Family of murdered schoolgirl Louise Bell will not give victim impact statements, court told
THE traumatised family of abducted and murdered schoolgirl Louise Bell will not make victim impact statements at the sentencing of her murderer, Dieter Pfennig, a court has heard.
THE traumatised family of abducted and murdered schoolgirl Louise Bell will not make victim impact statements at the sentencing of her murderer, a court has heard.
On Monday, prosecutors told the Supreme Court that Colin Bell, his wife Diane and daughter Rachel had decided not to participate in the sentencing process.
Their decision follows an application by prosecutors, last week, for a blanket suppression order on the family’s victim impact statements.
That request raised the concerns of Acting Justice Michael David, who said he could not suppress material that he himself had yet to read or know about.
Pfennig, 68, was last month found guilty of having abducted Louise from her Hackham West home in January 1983, and murdering her sometime later.
Acting Justice Michael David found the charge proven, beyond reasonable doubt, in part due to a cutting edge one-in-one-billion DNA match on Louise’s discarded pyjama top.
In an unprecedented move, Acting Justice David challenged Pfennig — already serving a life sentence for the 1989 murder of Michael Black — to reveal the location of his victims’ bodies.
Pfennig, however, filed an appeal against his conviction — and an application for more taxpayer funding to run it — insisting the DNA evidence was unreliable.
Had he not been convicted, Pfennig would be eligible for release on parole, having completed his 26-year non-parole period for Michael’s murder 12 months ago.
He is scheduled to face sentencing submissions tomorrow.
On Friday of last week, prosecutor Ryan Williams asked the court to suppress publication of the Bell family’s victim impact statements, which were due to be read at that hearing.
“We seek that on the grounds publication would cause undue hardship to them,” he said.
Acting Justice David asked to hear further submissions from Mr Williams — and from defence counsel and the media — about the request.
“It’s hard for me to know what to suppress when I don’t know what will be said,” he replied.
Mr Williams said it was an issue of great concern to the Bell family.
“If Your Honour was not to suppress, or gave an indication that you would not suppress, the statements then the Bell family would not provide them,” he said.
“They feel strongly about not having it widely known what their true feelings are about the impact upon them.
“It’s not in the interests of justice for victims to feel constrained.”
Media outlets, including The Advertiser, submitted it was a matter for the court to decide but questioned whether targeted suppressions on specific topics were more appropriate.
Mr Williams said he could not canvas such topics in open court.
“The impacts are far-reaching and because of the media interest over the years, there has been a lot of attention on the Bell family,” he said.
“Simply put, Colin Bell in particular feels his victim impact statement should only be provided to those who need to know.
“He has provided a public statement already (following the verdict) ... the feelings he wishes Your Honour to take into consideration are not to be widely known.”
Acting Justice David asked Mr Williams to consult with the Bell family over the weekend as to whether they would consent to edited victim impact statements being made public.
On Monday, prosecutor Sandi McDonald SC told the court the matter had been resolved.
“It’s actually quite straightforward — the Bell family no longer wish to make victim impact statements,” she said.
Asked, by Acting Justice David, if there was anything he could do to assist, she replied: “No.”
Sentencing submissions will be heard on Tuesday.