Former soldier choked, stomped on partner's face
A FORMER soldier who choked his partner until she blacked out before stomping on her head has lost an appeal to reduce his sentence.
Court documents show the former defence force machine gun operator launched an appeal in Queensland Supreme Court, arguing his head sentence of three and a half years was "manifestly excessive".
Court records show on January 2 last year the then 45-year-old was agitated and angry when he confronted his partner at her home about 7.30am.
"...you black piece of shit, why didn't you come home?" he said before punching her with his right hand repeatedly.
"The woman fell to the floor and felt blood running down her face and out of her ear," the court heard.
"The man then walked behind the woman and placed her in a choke hold, using his right arm.
"He squeezed hard enough with his arm that the complainant could not breathe or move. She was terrified and eventually lost consciousness."
When the woman gained conciseness she woke to find the her then-partner "stomping on her head with his left foot".
"He then started punching the complainant in the face again," the court heard.
QUEENSLAND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES
The appeal heard the events of that morning was not the first time the man had offended against the woman, who he began a relationship with two years prior.
"The applicant has a lengthy criminal history that includes street offences, minor drug offending, dishonesty offences, unlawful use of motor vehicles, breach of bail and probation orders, but relevantly contraventions of domestic violence orders committed in April 2009, March, June and November 2015 and June 2016," the appeal judgment read.
On 26 October 2017 the former soldier, who was described as an "appalling alcoholic" pleaded guilty to two counts of assault occasioning bodily harm, one count of choking, suffocation or strangulation and one summary charge of contravention of domestic violence order.
He was sentenced to a head jail term of three and a half years but the presiding judge declined to fix a date on which he would be eligible to apply for parole.
He was ordered to serve half of the three years and six months term of imprisonment before he could make any parole application.
It was on two grounds the man argued for a lighter sentence.
The first was that the sentence was manifestly excessive and the second was that it wasn't fair of the judge not to impose a parole eligibility date.
But the judge disagreed, ruling the offending involved an "episode of sustained violence undertaken by a recidivist who expressed no remorse".
"Deterrence and protection of the community properly loomed large as the relevant predominant factors on sentence," the judgment read.