R v Karageorges [2005] VSC 193

Supreme Court of Victoria|2005-06-14|Before: KAYE, J.

CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Murder - Husband killing wife of 30 years in jealous rage - No previous history of violence - Otherwise good character and background.

1 Vasily Karageorges, you have been found guilty by a jury empanelled upon your trial of the murder of your wife, Tina Karageorges, on 8 March 2003.

3 At the time of her death your wife was 47 years of age. She met you when she was about 16 years of age and she married you two years later in 1974. You were then 22 years of age.

4 The evidence, to which I shall later return, establishes that your marriage was, to a significant degree, a happy and harmonious one with your wife. Certainly the evidence reveals that your wife loved you very much, and I also accept that you felt the same way about her. Tina and you had three children, Alice, who was 28 years of age at the date of her mother's death, Phillip who was then 24 years of age, and Michael who was then 14 years of age. You were both proud, loving and devoted parents, you yourself had worked long and hard hours to build a family home and to provide for your family, and your wife had devoted herself to the care and rearing of the children. The uncontradicted evidence was that, during the 29 years of your marriage to your wife, you were never violent towards her either in act or in words, that you never abused her, and that you never sought to intimidate or dominate her.

5 However, the evidence, including that of the experts, reveals that from time to time you were prone to unwarranted feelings of jealousy about your wife. There were some incidents, albeit perhaps rather minor at the time, which provide an insight that, on occasions throughout your marriage, you were prone to wrongly suspect that your wife was unfaithful, and when you did so, you would not accept her denials of your allegations about her. The evidence of the psychiatrists and psychologist was that you are a perfectionist, a man of strongly held and rigid principles, to whom the values of family loyalty and marital faithfulness were sacred.

6 You are the only person who knows what occurred on the night on which you murdered your wife. Shortly after the police arrived at your home you told them what had happened until a short time before you killed your wife, at which point your memory is a blank. What you told them is consistent with what you told the police in the later formal record of interview, and with what you have told the psychiatrists and psychologist when they interviewed you. At your trial the Crown accepted, and in my view properly so, that you told the police the truth. Immediately after you had killed your wife you telephoned the 000 emergency line. The police arrived half an hour later. It would be doubtful that you would have had time, in your then state, to have fabricated what you told the police. I am fortified in that view by the consistency of what you have told the police in your record of interview and what you have later told the psychiatrists and the psychologist.

7 At the time of your wife's death your family was living on a 20 acre property at Bishop Avenue, Diamond Creek. On the evening of her death, you were watching television with your wife. Your elder son Phillip had gone out to a wedding with his girlfriend, and your daughter Alice and your younger son Michael were upstairs in their bedrooms. Your wife and you proceeded to become affectionate. You both then went upstairs to make love. After you had both undressed, you noticed what you believed to be bruising between your wife's legs. You became suspicious and argued with your wife as to the origin of those marks. You accused her of being unfaithful and she denied it. She said that the marks were a rash. You both then dressed and went downstairs to the sewing room. You persisted with your allegations to your wife and again she denied them. You told her that the matter could be settled by her attending a doctor. It is then that you maintain that your wife admitted that she had had affairs with other men, that two abortions which she had had earlier in your marriage may have been for pregnancies which were a result of those affairs, and that your eldest son might not be yours. You told the police that you then went outside to get some air. You then proceeded to the kitchen to get a glass of water. You have consistently told the police and the experts who have examined you that it was then that your mind blanked out. Your next recollection is waking up next to the deceased who was on the ground. She had a knife in her stomach and her face was cold. You pulled the knife from her stomach and telephoned the 000 emergency line. You told the operator that you thought you had stabbed your wife. You requested that he summon an ambulance and the police.

8 The police arrived half an hour later. It was then that you recounted to them the version of events which I have just summarised.

9 The pathologist, Professor Ranson, gave evidence that there were 27 stab wounds to your wife. There were four stab wounds to her chest. One was a complex wound to the upper left chest which was inflicted with sufficient force to cut through a rib. Those wounds were associated with an extensive wound to the left lung, a wound to the heart, and a wound to the right lung. In addition, there were at least two further stab wounds to the abdomen.

10 Professor Ranson noted that there were 12 stab wounds to the right arm and hand of your wife. In addition, there were a number of wounds including stab wounds to her left lower leg. The wounds to the arms and the leg indicated that your wife was endeavouring to defend herself against your frenzied attack. The injuries to her leg suggested that, at some stage, she was on her back, trying to defend herself by pulling her legs towards her chest.

11 On the evidence I accept that you do not have any memory between the time which you left the kitchen, and the time when you noticed the knife in your wife's abdomen. In other words, you do not have any memory of entering the sewing room and attacking and stabbing your wife to death. By its verdict the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that your actions in stabbing your wife were both conscious and voluntary, and that you carried out those actions with the intention of killing her or, at the very least, causing her really serious injury. As explained by Professor Mullens, Professor Ogloff and Dr Wood, the fact that you do not remember the incident is not uncommon for spouses who are involved in brutal killings of their partners. In this case your lack of memory is explicable both by reason of your shock at what your wife had told you in the course of your argument with her, and by the processes of your memory blotting out your recollection of the horrific event.

