THE FACTS
4 The charge in respect of which the sentence was imposed was that of soliciting a person to inflict grievous bodily harm on another person, Michael William Duck (Mr Duck).
5 The proposed victim of the crime had known the appellant for a number of years. They first met in 1989 when Mr Duck was aged twenty-three and the appellant forty-seven. The appellant conducted a cabinet making business and in 1992 Mr Duck undertook some voluntary work in the business and eventually became an employee. According to Mr Duck, in about 1993 the appellant made what was taken by Mr Duck to be a homosexual advance to him. This was rejected. However, within a matter of days another and more explicit homosexual advance was made by the appellant to Mr Duck. This was again rejected, but because Mr Duck felt uncomfortable in his employment he left.
6 Following the termination of Mr Duck's employment the appellant began to stalk him, telephone him asking him to return to work, and follow him to social events. It is clear the appellant was infatuated with Mr Duck and that he continued to have sexual designs on him. This continued for about two years and caused great distress to Mr Duck, who became so depressed that on one occasion he attempted suicide.
7 In addition to stalking and phoning him, the appellant contacted Mr Duck's employer alleging, falsely, that Mr Duck was a thief and a liar.
8 Despite requests from Mr Duck, the appellant persisted in his behaviour and despite an absence by Mr Duck from New South Wales for a period in 1994 the appellant approached him on his return and made further explicit homosexual advances to him.
9 Once again the appellant defamed Mr Duck by telling his then employer that he was a liar and a thief.
10 In January 1995 Mr Duck sought an apprehended violence order against the appellant. Interim orders were granted on a number of occasions and on 12 August 1995 a permanent order was made for twelve months against the appellant at Coffs Harbour local court. Although the stalking then ceased, the appellant was frequently seen driving past Mr Duck's rural property. In addition, the appellant made serious vexatious complaints to the police about Mr Duck on several occasions. These were, as the word "vexatious" indicates, all utterly without substance. Mr Duck then instituted a civil action for defamation against the appellant. This was settled on the basis that the appellant pay an amount which varies according to which part of the evidence one has regard to, but is either $10,000 or $20,000, including costs in settlement of the action. The first instalment of that sum was due to be paid on 27 February 1998.
11 In January 1998 a community source contacted Coffs Harbour Police with information concerning a plan said to have been initiated by the appellant for Mr Duck to be murdered. As a consequence, an undercover police officer contacted the appellant and arranged a meeting with him. It is clear that the appellant believed that the undercover police officer was a hit man from Sydney and in his discussions with the officer told him it would be worth his while to travel to Coffs Harbour. On 21 February 1998 the undercover police officer, wearing an authorised listening device, met with the appellant, who negotiated with him to kill Mr Duck. The appellant explained that his motive was financial, as he stood to lose a large sum of money in his business due to the defamation claim. In the conversation between the appellant and the undercover officer the amount of the loss was greatly exaggerated by the appellant.
12 The arrangement made was that the appellant would pay the supposed hit man $5000 to run Mr Duck off the Dorrigo Road while he was travelling to or from work on his motor cycle. That road is mountainous and extremely dangerous in places. This plan was said by the appellant to be cleaner than shooting Mr Duck, (as was discussed) and it would look like an accident.
13 The recorded conversation reveals that amongst other things the appellant said:
"I don't give a shit whether you fuckin kill him or what you fuckin do. You can maim him completely so it ruins his fuckin life. I don't care. You please yourself. I mean I wasn't planning on killing him or anything but I was planning on doing something - but it would put him out of action for fuckin six months."