Angelika Gavare, a 49-year-old woman from Adelaide, has sought to reduce her prison sentence for the 2008 murder of her 83-year-old neighbour, Vonne McGlynn. Gavare was found guilty in 2011 and received a 32-year sentence, of which she must serve a minimum of 32 years without parole.
Gavare’s initiative to apply for a shorter non-parole period comes after she provided new statements to the police about her crime, motivated by South Australia’s “no body, no parole” legislation. Her application was examined by the Supreme Court of South Australia in 2024.
In her horrific admission to the police, Gavare detailed the murder, claiming she ambushed McGlynn in her own home, holding her in a headlock until she lost consciousness. After killing her neighbour, Gavare concealed McGlynn’s body in her backyard before ransacking the home for valuables. She later transported the dismembered remains to her residence, where she used a circular saw to cut up the body five days later. Justice Sandy McDonald highlighted that Gavare meticulously placed the dismembered parts in plastic bags to avoid identification, hiding them beneath her children’s cubbyhouse and disposing of some in her council bin just before a police search occurred.
In a judgement recently delivered, Justice McDonald rejected her bid for sentence reduction, stating that altering her sentence would provoke significant community outrage. The judge remarked on Gavare’s 10-year reluctance to cooperate with the investigation, noting the resultant grief inflicted on McGlynn’s family due to their prolonged uncertainty about the fate of the victim’s remains.
Additionally, the judge condemned Gavare’s actions, describing her as a “greedy, narcissistic and deceitful woman completely devoid of any moral insight or empathy.” This characterisation framed her behaviour not as a product of madness but rather as a deliberate and self-serving act.
The rejection from the Supreme Court reinforces the Queensland judicial system’s stance on maintaining the integrity of sentences in cases involving serious crimes. Given Justice McDonald’s summary, it seems clear that community sentiment heavily influenced the decision, with Gavare’s heinous conduct overshadowing any potential arguments for leniency.