R V Campbell Essay Example
R V Campbell Essay Example

R V Campbell Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 8 (2125 words)
  • Published: July 22, 2018
  • Type: Case Study
View Entire Sample
Text preview

The elements of the offence are that Des Campbell was charged with murder under Section 18 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). Under Subsection (1)(a) Des Campbell was found guilty after trial on the 18th May 2010 of the murder of his wife Janet Campbell of 6 months on the 24th March 2005. After an 11-1 verdict all the elements of the charge were proved beyond reasonable doubt. The offence carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Description of the elements of the case:

Janet’s first husband died in 1997, leaving her with two properties and Janet was rumoured to be a wealthy woman. She was no athletic and did not participate in any regular exercise; she had also never been camping and had a strong fear of heights. The offender was posted to Deniliquin

...

where he met Janet through work. Campbell also had relationships with other women where he gained money. Janet and the offenders relationship was kept a secret from the family until mid-march 2004, much after their sexual relationship had begun in the middle of 2003, three years after they had met.

The family had discouraged Janet from marrying the offender and the wedding was cancelled for the 13th April 2004. The offender continued to have sexual relationships with other parties in which he gained money from. Janet wrote a will on the 9th August 2004 leaving her entire estate to her son. Soon after Janet was married to Des on the 17th September 2004 and re-wrote her will leaving her entire estate halved between her son and to Des Campbell after the $100000 payment to her son.

<

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

style="text-align: justify;">The offender continued for many months to steal money from Janet through the buying of houses, and not putting the right amount of money into the right accounts when necessary. On the 23rd February 2005 the offender bought an EPIRB (Emergency Positioning Indication Radio Beacon). Although the service doesn’t allow communication it puts out a tracking signal and is primarily used in maritime purposes. Des Campbell’s sexual relationships with other women continued. On the 18th March 2005 Janet moved from Deniliquin to Otford, she informed her family on the morning of the move and informed them of their marriage.

The morning of 24th March 2005, the day of Janet’s death, Janet had spoken to her mother where she had told her that she was going camping about 5km from their house. The police report shows that Des Campbell had stated that they left their car at the Otford Lookout and had walked along the cliff top track to the junction with the coastal track and then along the coastal track. The offender had indicated that he wanted to camp at Burning palms or Palm Jungle but Janet’s complaints of fatigue had changed the plans.

About 2pm they had set up a tent on a sloping tussocky site, about 14 meters from the edge cliff, surrounded by trees and other vegetation. The offenders account of the night states that Janet had left to go to the toilet some time after 7 but before 8 and about 5-15 seconds later he heard a sigh. He called out but heard no reply, he then went to the edge cliff but could not see her, he

returned to fetch his backpack and he went north along the ridge until he found a figure 8 gully, with the use of a rope he managed to aid himself down the cliff where he walked back along the rock platform to where he found Janet.

The offender tried resuscitation, even though he knew she was dead, he said he had moved the body so it was not washed away by the waves breaking around them. He activated the EPIRB some time between 7. 25 and 7. 35, however the position was not ascertained until about 9pm and the first paramedic arrived on site at around 10pm. A footprint on the edge cliff was proven to be those of Janet’s, and the breakage of the shrubbery around the cliff is also consistent to her trying to safe herself from falling to her death.

The imprint of her foot was established to be proven she was upright before she fell to her death. The Jury discounted the offenders account of what happened, his story of the account was inconsistent and how he acted after the death was not that of a grieving husband. On the 29th March 2005 Des Campbell contacted Ms Velicanski and arranged to go on holiday to Townsville and according to her he showed no signs of remorse. On the 9th or 10th of April 2005 he proposed to her. The offender did not attend Janet’s funeral on the 5th April 2005 and on this date he paid $79. 5 on the RSVP dating site and sent messages to a number of women. The offender continued to transfer money from home

loan accounts into his personal accounts and made no home load repayments after Janet’s death. It is estimated that Des Campbell gained $255,202 during Janet’s life and $340000 after she had died. It is said that Des Campbell took the life of an innocent, out-going, generous, warm hearted and somewhat naive, middle aged country woman when it became clear that he had gained as much financial gain from her as possible from the relationship.

The way she would have been feeling during her death was described as awful as the way she was standing indicates she was conscious, and aware of her fate for a short time before she fell. To the degree of planning that went into the murder is not possible to be determined with an precision. The Crowns submission states that the offender was planning to kill Janet prior to their marriage. However there is reason to believe differently as he gained money from prior relationships and didn’t kill them once the maximum financial advantage was gained.

The offender could have been planning the crime in December 2004, following the purchase of the Otford property and Ms Velicanski’s visit after Christmas, it became clear to the offender that he did not want to be with Janet, and wanted the property for him and Ms Velicanski and it had become more difficult to keep his two lives separate. By the time the offender had bought the EPIRB and camping equipment he had planned the death of Janet where it would take place in seemingly accidental circumstances. His prior knowledge of the coastline and walking tracks shows that he chose the most

prominent cliff on the track to set up camp.

