CDirector of Public Prosecutions v Barnett
[2025] VCC 1511
•16 October 2025
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-24-01141
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (CTH) |
| v |
| JUSTIN BARNETT |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE BRECKWEG | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 31 July 2025 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 16 October 2025 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | CDPP v Barnett | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VCC 1511 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:SENTENCE – CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Trafficking in a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine - attempting to posses commercial quantity – importation and possession – Australian facilitator in the syndicate – early plea – deprived background – no criminal record – Verdins limbs 5 and 6
Legislation Cited: Criminal Code (Cth); Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act1981 (Vic); Crimes Act (Cth); Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited: The Queen v Nguyen & Pham (2010); Tran v The Queen [2021] VSCA 292; Dickinson v The Queen [2021] VSCA 50; R v Ellery [2012] VSC 349; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR269; R v Pantsis [1998] VSCA 134; DPP v Holder (2014) 41 VR 467
Sentence: Total effective sentence 23 years imprisonment; total effective non-parole period of 12 years imprisonment. 855 days PSD declared as time already served. 6AAA declaration – total effective sentence of 27 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 17 years imprisonment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr A Sprague | Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) |
| For the Accused | Mr C Farrington | Stephen Andrianakis |
HER HONOUR:
1Justin Barnett, you have pleaded guilty to:
Charge 1: Attempt to possess a commercial quantity of the border-controlled drug methamphetamine, contrary to subsections 11.1(1) and 307.5(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth).
That charge carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Charge 2: Trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, contrary to subsection 71AA(1) of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled SubstancesAct 1981 (Vic).
That charge carries a maximum sentence of 25 years' imprisonment.
OVERVIEW OF OFFENDING
2The agreed facts of your offending are set out in the Prosecution Opening for Plea (Exhibit A). I will not repeat the entirety of the facts but, in summary, you were a member of a syndicate that sought to import a consignment containing 629 kilograms of pure liquid methamphetamine into Australia and distribute it to criminal syndicates in Australia. Other members of the syndicate included Benjamin WILSON, Hung NGUYEN, Channara THONG and unknown others.
3Unknown to you and other syndicate members, the consignment was intercepted by police and substituted with an inert substance before it came into the syndicate's possession. You were the primary onshore facilitator for the consignment and coordinated transport and storage of the consignment, directed WILSON - an employee of Pack & Send Laverton (Pack & Send) who used his employment to facilitate transport and storage of the substituted consignment - and you coordinated the storage of the consignment at various locations, and liaised with others (including persons outside Australia) as to the movement and delivery of the consignment.
BACKGROUND
4Prior to your involvement in the offending, on 17 December 2022, logistics provider International Cargo Express received an online submission relating to a new importation described as 'CANOLA OIL' to be shipped from Vancouver to Melbourne International Cargo Express then handled the customs clearance.
5On 20 January 2023 in Vancouver, the Canadian Border Services Agency intercepted the consignment, which was a shipping container with 18 pallets of 'Sunfrie Canola Oil' each pallet containing 60 x 17.3-litre jugs. Presumptive testing identified that the jugs in three of the pallets (180 jugs) contained liquid methamphetamine. The remaining 15 pallets contained canola oil.
6Canadian police reconstructed the entire consignment with legitimate canola oil and shipped it to Melbourne. Later forensic analysis of the seized liquid by Australian authorities confirmed the presence of 629 kilograms of pure methamphetamine in the three pallets.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDING
7On 22 February 2023, an image was saved on your mobile phone depicting a photograph of a driver's licence in the name Karen LESTER, which was one of the identities you subsequently used as a pseudonym during the offending. On 26 February, you and WILSON exchanged a series of text messages where you advised WILSON to 'start operations tomorrow' as you have 'got big job' for WILSON. The conversation continued the following morning, where WILSON said he was 'glad to hear'. You said, 'Will need start shipments today' and asked how much for two smartphones, needed today. The prosecution case is that 'start operations' and the reference to 'shipments' were references to the substituted consignment, and you were sourcing two mobile phones to avoid law enforcement attention while facilitating the movement of the consignment.
Movement of the substituted consignment
8On 1 March 2023, the substituted consignment arrived in Port Melbourne within the DP World dock terminal. At 6.44 that evening, you sent WILSON a text message to 'arrange a container pick up port and delivery to location'. On 2 March, the substituted consignment was reconstructed a second time by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), with an inert substance placed in the jugs in three of the pallets (180 jugs) and the balance (15 pallets) were left still containing canola oil. The consignment was then placed back into the cargo stream for collection. At 10:46 that evening, WILSON sent you a message that he has a 'driver waiting' for the container, and for you to send through details of the consignment.
9 On 3 March, you provided WILSON the details for the consignment, including a screenshot with the consignee details, container number and container weight, namely 18,100 kilograms. You said, 'Call me I'm ready to pick up container', 'Your guy can they call arrange pick up if I send BL copy'.
