where Mr Billings discussed packing up things that he wanted to send to his son and writing a letter, during which the following was said:
Amy: Is that for your court case?
Mr Billings: Yes.
Mr Billings: Would you forgive me if I killed myself?
Amy: Promise me that you will talk to me tomorrow.
Mr Billings: I will.
Mr Billings: Whatever happens know that I’ll be at peace
At some point during the conversation Mr Billings said, “Tomorrow is going to be a big day” and then said something Amy Baker could not hear. She asked him what he said, and he replied, “I’m not going to tell you because you will tell Josh”.
After the death of Ms Ticehurst, police located Mr Billings’ bail papers inside a clear compendium, which contained various notes Mr Billings had written. These notes appear to have been written by Mr Billings on or around 21 April 2024, including:
A note in green marker on the front of the compendium saying:
Innocent !!!
Pushed over the edge
Sorry my Friends :(
Amy Baker. Ya Silly goose :) I’m sorry we won’t be able to [sic] for that camping trip :( You’re part of my corner one of very few I trust, thank you for been [sic] you and all the great chills & talks we had, my best friend (only because Josh is my brother (cross eyed emoji). I’m sure I’ll send you a vid also :) Sorry I had to do this I hope you & everyone remember for the softy I am deep down. Not the monster I’m going to have to become.
I love you both (love heart) I’m so sorry. there will come a time [my son] will ask, and I’m beyond sorry how you both will feel, I just can’t fight anymore, I’m weak & worthless. My last thoughts will be of yous [sic] (love hearts x 2) Stay strong, also keep close with Joshy & Nicole, they’ve been here for me through this and I think you will all need each other. There will be videos I’ll send later expressing my love (love heart)
Dear all, I’m not sure how tonight will play out but I know I’m not going to be here after it, nothing anyone could have said or done would have been able to stop me or save me from myself. So please don’t think you shoulda said this or that because you can lead a horse to the water but you can’t make it drink. My whole life’s been missory & I’ve always been dealt the tough hand. But @ 29 y/o I’ve had enough. Accused of rape that I didn’t do!! Even if proven innocent I’ll be fucked financially, 9/10 Police at the Parkes Station have just been fucking horrible the way they’ve treated & spoke to me. My proudest achievement (QLD) team singlet thrown in the dirt was the final straw, then I started to plan this and obsess over it. If I’m gonna lose then so is this hoe. Make me out to be a monster treat me like a animal then okay, I’m gonna play the fucking part !!!
The references in these notes to “videos” are to a number of video recordings Mr Billings made over the course of the day on 21 April 2024 on his mobile phone. These videos were all played in full at the proceedings on sentence. They could best be described as “suicide” or “goodbye” notes to various friends and his ex-wife. They set out all of Mr Billings’ grievances, his intention to do something unspecified to Ms Ticehurst and to then kill himself. Below is the summary of these videos which was included in the Agreed Facts:
Video 1 was recorded on 21 April 2024 at 2:09pm. It begins with Mr Billings saying that he’s “not a fuckin’ woman beater or a rapist”. During this video he continued to discuss what he planned to do that evening by saying, “I don’t know what I’m going to do tonight, but nothin’ fuckin’ good. Um, but I just feel I’ve, I have been really pushed into a corner”. He discusses how he’s going to take “the easy way out”, apologising to friends and family about everything he plans on doing tonight as he’s “going to go right off the fucking rails”. He continues by saying that he’s “got a pretty foolproof plan tonight, so whether I get to her or any of her family and they get away, I, um, I won’t be suffering in the car, I will, um, I will make sure before I punch the big rig into somethin’, I will be holdin’ a knife at me chest”. He says that he “would not have let anyone or anything stop me tonight”.
Video 2 was recorded at 2:16pm and starts as an apology video to his ex-partner and his son for what he’s going to do tonight. He says, “I know it’s very selfish of me to end my life and I know it’s completely, and utterly bat shit crazy of me to, if I do succeed in doing what I’m sort of planning to do to these cunts over here, then that is also very crazy”. He continues by saying, “if you guys are going to lose me and I’m going to lose then, then they can lose too. They shalt not get out of this unscathed”. He goes onto say, “it can be eye for an eye” and “if I’m going to be punished either way then O.K. I’m going to, I’m going to go crazy”.
Video 3 is recorded at 2:23pm. He apologises to his son for not getting to know his father.
Video 4 recorded at 4:57pm starts with him talking about how he wants steak for dinner and discusses what clothes he should wear tonight. He continues by saying that the one thing that has always calmed him, and kept him level-headed in his life, is weed. He goes on to talk about changing the flavour of his vape. He finishes the video by saying he’s innocent, but that the financial cost of him proving that he is innocent will be something he will be paying for, for the rest of his life.
Video 5 recorded at 5:18pm begins with him saying, “Molly Jean Ticehurst, well, you’ve done it, you’ve succeeded in whatever you wanted out of all this, whether I get to you tonight or not”. He states he’s paranoid today, constantly looking out the door for the police to show up and arrest him again.
Video 6 is recorded at 5:39pm. Mr Billings makes a comment about his car being seized by police and that he’s “got to go give her another wash before um, before we go for one final ride”. He says that he admitted to police that he had sexual intercourse with Molly inside his car, but that he “did not rape her”.
Video 7 recorded at 5:48pm begins with him talking about his Queensland State of Origin Boxing singlet and how the police disrespected it. He goes on to say, “That singlet done me. That is when I’ve started getting thoughts in my head, oh maybe I’ll just fucken drive over there and she reckons I was going to go through the fucken window and cut her head off or something, maybe I might do that”. During that video he continued to say that he just wants to go over to Molly’s house and take her for a drive and ask her why she’s saying these things, but that “I don’t see this um, this night playing out very well but I dare say that I will be dead tomorrow”.
Video 8 recorded at 5:52pm starts with him saying that the police took his knife off him, so he just went and bought another one. He demonstrates with this knife where he will place it so that when he crashes his car, it will end his life.
On the evening of 21 April 2024, Mr Billings’ movements were captured by various CCTV cameras. Shortly after 6pm he was at Parkes Woolworths and purchased four Red Bull cans and was carrying an Esky.
At about 6.30pm, Mr Billings visited BP East End in Parkes where he filled his Ford Ranger with petrol and filled a few jerry cans, which he placed into his vehicle.
At about 7.30pm, Mr Billings visited Kustom Autocare in Parkes and washed his vehicle.
Between 7:58 and 10:04pm, Mr Billings was captured going in and out of his house located at 55 Medlyn Street, Parkes and to his Ford Ranger on various occasions. He left for 20 minutes returning at 10:32pm. He went to purchase a drink.
Mr Billings only remained at his home for a few minutes before leaving again. GPS data extracted from his car showed that at 10:35pm he left his home in Parkes and travelled to Young Street, Forbes. Ms Ticehurst lived in Young Street. Mr Billings recorded a further video whilst driving to Ms Ticehurst’s home (Video 9). He is listening to and singing the Johnny Cash song titled “The Man Comes Around”. He sings along to the following lyrics:
And I heard, as it were, the noise of thunder. One of the four beasts saying, “Come and see” and I saw, and behold a white horse.
There’s a man goin’ ‘round taking names and he decides who to free and who to blame. Everybody won’t be treated all the same. There’ll be a golden ladder reachin’ down when the man comes around. The hairs on your arm will stand up at the terror in each sip and in each sup. Will you partake of that last offered cup or disappear into the potter’s ground when the man comes around?
At 11:27:13pm, Mr Billings arrived in the vicinity of Ms Ticehurst’s home. His vehicle remained at the front of Ms Ticehurst’s home until the vehicle left at 11:28:12pm. It is during this period that Mr Billings forced entry into Ms Ticehurst’s home through her bedroom window and stabbed her causing her death. The stabbing resulted in 15 wounds.
By attending Ms Ticehurst’s house in Forbes, Mr Billings was in contravention of the AVO (Form 1 – contravene prohibition in AVO).
Mr Billings made two further videos on 21 April 2024 after leaving Ms Ticehurst’s home:
Video 10 begins with him saying, “I’ve just murdered my ex-girlfriend”. He continues by saying that he won’t be going to gaol because he will kill himself first, stating “I would not be able to live with doing what I just fucking did” and that he “cannot believe I just did that. That is fucked up”. Blood can be seen on his hand during this video.
Video 11 begins with Mr Billings saying, “But now there’s going to be two kids waking up in the mornin’ without a parent”. He states that he just wanted Ms Ticehurst to get in the car so he could ask her to drop the charges but that “she just wanted to scream in the bedroom because I did what she told the police I said I would do apparently. Apparently, I said I would jump through the fucking window. I did not kill any of her family, but I did jump through that fucking window”.
About two hours later, at around 1:45 to 1:50am on 22 April 2024, Mr Billings arrived at the home of Nicole Sunderland and Joshua Miller. They exited their home and went to meet him. He was sitting on the front steps with a can of rum.
They had the following conversation with Mr Billings:
Joshua: What are you doing here Daniel?
Mr Billings: I think I killed her
Joshua: What do you mean?
