R v Conway [2002] VSC 486

Supreme Court of Victoria|2002-11-14|Before: TEAGUE J

Criminal law - Sentencing - Murder of former fiancee - Jealousy and resentment - 19 years prison - 14 years non-parole period.

Midas Conway. You have been found guilty by a jury of the murder of Lisa Richardson on 18 October 2000. As at that time, Lisa Richardson had been, but no longer was your fiancee. You had met her in 1999. A relationship was quickly established. In August 1999, the two of you became engaged to be married. The two of you were then living in a unit in Mentone. In January 2000, your plans to marry were disrupted. You were charged with offences relating to illegal drugs. You were remanded in custody. Those charges are still to be dealt with by the courts. You remained on remand until 9 October 2000.

When you first went to prison, Lisa Richardson visited you regularly. By the middle of the year 2000 her visits were further apart. As time passed, her attitude to you changed. Another man, a Rino Salpietro, had come into her life. She established a relationship with Salpietro. The time came when she told you that she had met Salpietro. Independently, you received confirmation of his being on the scene from other sources. To you, she downplayed her feelings for him. You were nevertheless devastated at the turn of events. You became depressed. Your depression was such as to necessitate you receiving treatment in prison. Lisa Richardson did not discontinue visiting you in prison. It was, nevertheless, still clear that the position between the two of you was no longer as before.

On 9 October 2000, you were released on bail. Shortly before that, Lisa Richardson communicated to you that, on your release, she would not have you back at the Mentone unit. She returned your engagement ring and some belongings. When you got out of prison, you went to live with your mother and sister. Two days after leaving prison, you went unannounced to the Mentone unit. Lisa Richardson was not there. You spoke with the two women who were then sharing the unit with her. While there, you arranged to meet with her the next day. At the unit, you saw a photograph of Lisa Richardson with Rino Salpietro. You noted her obvious happy appearance. The next day you went to meet her at a jeans shop in Mentone. She had an interest in the shop. She worked there at times. She had arranged for others to be in the background at the shop. You and she had what appeared to be an amicable discussion. But she made it clear to you that a relationship with you was no longer a consideration. After the meeting, your depression deepened. Your sister arranged for you to be seen by a doctor three times in that week for your depression.

You arranged to meet with Lisa Richardson again at the jeans shop on 18 October 2000. Before leaving your family home, you took a knife from a kitchen drawer. You concealed the knife under your clothes. When you arrived at the shop, Lisa Richardson was there. Also there was an assistant, Suzanne Thobis. You and Lisa Richardson talked in the staff room for a few minutes. You then took out the knife. You took hold of Lisa Richardson. She called for help. Suzanne Thobis came in to help. Suzanne Thobis showed herself to be a very brave woman. She tackled you despite your being considerably stronger. She managed to bring about the breaking of your knife. What you then did speaks clearly of your true motive. You promptly took up another knife from a nearby table. You plunged it into the back of Lisa Richardson in front of Suzanne Thobis. Suzanne Thobis ran for help. You stabbed the defenceless Lisa Richardson many more times. Your attack on her was sustained and ferocious. The blood loss from the wounds that you inflicted was extreme. You delayed the provision to her of help. Her life could not be saved.

Later, you were interviewed by the police. I did not find credible some parts of the account of events you then gave. I cannot accept your claim that you took the knife to the meeting to use on yourself. I cannot accept your portrayal of Lisa Richardson as callous. I cannot accept your claim that she acted in an uncaring way when you told her that you would take your own life if you could not have her. You claimed: that she just laughed; that she invited you to go ahead; that you lost it; and that you just reacted spontaneously by using the knife to kill her instead of yourself. Your claim of an intention to harm yourself is scarcely supported by the injuries you sustained. Moreover, it was extremely unlikely, given other evidence, that she would laugh derisively as you claimed. All the indications are that she was a caring woman, who was scared of what you might do. Whatever Lisa Richardson said to you on the fatal day was likely to have been compassionate, not new or shocking or uncaring. You were already well aware that the relationship was over. The evidence points much more strongly to your having acted as you did for a very different reason. That was that if you could not have Lisa Richardson, no one else would. You were motivated by jealousy and resentment for her having preferred another man to you.

I do make allowance in your favour for the confused and depressed state in which you then were. There was evidence from the trial and the report of Dr Lester Walton that the level of depression was significant.

I have read attentively two victim impact statements. One is that of Suzanne Thobis. The other is that of Mary Vavladellis, Lisa Richardson's only sister. It is written on behalf of herself and her parents. While there are some aspects that go beyond what is appropriate, the contents of those statements make clear that the consequences of the death of Lisa Richardson for at least four people have been devastating, emotionally and in other ways. Nothing the law can do will much mitigate the adverse consequences flowing from her death.

I turn to your personal circumstances. You were born in August 1959 and are now 43 years of age. Your family background is a relatively normal one. You appear to have above average intelligence. Your schooling extended into the tertiary level. You have had a history of troubled relationships. You had two children by a marriage that had its ups and downs. You have a prior conviction for unlawful assault and two for trafficking in heroin. Both of the latter warranted prison sentences, the earlier being suspended. I note in your favour that you appear to have used your time in prison to date to advance your rehabilitation.

You have had 758 days of pre-sentence detention to today, 14 November 2002. I direct that that be noted in the court records. I sentence you to 19 years imprisonment. I fix a non-parole period of 14 years.

At a glance