10Over the next following days the consignment was collected and moved (or attempted to be moved) to several locations in Melbourne, including to Mordialloc Caravan and Boat Storage on 8 March, to Norman Carriers Pty Ltd on 10 March, and to Bayside Storage & Distribution, for longer-term storage on 16 March. You were the primary person in contact by email and phone with the storage locations in relation to the movement of the consignment, but you used the aliases 'Mark BURNE' and 'Karen Lester' from your fictitious business 'AP Trading'. You and WILSON were also in frequent communication during the period as transport was arranged to be done by Pack & Send, where WILSON was employed.
11On 6 March 2023, between 7:34 am and 1:18 pm, you and WILSON exchanged text messages confirming the collection of the substituted consignment from the DP World dock terminal. At approximately 12:30 pm, Lawson Sideloader Services collected the consignment from the terminal at the request of International Cargo Express. The consignment was transported and retained in storage at Lawson Sideloader Services. Later that afternoon, you and WILSON exchanged further text messages regarding a delay in the delivery of the substituted consignment due to miscommunications between you and International Cargo Express, and the simultaneous transport arranged by Pack & Send Laverton. You said to WILSON 'I got some cash for the fk up for you', and said WILSON should also give some cash to others involved, who WILSON said were 'pissed'. In relation to this double booking, WILSON referred to using 'local connections' and said 'happens easier, they need chill our space. Otherwise looks bad'.
12On 7 March, you and WILSON discussed whether International Cargo Express had delivered the consignment to Mordialloc Storage. On the morning of 8 March, at the direction of International Cargo Express an attempt was made to deliver the substituted consignment to Mordialloc Storage. You were in contact with Mordialloc Storage at this time, but the delivery was unsuccessful as Mordialloc Storage did not have room for a 40‑foot container and so the consignment was returned to Lawson Sideloader Services.
13 Later that morning, you and WILSON exchanged messages where WILSON advised you of a transport company called Norman Carriers that can accept delivery of the substituted consignment. You then made enquiries and arrangements with Norman Carriers using the Mark Burne and Karen Lester aliases. On 9 March, you and WILSON were attempting to organise delivery of the consignment to Norman Carriers. WILSON advised you to 'be patient', and that his contacts are 'invaluable long term'.
14At 9:50 am, you said you were 'getting pressured by my guy' and WILSON replied, 'he has driver definitely picking up today already slotted truck with port, they just waiting to hear from Port on Best time…We are doing a big favour here so ya guy can relax… My guy is getting stressed with me chasing up already so I can't keep pushing too much, he will get back to me with time in bout 30 mins'.
15 During the course of the day, you communicated with WILSON in relation to the collection of the consignment by the truck arranged by WILSON, and you also emailed Norman Carriers in relation to the intended delivery, posing as Mark Burne and Karen Lester from AP Trading. Ultimately, delivery of the consignment from Lawson Sideloader Services to Norman Carriers was unsuccessful as the driver attended the wrong depot under the instructions of WILSON.
16Between 4:11 and 9:22 pm, you and WILSON exchanged messages confirming the correct location of the consignment, that it had been scheduled for delivery tomorrow, and any outstanding payments that had been received. In the morning of 10 March, WILSON advised you that he would 'monitor until delivered. And I'll update u as soon as I receive any updates first thing'. You replied 'Please…As this guys already on my ass…Can't have any problems today…Just want get this done sleep for 3 days'.
17WILSON advised you that pick-up of the substituted consignment was scheduled for between 2:30 and 4:30. At 4:10, WILSON advised that the driver would pick up the consignment in 20 minutes and delivery will occur just after 6.00. WILSON also said to you that Norman Carriers accept delivery after 6.--. You replied, 'I hope so bro or I get shot'. At 3:52, an image was saved on your mobile of a text message thread where you advised an unknown person that he can drive there and be there in 35 minutes. The unknown person replied that others are waiting for 'the pic', and that if they have the photograph to show delivery, they can settle this now and get the funds, stating 'I'll ask 500k now'.
18At 5.31, the consignment departed Lawson Sideloader Services on a truck organised by WILSON. Between 5:38 and 7:16, you and WILSON exchanged messages including a) at 5:38, you wrote, 'Love ya', 'Man no one doing this again apart from p&s') at 5:53, WILSON replied 'Driver will be at Laverton drop off around 7-7:30 depending on traffic' c) at 5:54 you said 'Ok storage know it yet', 'Not going to get stuck I hope', 'Once photo comes we get payment'. At 5:59, WILSON replied, 'Yes they know, and after-hours driver ring… Dooley mobile if needed to open remote access. Laverton are aware of shipment'. At 6:41, WILSON said to you, 'Going thro Burnley tunnel. Heavy traffic on westgate. But driver will drop off between 7-7:30'.
19At 7.17, the substituted consignment arrived at Norman Carriers. You requested photos urgently, telling WILSON 'I can’t go anywhere…Won't let me go till photos come'. At 7:30, the consignment was unloaded in the container yard and securely stored. WILSON sent you the photo of the delivery of the substituted consignment that he had received.
