consider what they might be in the future. In R v Mostyn (2004) 145 A Crim R 304; [2004] NSWCCA 97, the Court of Criminal Appeal observed, at [179] per Howie J, that:
"It can no longer be assumed that a prisoner, by reason of the fact that he will serve his sentence on protection, will find prison life more difficult or onerous than other prisoners in the general prison population or that the prisoner will be deprived of amenities or opportunities for self improvement courses and education". [footnotes omitted]
97 The offender's own hearsay assertions about his conditions cannot be accepted in the absence of objective proof, because of his profound unreliability. He told Dr Nielssen that he has been assaulted, but no report to the authorities of any assault is in evidence, and I do not accept the offender's unsworn assertion. The recording of the gaol telephone call does not establish that he is any worse off than any other prisoner. The sort of unpleasant abuse it captured is representative of what is unfortunately a relatively standard communication between prisoners. Notably, the inmate who shouted abuse at the offender did so only after the offender directed an angry comment to him and did not refer to him as a child killer or say anything that might be a reference to his crime. Although it is regrettable, the language was very much everyday prison parlance. Further, the offender did not sound frightened or intimidated, and he responded with the same sort of abusive language as was directed at him. Ex. S2 proves no more than that prisons are unpleasant places inhabited by some people who may use bad language.
Other features relevant to the Determination of Sentence
- Remorse
98 There is no evidence that the offender has ever repented what he did to Charlise, or even spent as much as a moment feeling remorseful for his crime. Having murdered a 9-year-old girl, all of the offender's energies were spent on covering his tracks and deflecting blame elsewhere, upon Kallista Mutten. When his many lies to the police began to unravel, he suggested that, whatever had happened to Charlise, Ms Mutten was responsible. At his trial, he went even further, advancing a positive case in which he claimed to have witnessed Ms Mutten shooting her daughter, attributing to her acts he must have carried out himself, such as digging up the bloodied earth, and collecting
