A MAN who killed two women by suffocation after tying them up and stuffing tights into their mouths during sex was sentenced to 18 years penal servitude by a judge at the Central Criminal Court yesterday.
Mr Justice Carney said his five years "in this court have demonstrated to me that each case gets worse. I have no doubt the horrors of the instant case will soon be dwarfed by one of the next."
He told Michael Bambrick he was jailing him for 15 years penal servitude for the manslaughter of Patricia McGauley and, "to take account of his then knowledge of his propensities", 18 years penal servitude for the manslaughter of Mary Cummins.
Both terms will run concurrently. He unconditionally suspended the last year of each sentence to take account of time in custody and refused leave to appeal against severity of sentence. Relatives and friends of the dead women were in tears as judgment was read.
Mr Justice Carney said his preference would be to sentence Bambrick, "this dangerous accused", to life imprisonment for the "horrific homicides".
But he could not do so because of existing case law, Bambrick's guilty plea and the fact that the DPP had accepted Bambrick's plea of not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter.
The problem from the community's point of view was that Bambrick would be subject to "no controls" on release with remission, which is a matter of right, from a determinate sentence. On release on licence from a life sentence Bambrick would be subject to controls, he said.
He said Bambrick's killing of Cummins with the knowledge of what he had done to McGabley, "must satisfy me that he has a propensity to re offend".
"He is of an age that he is liable to be sexually active on release with remission from any determinate sentence," he said. "The probability is that he will have a pent up appetite for his form of bondage, fuelled by group fantasising with other sex offenders in Arbour Hill Prison."
To impose a sentence of, say, 30 years and claim it was a lesser sentence than life imprisonment would be "both judicially dishonest and populist", he said. His intention was to sentence within known and existing parameters and his sentence was intended to be "severe and deterrent".
Michael Bambrick (43), formerly of St Ronan's Park, Clondalkin, Co Dublin, but now of no fixed abode, pleaded guilty before the Central Criminal Court last May to the manslaughter of both women.
He admitted the manslaughter of Patricia McGauley (43), his then partner and mother of their two children, Adrienne (12) and Louise (6), in Dublin on a date unknown between September 1st, 1991, and February 28th, 1992.
He also admitted the manslaughter of Mary Cummins, the mother of Samantha, now aged nine, in Dublin between July 1992 and December, 1993.
Evidence in relation to sentencing, including Bambrick's statements admitting responsibility for the deaths, was heard in the Central Criminal Court last week.
In his detailed, 22 page judgment, Mr Justice Carney said he was concerned with two matters - the propensity of Bambrick to re offend and constitutional problems, which he had referred to in previous judgments where a life sentence appeared to be a non mandatory option.
He outlined Bambrick's manslaughter plea and read to the court Bambrick's account of the deaths of both women.
In a statement to gardai Bambrick said he had tied both women's hands behind their backs and tied tights around their heads and stuffed them into their mouths during sexual intercourse.
Bambrick said both women died as a result and he had dismembered the bodies with a junior hacksaw and paper knife and dumped them.
He said in the statement: "I don't know what came over me on either of these occasions. I don't know how to explain it. I got enjoyment out of stuffing the tights into their mouths. I now realise the danger of what I did on these occasions.
Mr Justice Carney said Bambrick was known to have had sexual relations in the manner described on at least five other occasions which did not result in the death of his partner.
To protect the community and protect Bambrick from himself would necessitate jailing Bambrick for life with the possibility of release after a substantial punitive period but only when the expert advisers to the Minister for Justice were fully satisfied he no longer posed a danger or threat to women in particular.
That was the approach he would wish to take, Mr Justice Carney continued. But interpretations of the Constitution which were binding, "persuade me that I am not free under the law as it stands to approach the case from this perspective".
He quoted from superior court judgments which found against preventative detention on the grounds of having a propensity to commit a crime. From these he concluded that he was precluded from approaching the case on the basis "that over and above any considerations of punishment this dangerous accused should be preventatively detained until, in the opinion of the most qualified experts, he is safe to be let back into the community".
He went on to consider whether he could sentence Bambrick to life imprisonment as punishment for "the horrific homicides".
He said he believed Bambrick's guilty plea and a Supreme Court ruling prevented him from pursuing that option and he quoted from two relevant judgments.