12 At your trial the Crown accepted, and I consider properly so, that, on the evidence, your wife did make the statements to you which, in your interviews with the police, you alleged she made. It is however appropriate that at this stage I remark that there is absolutely no evidence at all that your wife had ever been unfaithful to you. The evidence was unanimous and overwhelming that Tina Karageorges was a loving, faithful and devoted wife and mother. She was also a much loved and loyal sister. The conclusion which necessarily follows, and indeed was accepted by both the prosecution and your counsel at trial, was that, as a result of your refusal to accept her denials, and because of your persistent arguing with her, your wife, in utter exasperation, made a confession of infidelity to you which was entirely untrue.

13 I have made those remarks because it is only appropriate that what I say in sentencing you leaves no stain at all on your wife's memory, and causes no untoward grief to those who loved her so much. However, the tragic fact is that I do accept, for the purposes of sentencing you, that your wife did say to you what you allege she said. It is not an aggravating factor, and I do not take it to be such, that the confession made to you by your wife was extracted from her by your persistent refusal to accept the truth of the matter, namely, that your wife was always faithful to you.

14 Thus I do accept, as was indeed common ground at the trial, that, immediately before the fateful moments in which you took your wife's life, your wife gave into your pressure, and made to you a false admission that she had had affairs, and that one of your children may not be yours. I also accept that you were truly shocked by what your wife said to you. You accepted it at face value, notwithstanding the manner in which you had extracted that confession from her. Your wife's revelation to you shook the whole core of your value system. I accept that, when you went to the kitchen, it was then that your rage overcame you and that, as you said to Dr Wood, you saw "red". I accept that what then followed was the result of your uncontrolled rage.

15 Thus I accept that your stabbing of your wife was not premeditated. I also accept that it would not have occurred had not, in the course of the argument before that, you extracted from your wife the false admission which you did. I also accept that, the moment that you regained control over your rage, you rang the emergency line for an ambulance and for the police. All those matters go in mitigation of your sentence.

16 On the other hand, you stabbed to death your loyal wife of almost 30 years, and you did so with repeated brutal and merciless blows from a sharp knife. The violence which you inflicted on the woman who loved you so much was of considerable magnitude. In those last moments of her life, your wife must have suffered indescribably. No doubt her physical pain and fear were matched by the deep emotional hurt that it was her beloved husband who was so cruelly taking her life from her. Thus it is my duty to sentence you for what was a particularly violent and cruel stabbing of your defenceless wife who had trusted you so much.

17 Your killing of your wife was found by the jury to be without justification, and understandably so. Whatever your feelings of anger, or indeed rage, they provided no excuse or justification for you inflicting violence on her, let alone repeatedly stabbing her as she desperately fought to protect herself. The sentence I must impose upon you must adequately express the Court's condemnation of your crime, and must be of sufficient severity to send a clear and unequivocal message to the community that such violence by a husband against his wife or partner is utterly unacceptable. Thus in a case such as this the concept of general deterrence is of significance.

18 I have read, and re-read, the victim impact statements which were tendered by the Crown on your plea. Those statements demonstrate the suffering, grief and loss which your wanton actions have visited on your own three children, and on the sisters of your wife, all of whom loved her very much. Your children's lives have been shattered by the traumatic slaying of their beloved mother by their own father. The damage which your actions have caused to others, and which will remain with all of those who cared so much for her, is the direct and inevitable consequence of your actions. The victim impact statements are a specific reminder of the trauma, grief and anguish which have resulted from your actions.

19 On the other hand, there is much to be said in relation to your personal background which goes to your credit, and which I must and do take in mitigation. You are now 53 years of age. You have no previous convictions. You came to Australia from Macedonia during your teenage years. Since arriving here you have been in regular and steady employment. For five years before 2003, you had been employed by Lovett Technologies in Montmorency. That company is a large aircraft component manufacturer. You were employed as a setter and machine operator on a lathe which produced components for aircraft. That was precision work. Mr Drljaca, the operations manager of that company, gave evidence at your trial. He told the jury that you had a very strong work ethic and were a perfectionist. You worked long hours, including a 12 hour day, and half a day on Saturday. You were faultless in your work, totally reliable, and got on well with your fellow employees, notwithstanding that you are a quiet and withdrawn type of person. Mr Drljaca said that you were the person he would ask to help teach new employees their tasks. There is no doubt that you were a dedicated and much valued employee.

