Three men, two women jailed for manslaughter

Press, 24 June 1983, Page 7

Three men, two women jailed for manslaughter

Two women collapsed sobbing and had to be helped from in front of the dock up the stairs to the cells in the High Court yesterday by women prison officers after they haa been jailed for eight years and nine years respectively by Mr Justice Holland on a charge of manslaughter. It was the worst case of manslaughter he had ever heard of and it would be difficult to envisage a worse one, his Honour said.

Evidence was given during the trial of five accused earlier this month that Leyland Edward Bell, aged 57, who was crippled and intellectually handicapped, was brutally beaten up and tortured for three days until he died at a house in Lincoln Road, Addington, last November.

After spending almost 20 years of his life at Sunnyside Hospital, Mr Bell was looking for accommodation when he called at a residence in Lincoln Road to inquire about the house next door.

For the next three days he was subjected to a series of brutal beatings, made to stand naked on a chair with his arms upraised and he was struck every time he lowered them, forced to eat dog excreta and grass mixed with human urine and the point of a drawing compass was driven into his penis making him scream in agony. After he died, the battered body was dressed in someone else’s clothes in a shallow grave in the back garden. The grave was not long enough so the legs of the corpse had to be broken before it would go in. Pumpkins were planted on top of the grave where the body remained for two months and a half. When the stench of the decomposing corpse became unbearable Jeyes’s Fluid was poured over the area.

The pretext for the sadistic attacks on Mr Bell was that he had admitted that he was a child molester, but counsel conceded in submission yesterday that the allegation was false.

The house at 191 Lincoln Road where Mr Bell was tortured to death was described by counsel as a doss house for itinerant drunks.

Bryce Kelvin Kenneth King, aged 22, Richard Frank Flyger, aged 39, and Lindy Merina Jackson, aged 38, a machine operator, were each sentenced to nine years imprisonment on charges of manslaughter and wounding Mr Bell with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. Margaret Ann Genet, aged 30, a beneficiary, was jailed for eight years for manslaughter. Tauria Rewi, aged 52, was jailed for four years on a charge of causing grievous bodily harm. All five were originally charged with murdering Mr Bell, but Mr Justice Holland ordered that no indictment be presented on that charge after they had been committed to the High Court for trial.

Because of the number of accused, the two women had to stand in front of the dock. As they were all returning to the cells after sentence was imposed, King, who was described as the ringleader, put his arm around the shoulder of Genet to comfort her. Mr B. McClelland, Q.C., for King, said that his client had very few advantages. His mother had been a patient in a mental hospital for many years. His mother and father had separated shortly before his birth and he had an unstable and uncaring background. King had no serious

criminal convictions and certainly none involving violence. The psychiatrist had said that he was not insane but was a chronic alcoholic.

When King committed the offence he was grossly affected by alcohol. While sober he had many good attributes but when drunk he became violent and a different person altogether. What had happened on the Saturday had got completely out of hand. There was no evidence that King was the ringleader as had been asserted. He was no better or worse than any of the others, Mr McClelland said.

Mr E. Bedo, for Flyger, said that the events of Show Week-end had tragic consequences for the unfortunate Mr Bell and they had been tragic for Flyger as well. For some years Flyger’s life had been dulled by alcohol to the point where this otherwise intelligent and articulate man had lost contact with the standards of normal decent behaviour.

By November of last year Flyger’s existence had deteriorated into an unceasing cycle of drinking and sleeping in which he lost all sense of time and reality. Having been without alcohol for many months, the events of that horrible week-end in November were now incomprehensible to Flyger as his mind had become free of the numbing influence of liquor. Now he looked with almost disbelief on his participation in the degradation of Mr Bell.

