Suellen Pike, aged 63, was last seen on
Saturday, August 14, at her home on
Woburn Place Burleigh Waters, QLD.
Her son Stephen Pike was found guilty in 2013 of the manslaughter
of his mother Suellen and is serving a 10-and-a-half year jail sentence. He was
found not guilty of her murder. The body of Mrs Pike has never been found.
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: R v Pike [2014] QCA 352
PARTIES: R v PIKE, Stephen Jonathan (appellant)
FILE NO/S: CA No 3 of 2014 SC No 131 of 2012
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Appeal against Conviction
ORIGINATING COURT: Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON: 19 December 2014
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 24 October 2014
JUDGES: Gotterson JA and Philippides and McMeekin JJ
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to
the order made
ORDER: Appeal dismissed.
HAVING REGARD TO EVIDENCE – OTHER MATTERS
– where the appellant was found guilty after trial of manslaughter – where the
Crown case was entirely a circumstantial one – where the body of the deceased
was never found – where there was evidence that the deceased suffered from
severe psychological conditions – where there was evidence that the deceased had
attempted suicide in the past, but her condition had been stable for many years
– whether alcohol impacted on medication taken by the deceased – where the
deceased changed her will in favour of the appellant – where there was evidence
of lies and conduct by the appellant which was said to demonstrate a
consciousness of guilt of the offence of manslaughter – whether possibility that
the deceased committed suicide could be excluded – whether the possibility that
the deceased was alive after 13 August 2010 could be excluded – whether on the
whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable
doubt that the appellant was guilty of manslaughter M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR
487, [1994] HCA 63, applied 2 COUNSEL: M C Chowdhury, with J L Voight, for the
appellant (pro bono) B J Power for the respondent
SOLICITORS: No appearance for the appellant Director of Public Prosecutions
(Queensland) for the respondent
[1] GOTTERSON JA: I agree with the order proposed by Philippides J and with the
reasons given by her Honour.
[2] PHILIPPIDES J: The appellant was charged with the murder of his mother,
Suellen Pike, on a date unknown between 11 and 30 August 2010. He was acquitted
by the jury of murder but convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 10 years
and six months imprisonment with a declaration as to time served.
[3] The sole ground of appeal is that the verdict of the jury was unreasonable
and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence. The evidence at trial
[4] The body of the deceased, Mrs Pike, was not found and the case against the
appellant was a circumstantial one.
[5] Mrs Pike lived at Burleigh Waters on the Gold Coast. She was born on 18
August 1947. She took medication for a number of health problems, including
hyperthyroidism, dyslipidemia, hypertension, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety,
insomnia, migraines and arthritis.
[6] Mrs Pike had a close relationship with a number of elderly people associated
with a church community and was aided by members of that church community in
relation to such matters as transportation. She also received assistance from
Home Care Services, Department of Health.
[7] In about May 2010, the appellant came to live with her and assisted with her
care.
[8] In July 2010, Mrs Pike altered her will, revoking her previous will which
left her estate to the appellant and his brother Adam Pike, and instead made the
appellant the sole beneficiary.
[9] There was evidence that Mrs Pike was spoken to by a friend, Brenda Ring on
12 August 2010. The prosecution case relied on the following evidence to
establish that Mrs Pike was dead. No one had seen or heard from Mrs Pike, apart
from the appellant, since 12 August 2010. (The exception was Mary Anne Tracey
who gave evidence of seeing a woman of Mrs Pike’s description on roughly 14
August 2010, and Helen Farrell, of Home Care Services, who recorded a telephone
conversation on 17 August 2010 with a female caller, who she took to be Mrs
Pike, cancelling her home visit.) In addition, since 12 August 2010, Mrs Pike
had missed appointments, had not attended her doctor (including for an
appointment booked for 13 August 2010, which she had confirmed), had not had any
prescription filled, had not accessed her bank account and had not gone to
church or spoken to her friends.
[10] There was evidence at the trial that:
The appellant purchased a shovel and two drop sheets on 13 August 2010.
The appellant failed to attend his workplace on 13 August 2010. He told police
that Mrs Pike had returned later that day saying that she had been with Adam
Pike. A work colleague of the appellant gave evidence that the appellant told
him on 16 August 2010 that he had not been at work on the 13th because he
thought his mother was missing and he went looking for her, but found out later
in the day she was with his brother for two weeks.
On 14 August 2010, the appellant conducted Google Maps searches of bushland.
