‘Inadequate’ sentences for violent invasion of Wallaby legend Kefu’s home ‘must be corrected’

The “inadequate” sentences given to two teens who stormed the home of Wallabies legend Toutai Kefu risk undermining public confidence in the court system, lawyers for the Attorney-General have argued.

Toutai Kefu speaking to media outside his property following a home invasion. Pic: Tara Croser.

The “inadequate” sentences handed down to two teenagers who stormed the home of Wallabies legend Toutai Kefu armed with knives, seriously injuring two family members and badly injuring two others risks undermining public confidence in the court system and if uncorrected would “perpetuate manifest injustice” lawyers for Queensland’s Attorney-General have argued.

The two boys, one of whom is already out, were aged 15 when they broke into the Kefu home at 3am on August 16, 2021, in Coorparoo with one saying: “If someone wakes up, you just stab them.”

Together with two other co-offenders, who did not enter the home, they planned to drive two stolen cars to the Gold Coast to race them.

Forensic police at the scene. Pic: Tertius Pickard

During the home invasion, which left the blood soaked crime scene looking like a war zone according to sentencing judge Justice Peter Davis, Mr Kefu was stabbed in the stomach and would have died if he did not have surgery. His wife Rachel had her arm cut to the bone while the couple’s son Joshua, 21, suffered deep cuts all over his back and arm and a dislocated shoulder and 18-year-old daughter Madison’s hand was cut.

One of the teenagers assaulted Ben Cannon, a neighbour who ran to help.

Originally charged with attempted murder the two teenagers who entered the home ultimately pleaded guilty to charges including burglary, unlawful use of a motor vehicle, and four counts of malicious act with intent.

They were sentenced to seven and eight years, to serve half, respectively and neither teenager had convictions recorded.

While the normal maximum penalty for the most serious crimes was 10 years, Justice Davis had found the teenagers both committed “particularly heinous” offences opening the door to potential life sentences.

During an appeal, instigated by former Attorney-General Yvette D’Ath, the Crown on Friday argued their sentences were “manifestly inadequate”.

Toutai Kefu with his children following a home invasion. Pic: Tara Croser.

“If the sentence was not corrected it would in our submission, undermine public confidence in the administration of justice,” Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Caroline Marco told the Court of Appeal.

“This appeal is not just concerned with correcting a sentencing outcome, but laying down principles for the governance and guidance of the courts in future cases, which is the primary purpose of an Attorney-General’s appeal.”

Ms Marco argued Justice Davis had erred in not finding more of the offences “particularly heinous” and didn’t sufficiently take into account all of the criminality exhibited by the teenagers who had no previous criminal history.

“This is a case where if the court in our submission doesn’t intervene, it would perpetuate manifest injustice,” she said.

Speaking outside court Mr Cannon said the nightmare of that morning was not over for the victims.

Rachel Kefu and Ben Cannon leave the Supreme Court in Brisbane. Mr Cannon has become an advocate for victims of crime in Queensland.

“Knowing (one’s) out while we’re still going through the heartache and pain this suffering has caused is further insult,” he said.

“We would all prefer this wasn’t part of our story … we were asleep and now we’re still in court, that’s our story.

“These individuals made the choice to enter my neighbour’s home and bring knives and inflict mayhem and yet it seems like they’re about to start their life story without any implications, any pressure, without anyone knowing who they are which for us is hugely disappointing.”

One of the teenagers’ barristers Laura Reece said the sentences sat comfortably within the range for like offending.

“His honour clearly was aware of the seriousness of these offences his honour imposed very serious sentences,” she said.

“But there were significant matters of mitigation including a very early plea, including their age, their lack of criminal history, their personal circumstances, and their efforts towards rehabilitation.”

Barrister Daniel Caruana, representing the teenager who received seven years, said his client had been very seriously injured in the incident which Justice Davis had taken into account as extra-curial punishment.

The Court of Appeal will deliver its decision later this year