IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA	Not Restricted	
AT MELBOURNE
Criminal Division
S ECR 2023 0258

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS	Crown	
		
v  		
		
GORDON IVANKOVIC	Accused	

---

JUDGE:	Jane Dixon J	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	10 February 2025	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	3 March 2025	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Ivankovic	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VSC 50	

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Guilty plea following sentence indication – Assault on elderly mother leading to death – Reasonable prospects for rehabilitation – Sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 5 years – Sentencing Act 1991 ss 5(3), 18(4), 6AAA – DPP v Wang [2020] VSC 884 – DPP v Maskell [2023] VSC 689 – DPP v Nguyen [2024] VSC 99 – R v Tovey [2023] VSC 530. 

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the Crown	Mr Patrick Bourke SC with Ms Susanna Locke	Office of Public Prosecutions 	
			
For the Accused	Mr John Desmond	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers	

HER HONOUR:
1	Gordon Ivankovic you have pleaded to the crime of manslaughter in relation to the death of your mother, Maria Ivankovic on 12 June 2023.
2	You formally entered a plea of guilty to the charge of manslaughter on 4 November 2024 following a sentence indication hearing which took place on 30 and 31 October 2024.  The maximum penalty for manslaughter is 25 years’ imprisonment.
3	The Court received the following documents on behalf of the prosecution:
(a)	Summary of prosecution opening for plea dated 4 February 2025 (Exhibit P-1);
(b)	Three victim impact statements (Exhibit P-2). 
4	On behalf of the defence:
(a)	Defence plea submissions dated 6 February 2024; and defence sentencing indication submissions dated 29 October 2024 (Exhibit D-1);
(b)	Justice Health records (Exhibit D-2);
(c)	Psychological report of Mr Warren Simmons dated 30 January 2025 and transcript from sentencing indication on 30 October 2024 (Exhibit D-3).
Factual background to offending
5	In essence, the Crown case is that between 12.30pm and 12.45pm on 12 June 2023 you assaulted your mother and caused her death. However, at the time of assaulting her you did not intend to cause her death or really serious injury.
6	Your mother, Maria, was born in Croatia in 1941 and was aged 81 at the time of her death.  She had migrated to Australia with your father, Ivo, and your older sister Janine in the early 1960s.  You were born on 8 October 1967 and your parents moved into [redacted] in about 1969. Your father was a tool maker by occupation and your mother was a factory worker.
7	Your only sister, Janine is now aged 59 and is married and has a daughter Sascha. You had a younger brother, Max, who tragically died of a drug overdose in the family home in 1994, at the age of 23. Your father died from cancer in 1998.  
8	At the time of the events before the Court you had been living in a unit in South Yarra for about three years.  You had frequent contact with your mother, but your personal life was marred by drug abuse and mental health instability, which impacted your relationship with your mother.
9	I will now explain the circumstances of the offence in more detail.
The day of the offence
10	At 12.01pm on 12 June 2023, Rina P, a close friend of Maria, called her on her mobile phone.  It had been planned that Rina P and her husband, Ivan, and another friend, Anka T, would come over to Maria’s house at 5.30pm to play cards.  Maria told Rina P that you had phoned her earlier that day and agreed to come over to help her flip a mattress.  They spoke about what she would give you for lunch. The telephone call ended at 12.21pm. 
11	Meanwhile, you left your South Yarra unit at 10.52am on 12 June 2023 and called your mother from a pay phone in South Yarra.  Your mother did not answer that call.  You called again from a different payphone at 11.24am and this time the call connected for 56 seconds.  
12	You boarded a route 57 tram at about 11.27am and travelled to West Maribyrnong where you disembarked at a tram stop near Macedon Street at about 12.06pm.  Your mother’s house is a 20 minute walk from that tram stop.  You arrived at your mother’s house at 12.26pm and were only at the house for a relatively short time, departing at approximately 12.42pm.
13	During that short interval of under 20 minutes you had an argument with your mother that escalated into an assault by you on her. In the course of the assault you grabbed her and placed pressure on her face and upper neck, obstructing her airways for a sufficient time to cause incapacitation and death.  This was the unlawful and dangerous act that constitutes the offence of manslaughter.
