New Year home invader Justin Rose has sentence reduced on appeal

A man who stormed a Corio home with a baseball bat at the behest of his mother and bashed an innocent man has had his sentence reduced on appeal.

Justin Rose’s sentence, when compared with his mother’s, was “manifestly excessive” the Court of Appeal found.

A man who stormed a Corio home in the early hours of New Year’s Day with a baseball bat at his mother’s behest has won a court battle to have his sentence reduced.

Justin Rose, 27, was sentenced in the County Court in May to a maximum of two years’ jail, with a non-parole period of one year, on charges of aggravated burglary, recklessly causing injury and possessing a prohibited weapon.

His mother, Raylene Lagerwey, was sentenced to 70 days jail followed by a two-year community corrections order (CCO) on a charge of aggravated burglary.

On December 31, 2020 Rose, Lagerwey and a group of unidentified men armed with poles and baseball bats arrived at a home at Chaffey Sq, smashing windows down the side of the house before entering through a side door.

A 29-year-old man confronted the intruders, demanding to know: “What the f--k are you doing here?” and telling them to “Get the f--k out of my house”.

Rose attacked the man with a baseball bat, with some of the other intruders joining in.

The victim suffered bruising and swelling to his left wrist, face and mouth and a fractured nasal bone – although it could not established which injuries Rose himself caused.

The home invasion followed a misunderstanding over a handbag Lagerwey thought was stolen.

Rose appealed the jail sentence at a hearing in the Court of Appeal last month, arguing his sentence infringed on the principle of parity and was “manifestly too long”.

His sentence on the charge of aggravated burglary was nine times greater than that of his mother, despite her being the “driving force” behind the home invasion.

On Wednesday, Justices Kristen Walker and John Forrest re-sentenced Rose, cutting his sentence for aggravated burglary from 21 months to 12.

The Justices found the difference between the two sentences was a “striking imbalance”, writing: “nowhere can we find an explanation for this imbalance”.

The Justices concluded the disparity was “unjustifiable and manifestly excessive”.

In their analysis, the Justices considered several factors put forward on behalf of both co-accused, including their exposure to family violence, solid work histories, drug use, lack of a significant prior record and good prospects of rehabilitation, before they found a difference.

“It seems that Ms Lagerwey was traumatised by the proposal of returning to custody; the applicant, apparently not so,” the Justices wrote.

“However, the applicant, at 24 years of age was entitled to have his youth considered favourably.”

Further, the Justices found Lagerwey’s sentence of 70-days jail plus a CCO was “extraordinarily lenient”.

“If anything, in our view Ms Lagerwey is marginally more morally culpable than (Rose),” the Justices wrote; “she was, after all, the driving force behind the aggravated burglary.”

Rose’s sentence on the charge of aggravated burglary was quashed, and he was re-sentenced to 12 months in jail.

His sentences on the other two charges remained intact, resulting in a total sentence of 15 months, with eligibility for parole after nine months.

Originally published as New Year home invader Justin Rose has sentence reduced on appeal