20On 11 March, you provided WILSON with further instructions to move the consignment. On 13 March, you sent WILSON a message stating you were looking for a yard to put and unload the consignment. Between 6:59 and 7:00, you and WILSON exchanged messages such as a) WILSON said, 'I've just debrief Aman, two trucks when ready… his finally calmed down from all the badging the other day. He didn't like that business. Needs less going forward'. You replied, 'Yer cool' and 'know it's only coz long weekend and they fucked the first lot up we almost lost customer'.
21The prosecution case is that your reference to the long weekend and the 'fuck up' is a reference to the failed delivery to Mordialloc Storage and the subsequent logistical issues experienced with Lawson Sideloader Services transporting the substituted consignment to Norman Carriers, which occurred prior to the Labor Day long weekend in Victoria.
22At 7:06, you and WILSON had a telephone conversation and WILSON advised you how to set up a cryptocurrency wallet and said he needed the details of the person sending the money and where it has to go and you replied, 'well that's our mate, that's alright, he will send us a "thing"' and you explained their 'mate' has millions, but that you and WILSON are working with 50,000. The prosecution case is that WILSON was assisting you to set up a cryptocurrency account to receive and subsequently access 50,000.
23At 11:10 am on 14 March, you and WILSON had a telephone conversation and when WILSON asked you what you were doing today, you said you were 'just sorting out that shit', which the prosecution said is a reference to organising the upcoming transportation and storage requirements for the substituted consignment. During the morning you sent multiple emails posing as Mark Burne of AP Trading, to Norman Carriers about the contents of the container, and arrangements for its unloading and collection. Norman Carriers had asked for a packing list of the contents, and you, pretending to be Mark Burne, advised that it contained 1,080 cases of canola oil.
24Between 12:07 and 12:27 pm, you asked WILSON to organise two tailgate trucks for a 2:30 pm pick up tomorrow. You, posing as 'Mark Burne from AP Trading' then had telephone calls with storage facilities, enquiring about storage availability for roughly 20 pallets for a few weeks. You said your business was in cleaning products and cooking oils. One of the storage facilities was Bayside Storage in Moorabbin. You provided WILSON with the address of Bayside Storage, stating 'that's where needs to go'. WILSON asked for the delivery details and said, 'Tmr no badging. Else tips Aman over edge. Once booked in I will keep close eye on it, when pick up slot booked, when picked up, when dropped off etc'.
25You later sent WILSON messages about receiving payment via cryptocurrency and you and WILSON had a telephone conversation confirming the details of the storage facility. You then had further emails and telephone calls with Bayside Storage, posing as Mark Burne and you emailed the signed storage agreement, and arranged delivery.
26On the morning of 15 March, the container was unpacked at Norman Carriers, and all pallets were moved into the warehouse. The representative from Norman Carriers emailed photos to 'Mark Burne', including showing two pallets that were leaning over or had collapsed. You saved one of these photos to your mobile phone.
27Later, WILSON confirmed the transportation was booked for tomorrow and you provided a photograph of two of the pallets and confirmed there will be '10 pallets may more'. You confirmed the booking details for the movement of the consignment. You sent a picture of an email titled 'Truck Booking' to WILSON using email '[email protected]'. At 7:52, you confirmed with WILSON that everything is booked in for the delivery of the pallets tomorrow to Bayside Storage.
28On 16 March, WILSON provided you with frequent updates on the movement of the pallets from Norman Carriers to Bayside Storage. Between 12:13 and 12:27 pm, the consignment was unloaded into the warehouse at Bayside Storage. After receiving confirmation from Bayside Storage that the consignment had been delivered, you made an outgoing phone call to another male, referring to being paid quickly, you said: '…payment bro, I've never saw these cunts fucking pay bro like that, fucking bang bro straight to your bank account, boom'. You said you were going overseas on Saturday for a month and said the other male should work with you and he'll be making millions in months. When the other male asked about the catch, you said: 'what's the catch, don't get catched', and 'you know those little play pens that people end up in, … yeah that's the catch mate, you know'. You said, 'that's why you got the alias's and all that kind of stuff you know'. This was said by the prosecution to be a reference to not getting caught by law enforcement and ending up in prison.
29That afternoon, you and WILSON had a telephone conversation where you spoke of the successful movement of the pallets. You confirmed ‘'he currency thing works bro' and WILSON asked if you got paid for the shipment and you said you were paid some, but not the full amount. That evening WILSON provided his bank account details to you, and you advised 'we just waiting to get full payment then will give you cut from my end'. At 5:04 you spoke to your wife and told her you were 'coming back' next week in business class, and that 'they' paid. You said 'Daddy's gonna be rich next week', and that you were getting $2m next week, and 'Daddy's getting a Lamborghini mate'.
30At 5:19 pm, you and WILSON had a telephone conversation where you discussed flying Sunday in business class that 'they've paid for' and that you will have the money on the cryptocurrency wallet with you and will get it siphoned out when you get back. You also said you would use your mate's account so he can get the plane tickets and be reimbursed for the trucking fees and everything he paid for. You advised WILSON that you got paid in US dollars and have capitalized off that, and that you will do WILSON's payment today.