The offender was physically fit and some extent trained in survival techniques, which makes the use of the EPIRB, takes on some significance. The offender should have known that it would take some time for the signal to be found and the likelihood of her survival after two and a half hours after the fall was almost impossible. With all of this taken into account the offence was found as well about the mid range of seriousness for murder. The factors that might have led to the criminal behaviour includes: financial gain. Des Campbell described Janet as a fat, ugly woman who was stalking him.

His only purpose to marry her was to gain a financial advantage, after he had exhausted her resources he had to dispose of her somehow. Many would say his motive of murder was sheer greed for money. He was not only taking advantage of Janet, he was also exploiting many other women whilst commencing sexual relationships with them too. In the Reporting and investigation if the crime: Des Campbell’s account: The offender said he tried resuscitation even though he knew she was dead. He moved the body so that it would not be washed away by the waves breaking around them.

He activated the EPIRB some time between 7. 25 and 7. 35. The position of the EPIRB was not ascertained until 9pm and the first paramedic arrived on the scene at about 10pm. The offender told a story where he said that Janet had gone to the toilet between 7-8 pm and he heard a sigh and

when he called out to her he got no response so he went out to find her and looked over the cliff and he could not see her so he used a rope to go down the cliff a little further north then walked back along the rock platform to where he found her.

It was quite unusual the ways and the delay in which he put the beacon near her body and reporting of the incident. The investigation into the incident: There was a delay between the incident and the charging of Des Campbell according to clause 54 because of the steps taken by the offender to disguise his offence as an accident. It was only after a lengthy investigation by the coroner in 2007 that the impression made by the offender was dismissed. Because of the expert evidence the police opened the investigation and examined other evidence (Bank records etc) surrounding the ase. The Role of the Supreme court and justice Latham was firstly to decide bail. Des was granted bail as he was not sen as a danger to society, however his bail was revoked after we was found guilty due to further investigation to his past. Secondly the courts had to take the plea from Des Campbell- Des Campbell plead not guilty. Then the courts allowed the prosecution (Mark Tedeschi barrister) and the defence counsel (Sean Hughes) to call witnesses and examine and then cross examine each others witnesses.

The Crown called 45 witnesses, including Campbell's former girlfriends, Gorica Velicanski and June Ingham, as well as his parents, Michael and Christina. The legal representation include the prosecution and the

defence, where their roles are discussed below, The Prosecution, Mark Tedeschi argued that, Campbell was only after her money and “took advantage of Janet’s straightforward, loving, honest, maybe even simple nature”. He also argued that Janet’s death had not the slightest emotional impact on Campbell.

The main arguments made by the defence, Sean Hughes was that, he finds it extraordinary that people are judged solely on whether they are grieving appropriately. He also argued that, Campbell is not someone who reacts the way most of us would, but it doesn’t make him a murderer. The Prosecution has the burden of proof and the defence has to show reasonable doubt that their client didn’t commit the crime, if it is clear that their client is going under, then the role is to then argue mitigating factors to reduce the sentence.

Des Campbell plead not guilty to the murder of his wife, Janet. He maintained this plea throughout the entire case. Justice Latham explained that the repercussions of him maintaining his story, it impacted his ability to show remorse, which in the end prevented him from having his sentence lessened, had Des chosen to plead guilty then a plea bargain could have been made, where he ultimately comes out with a lighter sentence. The factors influencing Des Campbell’s sentencing were determinded on the basis of the offence being a mid range of seriousness. The offence warrants non parole period of 25 years, however, because of the circumstances it raises the question, should this be lowered. The judge determined that because his little remorse for his actions however having a stable marriage and an other wise

good character, it would be not possible to reduce the sentence because of a crime committed at that gratitude. Des Campbell was sentenced to a non parole period of 24 years, from the 10th May 2010 to 9th May 2034 with a balance term of 9 years expiring on the 9th May 2043, and eligible for parole on the 10th may 2034. The law in the case does balance out the rights of the victim and the offender.

The rights of the victim (Justice Latham took into account that he victim being a loving, caring and trusting woman who was aware of what was happening that night. ) have been served as the conviction of Des Campbell was made and he was sentenced. Justice was served in this case. The rights of the offender Des Campbell were upheld too as Justice Latham did take into account his good character and his failure to show remorse and not admitted his guilt and his actions were not quite the worst category of a life sentence. The sentencing was fair on both the offender and the victim in the case of R v Campbell.

Bibliography

  1. http://guides. sl. nsw. gov. au/content. php? pid=242811;sid=2189505 22/10/2012.
  2. State Library NSW http://www. news. com. au/national-old/jury-told-janet-fisicaro-was-killed-out-of-greed/story-e6frfkvr-1225853243494 22/10/2012. Updated: 13 April 2010.
  3. News. com http://www. smh. com. au/nsw/des-campbell-found--guilty-of-pushing-wife-off-cliff-20100518-vbdq. html 22/10/2012
  4. Kim Arlington/SMH reporter. http://www. heraldsun. com. au/news/paramedic-des-campbell-found-guilty-of-killing-wealthy-wife/story-e6frf7jo-1225868255289. 22/10/2012 / Larissa Cummings updated: May 18 2010
Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New