Steven Graham Peet admits 30-year minimum jail term not severe enough penalty for murdering three family members at Hillier
A TRIPLE murderer who denied his crimes at first, then delayed his trial with claims of mental impairment, has conceded his 30-year minimum prison term is insufficient punishment for his crimes.
Law and Order
Don't miss out on the headlines from Law and Order. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- ‘10 years per life’: Hillier triple murderer to serve at least 30 years
- Hillier victims’ grandfather has ‘lost all faith’ in system, DPP
- ‘Personal attack’: Formal complaint over clash between victim, DPP
- ‘Speak out if you’re mistreated’, Hillier grandfather urges victims
A TRIPLE murderer who denied his crimes at first, then delayed his trial with claims of mental impairment, has conceded his 30-year minimum prison term is insufficient punishment for his crimes.
In a shock move on Friday, counsel for Steven Graham Peet said they would not challenge a push to increase his penalty for murdering Adeline Yvette Wilson-Rigney and her children, Amber Rose Rigney and Korey Lee Mitchell.
Peet had previously filed papers asking the Court of Criminal Appeal to overturn his “manifestly excessive” sentence, while the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions wanted it increased on the grounds of inadequacy.
On Friday, Bill Boucaut SC, for Peet, said there was “so little that could be said” against the penalty, given the longer sentences imposed for other, past multiple murder cases in SA.
“Advice was given, instructions were taken and the concession that has been given was based on advice and was certainly subject to instructions,” he said.
“The court need not worry about that... you can take it that having regard to (precedent) informs the basis of the advice that’s been given.”
Ms Wilson-Rigney, 28 — who had been in a relationship with Peet — was beaten with a crowbar and strangled with a cable tie, and her body left under a mattress in the laundry.
Amber, 6, had a cable tie around her neck and had been hogtied, with a sock taped into her mouth, and left under a pile of clothes.
The body of Korey, 5, was found in his room under a play tent — he, too, had been tied up but had managed to remove the sock from his mouth before he died.
Peet pleaded guilty to murdering Ms Wilson-Rigney but initially denied responsibility for the children’s deaths, claiming he was in “a disassociative state”.
That prompted a five-month delay in the case while his ultimately baseless claims were investigated, further traumatising the victims’ extended families.
Peet’s minimum 30-year sentence, imposed in April, was five years less than that of SA’s last triple murderer, Kapunda killer Jason Alexander Downie.
It sparked outrage from the victims’ families, renewed debate over the sentencing of multiple murderers and prompted an appeal by the DPP.
On Friday, Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber SC said Peet’s triple murder was unquestionably “at the upper end of the scale of seriousness” and therefore deserving of a high-range penalty.
He said Downie had killed his three victims in a short period of time, in a “continuous frenzy” - but Peet’s crimes were very different.
“Unlike Downie, there was a substantial delay between Peet’s first crime - which was brutal in and of itself - and the murders of the two very young children,” he said.
“In the course of that delay, he had an opportunity for reflection... he made the children breakfast, giving them toast, and allowed them to watch television.
“He went outside to have a cigarette, to think about what to do and, when confronted with the possibility of discovery, he chose to kill.”
Mr Kimber said Peet had placed his own welfare above that of Amber and Korey.
“He treated these children in a most horrific way,” he said.
“One cannot properly understand the enormity of what he did, and assess what is an appropriate sentence for him, without looking at the crime scene photos - as distressing and disturbing as they are.
“The court will see, in the photos, the way those children were restrained and the way their lives were brought to an end... they would have been resisting... (the binds) were complex and would not have happened quickly.”
He said Peet’s penalty would affect the length of all future murder sentences if allowed to stand.
“If this was appropriate for three killings, it will inevitably push down what is considered appropriate when there is only one killing,” he said.
“(A past case) of two killings had a starting point (for sentence) of 40 years and, in Downie, it was 44 years – but he was 18, had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation and pleaded guilty early.
“That’s very different to this case – this man is older, had shown violent tendencies in the past and had the time for reflection.”
Mr Kimber said comparing murder cases was a difficult task, and that no disrespect was meant to any victim nor their surviving families.
“In short, this is at least as serious as Downie, but there is an argument for why it is actually a more serious triple murder than that of Downie,” he said.
Mr Boucaut said comparing sentences was “unhelpful”, and that penalties should not be considered in terms of “building blocks”.
“One does not get out a calculator and press a button in these sorts of settings,” he said.
He urged the court to consider Peet’s concession as a sign of his remorse and contrition.
“It’s such an unusual thing,” he said.
“The fact a concession has been made is, actually, entirely consistent with his profound sense of grief and sorrow at what he has done.
“It’s not quite the same as a guilty plea (but) this court should reflect the fact of this concession when it comes to reconsider the issue of sentence.”
Chief Justice Chris Kourakis said counsel and judges would agree courts should not “take the American approach and just triple” the mandatory 20-year minimum period for murder.
He, Justice Martin Hinton and Justice Sam Doyle have reserved their decision.