14	It seems that when you departed you left your backpack at the house.  You rang your mother’s mobile phone from your mobile phone at 3.04pm and 3.05pm.  Neither of those calls were answered. You then rang your sister, Janine, at 3.06pm and 3.12pm but did not get through at that time. Janine returned your call at 3.22pm but you did not answer.  She then called you again at 3.24pm. This time you answered the call and claimed that you must have accidentally called her. You spoke in a normal and talkative way to her, although she found it unusual that you wanted to stay on the phone and chat, as this was not your normal dynamic with her.
15	During the course of the afternoon Maria’s friends, who had planned to visit and play cards that evening, were unable to get hold of her on the phone following Rina P’s call that had concluded at 12.21 pm.
16	Rina P tried calling Maria a few times on her landline and her mobile phone throughout the afternoon and Anka T tried calling Maria for a final time at 4.45pm.  Rina P and Anka T agreed that Maria must be busy and that they would simply meet at her house at 5.30pm.
17	Rina P and her husband Ivan went to the house at 5.30pm and met up with Anka T and her son Matt who were already at the front door.  They had been knocking, but no one had responded.  Rina P had a key to Maria’s house and went around the back, followed by Anka T.  The security door was shut, but the back door was open. 
18	Anka T walked into the kitchen and came upon Maria lying on her back in the kitchen with her head near the kitchen cupboard and her arms by her side with palms up.  Maria appeared cold to touch and was not breathing. Anka T went back around to the front of the house and asked her son to call an ambulance.  
19	Mr Doyle of Fire Rescue Victoria attended just before 6.00pm in response to the emergency call.  When he entered the kitchen he observed Maria lying face up hard against the refrigerator.  He moved her into the centre of the kitchen and noticed that she was cold to touch and rigor had set in in her limbs.  Shortly afterwards a mobile intensive care ambulance (‘MICA’) arrived with MICA paramedics.  It soon became apparent that Maria was deceased. In the circumstances, resuscitation was not attempted and Maria was pronounced dead.
20	Rina P, Ivan and Anka T moved to the sitting room to await police and observed your backpack on the floor next to a chair.  Contact was made with your sister, Janine, and Janine and her daughter Sascha went straight to the house and met your mother’s friends there.  From 7.00pm that evening your sister tried calling your phone many times but each call went straight to voicemail.  She sent a text message asking you to call her urgently, but did not receive a return call from you until 18 June 2023, six days later.  
21	Photographs of your mother’s body were provided to a Homicide Squad detective, D/S Hupfield.  D/S Hupfield observed injuries to Maria’s mouth and nose but did not see any injuries that caused him significant concern.  He provided the photographs to the on-call pathologist, Dr Matthew Lynch, who also did not have any immediate concerns, but agreed that Maria’s body should be examined when it arrived at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine (‘VIFM’) the following morning.  Crime Scene officers collected your backpack which contained your wallet, bankcards and identification documents.
22	On 13 June 2023, Dr Lynch advised D/S Hupfield that he did not consider your mother’s death to be suspicious.  That same day at 8.52am you went around to your mother’s house and saw police in attendance.  You ducked under the crime scene tape and walked towards the house, before being intercepted by police who would not let you in.  You became agitated and said that it was your family home and that your name was Gordon.  You asked police what was going on and after some hedging about you said ‘I need to know, is everyone okay in there’.  After being denied entry by police, you went to Highpoint Shopping Centre where you used a phone in the Optus store to call your mother’s landline.  The call was not answered, but you left a message in Bosnian saying ‘mum it’s me, call me back’.  
23	At 12.32pm that day you withdrew $800 cash from an ATM in Collins Street.  At 6.12pm you attended Southern Cross Station and booked a trip to Sydney under the name of Stephen Smith, however, did not end up travelling to Sydney that night and instead returned to your apartment in South Yarra.  
24	At 8.05am on 15 June 2023 you called your mother’s landline and left a message saying, ‘Hey, listen, hello.  Hey, call me back, it’s Gordon’. You then travelled to Malvern and purchased a backpack from Aussie Disposals and a pair of blue running shoes.  At 7.32pm that same day you went to Southern Cross Station and police infer that you boarded a Sydney bound train, using a ticket bought in a different name.