On 15 August 2010 the appellant called for a tow truck from a payphone and
arranged for a tow truck to pick him up from his residence and take him to a
dirt road in bush area in Nerang to retrieve his car. He told the tow truck
driver, Andrew Healy that his vehicle had broken down the day before. Mr Healy
gave evidence of noticing what might have been a shovel on the rear seat of the
appellant’s car.
A police search of the appellant’s residence did not locate the clothes and
shoes that the appellant was seen wearing on CCTV footage of the morning of 15
August 2010.
Between 16 and 18 August 2010, the appellant conducted internet searches for
industrial strength ammonia, butchers’ supplies and various cleaning products.
Mrs Pike’s birthday was on 18 August 2010. She had been looking forward to it
and had been planning the celebration, including arranging for treats such as a
bracelet and new clothes.
On 20 August a concerned friend visited Mrs Pike’s house and found no one
home.
On 23 August 2010, police conducted a welfare check for Mrs Pike at her home.
The appellant told the police on 23 August 2010 that his mother was staying with
his brother and would be returning some time before his birthday (on 29 August)
and undertook to contact her.
The following day (24 August) the appellant acquired an industrial strength
cleaner.
On 28 August 2010 the appellant was at a party and had a conversation with
Dean Howard. The prosecution was given leave to cross-examine Mr Howard on his
original statement to police on 14 September 2010 about the conversation he had
had with the appellant. In that statement Mr Howard said that as a joke he
suggested to the appellant that now that his mother’s house was in his name he
could “knock her off”. The appellant said, “If I did it, there would be pieces
of her in the bush everywhere”. Mr Howard said words to the effect, “If you
can’t find the body then you can’t get caught”, to which the appellant said,
“Yeah, they would never find the body”. Mr Howard conceded that at the time of
the conversation he was very intoxicated.
On 29 August 2010, the appellant telephoned police and said he was concerned
his mother had not returned for his birthday. He told the police that Mrs Pike
had left on about 14 August 2010 to stay with his brother and said she had
travelled by bus or train. He stated he had not contacted his brother because
they were not on speaking terms and he did not have a telephone number for his
brother (although the evidence was that it was listed in the white pages).
A number of witnesses gave evidence of leaving telephone messages on Mrs
Pike’s message bank between 13 and 23 August 2010, including Adam Pike who
stated that he phoned and left a message on Mrs Pike’s birthday. When police
attempted to retrieve the messages from Mrs Pike’s telephone, there was only one
recorded message from 30 August 2010. The prosecution case was that it could be
inferred that the appellant had deleted the messages. The appellant told police
that he did not know how the phone messages worked and that the messages should
all be there. But he also told police that he did access some phone calls and
had returned messages. However, he maintained to police that he did not hear any
message from his brother.
On 9 September 2010, police inspected an area near where a tow truck had
collected the appellant’s car and found remnants of a fire that was only some 32
metres away from where the appellant’s broken down car was found. In the fire
police found personal property belonging to Mrs Pike, including a handbag and
its contents. The prosecution case was that the appellant had disposed of the
items in the fire.
A portion of the upholstery from the appellant’s car had been removed in an
area where a bloodstain was found (which the prosecution contended could be
inferred to be Mrs Pike’s blood). The prosecution case was that the appellant
had removed the upholstery.
[11] In discharging the onus on it to prove that Mrs Pike was killed by the
appellant, the prosecution relied on a variety of conduct and lies of the
appellant, said to demonstrate a consciousness of guilt on the part of the
appellant as follows:
Disposing of the deceased’s body in circumstances where it was not found.
Purchasing a shovel and two drop sheets on 13 August 2010.
Disposing of Mrs Pike’s personal property in a fire.
Disposing of the shoes and clothes he was wearing when he burnt Mrs Pike’s
property.
Conducting internet searches for butchers’ supplies and associated cleaning
products.
Acquiring an industrial strength cleaner the day after police conducted a
welfare check for Mrs Pike at her home.
Calling for a tow truck from a payphone.
Failing to report Mrs Pike missing for two weeks.
Deleting messages from Mrs Pike’s telephone message bank.
Removing upholstery from his car in an area where a bloodstain was found which
could be inferred to be Mrs Pike’s blood.
Disposing of some of Mrs Pike’s medication to make it appear as if she had
committed suicide.
Lying to police about Mrs Pike going missing on 13 August 2010.