31WILSON asked if the first one is settled and you replied that it is not settled until it is in his hand and he is back in Australia and you said, 'you know I could go missing in a boot mate'. You said you were going overseas to 'get our payment mate', 'figure out the next…biggest... bigger ones' and you said, 'I need to make half a mill this year, you need to make a hundred g's'. The prosecution case was that you and WILSON were discussing payment for your roles in relation to the consignment and distribution of that payment, and the new 'schedule' and future work was a reference to future importations. On 19 March, you flew to Bangkok, Thailand.
32After the substituted consignment was moved from Norman Carriers to Bayside Storage on 15 March, between 23 March and 22 May 2023 the operation moved into a distribution phase, whereby portions of the consignment were retrieved and further transported. This took place for apparent testing purposes, and then to distribute the consignment to associates/other syndicates for processing and further distribution. During this process, you and WILSON continued to communicate extensively with each other, as well as with the storage facilities, transport company representatives, and consignment recipients.
33As an overview, between 23 March and 22 May, the following movements of parts of the consignment occurred, arranged by you with WILSON assisting using his role at Pack & Send:
a. On 27 March, pallet 149 – which still contained 60 boxes of substituted liquid methamphetamine was collected from Bayside Storage by Pack & Send.
b. The remaining 40 boxes were held at Pack & Send, for later transport to NSW.
c. On 4 April, pallet 151 was collected by WILSON from Bayside Storage and taken to Pack & Send Laverton where it was unloaded.
e. On 5 April, 100 boxes (40 from pallet 149, and 60 from pallet 151) were collected from Pack & Send Laverton by a truck arranged by Pack & Send, and then delivered to Pack & Send in Mascot, NSW. WILSON notified you that the delivery had been completed, and you communicated further when another person came to collect the NSW delivery.
34On 22 May, the remaining pallets of the consignment were collected from Bayside Storage. Two of the pallets contained the substituted liquid methamphetamine. Hien PHAM escorted the truck driver under instruction from NGUYEN, and the pallets were transported to and unloaded into a storage unit at Sunshine by PHAM, THONG, HUANG, and NGUYEN.
35Between 23 and 26 March, there were extensive communications between you and WILSON in relation to the collection of the pallet from Bayside Storage, and further distribution. These communications also involved arranging logistics with Pack & Send, and communications with the intended recipients of parts of the pallet. The different arrangements made are set out in Exhibit A and I will not repeat them here.
36There were also text messages relating to testing and cooking the liquid in the consignment that demonstrated that you were trying to work out why there was no methamphetamine in the pallets that had been transported to Sydney and subsequently tested, and you thought that they could have been 'decoy' pallets and you were requesting further testing. These messages included:
a. One on 24 April you and a contact ‘Edwin’ exchanged messages via WeChat, and you stated: a. 'This week I'll give you add to go past pick up and take wrapping off before you give to anyone give 3 days but best to do ph test first before trying. They did one and came back dark brown / black so positive' and 'But when cook back nothing come out'.
b. 'Could be wrong pallet number been given to check them selfs when we had over the 2 pallets when they paid few hundred k. To check if it's same fake things in pallets that they put in the decos'.
c. On 27 April you and 'Edwin' exchanged text messages via WeChat including Edwin writing: 'Btw if the cargo is all fake that means they don't want the stuff from that thing you're holding anymore right' and 'If they still want it they probably just saying it's fake so they don't need to pay' and you responding: 'Letting it play out we ask for 1m more as they guaranteed it'
37On 16 May you received a phone call from a male associate, and you said you were in Bangkok and you cannot return to Australia, that it is not a good line to be talking about it on, and that the person will probably see it on the news next week, as it is 'the biggest haul in Australian history, yeah got caught' and that you had not received all of your payment, as you were meant to receive 3.6 million, and that this is why you did it.
38On 17 May you had a telephone conversation with an unknown female and told her that you were getting played by the guys in Bangkok and they were blaming you for the big problems, your friend in Australia had advised you not to trust the guy in Bangkok, you had a delivery going to him and you will check if the drug is inside and if it is inside then you will know you have been cheated and 'he' received $50m from the haul.
39On 18 May you had a conversation with a female associate, and discussed how you had left the country to do a job for somebody, but because of the results, you cannot return to Australia, you were meant to receive 3.6 million as a receiver's fee, but only received 300,000; you thought that 'Canada' think you swapped it, and speculated that Canada and the AFP could be working together. You said you do not believe it was 'the jacks' because he already shipped half to the cooking houses and 'nobody got jumped on', you had to test one of the containers and give it to a cook to see if there is anything in there, that the guy responsible for shipping it is your personal friend and he pays you a share as well.
40The female said 'congratulations, you are the biggest drug dealer in Australia, 600 kilograms of ice, pure ice'. You said there is no substantial evidence that 'Mark' from AP Trading existed and you protected yourself. You said you had now been told that there was nothing in there and that you will not be getting your payment, you were sending your friend tomorrow to pick up 17 litres and send it to the Melbourne cook to check it and you referred to 600 kilos being 50 million wholesale value.
