Murder victim's family told to 'temper' victim impact statements

THE grieving family of murdered woman Anne Redman has been told it must "temper" victim impact statements that wish violence on two teenaged killers.

THE grieving family of murdered pensioner Anne Redman has been told it must "temper" victim impact statements that wish violence upon two teenaged killers.

The Supreme Court has this morning heard claims, by defence council, the Redman family's statements about the murder and its impact are inappropriate under state law.

It has been told the statements express a desire for - and possibly a pleasure in - the self- confessed murderers suffering while in prison.

The teenagers, both 18, have each pleaded guilty to murdering Mrs Redman, 87, at her home on January 25 last year.

The court has previously heard they cut the power to the pensioner's Seacliff home, entered via a window and slashed her throat with a blunt hunting knife.

One of the teens kept Mrs Redman's torch as a "trophy", and gave the knife to a friend telling him that he "might want to clean it" because "someone had died" by the weapon.

Under state law, the families of those lost to or injured by crime may present a victim impact statement to the sentencing court.

Legislation says that statement must deal with the injury, loss and impact they have suffered as a result of the crime.

In August, Mrs Redman's family read out statements directed toward the first of the youths - the son of a serving SA Police officer.

They said they hoped that, in prison, he would "come up against individuals with souls as black as yours and that they do their worst".

Today Liesl Chapman, SC, for the second youth, asked Justice Margaret Nyland to adjourn sentencing submissions.

She said the family's statements about her client did not correspond with the legislation and should be re-written.

"Some of them condone violence upon my client, some wish violence upon my client," she said.

"I'm not suggesting these are feelings people should not personally have, but they do not comply with the law and should not be part of the sentencing process."

Ms Chapman said the statement of Mrs Redman's daughter, Karen Batsiokis, was most problematic.

"It's directed very personally at my client... the issue is the way it's expressed," she said.

"There is a description of him as a monster, an unstoppable and untreatable predator.

"That's no doubt an appropriate and understandable emotion, it just doesn't come under the law."

She said Ms Batsiokis' husband, Terry, had also gone too far.

"His statement asks my client to imagine violence upon his mother," she said.

"With respect, that just can't be part of the sentencing process in this court room."

Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber, SC, said he did not condone any suggestion of violent retribution.

"There's no doubt these statements express extremely strong feelings, and do so in very strong language," he said.

"But at the end of the day, unless directed by Your Honour, (the victims) will maintain their desire to express themselves in this way.

"It's not my office's role to write victim impact statements or express emotions for people."

Justice Nyland said she shared Ms Chapman's concern.

"I'm always very reluctant to take on the task of editing victim impact statements," she said.

"I think there should be some work done in order to, not tone them down exactly, but to comply with (the legislation).

"I think they do go too far... I do not want to tinker with statements, I would rather the victims sit down and temper their remarks."

She adjourned submissions until next month.

Outside court, Ms Batsiokis said she was disappointed.

"They didn't let me say anything... I understand why, but this is something I need to be able to say," she said.

"This is something that never goes away and I think about it every day.

"It's very disturbing to see so many young people reacting with violence and being violent."