Mr Billings: I think I killed her
Joshua: What do you mean you killed her?
Mr Billings: I killed her.
Joshua: What are you doing here?
Mr Billings: I’m here to give you this necklace, I want you to give it to [my son], I’ve got to go wrap my car around a tree, I can’t get arrested.
Nicole: You can’t go anywhere ... there are two options, we take you to Parkes now or I call the police
Joshua: You can’t wrap your car around a tree Daniel, if I allow you to do that, I’ll be in a lot of trouble
Mr Billings: I can’t go to jail, I’ve got to go.
Joshua: If you want to get your ute, you’ll have to go by me
Mr Billings: I’ll never touch you
Mr Billings: Can I call Amy?
Nicole: Where was [her son]?
Mr Billings: He was not home.
I’ve got a man named Daniel Billings here. He’s in the system and he’s just turned up to our house and saying that he’s killed someone.
When asked by the operator if she knew any more detail she said, “[My partner asked] have you killed her? And he goes I think so, yeah”. She provided the name of Ms Ticehurst to the operator and confirmed that she had asked Mr Billings whether her son was there.
At 2:02am on 22 April 2024, Joshua Miller called Amy Baker and put Mr Billings on the phone. The following conversation occurred:
Joshua: Daniel’s here
Amy: Is Daniel ok?
Mr Billings: Amy, I’m really sorry
Amy: Are you ok?
Mr Billings: I murdered her
Amy: What?
Mr Billings: I’m sorry, I murdered her.
Mr Billings: In an ideal world, what I wanted to do was go over there and talk to her, but she started screaming, and I did what I did.
Mr Billings: I’m sorry, I wanted you to hear it from me and that I was never going to hurt you.
Mr Billings: That’s why I left work early, that’s why I asked you if there’s anywhere to go and sit and think
After Mr Billings’ conversation with Amy, Joshua Miller went for a walk with Mr Billings who repeated his denials in relation to sexually assaulting and threatening Ms Ticehurst.
At around 2:40am, police arrived at 5431 Fifield Road, Fifield and arrested Mr Billings. Senior Constable Nikolas Floro recorded his interaction with him, during which Mr Billings said:
He had been charged with offences on the word of his ex-girlfriend.
He denied raping his ex-girlfriend.
He discussed reporting at the police station recently and how he felt that he was not being treated fairly and said, “Mate, at this point in time, I hadn’t fuckin’ done anything, I’d just been arrested over word of mouth, and I think that’s when I just snapped and thought, well, I’m going to get treated like a monster, I’m going to get made out to be one, I, I’ll play the monster in the story then. And then tonight, I did what I did”.
When asked what he meant by that, Mr Billings said, “I took her life”. He did not wish to say the name of Ms Ticehurst but confirmed that he had killed his “ex-girlfriend”.
When asked about blood that was on him, Mr Billings said some of the blood was from his finger but he was unsure about the rest of it, however he said “the only person [he] harmed tonight was [Ms Ticehurst]”.
When asked about what he had done to Ms Ticehurst, he said that he did not want to relive it and provided no details.
When asked about the cut to his hand, he said, “It’s not very bad mate, it’s, I probably need a stitch ... And I was going to be called a rapist or something, now I’m just called a murderer. I pray to God none of youse ever have to take a life, or take a life, it’s not good, I can tell you. This is not something that you want to do, I don’t even know why I did it”.
At around 2:11am, Senior Constable Christopher Evans arrived at Ms Ticehurst’s home. He knocked but received no response. He looked down the veranda and noticed a window blind protruding from the window. He walked towards the window and saw that it had been broken, observing shards of glass on the veranda.
He looked through the window and observed Ms Ticehurst to be lying on the floor, on her back, between the bed and the wall. Her head was wedged between the bed and the side table. There was a large amount of blood covering her clothing, legs, head and right arm. Ms Ticehurst appeared pale and did not appear to be breathing.
Senior Constable Evans called for urgent assistance from NSW Ambulance and then forced entry into Ms Ticehurst’s home. He searched the home for Ms Ticehurst’s son but did not find anyone else in the home. He observed Ms Ticehurst from a closer view and saw that she was wearing her pyjamas. She had blood covering her body, arms and legs, a hammer with an orange handle situated between her right arm and torso and under her left calf was a knife sheath.
NSW Ambulance officers arrived at Ms Ticehurst’s home at 2:23am and shortly thereafter confirmed that she had died.
Beginning on 22 April 2024, police undertook examination of Ms Ticehurst’s home and Mr Billings’ motor vehicle. Several items were seized, and samples were taken from these locations. DNA and fingerprint analysis was undertaken which identified:
The fingerprint of Mr Billings on exterior of Ms Ticehurst’s bedroom window;
The DNA of Mr Billings on blood taken from the bedroom window;
The DNA of Ms Ticehurst found in the right middle fingernail, the index fingernail and thumb of Mr Billings;
The DNA of Ms Ticehurst in a number of locations within Mr Billings’ Ford Ranger; and
The DNA of Ms Ticehurst on bloodstains found on Mr Billings’ pants and boots.
A number of items were seized from Mr Billings’ vehicle on 22 April 2024. Items of significance included a hunting style knife with wooden handle containing blood stains on the blade of the knife which contained a DNA profile which matched that of Ms Ticehurst and various items that were blood stained including his mobile phone.
Dr Bernard I’Ons conducted a post-mortem examination on 24 April 2024. He opined the direct cause of death was “multiple stab wounds”.
There were in total 15 “sharp force injuries”. Most of the sharp force injuries were located on the left side of the body. The three most significant sharp force injuries included a stab wound to the left cheek, a stab wound to the left ear, and two stab wounds to the left side of Ms Ticehurst’s neck.
The stab wound to the left cheek was a vertically orientated stab wound that entered the mouth, penetrated the base of the tongue, descended into the neck and severed the hyoid bone and the right carotid artery.
The stab wound to the left ear had a complex entry wound involving the left ear and skin posteriorly. The wound passed through the sternocleidomastoid muscle, the oesophagus, the trachea and injured the anterior body of C3 and lateral mass. A large amount of blood was present in the trachea and had been aspirated into the lungs.
The stab wound to the left neck displayed an entry wound with two components located at the base of the neck (90 mm below the left ear) with two divergent penetrating wounds. The diagonal component descended through the neck structures, the trachea and into the right lung. The vertical component passed through the platysma muscle, the left sternocleidomastoid muscle terminating with a fracture injury to the C6 lateral mass.
There were four other stab wounds identified on Ms Ticehurst on the right side of the body. These included a stab wound to the shoulder, to the base of the neck, to the chin/neck and to the forehead.
There were also seven stab wounds on the left side of the body. These included a stab wound to the left little finger, three to the forearm (ventero-medial), the upper arm, the shoulder, the left breast, the upper abdomen (epigastrium) and the scalp. Dr I’Ons opined that the wounds to the left forearm may represent defensive wounds.
The proceedings on sentence were heard on 3 and 4 September 2026. The Crown tendered a bundle comprising the Crown Sentence Summary, Indictment, Form 1, Agreed Facts, Selected Crime Scene Photographs, videos recorded by Mr Billings on 21 April 2024 with transcripts, the post-mortem report, Mr Billings’ criminal and custodial history and the victim impact statements.
The Crown also tendered a report of Professor David Greenberg dated 8 August 2026 in response to the foreshadowed evidence of Dr Olav Nielssen relied upon by Mr Billings. Both Dr Nielssen and Professor Greenberg gave evidence by audio-visual link (“AVL”) at the sentencing proceedings. I will consider their evidence later in these reasons.
The crime scene photographs depicted the brutality of the attack on Ms Ticehurst. The sheath to the hunting knife Mr Billings brought to the scene to kill her can be seen under her body which suggests Mr Billings withdrew the knife from the sheath at the scene. The post-mortem report did not add anything significant to the summary in the Agreed Facts. Mr Billings’ criminal history revealed that he had no prior convictions and no previous interactions with police until 5 April 2024 when he was arrested following Ms Ticehurst’s allegations.
As for the videos recorded by Mr Billings on 21 April 2024, extracts from them were included in the Agreed Facts but I propose to refer to other portions of them when considering Mr Billings’ motive and planning for the offence as well as when considering his mental state at the time of the stabbing. By way of overview, the recordings all depict Mr Billings looking into the camera on his mobile telephone and recording his thoughts throughout the day. He foreshadows that he is going to do something bad to Ms Ticehurst and then kill himself. He is at various times tearful, angry, joking, apologetic and calm. At all times, he seeks to justify himself by explaining that he was forced to take action due to Ms Ticehurst making what he perceived to be false allegations of sexual assault against him. In one of the recordings he goes through the events of his arrest on 5 April 2024 and provides a long detailed list of grievances about his treatment by police.
Turning to the victim impact statements, they can be summarised as follows.
The victim impact statements of Tony Ticehurst (Ms Ticehurst’s father), Kate Ticehurst (her mother), ND (her child), Melissa Shaw (her cousin) and Hollie Baker (her niece) were tendered, and some were read to the Court at the hearing.