41On 18 May you, as 'Mark Burne', emailed Bayside Storage, requesting pickup on 19 May of the remaining pallets from the consignment. The pickup was booked for 22 May, and on 18 May you emailed Bayside Storage to provide the details of those collecting: 'TT Trading Pty…Driver name is Hien…Is our regular transport truck…It will be a simi so all 16 pallets can go on the first load'.
42On 22 May, all 16 remaining pallets of the consignment were collected from Bayside Storage. PHAM attended with the truck driver to collect the consignment, receiving instructions from NGUYEN. You were also monitoring the collection process, advising Bayside Storage when the truck was on the way, communicating information from the driver which had been conveyed to you, and requesting confirmation when the truck had been loaded and left.
43 You and WILSON also communicated prior to the collection with you sending a message to WILSON that 'they picking up there shit' and 'we know what the outcome is soon'. The 16 pallets were ultimately transported to StoreLocal Sunshine, and unloaded into a storage unit by PHAM, THONG, HUANG[1], and NGUYEN. In this way the remainder of the total consignment was delivered to a downstream syndicate involving NGUYEN, THONG and PHAM. NGUYEN and THONG were later arrested at NGUYEN's residence in Sunshine North where a clandestine laboratory for the manufacture of drugs was set up and in operation.
[1] HUANG left Australia on 7 June 2023 and has not been charged.
44On 4 June, you returned to Melbourne from Bangkok. On 7 June you had a further telephone conversation with a female associate in which you discussed your fee in relation to the consignment. You said 'they' are still trying to get the balance of the receiver's fee, and you have only been paid '300'.
45On 8 June, separately, WILSON asked you if you can get him 5 litres of 'superglue' as soon as possible and stated 'it's the usual story'. You said you will ask your friend.
46On 13 June 2023 you and WILSON communicated in relation to the requested supply of 'five litres'. You said you would 'check with him now', and later advised that you could get it today, for $800 per litre. WILSON said to go ahead. You and WILSON met up that evening on St Kilda Road in Melbourne. WILSON later messaged you and said that it is 'Good shit mate'. The next day police found a quantity of clear liquid containing 1,4-Butanediol at WILSON's residence, including the 5 litres supplied by you to WILSON. (Charge 2).
SEARCH WARRANTS – 14 JUNE 2023
47On 14 June 2023, police executed a search warrant at WILSON's residence and seized 10 x 500 mil bottles containing 5,353.2 grams of 1,4-Butanediol in a Tsingtao box. They also seized another 813.4 grams of 1,4-Butanediol, $16,310 in cash and three mobile phones.
48On 14 June, you were interviewed by police and you denied the allegations, stating:
a. You did not know anything about any drug importation, you have never been involved in that kind of thing, and you are not involved with criminals of that calibre.
b. You said you have not been involved in any general imports in the last three to four months.
c. You had been travelling recently and visited Thailand and Hong Kong.
d. When questioned about liquid methamphetamine being seized in Canada, you stated you did not know what that is.
e. You said you did not know anything about Bayside Storage, Norman Carriers, and the contact between Mark Burne from AP Trading and Norman Carriers.
f. You did not know anyone from Pack & Send.
g. When questioned if you could explain why your phone number would appear on email signatures when Mark Burne was communicating with Norman Carriers, you said, 'no' and you 'don't know Mark Burne, AP Trading or Karen Lester'.
CHARGE 1
Sentencing Principles
49In assessing the gravity of your Charge 1 offending, I have had regard to the well settled sentencing principles that apply to offending involving the importation and possession of drugs:[2] I have set those out and I will not read them at the moment.
[2] The Queen v Nguyen & Pham (2010) 205 A Crim R 106 [72] as adopted in Nguyen& Phommalysack v The Queen (2011) 31 VR 673 at [34].
50In addition, in sentencing you for Charge 1, I have had regard to the matters applicable in sentencing for Commonwealth offences. Section 16A(1) of the Crimes Act (Cth) provides a court must impose a sentence or an order that is of an appropriate severity in all the circumstances of the offending and s16A(2) sets out a non-exhaustive list of factors that must be taken into account as far as these are relevant and known to the Court. I have had regard to the following factors set out in s16(A)(2):
16A(2)(a) Nature and circumstances of the offence
51There is no doubt your offending is extremely serious for the following reasons:
a) Charge 1 carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment reflecting the seriousness with which Parliament considers this offending.
b) You attempted to possess 629 kilograms of pure heroin which is 838 times the applicable commercial quantity of 750 grams. This was one of the largest consignments in Australian history.
c) Clearly, the potential harm or danger to the community that could be wrought by the sale of this quantity of drugs would be extensive.
d) This was an extremely valuable consignment, estimated to be worth between $75-79m if sold at wholesale level, to approximately 149 million if sold at street level. The value of the drug illuminates matters such as the commerciality of the offending, the motivation for the offence and the potential rewards to be gained.
e) Your involvement was not isolated but extended over a period of almost three months and, as noted below your role was crucial and involved the performance of many tasks.
f) You were motivated by financial gain and whilst the prosecution concede it is not possible to quantify the precise amount you were to receive, they submitted I should find it would have been a significant amount and well above your instructions to your counsel that you were to receive only $50,000 for your role. I consider it defies logic that you would receive only $50,000 given the high risk you were taking, the tasks you undertook, the very high potential value of the drugs and messages you sent to others including a) On 17 March, you told your partner you would be rich next week and that you were getting 2 million; b) On 27 April 2023, you told 'Edwin': 'Letting it play out, we ask for 1m more as they guaranteed it' and c) On 16 and 18 May, you told a male and then a female associate that you had not received all of your payment, but you were meant to receive 3.6 million and you told the female associate you had only received 300,000.