Lying to police about going jogging on 14 August 20101 and not seeing his
mother leave the house. He said he left the house before 8.00 am to go
jogging and had not returned until some time after 10.30 am but there was
evidence that he purchased fuel at about 8.40 am using his bankcard.
Lying to police about what he was doing on the night of 14 August 2010.2
[12] It was the prosecution case that the possibility that Mrs Pike had
committed suicide could be excluded and in that regard, the following were
relied on:
Mrs Pike had organised her affairs by changing her will on 15 July 2010,
leaving everything to the appellant, and had made arrangements for her funeral,
in keeping with her being an organised and budget conscious person.
There was no evidence that Mrs Pike had called a taxi in the period around her
disappearance, nor did any bus driver driving in the relevant area recall a
woman fitting Mrs Pike’s description travelling on a bus on 14 August 2010. And,
given Mrs Pike’s limited mobility, she could not have walked far (even allowing
for the evidence of Mrs Pike’s treating doctor Dr Khan, that she could perhaps
have walked some 750 metres to the corner shop and back, with some rest breaks).
Although Mrs Pike had mental health issues, there was evidence from numerous
witnesses that she was happy in the period leading up to her disappearance.
Dr Lichter, who was Mrs Pike’s treating psychiatrist between 1992 and November
2007, stated that, although Mrs Pike had periods of fluctuating mental health
issues and had taken a drug overdose in 1996 and again in 2005 when she
attempted suicide, her mental condition had stabilised in 2007 and she was no
longer considered a suicide risk whereupon he ceased treating her.
Dr Khan, who was Mrs Pike’s treating doctor, gave evidence that Mrs Pike was
well settled psychologically in 2010. She was happy and positive and he did not
recall any decline in her mental state in 2010.
The issues raised by the appellant
[13] The appellant accepted that the evidence raised a suspicion that the
appellant had unlawfully killed his mother, but argued that it was not open to
the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had
committed the offence of manslaughter. In advancing thatsubmission, the
following matters were emphasised:
(a) There was no evidence of threatening behaviour by the appellant towards the
deceased before her disappearance, nor was there any history of an abusive
relationship.
(b) The appellant was consistent in his reports that his mother had gone missing
to a number of people, including the police.
(c) The prosecution could not exclude the possibility that Mrs Pike committed
suicide, particularly given her serious psychiatric illness and previous
attempts at suicide. There were lakes near Mrs Pike’s home and there was no
evidence that police searched them.
(d) In the weeks before her disappearance Mrs Pike was consuming alcohol which
could have had unknown effects when combined with her many medications.
(e) There was no evidence of any foul play occurring in the house. The blood on
the car arm rest was consistent with blood from Mrs Pike’s leg wounds.
(f) There was the possibility that Mrs Pike was still alive after 13 August
2010.
(g) The evidence of Dean Howard was of no value, given his poor recollection and
that it seemed to be nothing more than drunken banter between Mr Howard and the
appellant. 2 The appellant told police that he drove to Nerang on the night of
14 August 2010 and went to a hotel where he spent the evening drinking before
catching a cab home, but the CCTV footage did not support that account.
Unsafe and unsatisfactory?
[14] In M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 at 493, the High Court addressed the
approach to be taken in determining whether the verdict of the jury is unsafe or
unsatisfactory: “… the question which the court must ask itself is whether it
thinks that upon the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be
satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was guilty. But in answering
that question the court must not disregard or discount either the consideration
that the jury is the body entrusted with the primary responsibility of
determining guilt or innocence, or the consideration that the jury has had the
benefit of having seen and heard the witnesses. On the contrary, the court must
pay full regard to those considerations.”
(a) No evidence of threatening behaviour or history of an abusive relationship.
[15] The appellant’s submission as to the lack of evidence of his exhibiting
animosity towards Mrs Pike does not advance matters as it was no part of the
crown case that there was a history of previous aggression. Rather, the crown
case was that the appellant had a motive to commit the offence because of the
alteration to Mrs Pike’s will favouring the appellant. There was evidence that
the appellant was aware of that. Indeed, Mrs Ring’s evidence was that the
appellant seemed fed up with Mrs Pike talking about it.
(b) The appellant was consistent in his reports that his mother had gone missing
to a number of people, including the police.