Mr Ticehurst read his statement to the Court. He expressed the immense pain of losing his daughter Molly. He lives now with ongoing trauma, struggling to sleep at night and replaying what happened over and over in his mind. He spoke to how much Molly’s death has impacted on her son, who experiences nightmares about also being stabbed in his bedroom. Mr Ticehurst also addressed the lasting and ongoing impact that Molly’s murder has on her mother, her siblings, Brooke and Luke, her cousins, and her friends. Mr Ticehurst described Molly as having a “big heart” and spoke of her being often recognised on the streets by children she had looked after in her job in childcare. She was not only his daughter, but his “good mate and confidant”.
A letter from NSW Health was provided stating that Mr Ticehurst sought assistance for depressed mood, suicidal ideation and distress. He reported experiencing regular nightmares, difficulty connecting with family and friends and a fear of going out in public. Mr Ticehurst’s clinical assessment was indicative of a severely depressed mood and he was prescribed medication, and also attended regular counselling. Mr Ticehurst has also developed significant anxiety in relation to his grandson whom he fears he would not be able to protect from any risk of harm.
Kate Ticehurst’s statement was read to the Court by Gabby Shepherd. Ms Ticehurst is Molly’s mother and described her as her only child, best friend, and her entire world. She told the Court that Molly would light up a room with her contagious laugh and joyful personality and that she was loved by all that knew her. She said that there were no words to describe how her life has been turned upside down by the murder of her daughter. She shared some beautiful photographs of Molly, her son ND and herself.
The statement of Molly’s 8-year-old son ND was read to the Court by his father. ND said that he really missed his mum and missed going on holidays with her, mowing the lawn with her and watching the movie “Ice Age” in her room. He said he loves his mum very much.
ND’s treating counsellor provided a report stating that he has demonstrated ongoing emotional stress and developed responses that are consistent with trauma reactions in young children exposed to severe loss. He has developed coping strategies such as disassociation, internalisation and numbing in order to avoid any exposure to trauma-related content. The report states that the impact on ND is not time-limited and that, due to his age, the effects are ongoing and will continue to unfold throughout his development.
Melissa Shaw, a cousin, told the Court that Molly’s family were enduring the worst pain imaginable since her murder. She described how Molly’s son takes the urn filled with her ashes everywhere with him.
The statement of Hollie Baker, Ms Ticehurst’s niece, was tendered. She spoke to the impact that her auntie’s death had on her including becoming depressed and unable to leave her house and placing her electrical apprenticeship on hold. She misses her auntie greatly.
The Court expresses its gratitude to Molly’s family for courageously providing their statements. It is clear that Molly’s senseless death has had a significant impact on those who loved her. It is particularly tragic that her son has been left without a mother at such a young age. On behalf of the Court, I extend my condolences to the family and friends of Molly Ticehurst for their loss.
Section 30E(1) of the Sentencing Act provides that when a victim impact statement is tendered in relation to an offence, the court must consider the statement and may make any comment on the statement that the court considers appropriate. Section 30E(3) of the Sentencing Act provides that a victim impact statement of a family victim may also be taken into account by a court in connection with the determination of the punishment for the offence on the basis that the harmful impact of a primary victim’s death on family victims is an aspect of harm done to the community, but only if the prosecutor applies for this to occur, and the court considers it to be appropriate. The Crown made such an application in this matter.
The Sentencing Act does not explain how the court is to determine when it is “appropriate” to consider the impact of the offence on the deceased’s family. As McCallum J observed shortly after it was enacted, the provision cannot be taken to suggest that some lives are more valuable than others. [12] All human lives are of equal value. Every unlawful death causes harm to the community and to the family of the person killed. Despite this, I am prepared to have regard to the significant impact on Molly Ticehurst’s family, especially her young son, as an aspect of harm done to the community for the purposes of s 3A(g) of the Sentencing Act.
Documents tendered on behalf of Mr Billings comprised the psychiatric report of Dr Olav Nielssen dated 15 May 2026, the affidavit of Mr Billings’ solicitor, Diane Elston, dated 15 May 2026, and the affidavit of his sister affirmed on 11 August 2026. Annexed to Ms Elston’s affidavit is a letter from Mr Billings, Corrective Services documents relating to his work assignments, completion of the Health Survival Tips Program and his classification, a letter from the Chaplain at the Goulburn Correctional Centre, Anthony Stuart, and the police statement of Amy Baker.
This material set out Mr Billings’ background, his conditions in custody, and matters relevant to his remorse and risk of re-offending which I will consider later in these reasons.
Mr Billings gave his account of the murder in the recording made shortly after the event, then to police when he was arrested in the body worn video and later to Dr Nielssen.
In the recording after the murder, Mr Billings looks at the camera and explains that he just wanted Ms Ticehurst to get in his vehicle so he could ask her to drop the charges but “she just wanted to scream in the bedroom because I did what she told the police I said I would do apparently”.
In the body worn footage when he was arrested after the murder he repeated to police that he “snapped” when he was first arrested. In speaking with police, he focused on the unfairness of being arrested and how he was mistreated by police.
Mr Billings’ account of the murder to Dr Nielssen was as follows:
He said “that is why I went there that night … I did not go with malice to kill anyone … I only wanted to kill myself … I thought now you have ruined my life you are going to have this on your conscience … but it did not go like that and it turns out now I am the one with that on my conscience”.
He said “I got there and smashed the bedroom window and jumped in … I did not want to have a conversation there I wanted to be in my car … I said you have to come with me we are going to have a talk … she told me to fuck off … there was no okay … she turned around and when she turned back to me I had stabbed her in the neck … I did not even remember taking it … maybe I had it to make her come with me … I had my knife sitting on the seat because I was planning to have it sitting on the steering wheel pointing at me when I crashed the car … there would be great odds that I would not wake up”. He said “there was one stab wound on the side of her neck … we were standing face to face … then I heard a gargle sound … I don’t know what happened then … I think I stabbed her twice near the collar bone … then she sort of fell and I sort of left”.
He said “I don’t know why I took it [the knife] with me … these are questions I ask myself every night”.
Mr Billings said “I was aware of what was going on around me but it was sort of like I was watching in third person … like I was the passenger in the car and then I was driving … it was sort of like shock and then I thought what the hell … this is real”.
It is necessary for me to assess the objective seriousness of the murder. Both senior counsel for the Crown and counsel for Mr Billings accepted that there was no obligation to place the objective seriousness of the murder on any particular range. [13] Despite this, it was accepted that it can be useful to do so, and I propose to adopt that course.
The Crown contended that the objective seriousness of the murder offence is at the high end of the range, while it was submitted on behalf of Mr Billings that the offending was mid-range. The Crown did not submit that this case fell into the worst category such that a sentence of life imprisonment should be imposed. A survey of the sort of cases that attract the maximum penalty of life imprisonment supports that position and it is to be accepted. But that fact does not detract from the seriousness of this offending.
I am ultimately satisfied that this murder falls at the high end of the range for murder in my assessment of its objective seriousness for the following reasons.
First, this offence was planned. As early as 11 or 12 April 2024, Mr Billings expressed to friends that if he was going to “do the time”, he may as well “do the crime”. On 20 April 2024, he purchased another hunting knife to replace the one that was seized by police when he was arrested. That night, he asked his friend to check whether Molly was still at her home in Forbes. The following day he made excuses at work and went home. During that day, he made numerous recordings in which he foreshadowed what he planned to do. Although those plans were “loose”, they did include him expressing that he was going to do something “bad”, play the part of a “monster”, and that he had planned and obsessed over this since he found his singlet.
The “loose” plans seem to have extended to possibly harming Ms Ticehurst’s family as well. He is recorded as observing that it was unclear whether he would “get to her or any of her family and they get away”. He later said, “if I do succeed in doing what I’m sort of planning to do to these cunts over here” (speaking in the plural). He also stated that if he is going to “lose” then “they can lose too. They shalt not get out of this unscathed”. In the recording after the murder he speaks of doing “what she told police he would do” but that he did not kill any of her family.
Mr Billings is also recorded that day as saying, “it can be eye for an eye” and “if I’m going to be punished either way then O.K. I’m going to, I’m going to go crazy”. He later stated, “Molly Jean Ticehurst, well, you’ve done it, you’ve succeeded in whatever you wanted out of all this, whether I get to you tonight or not”. He later circles back to the topic of his singlet and states, “[t]hat is when I’ve started getting thoughts in my head, oh maybe I’ll just fucken drive over there and she reckons I was going to go through the fucken window and cut her head off or something, maybe I might do that”. He also states, “I didn’t ask for this war … My whole body has been cast into hell from just this cunt making accusations that I did not fucking do”.
I am satisfied that the idea of Mr Billings killing himself and enacting revenge on Ms Ticehurst, and possibly her family, in some unspecified way, can be traced back to when he first got his singlet back. He considered a number of scenarios during the recordings including: whether he would get to her before police got to him; whether it would just be Molly or include her family; whether he could force her to come to his car; whether police would be there when he got there; or whether police would chase him when he had Molly in the car. In light of these multiple scenarios, I am unable to find beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Billings formed a specific plan to murder Ms Ticehurst during those recordings, although the looseness of the plan seems to derive from him not knowing how close to Ms Ticehurst he would get before police apprehended him.