The reference to $50,000 occurred in conversations you had with WILSON when you had a motivation to lower the amount when discussing it with him. I consider you would have been paid a much higher amount than $50,000 even though I cannot determine what that would have been, for being the Australian based facilitator of an importation worth at minimum $75-79m.
g)The quantity involved in the offending and the extensive role you played place the offending towards the upper level of offending of this nature.
Role
52In considering the role you played in the offending, I have had regard to what you did to commit the offence. It is clear your actions were extremely important in attempting to achieve the criminal purpose of the organisers.
53You were the primary Australian onshore facilitator of the importation once the consignment had arrived in Australia.
54I make it clear that I am not sentencing you on the basis that you were in any way were responsible as the organiser, or architect of the importation and you were not the owner of the drugs. This was, as I understand, the purview of others overseas and you were effectively following instructions from them. Notwithstanding this, it goes without saying that yours was a critical and crucial role as the Australian facilitator responsible for:
a) Coordinating the collection, transport and storage of the consignment to and from various locations. This involved liaising with the freight and storage facilities, making bookings and paying invoices for transport and storage and liaising regularly with your co-offender WILSON and being involved in actions he had implemented such as delivery arrangements.
b) You also liaised extensively with other people including overseas syndicate members to advise on the movement and delivery of the consignment.
c)You coordinated arrangements for the substituted drugs to be delivered or distributed to recipients/syndicates in both Sydney and Melbourne. You were effectively playing a high-level role as the link in the chain between those responsible for the importation overseas and those who were to receive the contents of the consignment.
d)You recruited WILSON into the endeavour.
55As part of your role, I am satisfied that you knew the consignment you were attempting to import was to contain a very large quantity of drugs, given your messages and communications with WILSON and others which included references to '700 keys of ice' and '600 kilos from Canada'. You used false names such as 'Mark Burne' in committing the offence and communications show you were alive to avoiding law enforcement interception, for instance on 4 April 2023 you stated that you were confident that law enforcement was not alerted or intercepting your phones, and said 'I can say on the phone, I’ve got fucking 700 keys of ice'. You and WILSON also spoke about testing the contents of the substance specifically referring to that being in the jugs to determine if the contents had been swapped or 'robbed'.
56I consider you were also aware the consignment was to contain a very valuable commodity as you explicitly referred in messages on 20 April and in a phone call on 18 May, to the wholesale value of 600 kilos being 50 million, and remarked that it was the 'biggest to land in a long time'.
16A(2)(g) Plea of guilty
57You pleaded guilty to the charge at the earliest realistic opportunity, being on 30 June 2024, following some degree of negotiation. Your plea warrants a clear reduction in the sentence to be imposed to reflect its utilitarian value in saving the community the time and expense of a trial and witnesses from having to give evidence, and to reflect its demonstration of acceptance of responsibility, willingness to facilitate the course of justice and remorse.
16A(2)(f) Contrition
58In your case, I am satisfied you have also demonstrated remorse for your offending over and above that reflected by your plea alone. Your contrition for the offending is evident from a letter of apology you provided to the court (Exhibit 3) in which you took full responsibility for your offending and expressed your remorse. You also expressed your shame and guilt for placing your wife in a situation where she now has responsibility for raising your child alone, paying the mortgage and expenses such as legal and childcare costs.
16A(2)(j) Specific Deterrence
16A(2)(k) Need for Adequate Punishment
59I must impose a sentence that deters you personally from committing any offence like this again. I must also give weight to the need to punish you for your offending and to denounce your offending. The case law makes it clear that stern punishment will be warranted in almost every case involving drug importation or possession.
16A(2)(ja) General Deterrence
60As noted earlier, general deterrence is a primary sentencing consideration in offending such as yours especially in view of the harmful impacts of illicit drugs on the community from trafficking, the consequences to the community if imported substances are released and the difficulty detecting such offences.
61Where general deterrence is the primary sentencing consideration, personal mitigatory factors such as prior good character, age, and prospects of rehabilitation must therefore be given less weight than might otherwise be given.[3]
[3] Tran v The Queen [2021] VSCA 292, Dickinson v The Queen [2021] VSCA 50; R v Jafari [2017] NSWCCA 152; DPP (Cth) v Page & Ors [2006] VSCA 224; R v Ellery [2012] VSC 349 at [33]; DPP (Cth) v Gregory (2011) 34 VR 1; DPP (Cth) v Rowson [2007] VSCA 176.
16A(2)(m) Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition
62You were 38 years old at the time of the offending and are now 40.
63Your mother is deceased. You have one younger biological sister who you are estranged from due to her drug use. You have three half siblings from your mother's relationships and nine half-siblings from your father's relationships.