[16] The appellant’s reports about Mrs Pike’s going missing and his
understanding that she was with his brother was to be assessed against his not
having confirmed that she was with his brother, whose number he claimed not to
have, even though it could be obtained from the white pages. It was also to be
assessed against the evidence given by his brother that undermined the
appellant’s account. Adam Pike’s evidence was that he had phoned his mother’s
house on her birthday and had left a message for her (which was not found by
police on the message bank and which the prosecution contended the appellant had
deleted). Also significant in the evaluation of the appellant’s account was what
the prosecution contended were a number of lies the appellant told police, in
particular, as to his whereabouts between 13 and 15 August 2010. The jury were
entitled to reject the appellant’s explanation that his lack of candour to
police was borne out of a concern to disguise his drink driving on those dates.
It was open to the jury to conclude that the appellant lied out of awareness
that the truth would incriminate him rather than for some other innocuous
reason.
(c) The possibility that Mrs Pike committed suicide could not be excluded.
(d) The issue of Mrs Pike’s consumption of alcohol and its interaction with her
medications.
[17] The two submissions are interconnected. The appellant pointed to the
evidence of Mrs Pike’s serious psychiatric illness and previous attempts at
suicide, and that in the period leading up to her disappearance it had been
noticed by some witnesses that she had been consuming alcohol which it was
submitted may have adversely impacted on her psychiatric medication. It was
submitted that in those circumstances, a reasonable hypothesis open on the
evidence was that she had committed suicide. It was contended Mrs Pike may have
gone for a walk and deliberately (or even accidentally) fallen into one of the
lakes near her house and drowned. There was no evidence of a search having been
conducted by police of those lakes and a rational explanation as to why there
was no trace of her body was that it could have been consumed by sharks.
[18] There was evidence from a home care worker, Sherilyn Bent, that she was
concerned Mrs Pike had started drinking alcohol. She said that Mrs Pike had
purchased quantities of alcohol on 22 July and 5 August 2010. However, she also
gave evidence that Mrs Pike told her that she had purchased the alcohol for her
son and that she herself only had one glass of wine a night. In any event, the
evidence relating to the effect of alcohol in combination with Mrs Pike’s
medication was very limited. Dr Khan’s evidence was simply that alcohol could
react with her medication.
[19] There was evidence from Elizabeth Finnan, who had known Mrs Pike for 10
years, that Mrs Pike appeared worried in the period leading up to her
disappearance. But the totality of the evidence indicated that Mrs Pike had no
tendencies of self-harm since 2007. Dr Lichter’s evidence was that Mrs Pike had
stabilised in 2007 and was not considered a suicide risk at that time. Although
he was unaware of Mrs Pike’s mental state subsequently, the evidence of her
treating doctor, Dr Kahn, who she saw regularly, was that in 2010 she was
settled psychologically, and that he did not recall any decline in mental state
at that time. Dr Kahn stated that had her condition deteriorated he would have
referred Mrs Pike to her treating psychiatrist.
[20] Nor was there any rational scenario on the evidence as to how Mrs Pike
could have committed suicide. The evidence indicated that Mrs Pike had not used
public transport on 14 August 2010. The jury were entitled to find it unlikely
that Mrs Pike had walked to the lake area in the vicinity of her house. Mrs Pike
was infirm and had limited mobility. She was a large and overweight woman (169
centimetres tall and weighing 108 kg). Her doctor considered she was only able
to walk a limited distance. Furthermore, the jury were entitled to find that,
even if Mrs Pike were able to reach the lake area and fallen into the water, it
was improbable that there would have been no trace of her body. Evidence was
given by a marine police officer that in previous cases of drowning in nearby
lakes, human remains were found, albeit with signs of shark bites. Accordingly,
it was open to the jury to reject the hypothesis that Mrs Pike had drowned in
the lake near her house as implausible and without foundation.
(e) There was no evidence of any foul play occurring in the house. The blood on
the arm rest was consistent with the blood from Mrs Pike’s leg wounds.
[21] The appellant submitted that there was no evidence of any struggle or foul
play having occurred at Mrs Pike’s home. However, the evidence presented at
trial, to which I have already referred, pointed to a strong circumstantial case
that the appellant had caused Mrs Pike’s death and was engaged in disposing of
evidence relevant to Mrs Pike’s death.
