11 The Two Intruders | Verdict

After five days of deliberations, the jury has decided whether Steve Fabriczy and Joseph Vekony are guilty of murdering Irma Palasics. In this episode, Elizabeth Byrne and James Vyver take us inside the courtroom as the jury return their verdict and talk through the key evidence which led to their decision. If you have any questions you'd like Liz, James and Stocky to answer in future episodes, please email [email protected] mailto:[email protected]. The Case Of is the follow-up to the hit podcast Mushroom Case Daily, and all episodes of that show will remain available in the back catalogue of The Case Of.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  We're in the mountains in Europe, where there are forests and meadows, and a 27-kilometre tunnel that scientists shoot lasers in. It's CERN, and it cost billions to build, and it's just about to be brought to a halt by a bird with a baguette. I'm Dr Anne Jones, and in my new series for What the Duck, I'm taking on nature's most wanted: the animals that end up on the wrong side of the law. Find What the Duck on ABC Listen or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 0:29Speaker 01

  ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music and more.

• 0:45Speaker 02

  After five days of deliberations, the 12 people deciding whether Joseph Akoni and Steve Fabriczy are guilty of murdering Irma Palazik have returned their verdict. I'm Stephen Stockwell, this is episode 11 of The Case of the Two Intruders.

• 1:00Speaker 03

  Irma Palazik's brutal murder rocked her family and has haunted them for 24 long years.

• 1:06Speaker 04

  This wasn't the average robbery. The brutality of the attack shocked the community.

• 1:11Speaker 05

  They were virtually tortured that night.

• 1:14Speaker 06

  Violently assaulted before the two men ransacked the premises and stole cash and jewellery.

• 1:19Speaker 04

  My grandparents were beaten, and my grandmother was left to die on the lounge room floor.

• 1:27Speaker 02

  For a quarter of a century, the family of Irma Palazik have been waiting for answers after she was murdered during a brutal home invasion. Tied up and beaten, her house torn apart in a search for money. We have taken you inside the trial of the two men accused of this murder, and now we have a verdict. In this room, as it happened, as it was handed down, was ABC Court reporter Elizabeth Byrne. Hi, Liz. Hi, Stocky. And we also have investigative reporter James Vyver. G'day, James. Hi, Stocky. Liz, the jury has reached a verdict. We've been waiting two months for this. How did you get the news that this decision had been made?

• 2:04Speaker 03

  Well, essentially, I got an email from the court saying the court will reconvene shortly. James and I had actually retired to a nearby cafe to discuss something that had happened earlier in the day, which was the judge answering a jury question. So I wasn't surprised, really, when we were called back to the court. And when we got there, I could tell it must be a verdict, partly because a whole lot of other lawyers had come into the court and other people from around the court precinct who would only come and sit down for a verdict. They wouldn't be worried about a question.

• 2:45Speaker 02

  Yeah. James, what was the mood like as, you know, the various parties, the families, the defendants filtered into the courtroom?

• 2:53Speaker 07

  Yeah, it definitely felt different to the other times we've been called in. Quite hard to put your finger on, really. But as Liz says, I noticed, too, the fresh faces that I hadn't seen at any point in the preceding two months. There was a lot of tension. It almost goes without saying, but you could really feel it in the room. The family came in relatively late. A lot of the rest of us were in there assembled. They sort of all sat on a couple of rows together, holding hands extremely tightly, super focused and just waiting those few more moments after that quarter century, as you said, to find out what had happened.

• 3:39Speaker 02

  When the jury came in, where did they look?

• 3:44Speaker 03

  Well, they, it's more about...

• 3:47Speaker 03

  This particular jury, how they looked. They looked resolved, um, and there's been these several ladies sitting in the front row for almost the entire trial, and I've been trying to gauge what they're thinking. But they, they looked like they were ha- um, I wouldn't say happy with their result, but, um, uh, resolved in their result. And I didn't notice them particularly looking at Mr. Fabrizi, uh, but they look like, we've got the decision, let's get on with the business.

• 4:23Speaker 02

  Yeah, I'm always a little bit interested and curious where a jury looks as they come in, because there is a theory that if they, they look at the defendant as they, they walk in, they, they may have a not guilty verdict. And if they don't look at the defendant, they may have a guilty verdict. So I always like to ask that question. Liz, what verdict did they deliver?

