The reference to being 'punched or struck' in s 9C(3)(c) and (d) of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) refers, according to the majority (Priest and Kyrou JJA), to the particular punch or strike contemplated by paragraphs (a) and (b) — i.e. the punch or strike that caused death. Croucher AJA preferred a construction that paragraphs (c) and (d) refer to any punch or strike to the head or neck, but not to any punch or strike to any part of the body. The question remains unresolved at the level of binding authority given the split. The court unanimously observed that the mandatory minimum non-parole period regime inverts conventional sentencing principles and can produce inadequate post-release supervision periods.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.