25	At 10.48am on 18 June 2023, you called your sister, Janine, from a New South Wales telephone number and said that you were in Sydney and needed money because your wallet had been stolen.  You did not mention your mother or what happened or ask how she was going.  Your sister became angry and hung up on you.  On 19 June at 6.45pm you caught a bus from Sydney Central Station to Brisbane and arrived in Brisbane on 20 June at 12.20pm. 
26	On 19 June 2023, Dr Michael Burke from VIFM contacted D/S Hupfield about a post-mortem he was conducting on the deceased.  Dr Burke had identified injuries that caused him to believe that Maria’s death was suspicious. Therefore, the Homicide Squad took over the investigation.  Dr Burke identified Maria’s cause of death was upper airway obstruction and he identified petechial haemorrhages in the conjunctivae of the eyes.  Although the larynx was intact, he observed bruises to the subcutaneous tissues of the left angle of the mouth and the soft tissues of the upper neck adjacent to the left superior cornu of the thyroid cartilage and to the anterior aspect of the hyoid bone.  There was also a laceration to the mucosa of the floor of the mouth, an abrasion beneath Maria’s chin and an abraded injury to the upper lip.  Dr Burke opined that the injuries were consistent with pressure being applied to the deceased’s face and upper neck.
27	Your backpack was seized by police on 19 June.  In it there was an exercise book which contained various handwritten notes, including an enigmatic note, which I cannot conclude is relevant to the offence.
28	During your visit to Brisbane, between 21 and 22 June 2023, it seems that you had run out of money. You had bought a new mobile phone from Officeworks and activated a new phone number and created a new Google account.  You then contacted Micah Projects, a not-for-profit organisation supporting homeless persons and sought financial assistance. With their help you booked and caught a flight back to Melbourne on 22 June, disembarking at Melbourne Airport at 9.40pm that day.  You were arrested the following day at 1.20am near your home and declined to make any comment when interviewed by police. 
29	The Crown SPO indicates that, over the years, your relationship with your parents was at times strained and volatile. When your father was still alive he evicted you from the family home several times following fights that became physical. There were also five occasions over the years between 1993 and 2019 when police attended Maria’s house to respond to family violence complaints about you concerning Maria.
30	Not long after Christmas 2022, you had a case of food poisoning after eating a meal at your mother’s house. You were very upset and stayed with your mother for a week while she looked after you.  It seemed that this incident caused ongoing friction between you and your mother.
Victim impact statements
31	Three victim impact statements were tendered in this matter. First, from your sister, Janine.  Janine states that the loss of her mother caused her unimaginable pain and grief, along with sadness, anger and confusion. She had to seek therapy after learning how her mother died, and the healing process has been slow and difficult.  She misses the simple everyday friendship that she had with her mother and finds it heartbreaking to live without her support.  
32	Janine’s daughter, Sascha, also provided a victim impact statement in which she described her shock at learning about her grandmother’s unexpected death. The loss of her grandmother impacted her ability to attend university where she had been achieving very high grades. Her grades plummeted and she lost focus on her studies and had to defer her course. Fortunately, she is due to return to university this year. However, she feels that she will never completely heal from the anger and pain of the loss of her Nona.
33	A further victim impact statement was received by Bozic D who had known Maria since childhood. Although she and Maria lived in different countries they kept in contact by telephone and mail. Bozic D was shocked to hear about Maria dying in such an unfortunate way and said she will be greatly missed.
34	The material before the Court indicates that your mother was a sociable and much-loved elderly woman despite the tragedies of losing her husband and son in the 1990s.  It seems that despite frequent conflict in your relationship with your mother she continued to love you and kept in close contact with you. Even when you became disgruntled with her for inflicting food poisoning on you, others interceded to encourage you to move on from that episode.
Personal circumstances
35	You are currently 57 years of age. My understanding of your life history has been gleaned from the psychological report of Warren Simmons (‘the Simmons report’) and from Mr Desmond’s submissions, along with statements in the depositions. 
36	When interviewed by Mr Simmons, you described your childhood as very tough. Upon migrating from Croatia your parents had high expectations of you and were strict and over-protective, restricting themselves to socialising within the Croatian community in Melbourne.  You and your sister acted as interpreters for your parents.  Your father worked long hours and you felt he was overbearing, placing numerous restrictions on you and your siblings. Whilst your father would make homemade alcohol and drink and play cards with his friends, you and your siblings were discouraged from integrating into Australian life.  For example, you wanted to play football in your teens but were not permitted.
