By CAM LUCADOU-WELLS
AN ELDERLY Springvale man has made an impassioned plea in court on behalf of his alcoholic son who had throttled and bashed him at home.
The father, 75, argued against the magistrate imposing a full intervention order barring contact at a Dandenong Magistrates’ Court hearing on Monday 10 August.
The father told the court that his 45-year-old son was of a “similar ilk to me” – both sharing alcohol problems “as has my father before me”.
He forgave his son, describing him as a “great support” through his own alcoholism.
“He has no other accommodation.
“What I’d like to see is for him to get back with me and get on a program of absolute sobriety.
“He’s of an absolute help to me in that regard.”
On Monday, the son pleaded guilty to the assaults and breaching an intervention order preventing him from being drunk at the father’s house.
He had also breached a community corrections order imposed in June for drunkenly beating his dad.
The court was told that the son arrived drunk and verbally abusive at the victim’s home about 4.30pm on 2 August.
In the kitchen, the son grabbed and pressed his fingers against his father’s windpipe, making it difficult for him to breathe.
He then punched the father several times, causing bruising and bleeding to his forearm and ear.
Police prosecutor Senior Constable Liz Millear said the “shaken” victim told police “he wanted to kill me. He wanted to cut my throat”.
The son’s lawyer said the most recent assault was an “isolated incident” after the son had made “positive steps” in the past three months, including abstinence from alcohol.
He said the son had been distressed by the eight days spent remanded in Dandenong police cells – his first time in custody.
Magistrate Jack Vandersteen sentenced the son to eight days’ jail – deemed as already served in police remand cells since the incident.
He also imposed a family-violence intervention order barring the accused from visiting his father, but allowing phone and text conversations.
Grabbing a victim by the throat was a “red flag” indicating there was a risk of the victim later being seriously injured or killed, Mr Vandersteen said.
“It may be in time that the order can be varied but that’s only predicated on you being alcohol-free.”