64You had what can only be described as an appalling upbringing marked by profound deprivation, instability and abuse. From infancy, you were repeatedly removed from your mother's care due to violence, neglect and drug abuse, only to be returned despite ongoing risk. One of your first memories was at age four or five of you being left in the care of two of your mother's male associates who locked you in a cage with a pit bull while they laughed and drank beer, leaving you convinced you would be killed.
65Your childhood featured chronic, unpredictable violence, including incidents where your mother threatened you with knives and, on one occasion, stabbed you in the leg. You were first removed from your mother's custody when you were less than a year old, after a partner of your mother's attempted to drown you and your
half-brother in a bath. Thereafter you were repeatedly removed from your mother's care due to abuse, violence, neglect and drug abuse. At seven you were sent to a boy's home and separated from your half-brother. By age nine you were permanently in foster care or in boys' homes where you were subjected to sexual abuse by an older foster child and physical assaults by staff.66By the age of seven, you were exposed to and using cannabis. You were smoking cannabis daily by the age of eight, and had begun chroming by aged 10, and were regularly smoking heroin by 12, supplied by older teenagers in group homes. You were encouraged to engage in criminal behaviour including stealing, property damage, arson and fighting. Your counsel submitted that you had concluded that your life was hopeless by the age of 13/14 and had resigned yourself to the fact that you would live and die on the streets.
67In terms of your education, your frequent placement in foster homes affected your schooling, and your attendance was intermittent. You also had major behavioural and emotional disturbances that impeded your capacity to engage in education. You attended numerous primary schools before commencing Year 7 at Cranbourne Secondary College, where it was identified that you had learning difficulties. After attending the Myuna Farm Teaching Unit, a re-engagement program for disengaged secondary students, for a short time, you left Cranbourne Secondary College and enrolled at Berengarra School, which was a specialist independent secondary school for students with social and emotional challenges. You attended this school briefly before ceasing all education at the age of 14.
68You finally experienced family care at the age of 14, when a man named Ken took you in after he often found you asleep in the doorway of his business. He gave you work and took you to live in his home with his wife and his own children and, for the first time, you had the stability of a surrogate family and consistent food and support.
69You became drug free at this juncture and began working, initially in furniture making before commencing an apprenticeship and becoming a fully qualified carpenter. You were very good at your trade, but your administrative business skills were not good, and you would not pay your bills on time or would not bill properly for money owed to you, leading to failed projects. In your early 20s you drank heavily but sought help for your alcohol problems in 2017.
70From your mid-twenties, you progressed to senior roles in the industry, at one stage supervising up to 70 workers as a foreman. In your late twenties and early thirties, you were self-employed running a small building business but you would also take salaried foreman roles on large developments when available. In more recent years, you held roles as Foreman, Site Manager and ultimately Construction Manager.
71You were able to remain abstinent from illicit drugs until you were around 37 years old in 2021. At this time your biological father came into your life, but he was constantly asking you for money and he failed in a job you gave him as a truck driver and eventually the relationship broke down. A client also offered you payment for a job in cocaine which you accepted, and you immediately began using more, and more. Your cocaine use spiralled out of control and escalated to heavy (up to 3.5 grams per day) use leading up to your arrest in 2023.
72You have been in a long-term relationship with your partner for over a decade and you have a child together who is four years old. You and Ms Wan, your wife, have agreed your son will not be brought in to visit you at the prison. At the time your partner was expecting your son you were also involved with another woman who became pregnant to you and later gave birth to a child. You have no relationship with the woman or child from that relationship.
73Your counsel submitted that your traumatic and deprived childhood enlivened the principles espoused in Bugmy in the general sense referred to in that case. The prosecution argued that only some very modest or limited weight could be afforded to reflect these principles because your offending was not to obtain cocaine for your personal use or to feed your drug habit. Rather, you were deeply engaged in one of the largest ever importations of methamphetamine in an organised and planned way over a period that was not fleeting.
74I accept that your deprived childhood does mean that your moral culpability for the offending is reduced as is the weight to be given to general deterrence. Whilst it may seem unusual that despite your tragic childhood marred by drugs, violence, crime and sexual abuse you were able to remain abstinent from drugs through most of your teenage years until you were 37 and had forged a successful career, the fact is that the effects of that childhood trauma do not diminish over time. Further, your perception of the wrongfulness of your conduct was likely to be at least slightly skewed as was your ability to deal not only with past trauma but with new trauma. Your counsel did not however suggest at all that you did not know the gravity of your actions or their consequences or that your conduct was illegal or wrong.
75I also accept the weight to be given to general deterrence is to be sensibly moderated based on Bugmy principles. However, it is not possible for me to conclude that your poor childhood experience was the only factor contributing to your offending. You offended because you were exposed to those in the importation overseas and, importantly, because you wanted to make money. Your financial motivation is very clear from the electronic evidence, and your counsel accepts this, although the amount you were to benefit by is disputed. You yourself told the psychologist, Mr Armstrong, that you believed your offending arose from issues you were experiencing that led to emotional and financial problems.
