STATE OF TASMANIA v DILLON SCOTT DAWSON 17 AUGUST 2022
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE ESTCOURT J
The defendant Dillon Scott Dawson, aged 29, has pleaded guilty to one count of assault upon the complainant Joshua Murtagh aged 21.
On 5 March 2021 the complainant, the defendant and Joshua Astell were all inmates at the Risdon Prison Complex.
At around 2:30pm they were all exercising in the Apsley yard along with the complainant’s brother, Steven Murtagh. When correctional officers informed the inmates that exercise time was almost over, the complainant and Steven Murtagh started to leave the yard. In order to do that, both men had to walk past the defendant, who was standing near the doorway. As the complainant walked past, the defendant punched him once to the left side of his head with a closed fist. All of this was recorded on CCTV, the relevant part of which I have viewed.
The complainant was taken by surprise by the punch, which made him feel dazed and very light headed. He said he immediately felt pain to the left side of his jaw and he said he felt his “jaw go suddenly” and said that it felt like he was missing teeth. He put up his fists to defend himself, and Steven Murtagh ran back into the exercise yard to help him.
At this point Mr Astell became involved and punched the complainant repeatedly with both fists causing the complainant to fall back into a wall and to stumble across to the other side of the yard. Mr Astell followed and backed him into a corner of the yard and resumed punching the complainant in excess of ten times to his body and head, before kneeing him to the stomach. The complainant tried to defend himself but ultimately fell to the ground. The complainant then stood up and kicked Mr Astell to the left hip, and Mr Astell punched him twice more to the head.
As a result of the incident, the complainant sustained two midline lower jaw fractures, venous bleeding and as a result of the fractures, significantly displaced lower teeth. He also sustained bruising and a haematoma to his left temporal area. He underwent emergency surgery to correct the alignment of his jaw, which was done by inserting plates and screws.
Following his surgery the complainant was returned to prison where he was housed in the medical unit for observation for six weeks. He was only able to eat pureed food for a period of eight weeks.
The defendant was jointly charged with Mr Astell. Mr Astell pleaded guilty to the charge in the Magistrates Court and was committed to this Court for sentence. He was sentenced on 16 December 2021 by Acting Justice Marshall to six months imprisonment. I interpose at this stage that Mr Astell’s prior convictions for offences of violence were not quite as numerous as the defendant’s, and Mr Astell was younger. However it cannot be said that the defendant has an extensive record of violence. It’s notable however that this offence was committed whilst the defendant was subject to a suspended sentence.
Whilst it cannot be asserted which of the blows inflicted by the defendant and Mr Astell caused the complainant’s fractured jaw, the State asserts that the injuries sustained by the complainant remain a relevant sentencing consideration. In either, the defendant caused the injuries, or he placed the complainant in a position of vulnerability to further blows by Mr Astell, causing him to feel dazed and light-headed; a position that he would not have been in but for the defendant’s conduct. The Crown asserts that the injuries sustained by the complainant are therefore a reasonable foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s criminal acts in either scenario.
I do not accept that the sustained nature of the attack on the complainant by Mr Astell and his repeated punching of him was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s single punch to the complainant’s head. I think I must sentence on the basis that given the complainant’s description of how he felt after he was first punched, his jaw injury was capable of being caused by the defendant’s punch but may well have been exacerbated by Mr Astell’s numerous punches to the head.
Section 15 of the Sentencing Act 1997 applies to this matter as assault is a prison offence pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Corrections Act 1997.
In mitigation, I am told that the defendant was apparently upset about COVID lockdowns at the time of the offending. The complainant and the defendant are now reconciled and on amicable terms.
Following the offence, the defendant spent six months in segregation. This involved being kept to his cell and largely excluded from time outside his cell, and completely excluded from access to programs.
The defendant is extremely sorry for the impact of this offending on the complainant and did not turn his mind to, anticipate or want the incident to escalate in the way that it did.
The defendant is now 29 years old and was 27 years old at the time of the offence, as already noted. He was born to a 15 year old mother and his parents separated when he was three months old.
As a child, he witnessed his mother’s new partner commit domestic violence against her. Between the ages of eight and 14 years old the defendant had no contact with his mother as his father prevented it. He lived with his father until he was 14 years old when they had a falling out. He has been homeless since.
From the ages of nine to 15 years old the defendant was subject to physical and sexual abuse at various institutions and schools.
Nevertheless, he has a good work history and has worked in kitchens since the age of 15.
He is the father of three children aged 2, 9 and 10 years old.
He fell into bad company and began using drugs. He did have a fairly recent gap in offending however, from 2017 until 2020, when he was drug abstinent. The more recent offending was in the aftermath of Christmas 2020 when one of his closest friends took his own life. The defendant was the last person to see him and felt a sense of guilt. This led to the defendant returning to drug use which, in turn, resulted in his current period of incarceration.
The defendant has expressed insight into his offending and has taken steps towards rehabilitation. His youngest child is subject to a Child Safety Order due for review in February 2023, and he is working towards his goal of having access with this daughter as a priority.
Between his release from custody on 1 June 2021 and his remand on this charge on 6 February 2022, he engaged in full time work; he saw Paul De Bomford from the Bridge Program weekly; he contacted a lawyer in relation to the obtaining of compensation and counselling through the National Redress Scheme. I am told this is the first time the defendant has spoken of his past trauma and taken steps to seek help.
He has arranged upon his release from custody to complete an anger management program and therapy with Anglicare, upon which he had commenced prior to his latest incarceration. This was confirmed, I am told, by Anglicare to the defendant’s counsel, Ms Wong; a place in the day program at the Bridge, which has been confirmed to me; a place on a wait list for residential treatment, which will be available at some point, which has been confirmed to me and a return to full time work with Brad Darnell Plastering, which has been confirmed to me.
The defendant’s current release date of 5th September 2022.
In all of these circumstances I am of the view that the community interest lies in giving the defendant an opportunity to carry out his plans to rehabilitate himself. If he fails to do so, he will inevitably be returned to prison, most likely by me.
The defendant is convicted and, taking into account totality and parity, he is sentenced to nine months imprisonment from 5 September 2022 which term of imprisonment is wholly suspended on condition that he commit no offence punishable by imprisonment for a period of two years from that date.