Overall, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, in the context of the earlier recordings, that it was by the time Mr Billings set out on the one-hour drive from Parkes to Forbes armed with a hunting knife and recorded himself singing along to the Johnny Cash song that he planned to kill Ms Ticehurst.
I reject any suggestion made by Mr Billings that he just went there to talk to her. That is inconsistent with his actions in smashing through her window instead of knocking at her door. There was realistically no prospect of Ms Ticehurst engaging in calm conversation with Mr Billings when he had just broken through her window at night with a knife in breach of his bail and the AVO. Further, software in Mr Billings’ vehicle recorded that from the time he parked his car outside Ms Ticehurst’s home, approached the house, smashed the window, confronted her, took the knife out of the sheath, stabbed her numerous times, left and got back into his vehicle was 59 seconds. This is consistent with her being attacked almost immediately upon his entry into her bedroom. The nature of the stab wounds and their locations when assessed against that brief time period are indicative of a brutal attack. The three most significant sharp force injuries targeted vulnerable parts of Ms Ticehurst’s body, being her face, head and neck.
Further reasons for rejecting aspects of Mr Billings’ account include that he denied to police that he threatened to assault Ms Ticehurst’s father but then in his text message to his friend admitted that he was thinking of doing it, but he did not wish to go to gaol. There is also a significant disconnect between Mr Billings’ picture of himself in the recordings as a “softy” and the objective facts. He has an image of himself as someone who was not violent which is inconsistent with the fact that in the previous year when they first broke up in June 2023 Mr Billings smashed their puppy’s head in with a hammer. In early 2024, he threw a pedestal fan across a room, smashed Ms Ticehurst’s window and made the other alleged threats. Prior to Ms Ticehurst going to police, she had told a friend that if she died it was because Mr Billings had killed her. He seemed oblivious prior to the murder as to how terrifying that conduct would have been.
I have considered the submission made on behalf of Mr Billings that “the only clear planning was that the offender would die whether by suicide or being shot by police”. There are two problems with this submission. First, there are simply too many references to Mr Billings seeking to exact revenge on Ms Ticehurst to find other than that he also planned to inflict some violence on her, including the references to “an eye for an eye”. Secondly, the simple fact remains that Mr Billings did not in fact kill himself; only Ms Ticehurst. His desire to kill her was clearly stronger than his desire to kill himself.
I am satisfied that the murder of Ms Ticehurst was planned and that this increases its objective seriousness. [14]
Secondly, I am satisfied that Ms Ticehurst was killed in retribution for going to police and reporting the actions of Mr Billings. She told police on 5 April that when she had threatened to go to police in the past he had threatened her in terms such as: “I will get in your window and get to you”; or he would “get to her before the police could”; or “I will come in the middle of the night & cut your head off”; or “I will get to you if that is the last thing I do”; and “the police won’t stop me, I will get to you quicker then they will”.
Central to Mr Billings’ grievances against Ms Ticehurst was his belief that he was not guilty of having had sexual intercourse with her without her consent. It was agreed that I could not make any finding as to the veracity of her claim. That is because when Mr Billings killed Ms Ticehurst, no trial against him on those charges could ever proceed. I am prepared to accept that Mr Billings believed the allegation to be false but even then, it is troubling that Mr Billings sought to justify his murder of Ms Ticehurst on the basis that he was responding to a false allegation by her.
The fact that Ms Ticehurst was killed because she was a witness in proceedings against him means that this murder can also be characterised as a very serious “public justice” offence. A public justice offence is one that interferes with the administration of justice and includes procuring witnesses in ongoing legal proceedings to give false evidence or threatening them with violence to “effectively immunise themselves from prosecution”. [15]
In addition to the motive of killing Ms Ticehurst as revenge for her going to police, the Crown relied upon a second motive; namely the context of the breakdown of the previous domestic relationship which had descended into one of threats and coercive control before Ms Ticehurst finally went to police. Although it was accepted on behalf of Mr Billings that it was open to the Court to characterise the murder as both a public justice murder and a domestic violence murder, it was submitted that there was no suggestion in any of the recordings that the motivation for the killing was that Ms Ticehurst would not continue the relationship with him. I accept that submission.
Prior to Ms Ticehurst going to police, the threats emanating from Mr Billings were directed at him trying to exert control over Ms Ticehurst when she did not want to continue the relationship. It was in that context that he said things like “if I can’t have you nobody can”. But I accept that there was a significant change in Mr Billings’ attitude from 5 April 2024 when Ms Ticehurst reported him to police. From that point in time, he was driven by anger, revenge and extreme hatred of Ms Ticehurst, in the context of the previous controlling behaviour during the breakdown of the relationship. As he observed with some insight during one of the recordings, “Hate – it’s like a chain around your neck that’ll lead you to places you don’t want to go to, it’ll lead you into darkness and desolation, and you become a slave to that hatred, and it will only lead to your own destruction”.
I am satisfied that the “public justice” nature of the offending in killing a witness who had made a complaint about him elevates the seriousness of this offending and differentiates it from most other cases involving domestic violence murder.
A further factor relevant to assessing the objective seriousness is that Mr Billings was aware that Ms Ticehurst had previously told police about her fears that he would break through the window and get to her before police could get there. Mr Billings ultimately chose to carry out the fatal assault by doing exactly what she said he had threatened to do. It must have been absolutely terrifying for Ms Ticehurst to die knowing that her worst fears had been realised.
The murder was also aggravated because it involved the actual use of a weapon, being a hunting knife, [16] and was committed in the home of Ms Ticehurst, where she was entitled to feel safe and protected from harm. [17]
I am unable to accept the Crown submission that the offence was also objectively more serious because of Mr Billings’ callousness after the murder in showing cruelty and lacking empathy. It is to be accepted that Mr Billings left the scene without contacting emergency services but given that I am satisfied that he planned to kill her, the fact that he did not call for help afterwards is consistent with that intent.
As for the recordings he made immediately after the murder, I accept that he did not express any immediate remorse towards Ms Ticehurst in them, but he did express sadness that her son would be without a mother. Although it is possible to observe a sense of exhilaration at the beginning of the first recording, it is short lived. In these circumstances, I am unable to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that this murder was accompanied by additional callousness beyond the obvious callousness in killing Ms Ticehurst in the manner he did in in the first place.
I now turn to consider Mr Billings’ subjective case.
Mr Billings was 29 years old at the time of his offending. He is now 31 years old. He did not give evidence at the proceedings on sentence so information about his personal background is derived largely from what he told Dr Nielssen and from a statement and affidavit from his sister.
Mr Billings’ parents separated when he was a child. His mother was his primary carer with access to his father every second weekend. He was close to his father but not his mother. His father died when he was only 12 years old and this affected him greatly.
Mr Billings’ relationship with his mother was strained and characterised by emotional neglect and physical abuse. Mr Billings was left alone a lot as a child. He described his home life as “rough” and “absolutely terrible”. His sister remembered an incident when their mother smashed Mr Billings’ forehead into the kitchen table multiple times when he refused to get a haircut, and another incident in which he was locked outside at night when he was 12 years old. She said there was “a lot of swearing, yelling and screaming at home”. She also recounted these same incidents in her police statement made in July 2024, although she said that her upbringing was “relatively normal” and that it “wasn’t all bad”.
Mr Billings’ poor relationship with his mother led to a distrust of authority figures and behavioural issues at school. He attended various schools including behavioural schools. He did not complete high school and instead attended TAFE to complete Year 9. He was referred to a psychologist as a child who diagnosed him with oppositional defiant disorder. He was prescribed a trial medication, but his mother was opposed to him being given medication. He reportedly sought no mental health care as an adult due to his distrust of people. He resorted to using cannabis instead.
Mr Billings became focused on his physical health and fitness from about the age of 16, training as a boxer. He felt this had a positive impact on his mental health. But when he ceased physical training in 2019, he perceived his mental health declining. He engaged in substance misuse, specifically heavy drinking and daily cannabis use. He had first used those substances in smaller amounts and frequency in his teenage years.
As an adult, he had a small friendship group and held down steady employment including as a driller’s offsider prior to his arrest. Prior to his relationship with Ms Ticehurst, Mr Billings had several relationships with women including a long-term relationship from which his son was born.
Although the Crown urged caution when dealing with Mr Billings’ self-reported history, there were aspects of it which were supported by other evidence, including from his sister. Mr Billings had also previously spoken about his upbringing with Amy Baker, telling her that “his mum beat him and that his dad died when he was young”. Mr Billings also referred to his relationship with his mother in Video 3, stating, “I think this is where I have gotten my fucked up head from and stuff”.
During Mr Billings’ arrest he told police, “Boxing took me off the streets … I had a very fucked up childhood, my mum used to belt the fuck out of me every day”. He also described running away from his mother’s home to his father until his father died.