• 4:41Speaker 03

  Well, the judge asked the jury foreman, uh, to come forward, and the judge's associate actually read the charges to the jury, asked first of all, have you reached your verdicts? And the foreperson said yes, and then read each of the charges. Uh, and the first charge was a charge of murder against Steve Fabrizi, and the answer was not guilty. And then it was a charge of manslaughter against Steve Fabrizi, and the answer was guilty. So from that, we knew what else was probably coming. Uh, so Joseph Focconi also guilty of manslaughter. And then of course, the raft of other charges. In addition to that, Joseph Focconi was found

• 5:26Speaker 03

  guilty of two charges related to the nineteen ninety-eight, um, incident at Irma Palasics's former home in Canberra. And, uh, that included, uh, an assault on, on Irma Palasics. So there were quite a few guilty findings, but a lot of those alternative charges, they didn't even go into, uh, they were found guilty of everything.

• 5:52Speaker 02

  Yep, yep. Uh, James, what was the reaction in the courtroom as, you know, it was announced that Steve Fabrizi and Joseph Focconi guilty of the manslaughter of Irma Palasics's?

• 6:03Speaker 07

  There was a moment when John Makita, who has been the figurehead of the Who Killed Irma campaign, the grandson of Irma, when he, he must have been holding his breath when, when, when everything started, as Liz described, and when they said guilty to manslaughter, I just heard this massive exhalation of breath that felt like it had been in there for the last twenty six years, not biologically possible, but that's how it felt. Um, and, you know, he was sat there with his wife and his two daughters and they were just sort of, as I said before, hold, like, holding hands so tightly that their knuckles had gone white. They had tears in their eyes, you know, John looked down and it was just

• 6:46Speaker 07

  a palpable moment of emotion that thankfully, most people never get to feel really because it is such a mixture of probably all the emotions any human being could possibly feel, you know, a- and in the row behind them. And I should, it's worth pointing out to people who might not be able to picture the courtroom. When we say the public gallery, that kind of makes it feel like it's high up and you're looking down. It, it, it really isn't. You're on the same level, really pretty close to what's going on in the public gallery. And we are close to them. Um, in the various times, you know what things like you go to, go to a place for ages, you send, send up sitting in the same spot. Um, you, you're close enough, you can reach out and touch the family, you talk to them every day and,

• 7:31Speaker 07

  you know, you really, you get to them just a little bit. And there were two rows of the family there, sisters and brothers and relatives and, you know, and so on. Um, you know, there was a moment, I'm frantically taking notes and I just sort of, I'm trying to look over and observe what they're doing while sort of being respectful. There was a moment when, I'm not sure how she fits into the family, but she was sitting on one end and she just sort of turned and looked at me with tears in her eyes and we just had a slight nod at one another and then sort of carried on. So. Sadly, the timing just wasn't quite right for Elizabeth Makita and her husband John, John Senior, to make it into the court to physically hear the verdict come from the

• 8:15Speaker 07

  lips of the foreman of the jury. Obviously, they'd been messaging, but by the time they arrived, they knew. And if there was a moment that just summed up everything that we're talking about over all of this time, it was just a long, long, tearful embrace between John Makita Junior, grandson of Irma, and his mother, Elizabeth. They just hugged and hugged and hugged and hugged and hugged. And it was really moving, I have to say. It really was.

• 8:47Speaker 02

  And James, what about reactions from the defendants as the verdict was handed down?

• 8:52Speaker 07

  I must say, the thing that I noticed was, at first, Steve Fabriczy's expression was pretty blank. It then changed, and people won't have seen this, but Liz and I have, it changed to a similar expression during the recording of his police interview, after he'd been arrested and was sat there with lead investigator Craig Marriott, that sort of quite shocked, looking down. As you might expect, his face continued to darken. I thought he was on the verge of tears at one point. Hard to know when you don't know someone personally, but, you know, as I mentioned, we sit quite close to really everything in

• 9:33Speaker 07

  that particular courtroom. And so that was the thing that stuck with me, perhaps as the reality of what had happened sunk in in those first few seconds in the rest of his life.

• 9:46Speaker 02

  Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I'm wondering, you know, with this verdict, you know, Steve Fabritzi and Joseph Akoni, round trial for murder, the option of manslaughter was given to the jury. Do we know why they ended up at that decision of manslaughter and not murder?