37	You attended St John’s Primary School and then St John’s College to Year 10.  You became rebellious towards your father in secondary school, wanting to spend more time with your friends, against your father’s wishes. Although you never went without as a child, you felt that there were few family activities and that your childhood was lonely, apart from having a close relationship with your younger brother.
38	You felt closer to your mother than your father, noting that your father set the rules and frequently subjected you to physical punishment.  You grew apart from the family in your teen years, recalling that at the age of 14 your family booked a holiday to Croatia and left without you because you had run away. This led you to feel abandoned by your family.  
39	Regarding your educational history, you did reasonably well in primary school but were often in trouble for being the class clown. In later life you were diagnosed with ADHD, which may explain some of the difficulties you had.
40	At the Christian Brothers secondary school you attended you excelled at sport, but in Year 8 you began to be sexually abused by one of the brothers. This continued until Year 10 and was of a serious nature. You had been doing well before the abuse but your behaviour deteriorated and you began to truant from school and act out in class. You were expelled in Year 10 which led to tension between yourself and your father.  You believe that what happened at school messed you up and you are currently pursuing the National Redress Scheme. You describe your adolescence as unhappy.
41	Following your expulsion you attended Maribyrnong High School and were asked to repeat Year 10, but found this embarrassing and began truanting again. The relationship with your father became more violent and strained, and at the age of 17 you began to use cannabis with friends and avoided going home. You believe that your relationship with your family has been difficult ever since. 
42	After leaving school you found work as a labourer but you began getting into trouble with the police. You used cannabis daily and experimented with amphetamines to escape your emotions. You graduated to heroin and slipped into criminal offending in your early adulthood. 
Prior criminal history
43	Your criminal record was filed by the Crown and it shows that you began to appear in local Magistrates’ Courts from 1986 through to 1991, receiving good behaviour bonds or fines for lower-level offending, including summary offences, thefts, low-level assaults and, on one occasion, a charge of burglary.
44	By August 1991, aged 23, your offending led to more significant sentencing dispositions with a community-based order being imposed in 1991 for car theft.  In October of that year you received a three-month suspended sentence for burglary, theft and drug possession charges. At age 25, on 7 June 1994, you received your first sentence of imprisonment in Melbourne County Court on charges of armed robbery and theft.  You were sentenced to six years’ imprisonment, with a minimum of three years and nine months, for your part in robbing a TAB at the age of 23 with a much older co-offender. You told Mr Simmons that at the time you had a raging drug habit and were mixing in a criminal element.
45	Further Magistrates’ Court appearances between 1994 and 1999 included lower-level dishonesty offences, a firearms offence, and then on 2 June 1999 a charge of recklessly cause injury.
46	There was then a gap in your offending, although there were appearances for fine defaults and in 2010, at the age of 42, you were dealt with for possession of drugs, which led to further fine default appearances.
47	On 5 October 2016, at the age of 48, following a further gap in your offending, you were fined at Geelong Magistrates’ Court for theft and intentionally damage property.  The following year you appeared at Melbourne Magistrates’ Court for possessing a dangerous article, escaping custody and resisting police, and fines were imposed once again. There were further summary convictions in 2018 and 2019 for minor offences.
48	Your next period of imprisonment was imposed at the age of 52, at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on 28 January 2020, where six months’ imprisonment was imposed for a charge of intentionally cause injury.  I was told that this related to an altercation with another male on New Year’s Eve in which you got the upper hand. Custody management issues noted at that time indicate that you were prescribed methadone and dexamphetamine and that you had back and shoulder issues.  You were ordered to commence a 12-month community correction order after the expiry of your prison sentence, including treatment for drug abuse and mental health issues.  Some further minor offences were recorded in 2022, including a charge of possess methamphetamine, for which you were convicted and discharged.
49	It can therefore be seen that the majority of your criminal history is composed of less serious offending connected to your ongoing drug problem and impaired mental health, with only the armed robbery (committed when you were 23) being dealt with in a higher court. You have no outstanding matters before the Courts. 
50	Regarding your employment history, it seems you gained some skills in computers in the mid-90s when you were imprisoned for the armed robbery. You were then able to obtain some self-employment in that field over the years, but your drug habit impeded your ability to live a normal and settled life in the community.
