NewsBite

The Court of Appeal has slammed prosecutors over its deal with two police shooters

A DEAL by prosecutors gifted to two violent criminals who blasted a cop in the face has been branded a “complete mystery” by the Court of Appeal.

Senior Constable Tom Wospil and First Constable Ben Ashmole outside the Supreme Court on the day their assailants were sentenced.
Senior Constable Tom Wospil and First Constable Ben Ashmole outside the Supreme Court on the day their assailants were sentenced.

A DEAL by prosecutors gifted to two violent criminals who blasted a cop in the face with a shotgun has been branded a “complete mystery” by the Court of Appeal.

Constable Ben Ashmole was wounded by shotgun pellets on July 7, 2015 while trying to intercept Rodney Phillips and Sam Liszczak.

ANGER OVER COP SHOOTERS’ JAIL SENTENCE

PAIR ADMIT SHOOTING POLICEMAN IN HEAD

In dismissing the pair’s appeal against sentence, the Court of Appeal expressed dismay at a decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions to allow the criminals to plead guilty to “merely recklessly causing injury rather than causing serious injury”.

The men, aged 23 and 22 at the time, were scheduled to face trial over the attempted murder of Constable Ashmole when the Director of Public Prosecutions made the deal.

Rodney Phillips.
Rodney Phillips.
Sam Liszczak.
Sam Liszczak.

Surgeons were only able to remove three of the 14 shotgun pellets in Constable Ashmole’s head. He spent six months recovering before returning to work, but still suffers headaches.

In March, Justice Michael Croucher sentenced Phillips to serve a maximum of eight years in prison, with a non-parole period of six years and two months.

Liszczak received a maximum of seven years and 10 months, with a non-parole period of six years.

While the jail terms were widely condemned as lenient, both believed they have been dealt with harshly considering the charges they pleaded guilty to and appealed.

Supreme Court of Appeal Justice Mark Weinberg said the decision taken by the director was a “complete mystery”.

“I would have thought that, on any view, the firing of a shotgun in the direction of Constable Ashmole, resulting in his being struck by 14 shotgun pellets to the head, and leading to the ongoing consequences identified ... could not be described as anything other than the infliction of ‘serious injury’,” he said.

What happens in a criminal trial?

Justice Weinberg said it would be “extraordinary” if a jury were to find otherwise.

The men also pleaded guilty to criminal damage, arson, and firearm possession.

Both were accused of embarking on a bungled firebombing attack aimed at the family of slain crime lord Carl Williams days before shooting the officer.

Constable Ashmole was shot in the face at point blank range after he and his partner Constable Tom Wospil cornered the suspects in a school carpark.

The Court of Appeal further criticised the sentencing judge for imposing inadequate sentences on the charges of arson.

At sentence, Justice Michael Croucher described their throwing of Molotov cocktails as “towards the lower end of the scale of seriousness for (that) type of offending”.

The Court of Appeal stated the offending was actually “very serious examples of the offence”.

The court also criticised their sentence over possessing a gun, labelling it “inadequate”.

wayne.flower@news.com.au

Add your comment to this story

To join the conversation, please Don't have an account? Register

Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout

Original URL: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/the-court-of-appeal-has-slammed-prosecutors-over-its-deal-with-two-police-shooters/news-story/4e836f1f41f0af44b1dcbfd589942f94