• 10:03Speaker 03

  Well, they can never tell us because they'd be breaking the law. But manslaughter is the statutory alternative to murder. And it was an option given to them. It has obviously a lesser penalty. But that's all we can tell you about that really. But as I said to you before, they seem fairly resolved on that result.

• 10:27Speaker 07

  Hmm. How does the family feel about that result, you know, it being manslaughter and not murder?

• 10:33Speaker 03

  Well, I wondered that question myself. But they said, they'd had this question for 26 years. Who killed Irma? And John said to me later, well, now we know. And outside, he was really quite passionate about what had happened.

• 10:53Speaker 04

  Twenty six long years, twenty six years that we've waited for justice for Irma and Gregor. Our family is today overwhelmed with relief and gratitude. As those responsible have now been held accountable. Irma and Gregor did not deserve what was done to them on that horrific night in November nineteen ninety nine. A bashing so brutal and with such devastating consequences. Irma was so much more than a victim. She was our mum, our grandmother, our sister and our friend. And Gregor was a gentle, loving husband.

• 11:37Speaker 04

  And a grandfather who cared deeply for his family, for our family. But he was forever altered after beloved Irma's death. Nothing will ever bring Irma back or undo the pain of that night. But our family can today rest knowing that we now know who killed Irma.

• 12:01Speaker 07

  And Elizabeth also, she wasn't sure if she was going to speak and then she mustered up the courage to do so. And I'm so glad that she did because I have to say. You know, in covering this, and we can't talk about it while the jury is there, but now that we have a verdict, we can, of course. In covering this trial over the last few weeks, what I have been wondering about is just how they've had the resilience to.

• 12:24Speaker 07

  Live with.

• 12:26Speaker 07

  What happened to their parents and specifically Elizabeth and her mother? And to sort of think in the darker moments in the middle of the night, how she must have thought about what happened and what might have gone through her mother's thoughts in her final moments and just the shock of it all. And it was really, yeah, again, quite moving to hear her describe exactly the way in which she has lived with the mental imagery, let alone the pain of it all over these last 26 years.

• 12:59Speaker 05

  It's been extremely hard.

• 13:05Speaker 05

  I try to put it in the back of my head constantly, but I keep seeing mum getting bashed and her feelings of terror, hurt, confusion.

• 13:24Speaker 05

  I just, I can't get it out of my head, but I don't think I ever will get that out of my head. And I'm not upset about the, that it was manslaughter because I don't think they outlived their life.

• 13:38Speaker 02

  That's Elizabeth Makita, Irma Palasics's daughter. Before that, you heard John Makita, Irma Palasics's grandson, Elizabeth Makita's son, the man who has run the Who Killed Irma campaign for decades at this point. You know, James, you've spent time with the family over the last week waiting for this verdict. You know, you talk about their resolve. What's it been like sitting with them over those last few days?

• 14:05Speaker 07

  Hard to say, really. You know, as a journalist, you have to try and calibrate in any given situation where the line is in terms of doing your job and being respectful. It's quite a hard one to figure out, to be quite honest with you, and I've been doing this a long time, not as long as Liz. She's the doyen of court reporting, but you know, I've been in this trade, if you like, for a long time. I've found this quite a hard one to work out. I have to say, they're so nice. They were so friendly and were always up for a chat and a joke and to have a bit of banter and, you know. Even in the press conference, if we may just take a small bouquet on ourselves, thanks

• 14:45Speaker 07

  to the press for all of the coverage of who killed Irma as a, you know, TM as a, as a campaign over the years. And so in a bit of a similar way to the police, obviously much less, of course, you know, they were, they were cognizant of it being a group effort, as it were, to, to sort of get to this particular moment. Now, we're just a tiny little cog, of course, in, in, in all of this. But insofar as spending time with them, it is, like, it's heavy going and you get the sense of they're just carrying around this big weight of emotion on their backs for all of this time. And now hopefully they're able to just put some

• 15:29Speaker 07

  of that weight down, although as you just heard from Elizabeth, it's, it's easier said than done. There is, as John Makita, I, I thought quite cheerfully put it, the departures lounge area outside the court, which is, once I, once you describe it like that, I couldn't unsee it. This is essentially some quite, you know, uncomfortable chairs that you, everyone sort of sits on in between proceedings. And they've all sort of gathered in that spot and chatted away and various levels and generations of the family have been there. And obviously it's school holidays at the minute. So, you know, the great granddaughters of Irma have been there. And that's, that sort of felt quite nice, too, that they were in the court and they could, could, could see the result of this thing that happened even before they were born.