The most significant aspect of Mr Billings’ subjective case was the expert evidence from Dr Nielssen as to his depressive illness. Although Mr Billings had never sought treatment for any mental illness, in some of the videos recorded on 21 April, prior to the killing, he discussed his history of poor mental health. At one stage, he observed, “I have been fucked up mentally for a long time, and I have tried to end myself before”, “I have always dealt with mental and stuff like that” and “I have always fought and fought”.
In a later recording, he stated, “It’s a very fragile thing life. Don’t cheat someone that’s mentally ill or severely depressed, don’t treat him like an animal or a monster, become he will become that”. He also stated, “[i]ts only the environment in which I grew up in where I … had to become tough and rugged in order to survive it, and here it is now, it’s going to end me”.
In another video, he stated, “I cannot function normal at the moment. It’s almost like dementia except I don’t think its dementia. I think its fucking trauma for being accused of something I haven’t done and the fucking reality of what will happen if they don’t prove that I’m fucking innocent and it’s also the reality of even if they prove that I’m innocent how much it’ll cost”.
Dr Nielssen interviewed Mr Billings via AVL on 27 February 2025, 6 March 2025 and 30 April 2026. He had prepared a report dated 18 July 2025 for the purposes of establishing the defence of substantial impairment and then another report dated 15 May 2026 in similar terms after Mr Billings pleaded guilty. Only the 2026 report was put before the Court.
Dr Nielssen diagnosed Mr Billings with a “depressive illness, in partial remission” and “substance use disorder, in remission”. It became clear in cross-examination by the Crown that, unlike Professor Greenberg, Dr Nielssen prefers not to adhere closely to the international diagnostic tool in the DSM-5. He opined that the best pointer to a depressive illness is suicidal ideation. Other depressive symptoms identified in his report were “low mood”, “lack of energy” and “poor sleep”.
Dr Nielssen agreed that adverse childhood events can lead to depression later in life, including by adversely affecting a person’s coping skills and resulting in self-sabotage like drug taking and alcohol abuse. Specifically, in Mr Billings’ case, he opined:
Mr Billings depressive illness appears to have its origins in events in his childhood, including regular physical punishments and the death of his father when he was aged twelve, and was exacerbated by his pattern of substance use. Both chronic cannabis use and heavy drinking are associated with depressed mood.
…
Longitudinal and case linkage research shows a strong association between adverse childhood experiences and the likelihood of developing both mood disorders and substance use disorders in adult life. The unpredictable physical abuse and lack of maternal warmth described by Mr Billings, as well as the death of his father when he was aged twelve, are both likely to have increased Mr Billings’ vulnerability to develop depressive illness in adult life.
Dr Nielssen accepted that Mr Billings looked strangely calm and even euphoric in some of the recordings. However, he opined that this is consistent with persons finding peace once they have made the decision to commit suicide. Dr Nielssen also relied on the fact that Mr Billings had a history of previous suicide attempts.
Dr Nielssen accepted that a number of biological symptoms of depression were not evident in Mr Billings’ behaviour at and around the time of the murder such as loss of appetite and enjoyment of life but there were some biological features in the recordings such as trembling and sweating. Mr Billings notes these features in some of the recordings in the context of being concerned that police were watching him.
Dr Nielssen opined that a depressive illness affects a person’s perception in that they view things as being worse than they in fact are. There is “catastrophising” or seeing a small problem as a catastrophe. Interestingly, in the context of discussing Mr Billings “catastrophising” the allegations made by Ms Ticehurst, Dr Nielssen remarked that “having this sort of accusation for someone who didn’t have a record would have been traumatic for anyone”.
Dr Nielssen opined that Mr Billings’ depression also manifested in ruminations reflected in his anger at Ms Ticehurst. Dr Nielssen accepted that Mr Billings was thinking logically but maintained that his perception was still affected. As for Mr Billings’ inability to remember how many times he stabbed Ms Ticehurst, Dr Nielssen suggested that reasons for not remembering a crime could be alcohol, shame, denial or trauma.
When asked what the Court could infer from Mr Billings killing a puppy with a hammer even before the allegations, Dr Nielssen responded that it was “not a good sign”.
Dr Nielssen was questioned about the significance of the fact that Mr Billings ultimately did not commit suicide as he intended after he killed Ms Ticehurst. His opinion was that “the fact that he didn’t go through with it indicates that there was still a wish to live on” and suggested that he may have lacked the courage to go through with it.
Mr Billings reported that “after Christmas” (which was after the second “break-up”) he attempted suicide by gassing himself with helium in his car, and had made two previous suicide attempts, one by hanging where the branch to which the rope was attached snapped and the other by taking an overdose of hallucinogenic “trips”.
Dr Nielssen also opined that Mr Billings was affected by alcohol at the time of the murder. Being intoxicated is not a mitigating factor on sentence, [18] but in any event, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Billings was significantly intoxicated at the time of the murder. He had expressly stated in one of the recordings that he would need “red bulls” [19] to drink as he wanted to stay awake. The Agreed Facts disclose that he did in fact buy four cans of Red Bull in the hours before the murder. The Agreed Facts disclose that he had “a drink” at one stage which presumably was an alcoholic drink. Mr Billings does not appear intoxicated in either of the two recordings he made after the murder nor in the recording on the way to the murder. The only basis for Dr Nielssen’s opinion on this issue is that Mr Billings told him that although he told police he had about three cans of beer that night, he “probably” had eight or nine cans of rum and cola. Dr Nielssen also observed that in the body worn video with police after the murder Mr Billings appeared moderately intoxicated. The Agreed Facts disclose that when he arrived at his friends’ place over two hours after the murder and confessed, he was drinking a can of rum. That would explain why he appeared intoxicated on the body worn video (which was not before the Court). In light of this material, I am unable to accept Dr Nielssen’s opinion that Mr Billings was intoxicated at the time of the murder.
Returning to the issue of his mental health at the time of the murder, in his report, Dr Nielssen’s conclusion about the impact of these mental health issues on the offending was as follows:
With regards your question about the role of depression and substance use on mental function, depressed mood results in a more negative view of oneself, one’s circumstances and one’s future prospects, and is likely to have contributed to Mr Billings perception that he faced ruin and imprisonment as a result of what he saw to be a false allegation of sexual assault. Substance use, including the use of both cannabis and alcohol is associated with more depressed mood, and intoxication with alcohol typically results in impairment in the ability to think in a logical way and the loss of normal inhibition.
Mr Billings’s depressive illness resulted in a mental impairment at the time of the offence within the meaning of Section 23A of the Crimes Act, which gave rise to an abnormal state of mind at the time of the offence. The recordings show that Mr Billings planned to commit suicide, consistent with a severe form of depression. His abnormal state of mind is likely to have affected his perception of the events and also his capacity to exercise proper control over his actions, because of his negative perception of his situation after his arrest several weeks earlier and obtaining legal advice, on a background of longstanding depressed mood, and his interpretation of the effect of Ms Ticehurst’s behaviour in pushing him to suicide. Whether his degree of impairment was substantial is a matter to be determined by the court.
Mr Billings did not agree to be examined by Professor Greenberg. This meant that Professor Greenberg was unable to diagnose him with any precision. Despite this, he agreed with Dr Nielssen that Mr Billings suffered from a depressive illness; but he could not be specific as to whether it was Major Depressive Disorder (“MDD”), persistent depressive disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, or adjustment disorder with depressed mood.
He disagreed with Dr Nielssen that Mr Billings’ depressive illness impacted on his cognitive processes. In his opinion, Mr Billings’ depression was not serious enough to impair his reasoning. Professor Greenberg noted that Mr Billings’ conduct was also consistent with anger and resentment in a domestic violence context. He also noted the elements of coercive control.
Professor Greenberg opined that Mr Billings likely did not meet the clinical criteria for MDD. He pointed to the fact that the night before the offence Mr Billings went pig hunting with his friends, he had full-time employment and he demonstrated a high level of functioning in the recorded videos including talking about eating a steak, the clothes he would wear, washing his car and getting fuel for his ute.
In cross-examination, he agreed that there were reasons that men do not seek help for mental illness which include that the condition is not that severe, that it can be managed through exercise and/or drugs, or a concern that it may impact on employment.
As to Mr Billings’ self-reported previous suicide attempts, Professor Greenberg identified some inconsistencies in his accounts and noted that they were not corroborated by any contemporaneous medical records. He observed that if he had been able to interview Mr Billings, he would have asked him about these suicide attempts. In this regard it should be noted that Dr Nielssen conceded in cross-examination that in hindsight he should have asked those questions of Mr Billings when he interviewed him.
As for his depressive ruminations, Professor Greenberg accepted that they can be associated with catastrophic thinking but in this case Mr Billings sought to justify his actions.
Professor Greenberg opined that it is a matter of speculation whether Mr Billings acted out of anger or depression. He did not dismiss the depression as a factor, but he emphasised that there were other factors involved. He concluded as follows:
In summary, I am of the view that Mr Billings certainly had some depressive mood features but also likely intense anger at the deceased related to his perceived losses and perceived ‘wrongs’ done to him … at the time of the index offence. However, in my view, he was not specifically documented with the required five or more MDD symptoms of depressed mood … It would be unusual for a person with a severe end of the spectrum of MDD symptoms to be working full time, having a healthy appetite, enjoying pleasurable activities such as movies, having the concentration to read several books, concerned about his attire, maintaining his vehicle, having a healthy sexual appetite etc. Individuals with a severe form of MDD usually would require immediate hospitalisation as they are unable to care for themselves.