51	Prior to being imprisoned for the armed robbery, you were using a cap of heroin a day, and after being released from custody in 1996 you found yourself back in the same milieu.  You had a right shoulder reconstruction as a result of an injury to your shoulder whilst in custody, and were prescribed oxycodone after the surgery with regular prescriptions being required at a higher dosage to substitute for the heroin that you were otherwise prone to using.  
Attempts to rehabilitate from drugs and alcohol abuse
52	At the age of 48 you joined Narcotics Anonymous and had a period of total abstinence from drugs and alcohol for 4½ months. You found this experience helpful.  
53	You met a female partner, Tia, through Narcotics Anonymous, which led to the birth of a daughter, Bella, although you were not able to sustain a relationship with either Tia or your daughter.  
54	Unfortunately, you continued to experience pain following the shoulder reconstruction, and you have had ongoing problems with shoulder and back pain and right-sided sciatica.  After your GP retired, you relapsed into heroin use, before being prescribed methadone. More recently, you have suffered from tinnitus, which you have found very disturbing to your mental state, especially since some opiate substitutes seem to worsen that condition.
Medical and mental health management on remand and burden of imprisonment
55	Since being remanded your shoulder pain has been investigated and recommended for continued conservative management. You have had ongoing urinary issues which are currently being investigated by Justice Health. Mr Desmond referred to the Justice Health records, showing that between 2023 and 2025 you were placed on various mental health and integrated care plans with a focus on your ADHD and depression and anxiety.  Psychological support was being provided in relation to your chronic suicidal thoughts and risk of self-harm. You are prescribed methadone and ADHD medication as well as medication for nerve pain. An occupational therapist’s report showed that you have been participating in sessions to improve your assertive communication skills and emotional regulation. 
56	It was put on your behalf that the sentence of imprisonment to be imposed on you will be especially burdensome for you because you are now in your late 50s and have a number of medical and physical ailments. I accept that submission.
Objective gravity of the offending
57	Mr Desmond submitted, and I accept, that there is no evidence that more than one application of force was applied to your mother. The brevity of the offence was noted and its spontaneous and unplanned nature was highlighted as mitigating the offence when compared to other more grave examples. I agree with that submission and observe that the fact of your backpack being left behind is an indication of the spontaneous nature of what took place.  Contextually it seems that, despite occasional conflict with your mother, the two of you had ‘muddled along’ for many years and your visit was at her request to help her flip her mattress.
58	Regarding the evidence of the pathologist, Mr Desmond pointed out when cross-examined at a s 198B hearing the pathologist made a number of relevant concessions about what could be interpreted from the nature of the injuries, including that the degree of force was on the mild side and that some injuries may have been the result of post-mortem contact. I accept that those concessions are relevant to mitigate the gravity of the offence.
59	Mr Desmond submitted, and I accept, that the offence of manslaughter encompasses a wide spectrum of offending, and that many more grave examples of that crime can be found, for example, those involving weapons or more protracted assaults.
60	On the other hand, the Crown rightly points out that manslaughter is an inherently serious offence involving, as it does, the unlawful killing of another person, and this offence is made more serious because your mother trusted you and was elderly and vulnerable. You assaulted her in her own home where she should have been safe. I also accept that after the assault you should have called for medical assistance and your failure to do so showed little regard for your mother’s wellbeing. You then engaged in a range of avoidant behaviours. 
61	I consider that the offence gravity based only on objective factors lies somewhere within the mid-range of seriousness, noting the reservations the Court of Appeal has expressed for this form of categorisation. 
Moral culpability
62	The Crown submitted that your moral culpability is high. Mr Desmond countered that, while no particular Verdins submission was made, the Court should take account of the personal and family dynamics that have affected your life and your general functioning. He pointed out that Mr Simmons’ opinion was that your difficult upbringing left you vulnerable to substance use, based on the sexual abuse you suffered outside the home, and the violence inflicted by your father and the restrictions on being able to interact with the wider Australian community. I accept that without needing recourse to Verdins, these factors remain relevant to my consideration of the person you were when you committed this offence, so that I do not assess your moral culpability as high. It is apparent that over the course of your adult life you have struggled to overcome mental health and addiction issues and you  functioned quite poorly as a result of your difficult personal history. Even now, in your late 50’s, you still have not managed to settle into a normal way of life.