• 16:15Speaker 02

  Yeah. While there was a wait for the verdict, you know, and a number of days as well, you know, five days the jury was deliberating for, before they reached the, the guilty verdict on a manslaughter charge for Joseph Akoni and Steve Fabriczy. The jury was working quite hard. They were deliberating through that period. And, you know, we had questions from them to the judge throughout that as well. One of them asking how extended joint commission works. Now, this is the concept that two people, if two people go to commit a crime, burglary, for example, they're both responsible if it escalates to something like murder. Liz, does a question like that suggest that the jury may have had a kind of a harder time reaching this verdict?

• 16:55Speaker 03

  Uh, if they were having a harder time, they'd have sat for six weeks. I I think it showed, which has happened to me, but I I think what it showed is that they were a smart jury. This was a very sophisticated question. And what they asked the judge was, did um this extended joint commission idea, where something outside what was obviously the original agreement to burgle the house had happened, and that was of course, uh, the death of Mrs. Palasics. So, um, they wanted to know, did extended, uh, joint commission apply to all of the charges or just the murder charge? And the answer to that was just the murder charge.

• 17:39Speaker 03

  Then they came back a day later and they were asking about, uh, if, you know, do they, does it apply to both, um, of the people involved, uh, you know? And so they, they asked, uh, the judge had to explain to them that it doesn't matter who had attacked Mrs. Palasics, both of them were equally liable.

• 18:06Speaker 02

  Yeah, and it was, it seemed quite, quite soon after that question was answered that the jury returned with a verdict.

• 18:12Speaker 03

  Yes, and I think that, you know, you don't know how they were thinking, uh, because they can't tell us, obviously, but, um, I th- I thought at the time, when that question was answered this morning, they'll either be back in an hour or it'll be another week. So, uh, I was right about the back in an hour.

• 18:31Speaker 02

  Yeah, yeah, pleased it was the, the former, um, mostly for the family, save them having another, a week of, of waiting in that, in that departures, Laura James, as, as you've described it. Um, you know, with, with Joseph Ikone and Steve Fabriczy being found guilty of, of manslaughter in this, in the trial of, you know, whether or not they have murdered Irma Palasics, you know, there was so much evidence that we've heard over the last two months, you know, the DNA found on items in the fridge of the Palasics home that prosecution said had a really high likelihood of being from Joseph Ikone and Steve Fabriczy, obviously being a key part, then challenges from the defence about, you know, how much you could trust that evidence as well, you know, the, the defence also highlighting potential other people that could have been involved too. I mean, what struck both of you as the kind of the key evidence that, you know, the jury may have relied on as they, they, they worked their way to this decision?

• 19:17Speaker 03

  I thought throughout it, it was very hard to get past the fridge. The D, that DNA evidence was very compelling, regardless of the other, if there might have been contamination of other things or mis, you know, small mistakes made or some, you know, other mistakes. But it was very hard to get past that because the key question the jury had to answer to before it began to think about whether they'd done it, was putting them both in the house. And if they accepted that evidence, it put them both in the house.

• 19:52Speaker 07

  As Travis Jackson said critically of the investigation, it was DNA or bust. And so it proved to be, just not in the way perhaps that he suggested. I, I, I agree with Liz. I mean, no DNA, no case ultimately. Um, you know, no undercover operation, no, no Joseph Ficcone ever really being known. Um, but insofar as coming to the, the decision that they have, yeah, exactly that, you can't get past the fridge.

• 20:20Speaker 03

  Yeah. And of course, the fridge was the DNA on the milk bottle from Steve Fabrizi and the DNA on the water jug from Joseph Ficcone.

• 20:30Speaker 07

  Which matched the balaclava, which is how he got convicted of the incident in nineteen ninety eight, just to close the loop for everyone following along.

• 20:38Speaker 02

  Yeah. It's been, yeah, incredible kind of work from the police to, to get to these points, to connect those, those items, also from Gregor Plasix as well, you know, to have the presence of mind lying in the hospital bed after being assaulted during this home invasion to, to mention to, to someone that, I think I saw someone drink from something in the fridge as I was lying on the ground. And, and that being the thing that brings us to the moment that we're at now as well. Um, you know, Liz James, you've talked us through, um, the verdict, the reactions from the family. What happened in the courtroom after the verdict was delivered? Was there any sort of further legal discussion, any planning that's happening for the, for the next stages in those moments?