Therefore, based on the available documentation, in my view and on balance, Mr Billings likely had a chronic lower form of severity of depression such as persistent depressive disorder, chronic adjustment disorder with depressed mood or even a milder severity of chronic MDD rather than more “severe” form of depression at the time of the offence of killing. (Emphasis in original.)
Both of the expert witnesses are highly qualified and experienced forensic psychiatrists who regularly give evidence in proceedings in this Court. They agreed that Mr Billings was suffering a depressive illness at the time of the murder; the dispute was as to the severity of his symptoms and to what extent, if any, they impacted on his decision-making at the time of the murder.
Both experts agreed that the recordings made by Mr Billings on 21 April 2024 evidenced his intention to kill himself after he did whatever he planned to do to Ms Ticehurst that night. Expressing a suicidal intention is a symptom of a depressive illness. Although the experts disagreed as to the genuineness of the previous suicide attempts there was no evidence put before the Court to suggest that the attempts were not made. Further, I am satisfied that the recordings reflect a genuine desire on Mr Billings’ part to commit suicide after his confrontation with Ms Ticehurst. The recordings are full of self-pity, anger and self-justification and they are very performative. Despite this, I do not doubt the genuineness of his intention at the time they were made to kill himself. As Dr Nielssen observed, the fact that Mr Billings is strangely calm throughout most of them is consistent with the behaviour often displayed by persons who have made such a decision and do in fact go on to commit suicide.
Both experts agreed that Mr Billings’ depressive symptoms contributed to the offence; the main point of difference being that Professor Greenberg observed that Mr Billings’ expressions of hatred and revenge also played a role.
Having considered this evidence, it is simply not possible to identify which aspects of Mr Billings’ motivation to kill Ms Ticehurst were due to his depressive illness and which were motivated by his hatred of her and need for revenge. It is not irrational to have strong feelings of hate towards someone who you believe has ruined your life, which was clearly Mr Billings’ mental state at the time of the murder.
I am unable to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Billings suffered from an abnormal state of mind at the time of the murder which affected his perception of the events and his capacity to exercise proper control over his actions. He simply did not exhibit a number of the symptoms of MDD. He was still working full time, socialising with friends, looking after his grooming, had an appetite and is seen laughing and joking through some of the recordings.
I have considered the evidence that Mr Billings first starting contemplating an act of revenge when his boxing singlet was returned. As he explained in one of the recordings, he had trained hard to compete for Queensland in an inter-state boxing competition, a fact he was clearly very proud of. The singlet from that event was in his vehicle when it was seized by police on 5 April 2024 for crime scene testing. Although the specifics are unclear, it seems that the singlet was dirtied during this process. Mr Billings does appear to be irrationally affected by this event suggesting that he catastrophised it.
Although I accept that Mr Billings intended to commit suicide at the time he made the recordings, that urge went away after killing Ms Ticehurst, possibly because his intense anger towards her dissipated when he killed her. His explanation was that he saw a “drive safe dad” sign hanging from his rear-view mirror, but he is also recorded looking at this item prior to the murder and it did not stop him from killing Ms Ticehurst then. For whatever reason, once he killed Ms Ticehurst, his desire to kill himself went away. As Professor Greenberg observed, his depressive illness was no doubt a contributing factor to the murder, but there were other factors.
It is well established that an offender’s “moral culpability” or moral blameworthiness for the offending may be reduced by reason of a mental illness [20] and/or the effects of an offender’s profoundly deprived childhood. [21] References to moral culpability being “reduced” means reduced by reference to the moral culpability that corresponds or substantially corresponds with the objective seriousness of the offence. [22] I have already found that the objective seriousness of this offence is at the high end of the range.
If an offender puts evidence before the court and submits that their moral culpability should be reduced, then the court is required to make a separate finding on this issue. Mr Billings submitted that the Court would make a finding that his moral culpability for the offending is reduced on account of both his childhood deprivation and his mental health impairments. The Crown’s position was that there was no basis to make such a finding in this case.
Counsel for Mr Billings accepted before me that where the expert evidence supported a finding that his depressive illness was caused by adverse childhood events, there was no need for me to make two separate findings in relation to any reduction in Mr Billings’ moral culpability.
I accept that Mr Billings’ childhood was marred by the early divorce of his parents, occasions of psychological and physical abuse by his mother, the death of his father when Mr Billings was only 12, leaving school early and a diagnosis of oppositional defiant disorder. His lack of ongoing family support was evidenced by the fact that his only family member who attended the proceedings on sentence was his sister. It is not to the point, as was submitted by the Crown, that his childhood was not as bad as others that come before the Court; what is relevant for sentencing purposes is that the experts agreed that the adverse events of his childhood led him to develop a depressive illness well before the murder of Ms Ticehurst.
If I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Billings’ depressive illness contributed to the commission of the offence in a material way, then his moral culpability for the offence may be reduced. It has been held that mental illness does not have to be the direct or precipitating cause of the offending [23] and must merely “contribute directly or indirectly to the commission of the offence”. [24] This requires the mental condition to assume “some causal significance”. [25]
Having considered the circumstances of Mr Billings’ childhood and the evidence that it led him to develop a depressive illness I am prepared to accept that it was one of a number of factors which contributed to the offending. Given that there is no need for any causative link to be established to invoke the Bugmy principles and that Professor Greenberg agreed that the depressive illness was one of the factors contributing to the murder, I am satisfied that a finding of reduced moral culpability should be made in this matter both on the basis of his mental illness and his adverse childhood events. But that is not the end of the matter.
A reduction in moral culpability does not automatically translate to a reduced sentence. [26] It is well established that a sentencing judge is also required to have regard, as far as is relevant, to countervailing factors which may include the protection of the community and the need for the sentence to vindicate the dignity of the victim and reflect the community’s disapproval of the offending. The purposes of sentencing as set out in s 3A of the Sentencing Act will commonly pull in different directions.
I have considered how the finding that Mr Billings’ moral culpability is reduced should be reflected in the sentence imposed. I propose to reduce the need for general deterrence slightly, but it remains an important sentencing purpose in matters of this kind. There is no basis to find that Mr Billings presents a danger to the community due to his depressive illness warranting increased weight being attached to considerations of specific deterrence but there is a need in this case to “recognise the long-standing obligation of the state to vindicate the dignity of each victim of violence” and to “express the community’s disapproval” of the offending. [27]
Mr Billings was subject to conditional liberty at the time of the offence, namely the conditions of his bail. [28] Although that is an aggravating factor, it does not aggravate the objective seriousness of the offending. Rather, it is a matter personal to the offender and its relevance is confined to the determination of the appropriate sentence in the context of considering the importance of the various purposes of sentencing. [29]
As to the breach of the AVO, it has been described as not amounting to “conditional liberty simpliciter” but rather “a form of conditional liberty designed to protect the same victim from further attacks” the breach of which attracts a need for specific and general deterrence and denunciation. [30] Rather than strictly being applied as a statutory aggravating factor, it can increase the contextual seriousness of the offending. [31] The Crown accepted that I could take either course when considering the breach of the AVO.
To avoid any suggestion of double counting, I propose to take into account that Mr Billings murdered Ms Ticehurst whilst on bail for offences against her as an aggravating factor relevant to the purposes of sentencing and will confine the relevance of the breach of his AVO in the manner explained below. [32]
Mr Billings asks the Court to take into account four further offences for which he has admitted guilt on the Form 1. Mr Billings is not to be convicted of or sentenced for these offences. [33] Nor can these offences be taken into account to elevate the objective seriousness of the principal offence of murder. [34] Instead, the Court is to take these offences into account with a view to increasing the penalty that would otherwise be appropriate for the murder by giving greater weight to specific deterrence and retribution. [35]
As the Crown recognised, I must avoid “double counting” the contravene AVO offence by increasing the sentence both on the basis of the Form 1 and as an aggravating factor in the sense I have already described. [36] As stated above, to avoid any appearance of double counting, I do not propose to have regard to the fact that Mr Billings acted in breach of his AVO as a separate aggravating factor for the murder and will confine its significance to acting to increase the sentence when I take it into account on the Form 1 consistent with established principle.
It was not suggested that Mr Billings was of prior good character as at the time of the murder, but the absence of prior convictions is a separate mitigating factor. [37] It is also relevant to findings of prospects of rehabilitation and risk of re-offending.
It was submitted on behalf of Mr Billings that he is unlikely to re-offend and has good prospects of rehabilitation. [38] Dr Nielssen assessed Mr Billings as having “reasonable prospects of eventual rehabilitation” because he does not have a history of criminal conduct despite his difficult upbringing, he showed self-discipline in the past, he had been consistently employed prior to the offending, he had an eight-year marriage and is very attached to his son from that relationship, and he has some supports in the community. Dr Nielssen also opined that treatment for depression and substance abuse would assist in his rehabilitation.