Value of guilty plea and remorse
63	Mr Desmond rightly emphasised the importance of your plea of guilty for its utilitarian benefit in sparing witnesses and police from the rigours of a trial, as a demonstration of your willingness to accept responsibility for the offence and in facilitating the course of justice.  He pointed out that there are a number of aspects of the police brief that indicate that you may have had a viable defence had you chosen to go to trial in this matter, strengthening the value of your guilty plea. I accept that submission.
64	Mr Desmond noted that the Simmons report states that you accept the circumstances of the offending as set out in the Crown Opening for Plea, even if, as pointed out by the Crown, your account to Mr Simmons of how events unfolded can be seen as minimising what you did. I agree with the Crown that your version of the assault is not wholly plausible but I also accept that you have pleaded guilty based on the facts alleged in the Crown Opening for Plea. As pointed out by Mr Desmond, and accepted by me, the Simmons report mentions your shame and remorse for your role in causing your mother’s death. She was an important person in your life and a support for you and you miss her. You are now without family support as a result of your own criminal actions.
Sentencing purposes
65	Denunciation, just punishment and general deterrence are all relevant in your case. Specific deterrence is somewhat relevant as you need to undertake treatment around anger management. Rehabilitation remains an important goal of sentencing.
66	While your offending did involve family violence, comparisons with cases involving male intimate partner violence have limited utility due to the idiosyncratic nature of your personal and family dynamics, and of the event that led to your mother’s death.
Parsimony
67	Mr Desmond appropriately relied upon the principle of parsimony under s 5(3) of the Sentencing Act which the Court is bound to apply.   
Prospects for rehabilitation
68	The Crown submits that your prospects for rehabilitation are not promising given the length of your criminal history.
69	On the other hand, Mr Desmond submits that given your current age, if you receive appropriate rehabilitative treatment your prospects should be regarded as reasonable. He emphasised the importance of a parole period that would support your reintegration into the community. I accept that submission, noting that although you have a lengthy record you have only ever once appeared in a higher court for violent offending, being the armed robbery that occurred 34 years ago, and was prompted by your heroin addiction at that time. 
70	The Justice Health records show you have been making a good effort to stay out of trouble in prison and are well engaged in seeking therapeutic assistance despite the shame you feel over the current offence.
Current sentencing practice
71	Both parties agreed that the variety of circumstances in which manslaughter offences occur can make it difficult to identify comparable cases. 
72	Mr Desmond pointed out that this is not a case that involved a weapon, a group assault, or any significant post-offence conduct.
73	The Crown noted that the maximum sentences for manslaughter was increased on 1 July 2020, so caution is needed in looking at older sentences. 
74	I indicated to the parties at the sentence indication hearing that I had reviewed a number of recent sentences including the case of DPP v Wang, offered up by the Crown, although Wang involved a sentence after a contested trial. In that case, the offender assaulted his sister to the upper body, head and chest during an argument. He was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment with minimum non-parole period of 6 years and 4 months.
75	The case of DPP v Maskell also involved a conviction after a trial. In that case the offender, behaving very aggressively and without provocation, struck a service station attendant with a bottle to the head and kicked him during an argument in the service station. The sentence imposed was eight years with a minimum non-parole period of 5 years.
76	In the case of DPP v Nguyen, the male accused and victim, who shared a rooming house, were generally friendly but prone to fighting from time to time. The offender stabbed the victim to the legs and there were other bruises and injuries. The sentence imposed was eight years with a minimum non-parole period of five years and six months.
77	In R v Tovey the offender pleaded guilty to unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter arising from an altercation with his brother where the offender stabbed his brother to the chest, neck and each shoulder. His brother fled, and collapsed in a nearby car park, although the offender did not expect him to die. The sentence imposed was 8 years and 3 months with a non-parole period of 5 years.
78	I had regard to these comparative cases along with other recent sentences for the offence of unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter. 
Sentence 
79	At the sentence indication hearing I indicated that if you were to plead guilty to the offence of manslaughter, I would sentence you to eight years with a minimum non-parole period of five years. I still consider that the appropriate sentence and that is the sentence I therefore impose. 
80	Pursuant to s 18(4) of the Sentencing Act, I declare that you have already served 619 days by way of pre-sentence detention, not including today’s date, and I direct that that period be reckoned as time already served under the current sentence. 
81	Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I declare that had you not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 8 years.