Three men who pleaded guilty to killing a Sydney baker, but
did not admit to firing the fatal shot, have smiled as they
were sentenced in the NSW Supreme Court.
Bryce Mark Williams, 25, Christopher William O'Brien, 21, and
Thomas McManus, 21, were all sentenced to minimum terms of
about five years in the NSW Supreme Court today
They had pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Alfred Lee,
33, on November 12, 2010.
Mr Lee was shot in the head in an attempted robbery during a
drug deal but none of the offenders admitted to being the
shooter.
As a result, the Crown could not prove beyond reasonable
doubt who fired the gun that killed Mr Lee, or that the trio
knew there was a gun present.
Justice Derek Price today sentenced Williams to at least five
years, nine months' imprisonment, with a maximum term of
eight years, one month.
He jailed O'Brien for at least five years, six months, with a
maximum term of seven years, 10 months.
McManus, the youngest member of the group, was jailed for at
least five years, four months, with a maximum term of seven
years, eight months.
The trio exchanged smiles as the sentences were handed down,
while Mr Lee's fiancee shook her head and wept.
Justice Price had to sentence each offender on the basis he
did not shoot the gun, did not know a gun was present and
that the attempted robbery was carried out without an
intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
The court heard a $23,000 ecstasy drug deal was arranged
between Mr Lee and his associates and the trio, who intended
to take the drugs without paying for them.
The two groups met in a lane at Stanmore on the evening of
the killing, with shots fired from the offenders' car into Mr
Lee's car, killing him instantly.
"Although the offending did not involve an intention to kill
or inflict grievous bodily harm upon the deceased, the
offenders unsurprisingly contemplated that there was the
possibility of some harm," Justice Price said.
Each of the men will be eligible for parole in 2016.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.