I also have had regard to the evidence that Mr Billings has been a “model inmate” since he has been in custody and has been employed, undertaken education programs and demonstrated compliance with prison rules.
I am prepared to accept that Mr Billings has reasonable prospects of rehabilitation when he is released given his lack of prior convictions, his conduct in custody and the fact that he now must have a considerably greater understanding of his mental health issues.
Mr Billings relied on a number of factors to demonstrate remorse. These factors include his early plea of guilty, his statements in the videos after the murder that there would be two children waking up without parents, his full admissions upon arrest and the evidence from the prison chaplain with whom he has discussed his remorse and feelings about the offence. That prison chaplain, Mr Stuart, referred to Mr Billings’ “internal anguish” about the “stark reality” of his actions.
The Justice Health notes considered by Professor Greenberg included references to Mr Billings’ expressions of remorse since being in custody. On 19 November 2025, a clinical mental health nurse specialist who spent time with Mr Billings opined that he was reflective and remorseful. Further, Mr Billings’ letter to the Court demonstrates some insight into the tragic impact his actions have had on Ms Ticehurst and her family.
The Crown accepted that there are some expressions of remorse, but submitted that it was limited.
Clearly the best evidence of remorse is when an offender is willing to enter the witness box and be challenged on it. But it is well established that genuine remorse [39] can be established without the need for oral evidence to be given by the offender. [40]
A further factor relevant to remorse is that Mr Billings pleaded guilty to murder in the Local Court despite being warned at that time that the Crown intended to make an application that s 25F(2) of the Sentencing Act should be applied.
Based on all of the material put before the Court, I am unable to accept the Crown submission that the evidence of remorse is limited. Although I have seen more eloquent expressions of remorse by an offender, I am satisfied that Mr Billings’ remorse is genuine such that it is a mitigating feature on sentence. It is also a factor relevant to his prospects of rehabilitation and the risk of re-offending.
Mr Billings pleaded guilty in the Local Court and is thus entitled to a 25% discount. Despite this, the Crown submitted that this was a case in which s 25F(2) of the Sentencing Act should be applied. That section provides that the Court may determine not to apply the sentencing discount or apply a reduced sentencing discount if “the level of culpability in the commission of the offence is so extreme that the community interest in retribution, punishment, community protection and deterrence can be met only by imposition of a penalty with no allowance, or a reduction of, that discount”. The Crown complied with s 25F(3) by notifying Mr Billings prior to the case conference in the Local Court that it intended to submit that the 25% discount should not be applied or should be reduced.
It can be noted that s 25F(5) provides that it is for the offender to establish that grounds exist for the sentencing discount, and this must be proved on the balance of probabilities. The provision constitutes a further reflection of the requirement that a lesser penalty imposed as a result of a guilty plea must not be unreasonably disproportionate to the nature and circumstances of the offence. [41]
The statutory language in s 25F(2) of the Sentencing Act is largely the same as in s 61(1) of the Sentencing Act. It has been held that the word “culpability” in s 61(1) involves consideration of objective factors, such as the objective seriousness of the offence, as well as subjective factors, such as the offender’s background, criminal history and any mental disease, disorder or incapacity. [42] It was accepted that the word has the same meaning in s 25F(2).
The Crown accepted that there has been no case since s 25F was first enacted as part of the Early Appropriate Guilty Plea (EAGP) scheme in 2018 in which a court has declined to apply any discount at all. It was submitted that the aggravating features of this murder, being both a coercive control domestic violence murder and also a public justice offence (in killing a witness), warranted this case being the first such case. I am unable to accept that submission. Even though I am satisfied that the objective seriousness of this offence is at the high end of the range, I have made a number of positive findings in Mr Billings’ case, including that his moral culpability is reduced, which militate against such a conclusion.
Although I am not satisfied that the features of this case warrant Mr Billings being denied any discount for his early plea of guilty, I have considered the two decisions in which a reduced discount for an early plea of guilty has been imposed pursuant to s 25F(2).
In R v Simon, [43] the discount was reduced from 25% to 15% having regard to the level of planning, the callous nature of the killing, the perverse pride the offender took in the shooting and the nature of the motive. That offender had post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”) but the sentencing judge was unable to accept that it was directly causally related to the murder.
In R v Ney, the offender had journeyed to the Sydney CBD planning to kill a person and to use violence and terrify persons. He murdered a sex worker and then filmed the scene and expressed a measure of satisfaction at what he had done. He then ran amok through the CBD trying to stab others. He wounded one victim before he was able to be restrained. He was affected by a mental disorder and remained a danger to the public. Johnson J would have imposed life imprisonment but for the offender’s mental health issues. Instead, he reduced the discount for the early plea of guilty down to 10% pursuant to s 25F(2).
For completeness, I note that in R v Kovaleff [44] the discount for the early plea was reduced by the sentencing judge from 25% to 15% pursuant to s 25F(2) when he did not accede to the Crown submission that the offending warranted life imprisonment. The murder was premediated and callous. The offender killed his girlfriend’s best friend who was 17 years old because he wanted to have sexual intercourse with his girlfriend and would not have been comfortable if her friend was present. He celebrated afterwards by playing music. On appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal (“CCA”), [45] it was held that no error was disclosed in reducing the discount in that matter, but when the CCA intervened to re-sentence the offender on a different basis, the Court afforded him the full 25% discount.
It was submitted on behalf of Mr Billings that although there has been “massive” public and political attention given to this case, its objective and subjective features in the context of other cases and the application of consistent sentencing principles means that this is not an appropriate case for the application of s 25F(2).
I have considered the circumstances of the two cases in which a full discount was not afforded. Although they differ significantly to the present case, the murder of Molly Ticehurst is a serious murder involving the revenge killing of a woman who made a complaint of domestic violence against him. Having considered the community interest in retribution, punishment, community protection and deterrence in this matter, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to reduce the discount to be applied from 25% down to 20%.
Mr Billings has been in segregation and isolation in the High Risk Management Unit at Goulburn since his arrest due to the extreme media attention this case has received. The case was also the impetus for law reform to bail conditions for domestic violence offenders, which makes Mr Billings more vulnerable in custody.
Although Dr Nielssen suggested in his report that Mr Billings would not endure greater hardship in custody due to his depression, he noted in his evidence in Court more recent Justice Health records which show that Mr Billings is experiencing night horrors and flashbacks of the murder and that he has been on clonidine which is an adrenaline blocker prescribed to people with PTSD.
I accept that Mr Billings’ experience in custody has been made more onerous due to the media scrutiny surrounding his offending leading to his segregation. To a lesser extent I also accept that his depressive illness and more recent PTSD symptoms also mean that his custodial sentence will weigh more heavily on him. I propose to ameliorate the sentence on these bases.
The Crown did not rely on any comparative cases, although, in response to a query from me, it was noted that the highest sentence imposed for a domestic violence murder was a head sentence of 44 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 33 years. [46] The Crown expressly disavowed reliance upon it as being a comparable case. It was a planned murder committed out of jealousy in which the deceased was strangled in her home after a lengthy and violent struggle. The offender then had sexual intercourse with the corpse after he murdered her. He showed no remorse, went to trial in the face of a strong Crown case, received no discount on sentence and the trial judge was not satisfied his moral culpability was reduced. That is clearly a very different case.
A schedule of purportedly comparable cases was relied upon by Mr Billings. While acknowledging the limitations on using sentences imposed in other murder cases, [47] I have considered all of these cases. Common features were a lack of planning, a reduction in moral culpability due to mental illness and/or a deprived childhood and/or youth, limited or no criminal history, and/or no intention to kill. Nearly all of the cases involved pleas of guilty, but the starting points for them before any discount was applied were head sentences of 22 years, [48] 23 years and 11 months, [49] 24 years, [50] 25 years, [51] 26 years, [52] 26 years and 8 months, [53] and 32 years. [54] Of these cases I consider two of them to be particularly helpful and they were both the subject of appeals to the CCA.
In Wood v R the offender was subject to an AVO (Form 1 offence) as well as being on bail for domestic violence offences against his mother. He and the deceased had been in an “on and off again” relationship marred by a history of controlling domestic violence. The murder was committed in the deceased’s home with the use of a weapon. He intended to kill her but there was no planning. The offender had an extensive criminal history of violence, and the offending was aggravated by the fact that the offender was intoxicated and was aware of the link between alcohol consumption and his own violent behaviour. The objective seriousness of the offence was above mid-range. His prospects of rehabilitation were guarded at best, but he was remorseful. Full weight was given to his disadvantaged background. After a successful appeal he received a non-parole period of 18 years’ imprisonment with a head sentence of 24 years after a 25% discount was applied. The starting point was 32 years’ imprisonment.
In Thompson v R the offender was on parole for offences committed against the deceased as well as on an AVO. He was released from custody only two weeks earlier. He stabbed the deceased at least 78 times in her home in the presence of her young child after she had called Triple-0 to get him to leave earlier in the evening. He intended to kill her but there was no planning. There was a history of domestic violence in the relationship, and he had a criminal history. After a late plea affording him only a 10% discount, he received a head sentence of 22 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 15 years and 6 months. His moral culpability was reduced for his mental illness, childhood deprivation and his youth; he was only 22 years old. The starting point was 25 years’ imprisonment.