Self-induced intoxication was no excuse or defence to what had taken place and Flyger knew that he had to be punished for acts committed when he was unable to bring a clear, rational mind to what he was doing and the consequences. That was of little consolation to the relatives of Mr Bell or the public at large and Flyger knew that but for his intoxication he would not be facing the bleak prospect of imprisonment. Since his arrest Flyger had not indulged in self pity nor had he sought to blame others for his present predicament. He was truly ashamed for allowing himself to degenerate to the level which he did, Mr Bedo said. Mr R. J. Murfitt, for Genet, said that the house at 191 Lincoln Road rented by Genet had become a doss house for itinerant drunks. She had gradually moved down the social scale in search of more ready acceptance. Genet was a very inadequate person and had little ability to learn from her mistakes. She had repeatedly formed disastrous and ill-suited associations, often with violent men who beat her up regularly. Although of volatile temperament, Genet was physically puny and ineffective. She was easily dominated by others and was dependent on persons, including even her young daughter. Until she was 13 Genet was raised alone by her mother who then remarried. She left home and at 17 married while already pregnant. The probation report was a dolefur one.

She regretted whatever part she had played in this sorry saga. Genet, who had no previous convictions, had shown some concern for Mr Bell and wept when assaults were committed on him. Genet’s revulsion and contribution were shown by her efforts to report the matter in the face of the hostility of her associates. If it had not been for her efforts Mr Bell’s disappearance might still be a mystery. The horrific events of

those few days had caused Genet nightmares and loss of sleep and she had been parted from her children, Mr Murfitt said.

Mr M. J. Glue, counsellor for Jackson, said that viewed over-all there were no redeeming features about this homicide. A harmless, docile old man with severe intellectual handicaps wandered into the house in Lincoln Road where he was most cruelly ill treated before he eventually died. During the three days he was there, he was subjected to a series of assaults and some of his tormentors in an apparent drunken frenzy on the Saturday afternoon inflicted on him injuries which must have been exceedingly painful. Mr Bell had been forced to eat dog excreta and grass soaked in human urine in what was a brutal, sadistic and sordid saga of events. The circumstances gave rise to feelings of revulsion and disgust at the actions of the accused and of sympathy for the unfortunate Mr Bell.

Allegations had been made that Mr Bell was a child molester, but even if that was true it did not amount to any justification for what the accused did to him.

Mr Glue said that he was satisfied that Mr Bell was not a child molester and his client deeply regretted that Mr Bell’s character had been maligned through the adverse publicity. His client had never branded Mr Bell as a child molester.

Although there were no redeeming features about the homicide there were some about Lindy Jackson. It would be idle and irresponsible of counsel to submit that she could be dealt with other than by a term of imprisonment, but the term should not be a long one.

Of all five accused. Jackson was deserving of the greatest leniency. She had relatively few convictions considering her background. Of the eight convictions three were based on alcohol. She had none for assault or fighting. Jackson had had few advantages in life. The probation report disclosed that she was either of low intelligence or was suffering from brain damage. She was socially incompetent and readily fell in with the suggestions of stronger personalities.

Her problem with alcohol had manifested itself in a poor work performance and attendance record, Mi- Glue said.

On the positive side, Jackson had not taken a leading part in the assaults on Mr Bell. There came a time when she sought to dissuade the others. Her attack on Mr Bell on the Thursday had been a relatively minor one.

Jackson, alone among the accused, had been totally honest in the full and detailed statement she had made to a sympathetic and understanding policewoman. She had unburdened her conscience and obviously told the complete truth in contrast to the self-serving statements of the others.

Jackson did not attempt to minimise her part in the disgraceful business. She had described exactly what had happened to the unfortunate man. It was a patently frank and straightforward confession. To Jackson’s credit she had bathed and tended the battered man according to the evidence of Crown witnesses. She was genuinely contrite and did not treat the proceedings as some form of entertainment. At times she wept.

“She deeply regrets the death of Leyland Bell and feels the greatest remorse for the part she played,” Mr Glue said.

Jackson had to go to prison but she deserved a lighter sentence than that which would be imposed on some of the others, Mr Glue said.

Mr D. J. Taffs, for Rewi, said that his client appeared on a lesser charge than the other accused but played an integral part in the scenario which brought them before the Court.