• 21:17Speaker 03

  Well, there are a couple more things to come and we can't discuss some of that just yet, but you know, the judge does what the judges always have to do. In a case where someone's found guilty, they set up a pre-sentence report for both men. They also set a date for the next set of directions. And Sky Jerome, who had represented Steve Fabrizi, stood up and said that she'd been instructed to to offer to the court restorative justice. Now, restorative justice in the ACT is a programme which brings perpetrators together

• 21:59Speaker 03

  with victims so that there is an exchange there. So and it gives it gives perpetrators an opportunity to apologise and victims an opportunity to talk to a perpetrator. In this case, however, it's not going to happen. Before Sky Jerome could even sit down, the prosecutor was on his feet saying the family doesn't accept that. So it's out of the question, but it was an interesting little development.

• 22:29Speaker 07

  The other thing that I noticed, I hadn't even really thought about, to be honest, is what happens to the jury after they've given their verdict. And the judge said, well, listen, you can you can go, or you can go and sit in the public gallery and watch what goes on if you like, or you can stay sitting there while we sort of tidy things up. All of them left. I think they were ready to, well, clearly they were ready to go. You know, on a human level, it must be quite awkward sitting there, you know, with the defendants, the accused and the family and all of that. And as the judge said, as Justice Mossop said, you know, it is a burden on on, you know, with the greatest respect, lay people. And he marked on the the service that they had carried out and thanked them

• 23:13Speaker 07

  for it and all of those things. So but off they went. And fair enough, too.

• 23:18Speaker 02

  Yep, yeah. Liz, what happens now? Do we work towards sentencing? How does the how does the process from here here work?

• 23:27Speaker 03

  Yes, we will work towards sentencing. So of course, there's the pre-sentence report. There'll be a bit of time before that gets or comes to fruition. There's also the question of appeals. Now, there's 28 days from conviction to the deadline for an appeal. You can apply out of time, but usually there's a decision about whether there'll be an appeal within that period. I'm not sure where, what will happen there, but Travis Jackson already raised that period in the court, so we'll just have to wait and see.

• 24:11Speaker 02

  Yep. Do we have any idea on what potential sentence these men may be facing?

• 24:18Speaker 03

  Well, it's very hard to tell, particularly since there are so many charges that they've been found guilty of. But the maximum term for manslaughter is 20 years in the ACT.

• 24:31Speaker 02

  Thank you, Liz. And these men, at the moment, in their, in their early 70s. So a sentence of that length, we'd put them into their 90s, not considering sentences for the other offences that they've been convicted of today as well. If you've got any questions about this, I'm sure people do, please send us an email. Get in touch, [email protected]. We do love hearing from you. We will, in fact, be back early next week with an episode where we start answering the questions that we couldn't answer during the trial, talking about some of the things that the jury didn't hear as well. And Liz, there's a couple of pretty big things that we can start to reveal in that episode.

• 25:07Speaker 03

  Yes, hopefully.

• 25:10Speaker 02

  It's some things that I'm very keen to share as well when we start getting to what we really think about the trial and offer some of our analysis and insights into the process throughout as well in some of our other episodes we've got coming up. And there's also been one question that we have been asked so much throughout this trial. I think probably one in every two emails to the case of has asked this question. So, given that weight of inquiry. We've decided we'll do a special episode on that as well. So you'll find out more about that if you grab yourself ABC Listen. All the details will be dropping in there. Our latest episodes pop up there slightly before they pop up anywhere else. So grab yourself ABC Listen. And if you've enjoyed this series of The Case of, jump on to whatever podcast

• 25:54Speaker 02

  app you listen to us through and leave us a rating and a review because it makes it much easier for people to find us. Elizabeth, James, thank you so much for joining us for this series, for taking us inside the courtroom and talking us through the verdict in this episode.

• 26:08Speaker 03

  Thank you, Stocky.

• 26:10Speaker 02

  No, you're welcome.

• 26:18Speaker 02

  The Case of the Two Intruders is produced by ABC Audio Studios and ABC News. It's reported by Elizabeth Byrne and James Vyver and presented by me, Stephen Stockwell. Our supervising producer is Greg Muller and our executive producer is Claire Rawlinson. This episode was produced on the land of the Nunawal, Nanbury and Warunchee people.