The Crown unsuccessfully appealed to the CCA against the manifest inadequacy of Mr Thompson’s sentence. The CCA was not satisfied that the sentence sat outside of the range of other comparable cases [55] and that any marginal difference in length of sentences was at least partially explicable by the offender’s diminished moral culpability, which was lacking in many of the comparable cases referred to by the Crown. No error of principle could be gleaned in the sentencing reasons of the primary judge. Although the Chief Justice observed that he would have been inclined to impose a slightly higher sentence, he acknowledged that this is not the test for manifest inadequacy. [56]
I have also had regard to the sentences imposed in R v Wang and R v Gina Kennedy. Both cases involved female domestic violence offenders and are two of the higher sentences imposed for domestic violence homicides in recent years.
In R v Gina Kennedy, which was a sentence I imposed, the offender killed her estranged husband in a frenzied attack with an axe while he was sleeping. It was a planned killing committed out of revenge and jealousy. The offender did not submit that her moral culpability was reduced. She had no previous criminal history. The starting point was 36 years’ imprisonment before the application of the 25% discount.
In R v Wang, the offender murdered her ex-girlfriend. The deceased had fallen off a fifth-floor balcony following a fight with the offender. The offender came down and inspected the deceased, went upstairs to fetch a knife from the apartment, returned and stabbed the deceased about 40 times. Beech-Jones J found that it was an especially callous crime. It involved some planning from the point that the offender inspected the deceased after the fall (less than five minutes before the murder). The offender had no criminal history. She showed some remorse. She was diagnosed with MDD but Beech-Jones J did not accept that her mental state had any material effect on her moral culpability. The starting point was 34 years’ imprisonment before the application of the 25% discount.
For completeness I note that in Tammajanta, I considered several cases of domestic violence homicides involving beatings and an intent to inflict grievous bodily harm (rather than to kill). [57] Offenders in those cases received undiscounted head sentences ranging from 22 years and 6 months to 30 years’ imprisonment.
Clearly, the purposes of sentencing in s 3A of the Sentencing Act can only be reflected in a sentence of full-time imprisonment. Mr Billings sought a finding of special circumstances and a variation to the statutory ratio [58] on the basis of his protective custody status and in order to enhance his prospect of successful reintegration into the community.
The Crown submitted that a finding of special circumstances should not be made because the statutory formulation will provide the necessary post-release supervision to meet the respective needs of Mr Billings and the community.
It is often said that there is no need to make a finding of special circumstances in murder cases given that the parole period will already be lengthy. Despite this, I am persuaded that the relevant matters identified on behalf of Mr Billings militate in favour of such a variation in this case, in particular his mental health issues. As a result of this finding the ratio between the non-parole period and the head sentence will be reduced from 75% down to about 71%.
Nothing I do in sentencing Mr Billings today nor anything I say in explaining the reasons for that sentence can bring Molly Ticehurst back or provide her family with any meaningful closure or relief. All I can do is to acknowledge their grief and sentence Mr Billings according to law, taking into account the various purposes of punishment and the evidence presented in the case.
I have considered the significance of the various purposes of sentencing as set out in s 3A of the Sentencing Act. They are: to ensure that the offender is adequately punished for the offence, to deter others, to protect the community, to promote the offender’s rehabilitation, to make the offender accountable for his or her actions, to denounce the crime and to recognise the harm done to the victim of the crime and the community. I have already explored the significance of these purposes throughout these reasons.
I have made a number of favourable findings in relation to Mr Billings’ subjective case and his sentence will be ameliorated accordingly as part of my instinctive synthesis. These include remorse, hardship in custody, his plea of guilty, his lack of a prior criminal history and his reasonable prospects of rehabilitation. But these mitigating factors fall to be considered in the context of very serious offending.
Mr Billings has been in custody since his arrest having already spent a night in custody when he was arrested the first time on 5 April 2024. It was agreed that his sentence should be backdated to 20 April 2024. [59]
Taking into account all relevant factors, including the objective gravity of the offending and Mr Billings’ personal circumstances, I would commence with a total sentence of 35 years’ imprisonment and would reduce that by 20% for the early plea of guilty.
The offender is sentenced as follows:
For the offence of murder, and taking into account the four matters on the Form 1 document, Daniel Billings I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 28 years commencing on 20 April 2024 and expiring on 19 April 2052. I fix a non-parole period of 20 years to expire on 19 April 2044.
You will be first eligible for release to parole on 19 April 2044.
In compliance with s 25C of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), I note that the provisions of that Act have potential application to Mr Billings. I direct that his legal representatives advise him of the existence of the Act and its application to this offence.
**********
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 23A.
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 18(1)(a); Table to Division 1A of Part 4 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) (“Sentencing Act”).
Sentencing Act, s 33.
R v Thompson [2025] NSWCCA 133 at [1]-[2] (“Thompson Appeal”).
R v Hamid [2006] NSWCCA 302; (2006) 164 A Crim R 179 at [67]-[88].
Thompson Appeal at [8].
R v Tammajanta [2024] NSWSC 1180 at [137] (“Tammajanta”).
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 at [27] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Hayne and Callinan JJ).
Although extracted in full, I have allowed for small changes in style and to avoid repetition.
This was the wording adopted in the Agreed Facts and I have taken it to mean that Ms Ticehurst mentioned the alleged sexual assault to Mr Billings in this text.
As above.
R v Halloun [2014] NSWSC 1705 at [46].
Dorsett v R [2024] NSWCCA 192 at [149]-[155]; Daher v R [2026] NSWCCA 26 at [4]-[14].
See R v Wang [2020] NSWSC 1335 at [46].
Evans v R [2017] NSWCCA 281 at [27].
Sentencing Act, s 21A(2)(c).
Sentencing Act, s 21A(2)(eb).
Sentencing Act, s 21A(5AA).
A caffeinated non-alcoholic soft drink.
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194.
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37.
DS v R; DM v R (2022) 109 NSWLR 82; [2022] NSWCCA 156 at [91].
Moiler v R [2021] NSWCCA 73 at [59] (Button J); DS v R; DM v R at [95]; Evatt (a pseudonym) v R [2025] NSWCCA 130 at [83] (Yehia J).
Luque v R [2017] NSWCCA 226 at [113] (Hamill J).
Oliver v R [2025] NSWCCA 227 at [90].
Harris v R [2021] NSWCCA 322 at [89].
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 at [54]. See also Christopher Ross v R [2019] NSWCCA 314 at [44]; Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 at [142].
Sentencing Act, s 21A(2)(j).
Hilier v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2009] NSWCCA 312; (2009) 198 A Crim R 565 at [30]; TL v R [2017] NSWCCA 308 at [72]; Oliver v R at [45].
R v Cherry [2017] NSWCCA 150 at [80] (Johnson J).
R v Thompson [2025] NSWSC 419 at [195] (“Thompson”); R v Gina Kennedy (a pseudonym) [2022] NSWSC 1499 at [108] (“Kennedy”).
Kennedy at [108].
Sentencing Act, ss 33, 35(4); Colak v R [2026] NSWCCA 108 at [45]-[50] (in relation to the equivalent Commonwealth provision).
RO v R [2019] NSWCCA 183 at [56]-[57].
Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146; [2002] NSWCCA 518 at [42] (Spigelman CJ).
See Morris v R [2026] NSWCCA 119 at [41], [75].
Sentencing Act, s 21A(3)(e).
Sentencing Act, ss 21A(3)(g), (h).
Sentencing Act, s 21A(3)(i).
Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 at [16]-[18]; Lloyd v R [2022] NSWCCA 18 at [45]; Towers v R [2025] NSWCCA 142 at [7].
Sentencing Act, s 22(1A); R v Ney [2021] NSWSC 529 at [201]; Milat v R; Klein v R [2014] NSWCCA 29 at [69]-[92].
CC v R; R v CC [2021] NSWCCA 71; (2021) 289 A Crim R 453 at [81].
[2025] NSWSC 309.
[2023] NSWSC 302.
Kovaleff v R [2026] NSWCCA 56.
R v Sultana (No.8) [2025] NSWSC 1573. NB: A notice of intention to appeal has been filed in that case.
Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 at [53]-[54].
R v King [2025] NSWSC 1572.
R v Zafar [2024] NSWSC 1639.
R v Hachem [2023] NSWSC 535.
Thompson.
Tammajanta.
R v He [2024] NSWSC 417.
Wood v R [2019] NSWCCA 309.
Thompson Appeal at [47].
At [50].
Tammajanta at [122]-[131].
Sentencing Act, s 44(2).
Although Mr Billings only spent one night in custody after he was arrested on 5 April 2024, the Crown submitted that he should be afforded the benefit of two days of pre-sentence custody.
R
Billings
[2013] HCA 37
(2002) 56 NSWLR 146
(2013) 249 CLR 571
(2010) 79 NSWLR 1
(2022) 109 NSWLR 82
(2010) 242 CLR 520
(2013) 249 CLR 600
(1999) 199 CLR 270