[22] Expert evidence was given by Shannon Merrick, a forensic scientist, as to a
bloodstain in the appellant’s car, which the jury were entitled to infer was
that of Mrs Pike. The submission urged by the appellant was that it could not be
excluded that the source of the blood stain was a leg wound. The evidence
relating to Mrs Pike having leg wounds was scarce. The appellant stated to
police that Mrs Pike suffered from ulcers on her leg. There was evidence of the
deceased’s Medicare billing records indicating that she had been treated for two
wound dressings on 23 and 30 July respectively. Dr Kahn, however, did not recall
seeing or recording treatment of any wounds on those days, although he could not
rule out the possibility that Mrs Pike had been treated for a minor wound on 23
and 30 July 2010. Likewise the nursing staff did not remember treating or
recording treatment of any wounds on those days. The jury were entitled to
reject the notion that the presence of the blood could be understood as arising
from a leg wound.
(f) There was the possibility that Mrs Pike was still alive after 13 August 2010
[23] The hypothesis that Mrs Pike was alive after 13 August 2014 rested on the
evidence of two witnesses. Ms Tracey was a resident of Burleigh Waters. She did
not know Mrs Pike, but had read about Mrs Pike’s disappearance in the newspaper.
She reported to police that during one of her walks she saw a large-looking
woman fitting the description of Mrs Pike. Ms Tracey identified the date as
“roughly about” 14 August 2010. She said she was “inclined” to think it was that
date because she had been to Brisbane on 13 August 2010 and had not been able to
walk her dog as she generally did. It is not likely that the jury would have
placed much store on Mrs Tracey’s evidence. Although she gave a description that
resembled that of the deceased, she did not know Mrs Pike and, was at best vague
as to the date of the sighting.
[24] The other witness who gave evidence on the topic was Ms Farrell, of Home
Care Services, an organization which provided fortnightly assistance to Mrs
Pike. On 17 August 2010 at about 8.25 am she received a phone call cancelling
Mrs Pike’s appointment. Ms Farrell noted in her diary ‘COVO, Tues 17/8 HF’
denoting “cancel one visit only”. Such visits could be cancelled only by the
patient or the designated contact person.3 Her note on 17 August 2010 did not
show that the visit had been cancelled by the designated person, so she assumed
that the caller must have been Mrs Pike. Moreover, Mrs Farrell explained that
she did not know Mrs Pike, and since the caller had a female voice she took her
to be Mrs Pike. Given that Mrs Farrell had no real recollection of the call and
did not know Mrs Pike but proceeded on an assumption as to the identity of the
caller, her evidence was not likely to carry much weight with the jury.
[25] In the circumstances, it was entirely open to the jury to reject the
hypothesis that Mrs Pike was alive after 13 August 2010.
(g) The evidence of Dean Howard was of no value, given his poor recollection and
that it seemed to be nothing more than a drunken banter between Howard and the
appellant.
[26] As to Mr Howard’s evidence, the jury was entitled to know that the
appellant was joking about disposing of his mother’s body in the bush and to
consider that evidence with proper instruction from the trial judge as to its
context; that the appellant’s comments made in the context of a drunken
conversation and as to its reliability.
[27] The appellant’s statement to Mr Howard was relevant in the context of the
evidence of Mr Healy, who was called to tow the appellant’s car. There was
evidence that the appellant guided Mr Healy to the middle of a ‘thick bush’.
While Mr Healy was attaching the car to the tow truck, the appellant disappeared
in the bush for a prolonged period of time. During that time, Mr Healy noticed
what he believed to be the handle of a shovel sticking out from behind the
passenger seat. As the respondent submitted, that evidence, together with the
statement to Mr Howard, formed a compelling base for the Crown’s theory that the
appellant disposed of Mr Pike’s body in the bush.
Conclusion
[28] In my view, there is no substance in any of the issues raised by the
appellant. The trial judge addressed the rival contentions relating to those
issues in her summing-up and 3 Deidre Fairweather, the service manager for Home
Care Services, also stated that the protocol for cancellation of visits was that
cancellations could only be made by the client or nominated person, who was Adam
Pike. 9 the jury were properly appraised of them. As was submitted by counsel
for the respondent, the matters raised by the appellant in contending that the
verdict was not open to the jury were quintessentially issues for a jury to
consider based on findings of fact and in light of all the other evidence.
Bearing in mind the significant advantage the jury had in seeing and hearing the
witnesses give evidence, and taking into account the whole of the evidence, it
was clearly open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the
appellant was guilty of the offence of manslaughter.
[29] I would dismiss the appeal.
[30] McMEEKIN J: I agree with the reasons for judgment of Philippides J and the
order proposed.
