By Andrea Petrie
The two swingers who pleaded guilty to the killing of millionaire Melbourne businessman Herman Rockefeller have been sentenced to prison.
Mario Schembri was jailed for nine years with a minimum of seven years, and Bernadette Denny for seven years with a minimum of five years, in the Victorian Supreme Court.
Schembri, 58, and Denny, 42, both pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of the 51-year-old married father of two on January 21 after a swingers' rendezvous at the couple's home in Hadfield, in Melbourne's north, went horribly wrong.
Justice Terry Forrest began his sentencing remarks: ‘‘Herman Rockefeller made some unorthodox choices in his adult life. So too did you, Mario Schembri, and you, Bernadette Denny.
Bernadette Denny and Mario Schembri in court.
‘‘None of those choices was in itself unlawful, nor is it the function of this court to pass judgement on them.
‘‘The upshot of the choices you made, however, is that the scene was set for the totally unnecessary death of a man.
‘‘His parents, wife and children are devastated. The harm that you have caused them is profound.
"They will always carry some legacy of it and so will you.’’
Herman Rockefeller
The court earlier heard the couple met Mr Rockefeller, who told them his name was Andrew Kingston, when Denny responded to an advertisement he had placed in a sex-swingers' magazine.
He had advertised as a married couple looking for discreet sexual encounters, but had arrived at the couple’s Hadfield address in early January without his wife, whose name he told them was Jenny.
The pair had admitted to being angry when Mr Rockefeller showed up alone and requested sex.
The court heard Schembri started wrestling with Mr Rockefeller before the fight continued in several rooms of the house.
The fight continued to the garage where they claim Mr Rockefeller fell and hit his head on the floor.
The pair put Mr Rockefeller in the boot of Schembri’s car and Denny said she could hear him moaning and tapping as they drove towards Heathcote where they planned to dump him.
She later told police he was alive when they had dumped him, which led to an extensive police search of bushland in the area before she changed her story and said they brought him back home to cut his body up in their garage.
Schembri burned the body in a 44-gallon drum in a friend’s backyard in Glenroy.
Justice Forrest described the killing as ‘‘a totally unnecessary death’’.
‘‘The damage you have caused to a decent honourable family is incalculable,’’ he twice told the couple during his sentencing remarks.
The judge said he accepted the death arose spontaneously because the couple believed Mr Rockefeller was trying to take advantage of them.
But he said that the anger ultimately led to Mr Rockefeller’s death and without Schembri’s loss of control, the offence would not have happened.
He quoted the measure of violence Schembri had inflicted on Mr Rockefeller from the answers the semi-literate handyman gave police, during which he implied Mr Rockefeller had no chance, the judge said.
‘‘How could you go up against Muhammad Ali? It was like that with him,’’ Justice Forrest read from a transcript of the interview.
‘‘He didn’t have the anger that I had in me ... I lost it ... I didn’t know I could get that angry or that forceful. I’ve never hit that hard with anybody.’’
Quoting from a psychological report that accompanied Mr Rockefeller’s wife Vicky’s victim impact statement, Justice Forrest noted that she was the victim of ‘‘horrifying traumas’’.
‘‘The world as it was known prior to her husband’s death is no longer safe or predictable,’’ he said.
‘‘The trauma that she has experienced and continues to re-live have imposed a life sentence. She is isolated, set apart and defined by her husband’s death, horrendous disposal of his body and the discovery or his secret life.’’
Justice Forrest said while the pair were not responsible for Mr Rockefeller’s secret life, they had admitted responsibility for his death and the defilement of his body based on their guilty pleas.
Denny sat sobbing in the dock as the judge delivered his sentence. A sole security guard sat between the couple. Schembri lowered his head as the graphic details of the crime were repeated.
The court heard Denny suffered from alcoholism, depression, anxiety and had been diagnosed with a dependent personality disorder and only had an average level of cognitive function.
A psychiatrist’s report stated that her personality structure was relevant to the ‘‘poor judgement’’ she showed, particularly in assisting and concealing the crime.
‘‘I accept that without Mr Schembri’s explosive loss of control, this offence would not have occurred,’’ Justice Forrest said.
‘‘I also accept that your personality profile provides some explanation for your failure to withdraw from the brutal assault upon Mr Rockefeller. In that sense, I consider that your overall moral culpability is somewhat lower than Mr Schembri’s, despite the fact that your encouragement, assistance and participation were considerable.’’
The judge said the pair’s guilty pleas had saved the community the cost of a trial and the Rockefeller family further trauma.
‘‘I consider that given the admissions made, the strong forensic evidence available and the appalling post-offence conduct of you both, convictions for manslaughter were inevitable,’’ he said.
Justice Forrest noted that Schembri was open with police in his record of interview after a period of negotiation which he considered as evidence of contrition and remorse.
He described Denny’s conduct in police custody as ‘‘reprehensible’’.
‘‘You were arrested on Thursday 28 January. By that stage, the disappearance of Mr Rockefeller and the trauma it was causing his family was lead bulletin or front-page news and had been so since Sunday 24 January,’’ he said.
‘‘You knew this. Notwithstanding this, after you firstly denied all knowledge, you then told the police the deceased had been taken to Heathcote alive and dumped there.
‘‘You travelled there with them under the guise of helping them find him, perhaps alive. This aspect of your conduct was simply mendacious. The explanation for it must lie in your reluctance to admit Herman Rockefeller’s real fate and your participation in it. I can distil no remorse or contrition from your police interview.’’
She had since expressed remorse to her prison counsellor, to whom she had told she was ashamed that she could have been involved in ending a man’s life in such tragic circumstances, he added.
‘‘As you no doubt now appreciate, your conduct has not just had a profound impact on Mr Rockefeller’s family, but also yours,’’ he said. ‘‘Your aged parents are so traumatised they rarely leave their house whilst charged with looking after your children, who are themselves troubled and grieving.’’
The judge noted Schembri’s prior conviction for intentionally causing serious injury dating back to 1991 following a serious assault. He received a nine-month prison sentence which he served as an intensive corrections order.
He said he accepted that Schembri was a good father with strong family values, a good neighbour and friend to many people but considered his prospects of rehabilitation as ‘‘reasonable only’’.
‘‘I am troubled by your propensity to lose control when angry,’’ he said.
He said he believed both Schembri and Denny had a good deal to offer the community ‘‘providing you can conquer your demons’’.
‘‘In both cases, I consider there is a need to punish you and denounce your conduct. I am of the view that the aspect of general deterrence must be given weight. Anger-related violent incidents are everyday occurrences,’’ he said.
‘‘Every serious punch that is thrown has the potential to kill. Those inclined to settle their arguments with fists must be deterred if possible.’’
Mrs Rockefeller sat just metres away from the dock but refused to look at the convicted couple as they were led from the court.