Few persons would have led such a dismal and wasted life as Rewi. He did not go to school until the age of 10 and then attended for no more than three years. In his teens he went to Borstal. Rewi’s home environment was impoverished of affection, education and material necessities. In 34 years he had spent only six out of prison. During the last 12 years he had only six months employment. However, Rewi had only two convictions involving violence and those were for common assault. He was a chronic alcoholic, of low intelligence, but did not have a propensity for violence. When Rewi learned of Mr Bell’s death, he was so shocked he sat down and cried like a baby, Mr Taffs said.

His Honour said that King, Flyger, Genet and Jackson had been convicted of manslaughter.

“The circumstances of the offence are such that I can say I have never heard of a worse case of manslaughter and it is difficult to envisage one.

“On this Saturday afternoon you combined to beat up, and in a vile and horrible way, physically abuse a defenceless, mentally and physically inadequate man over a continuing period until he was able to take no more and died,” his Honour said.

There were some crimes where the - behaviour of those committing them was so disgusting and repulsive to society that an inadequate punishment had to be imposed which to some extent reflected the revulsion of society to such conduct. This crime was one of those. He had listened to all that had been said on King’s behalf and had given regard to the reference from the Rev. James Consedine. He was satisfied that all that could be said on King’s behalf had been said. Each accused was to be pitied to some extent because at a very early age they had rejected the obligation on persons who lived in a community with others. In some cases it was because they had the misfortune to have parents that might not have fully carried out their obligations to their children or perhaps were unable to.

At least one had rejected the guidance and love which his parents had offered him. It was a sad commentary that three of the accused were parents themselves and appeared not to have helped their children much in their start in life.

All accused, to varying extent, had become dependent on alcohol and possibly drugs to compensate for their failures in life and they were to be pitied on that account.

“But your behaviour has been such that the Court would be failing in its duty if it did not impose a sentence which reflects the enormity of your offending,” his Honour said.

Notwithstanding the submissions made by counsel he could see no grounds to

differentiate between accused by way of punishment. Not all had past criminal records and none had offended in a way that would lead the Court to believe that they had a propensity to " commit crimes of this appalling nature.

To some extent Genet might have been fearful of King but the extent of that fear was of considerable doubt. In any event he could not regard her as less blameworthy merely because of her relationship with King.

It was true that as a result of Genet’s confession that the investigation into Mr Bell’s death had commenced. But it was usual only to make allowances when that confession was coupled with a plea of guilty and that did not happen in this case. “You, like the others, took part in an unjustified character assassination of your victim and that was not abandoned until the submissions on sentencing this morning,” his Honour said. He accepted that none of the accused would have behaved in this way without the encouragement of at least some others and in each case was bolstered by a hugh consumption of alcohol. Each had been in custody for five months. King, Flyger and Jackson had also been convicted of wounding with intent to commit grievous bodily harm on the Thursday. It was obvious that the injuries inflicted then were of themselves insufficent to cause death. “But this was a brutal and prolonged attack on a defenceless man and is a serious crime in itself,” his Honour said.

King, Flyger and Jacksen were sentenced to three years jail on that charge, one year of which was added to the sentence of eight years imposed on the manslaughter count.

Genet was also sentenced to eight years jail for manslaughter and Rewi for four years on a charge of causing grievous bodily harm.

Addressing Rewi, his Honour said that he was lucky not to be appearing on a conviction for manslaughter. The jury was not satisfied that the combined assault which Rewi joined in on the Saturday afternoon was sufficient on its own to have caused death. “Your behaviour was, however, despicable. You joined an attack on a man who obviously must have been suffering from beatings over a period of days.

“You were in at the end, and although you probably left before he died and certainly before the body was discovered, the evidence indicates that you participated in what was the final attack. This was an act of bullying which was appalling,” his Honour said.

Rewi was a much older man and was a recidivist—a person who habitually resorted to crime. He had more than 100 convictions and of the 34 years between the ages of 15 and 49 he had spent 28 years in prison, his Honour concluded.

Mr N. W. Williamson, for the Crown, said that during the trial Mr Bell’s character had been attacked and he had been portrayed as a child molester. He had no convictions for such an offence.

(Life imprisonment is the maximum sentence for manslaughter, under the Crimes Act, 1961. Wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.)