Police plea over missing Coast woman
| August 31st, 2010
POLICE are appealing to the public to help find a 63-year-old woman who
disappeared in the Burleigh Waters area more than two weeks ago.
Suellen Pike, who suffers from a medical condition which requires regular
medication, was last seen by her son on Saturday, August 14, at their home
on
Woburn Place.
Detective Acting Inspector Terry Goldsworthy from the Southern
Investigative Group said Ms Pike was not capable of walking far because of
back injuries.
He said she was last seen with a handbag and a black rectangular
synthetic suitcase and was dressed in a dark charcoal short-sleeve dress
with a grey wool shirt underneath and black leather flat shoes.
''The son spoke to her, everything was normal, he has then left the
home to do some chores ... upon returning home his mother is not there and
he hasn't laid eyes on her since,'' said acting Insp Goldsworthy.
The medication she took was for physical issues, he said.
Anyone with information should call
Crime Stoppers
on 1800 333 000.
Police searching for Gold Coast woman
By Tom Forbes - ABC
Updated
Thu Sep 2, 2010
11:57am AEST
Police say they hold grave fears for the wellbeing of a
63-year-old woman from Queensland's Gold Coast who was reported missing almost
three weeks ago.
Forensic police are examining Suellen Pike's home and State Emergency
Service (SES) volunteers are combing bushland near the Burleigh Waters property.
Police say she lived at the house with her son and pet dog.
Detective Sergeant Toby Wilkinson says police are investigating whether Ms
Pike's bank accounts have been accessed since she was last seen on August 14.
"Grave fears are held for the missing person," he said.
"At this point in time she's known to be not particularly mobile.
"She's medicated heavily and it would appear that medication has not been
taken for some period of time.
"We are currently speaking with associates, friends and family."
SES joins search for missing Coast woman
Ben Dillaway | September
1st, 2010 - Goldcoast.com.au
THE State Emergency Service has joined the search for missing Burleigh
Waters women Suellen Pike, a day after forensic officers examined her home.
SES Volunteers are currently looking through bush land at the back of
Marymount College while forensics continue to search her
Woburn Place home, only a short distance away, for signs of foul play.
Detective Acting Senior Sergeant Toby Wilkinson said police now held
grave fears for the 63-year-old.
''She is know not to be particularly mobile, she's medicated heavily
and it would appear her medication has not been taken for some period of
time,'' he said
''We're currently speaking with associates, friends and family.''
Detective Acting Inspector Terry Goldsworthy from the Southern
Investigative Group yesterday said Ms Pike was not capable of walking far
because of back injuries.
He said she was last seen with a handbag and a black rectangular
synthetic suitcase, and was dressed in a dark charcoal short-sleeve dress
with a grey wool shirt underneath and black leather flat shoes.
''The son spoke to her, everything was normal, he has then left the
home to do some chores ... upon returning home his mother is not there and
he hasn't laid eyes on her since,'' said acting Insp Goldsworthy.
The medication she took was for physical issues, he said.
Update, missing
Burleigh Heads woman:
Police continue to appeal for information in relation to
missing Burleigh Heads woman Suellen Pike. SES and police are today conducting a
search in local bushland near Ms Pike’s residence. Police hold grave concerns
for her welfare as she suffers from medical conditions which require regular
medication. Ms Pike was last seen at her Burleigh Heads home on Sunday August
15. Anyone with information which could assist police with their
investigations should contact Crime Stoppers anonymously via
1800 333 000 or crimestoppers.com.au 24hrs a day.
Missing woman's son charged with murder
Leah Fineran | September
30th, 2010 - GoldCoast.com.au
THE son of missing Gold Coast woman Suellen Pike has been charged with
her murder and is being held behind bars.
Ms Pike, 63, went missing
from her Burleigh Waters home six weeks ago.
Her body has not been found but yesterday her 35-year-old son Stephen
Pike was charged with her murder.
Mr Pike was not produced from the watchhouse when his case was raised
in the Southport Magistrates Court this morning.
Police prosecutor Constable Rosanna Doolan said significant police
investigations had led to the arrest.
"This case has involved a lot of police work and a lot of a DNA and
other testing," she said.
Mr Pike will be held in custody until his three day committal hearing
from April 11 next year.
Court hears victim frightened of
alleged killer son
Date:
12 April 2011 - 02:31pm -
My GC.com.au
Prosecutors in the murder trial of a man
accused of killing his mother claim she was frightened of him.
Stephen Jonathan Pike, 35, is charged with killing
63-year-old Suellen Pike sometime between August 12 and 15 in
2009.
