“He Would Do It All Again”: Chief Magistrate Clashes With Defence Over Jailing 71-Year-Old Man for Attack On Brother With Machete

By Alric Lindsay

A violent feud between elderly brothers, reportedly over a family estate, initially left a 71-year-old man facing a potential prison sentence, despite his defence lawyer arguing that jail would “achieve absolutely nothing” for a pensioner.  After hearing arguments, the Chief Magistrate handed down a six-month sentence, suspended for two years.

The incident was aired in the Summary Court today, October 21, 2026, when Richard Alexander Bernard III appeared for sentencing for assault causing bodily harm, making a threat to kill, possession of offensive weapon, causing fear or provocation of violence and damage to property.

The courtroom heard details of a violent nocturnal fight linked to an ongoing dispute over the administration of a family estate. The prosecution, led by Crown Counsel Orrett Brown of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, revealed that the defendant approached his biological brother, punched him in the face, and continued a sustained assault by punching him while he lay defenceless on the ground. The victim, who watched the proceedings from the court gallery, required medical treatment for severe bruising to his forehead, and his dentures were left damaged.

DPP Brown pushed for a stiff sentence, noting that carrying a machete at night carried an automatic starting threshold of two years in prison, with a sentencing range of 1 to 3 years. The Crown also sought financial restitution for the damaged dentures.

Defence attorney Katie Williams launched an aggressive bid to keep the 71-year-old out of jail, pointing out that his only prior convictions were spent and dated back to the 1970s. “What could be achieved by sending a 71-year-old man down the steps to prison?” The court also heard that the machete was only raised because Bernard “fully disrespected” during a highly charged moment of family provocation. The defence suggested that the Pre-Sentence Report revealed patterns of “obstinate thought processes,” and implied that assistance from a probation officer may assist him to maintain a level of stability.

However, the proposed community rehabilitation framing faced immediate resistance from the bench. Upon reviewing the evaluation, Chief Magistrate Hernandez expressed deep concern over the defendant’s psychological posture, stating: “There is no remorse, no victim empathy. He would do it all again. How are we to rehabilitate someone who doesn’t see anything wrong with his actions?”

Because the evaluation revealed the defendant remained completely unrepentant and unchanged, Chief Magistrate Hernandez appeared to have concerns about what options available to the court would be workable. Opting instead for a strict alternative framework focused on mandatory behavioural intervention, the Chief Magistrate sentenced Bernard as follows:

The sentences run concurrently and each is tied to a mandatory supervision order and an explicit directive to maintain good behaviour toward his brother. No compensation order was made by the Chief Magistrate.  Bernard has the right to appeal.