20 I have also heard evidence from the five sisters of your late wife. Their evidence was that you were a good and devoted husband, and that you enjoyed a happy marriage with your wife. Shortly before she died your wife told her sister Flora that she was very happy when you were around. You were never known to lose your temper. It appears that your relationship with some of your children, and in particular your eldest son, was not all it should have been before your wife's death. No doubt that was attributed to partly by your very rigid outlook, and also by the generation gap between you and your offspring. Nonetheless, the evidence persuades me that you were a devoted husband who cared very much about your children. You worked very hard, were a good provider, had paid off your dream home, and did all you could for your family.

21 Thus, until the dreadful events of 8 March 2003, I accept that you were a man of excellent character, who justifiably enjoyed the respect of members of his family and of his employer. Further, there is no evidence at all that there is anything in your character that shows you to be of violent disposition, or a man who cannot control his emotions or temper. As a result of the events of 8 March 2003 you have not only taken your wife's life from her, but you have also shattered your own dreams. As Professor Ogloff said at your trial, you are now a broken man who has destroyed nearly all of what you worked so hard to achieve.

22 The question whether you are remorseful for your actions is somewhat difficult. You have expressed remorse to Professor Ogloff, and in particular you have expressed considerable concern about the effect which your behaviour has had on your children. In a personal history which you prepared for Professor Burrows, you set out, at some length, your feelings including your contrition for what you have done to your wife and children. Unfortunately, it appears that you have not been able to express that remorse directly to your children, who have been left to grapple with their grief without any support from their father. There are two possible explanations for your failure to do so. One explanation is that you are not sincerely remorseful for killing your wife and the mother of your children. The alternative explanation may lie in your rigid personality structure, and in your excessive pride which bars you from seeking the forgiveness of your own children. With some reservations, for the purposes of sentencing you, I accept that the latter explanation is the more likely explanation. On the balance of probabilities I accept that you are, in your own way, remorseful for taking your wife's life. However, the extent of that remorse is qualified by your stubborn refusal to accept that your wife was never unfaithful, and by your failure to communicate that remorse to your own children.

23 It is clear that you have suffered and will continue to suffer gravely as a result of what you have done. You have not seen your children for some time. I have no doubt that, whatever they feel towards you, a large part of it is affected by the fact that it was you who so cruelly took their mother from them. You are cut off from the work to which you were so dedicated and which gave you such a sense of fulfilment. There is no evidence that you are other than in good physical health. However, you are now at an age at which life in prison would not be easy for you. Further, unless you are able to take steps to effect some reconciliation with your children, I would expect that the years ahead for you will be lonely.

24 I am therefore left with the task of sentencing you as a man of otherwise excellent background and character for what was a truly terrible crime committed by you against your wife.

25 As aggravating factors I must take the following matters into account:

(1) The extent and severity of the violence inflicted by you on your wife. You used a sharp knife as a weapon. You struck her repeatedly with it. She tried to resist. Nevertheless you continued with your violence to her. You continued to strike her when she was entirely defenceless on the ground. The attack by you on your wife lasted for sufficient time to enable you to inflict 27 knife wounds to her body. A number of the blows were inflicted with considerable force.

(2) The person who you killed was your faithful and loyal wife who trusted you, and who had shared the whole of her adult life with you and borne your children. She was in your care and your murder of her totally betrayed her trust in you. You murdered her in what should have been the safety of her own home.

26 Further, as I have stated, it is my duty to ensure that the sentence which I pass on you is of sufficient severity to send a loud and clear message to the community that conduct of that type will not be tolerated. While I do not consider that specific deterrence is of particular relevance in this case, nonetheless it does have some part to play.

27 On the other hand, by way of mitigating circumstances, I take into account the factors to which I have referred above and in particular the following:

(a) The killing by you of your wife was entirely unpremeditated. At the critical time you were in a state of uncontrolled anger which had been precipitated by the argument between you and your wife, in the course of which she falsely confessed infidelity to you.

(b) Your actions were totally out of character for you.

(c) You have no previous convictions. You are a person of otherwise excellent character. You have shown yourself to be a model citizen, a very hard worker, a good husband, and a devoted father. You had earned the respect of your wife's family and of your employer.

(d) Within the confines of your own rigid personality, you are remorseful for what has happened. You immediately repented when you snapped out of your rage, and sought help for your wife. You have consistently told the truth to the police.

(e) Your actions in murdering your wife have not only taken your wife from you, but have shattered your dreams and destroyed all you have worked for so far. For 30 years you worked hard to build a home and a family. In one short episode of rage, you have destroyed it all.

(f) Whatever sentence of imprisonment is imposed on you, it will be difficult for you. You have no contact with your children. You are now a broken man.

(g) When you are finally released from prison it will be difficult for you to re-build your life. You are not close to your own family. You will emerge from prison with little if any personal support.

28 Weighing all those matters and taking them into account, I now sentence you as follows. I sentence you to 18 years' imprisonment. I fix a period of 14 years during which you are not eligible to be released on parole. I declare, pursuant to s.18 of the Sentencing Act, the period of 830 days to be the period reckoned as already served under the sentence, and I shall cause that declaration to be noted in the records of the Court.

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (39 paragraphs)

Parties