On day two of the committal in the Southport Magistrates
Court, the missing woman's close friend Brenda Ring said Suellen
had confessed her son was violent.
But she also revealed on cross-examination her friend, who
suffered from schizophrenia, had said she loved having her son
living with her.
Yesterday Pike's childhood friend Dean Howard told the
court they had a drunken conversation at a party on August 28 in
which they joked about Pike "knocking" her off in order to claim
his inheritance.
Mr Pike was charged in late September and voluntarily
surrendered himself into police custody.
At the committal hearing in the Southport Magistrates
Court, 145 witness statements and 118 exhibits have been
tendered.
The hearing is scheduled to run until Wednesday and resume
for a further seven days later this year.
Zoe Hancock | September
9th, 2011 - Gold Coast.com.au
A MAN facing murder charges will have to wait two weeks in custody
while a Gold Coast magistrate decides whether to commit him to trial.
Stephen Jonathan Pike, 35, has been charged with his mother's murder
between August 12-15 last year.
Suellen Pike's body has not been found and her son has been in
custody since he was charged about a year ago.
Pike's defence barrister Dennis Lynch in the Southport Magistrates
Court today slammed the prosecution's case in the committal hearing.
He told the court there was not enough evidence to consider
committing Pike to trial.
''The prosecution needs to prove Suellen Pike is dead, that the
defendant caused her death, he did so unlawfully and he intended to kill
her or cause her grievous bodily harm,'' Mr Lynch said.
He submitted the case did not stand up to proving any of the
allegations and alternative explanations existed for the police.
Mr Lynch said arresting officer Justin Percival had relied on a
range of things including Suellen going missing from her Burleigh Waters
home where she and Pike lived on August 12 and Pike's explanations of
where he went looking for her not adding up.
Magistrate Catherine Pirie interjected that she thought there were
other reasons that supported the prosecution's case Mr Lynch had not
mentioned in his submissions.
She said it was not her authority to decide whether there were
alternative explanations, that should be up to a jury.
Ms Pirie said she would hand down her decision on September 23 after
she had a chance to read the evidence.
Man to face trial over mother's alleged murder
Ashlynne McGhee - ABC
Posted
Fri Sep 23, 2011
11:51am AEST
A man on Queensland's Gold Coast has been committed to stand
trial on a charge of murdering his mother.
Stephen Pike, 35, allegedly murdered Suellen Pike, 63, between August 12
and 15 last year.
Her body has never been found.
Magistrate Catherine Pirie told the court a neighbour testified she heard
an elderly woman repeatedly scream "oh no" at Ms Pike's home on August 12.
Ms Pirie said there is evidence Pike purchased a shovel and plastic
protection sheet the next day.
She said days later, police found a burnt out patch of bushland at
Clagiraba.
Parts of a woman's handbag, glasses, earings and a tooth crown were
located.
Pike was remanded in custody and is expected to stand trial next year.
Stephen Jonathon Pike has been jailed for 10-and-a-half years after
he was found guilty of the manslaughter of his 'adoring' mother
A GOLD Coast man dealt his devoutly
religious mother the cruellest insult by hiding her body and
depriving her a proper burial in "consecrated ground'.
Tony Keim, GoldCoastBulletin
A GOLD Coast man dealt his devoutly religious mother the cruellest insult by
hiding her body and depriving her a proper burial in "consecrated ground''
after he killed her, a court has been told.
Stephen Jonathon Pike, 38, was yesterday jailed for 10-and-a-half years after a
Brisbane Supreme Court found him guilty of the manslaughter of his frail
63-year-old pensioner mum more than three years ago.
Pike - a former Australian soldier and Gold Coast City Council mapping analyst -
stood stony in the court dock as he was admonished for his criminal betrayal of
a devoted parent.
However, he wept openly when told by the sentencing judge - Justice Debra
Mullins - he would have to serve at least 80 per cent of his sentence - more
than eight years - in a prison cell.
Three weeks ago Pike pleaded not guilty to murdering Suellen Pike just weeks
after she changed her will - making him the sole beneficiary of all her assets
including the family home.
The jury was told Mrs Pike 'disappeared off the face of the planet" in August
2010 shortly after a will change leaving everything to one of her two sons.
Pike, then aged 34, was living with his mum when she disappeared and told
concerned family, friends and police that she had simply gone away to stay with
his estranged brother.
The jury heard Suellen Pike adored her son Stephen - so much so she was happy
when he returned to home to live her and even changed her will to leave him all
her worldly possessions.
When police went to conduct a 'welfare check" on Mrs Pike they noticed a new
shovel that had been purchased from a hardware store, along with two plastic
drop sheets, a day or two after she went missing.
Pike is said to have killed his mum at her Burleigh Waters home, on the Gold
Coast, between August 11 and 30, 2010.
Late Wednesday the jury found Pike not guilty of murdering Mrs Pike, but guilty
of the lesser charge of manslaughter.
Prosecutor Vicki Loury, in sentencing submissions, said the act of any person
responsible for the killing of their own mother was almost unthinkable.
But, she said the fact Pike not only killed his mother, but then disposed her
corpse, was particularly heinous.
"The killing of one's own mother is particularly aggravating,'' Ms Loury said.
"(Ms Pike) was a woman of (religious) faith ... (and now) can't be buried on
consecrated ground ... and can't be properly put to rest.''
Ms Loury said Pike's failure to reveal the location of his mother's remains to
this day showed a complete lack of remorse.
Justice Mullins, in her sentencing remarks, said: "The prosecution's case was a
circumstantial one because your mother's body has never been found.''
"(The jury's verdicts infer) you killed her in circumstances where you did not
intend to kill her.''
She said while it was unclear when Pike killed his mother, it was accepted he
dumped her body on August 13 or 14.
Under Queensland law anyone sentenced to 10-years or more for an offence of
manslaughter must serve 80 per cent of term in custody.
Stephen Pike, who killed own mum soon after he became sole beneficiary will not
inherit a cent
NOT long after her youngest son moved back into her home, Suellen Pike changed
her will to make him the sole beneficiary. Not long after that, the deeply
religious woman went missing, never to be seen again.
Kay Dibben
Courier Mail
May 23, 2015 - 11:22AM
A MAN who killed his own mother soon after she made him sole
beneficiary of her estate will not inherit a cent, after his brother
successfully challenged it in court.
Applying the forfeiture rule, Justice Ros Atkinson said Stephen Pike
could not benefit from unlawfully killing his mother and ordered his
elder brother Adam Pike get her entire estate.
Stephen Pike was found guilty in 2013 of the manslaughter of his frail
mother Suellen Pike, 63, in 2010 and is serving a 10-and-a-half year
jail sentence.
He was found not guilty of her murder.
The body of Mrs Pike has never been found and the Crown Prosecutor said
the religious woman had been deprived of a burial in consecrated ground.
Pike had returned home to live with his Burleigh Heads mother, who just
weeks before she disappeared changed her will to leave her adored
younger son everything she owned.
Pike told family, friends and police his mother had gone away to stay
with his estranged brother.
But police doing a welfare check on Mrs Pike found a new shovel purchased from a
hardware store and two plastic drop sheets a day or two after she went missing.
The Crown case was that Pike killed his Mum at her Gold Coast home between
August 11 and 30, 2010.
The judge said the while it was unclear when Pike killed his mother, it was
accepted he dumped her body on August 13 or 14, 2010.
Mrs Pike’s elder son Adam Pike applied to the Supreme Court for an order that
his mother’s estate to be distributed to him, instead of his killer brother.
Mrs Pike made three wills, with the first in 2009 leaving 80 per cent of the
residuary estate to son Adam, 10 per cent to Stephen and 10 per cent to a
friend.
A second 2009 will divided her estate equally between her two sons.
But on July 15, 2010, Mrs Pike made her final will, appointing Stephen as her
executor and trustee and leaving him her whole estate.
She made a provision that if distribution of her estate failed to take effect,
the whole of the estate would go to her son Adam.
The forfeiture rule says if a person is criminally responsible for the death of
another, and that death is a material fact in the vesting of property in favour
of that person, the interest in that property is forfeited.
Justice Atkinson said the forfeiture rule clearly, in Queensland, covered all
cases of murder and manslaughter.
“Accordingly, the forfeiture rule applies to this case and the provision in the
will leaving the whole of the estate to (Stephen Pike) must fail because he has
been criminally responsible for the death of the testator,’’ the judge said.
“Hence it is his crime that would lead to his benefiting under her will, a
situation which the common law cannot tolerate.’’
The judge ordered Adam Pike could sell off any of his brother’s property that
remained in his mother’s unit and pay the proceeds to the Public Trustee, as
manager of the estate