76I have had regard to the psychological report of Mr Armstrong. He opined that you present with a complex overlapping of PTSD and Dependent Personality Disorder. Mr Armstrong assessed your full-scale IQ at 71 which places your cognitive ability within the borderline range of intellectual functioning. You were also assessed as having Stimulant Use Disorder by the end of 2021.
77You do not rely on the application of the principles in R v Verdins;[4] to reduce your moral culpability or to reduce the weight to be given to the principles of general and specific deterrence. You do however rely, based on Mr Armstrong's assessment, on principles 5 and 6 arguing that prison will be more onerous for you given your complex psychological makeup, and your low cognitive abilities and poor social skills would make you a target for manipulation, physical and psychological harm from other prisoners and that your mental health would likely deteriorate over time. I accept that opinion, noting the prosecution did not argue otherwise.
[4] (2007) 16 VR 269
78You have no criminal convictions or charges for any drug related offending and no outstanding matters. Apart from a very minor bail matter, you have no prior convictions at all.
16A(2)(n) Prospects of rehabilitation
79I now turn to an assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation. Since being remanded you have participated in drug and alcohol programs. You have
re-established contact with Ken and have periodic phone conversations with him which is a very positive pro-social development. You have the continued support of your wife, and you have no prior drug convictions. Against this, you maintain in your letter of apology that you did not think the consignment contained drugs when you were asked to store it and did not realise until some three weeks after that it when it was too late to walk away. As I said before, I do not accept this. Overall, given you managed to live drug and offence free for a very large portion of your life, I accept your counsel's submission that you have good prospects of rehabilitation, but note also that these are very contingent on you abstaining from drug use and removing yourself from those in the drug milieu.
16A(2)(p) Family hardship
80I have also given some weight to the hardship your imprisonment will cause your wife and your child, and I have had regard to the contents of the letter she wrote to the court about this. However, because family hardship is a predictable consequence where an offender has a wife and child, and there is no evidence in your case that your son has special needs or will suffer significantly emotionally or educationally or will be left without any family care, I attach only very modest weight to it. This will reflect hardship because your wife has little family support in Australia, will have to raise a child on her own and will endure a not insignificant degree of financial hardship.
CHARGE 2
81In sentencing you on Charge 2, I have had regard to the purposes for which a court may impose sentence set out in s5 of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), and to the matters outlined in s5(2), which I will not repeat here.
82I have had regard to the considerations which will ordinarily be relevant to an assessment of the objective gravity of drug trafficking offences which include:[5]
a) General deterrence and denunciation assume substantial importance, and specific deterrence and protection of the community assume particular importance.
b) Because the maximum penalties for trafficking offences vary according to the quantity of drugs trafficked, quantity is a significant and relevant factor in sentencing because generally the greater the quantity trafficked the more serious the offence.
c) Where, as was the case here, the drugs trafficked are not ultimately distributed into the community, the offence is not less serious. Charges of trafficking where the drugs are unsold or distributed are viewed as seriously as those sold or distributed given their potential for harm.[6]
[5] R v Pantsis [1998] VSCA 134; Nguyen v R (2011) 31 VR 673; Gregory (a pseudonym) v R [2017] VSCA 151; (2017) 268 A Crim R 1
[6] DPP v Holder (2014) 41 VR 467, [25]
83Your Charge 2 offending is serious:
a) The offence is punishable by 25 years' imprisonment.
b)The quantity of 1,4-Butanediol you trafficked to WILSON was 5,353.2 grams which was 2.67 times the commercial quantity threshold of 2 kilos. This is a significant quantity.
c)The offending is clearly serious but, as the prosecution submitted, substantially overshadowed by the criminality involved in Charge 1.
84As noted above in considering the sentence to be imposed I have given weight to your weighty personal circumstances.
Totality and cumulation/concurrency
85In my view and bearing in mind the principles of totality and proportionality, there should be a degree of cumulation between the two charges to reflect what are different and discrete instances of offending each warranting separate punishment. Whilst both charges involved drugs, Charge 1 involved the attempted importation of a commercial quantity of methamphetamine and Charge 2 involved trafficking in a commercial quantity of a different substance 1,4 Butanediol.
Comparative sentences
86I was provided with a schedule of comparative cases for both Charges 1 and 2. These sentences are of assistance in illustrating the relevant sentencing principles, but as is often the case, the facts and circumstances of those cases differ in many ways to yours, especially in terms of role and quantity for Charge 1 and each case must turn on its own facts.
PARITY
87Whilst there were several individuals involved in the offending post the attempted possession, in my view it is only WILSON who is directly relevant for parity purposes as your co-accused who you recruited and with whom you had extensive contact regarding the attempted possession at the time the offending was occurring.
88You had a significantly higher role in the Charge 1 offending than WILSON who was primarily involved, under your supervision, in facilitating transport of the substituted consignment through his work at Pack & Send. WILSON pleaded guilty to the same charges as you except he was charged with possession (of the 1,4‑butanediol) and not trafficking in it (Charge 2). It was also you who had supplied that substance to WILSON. WILSON was sentenced to a total effective sentence of 17 and a half years, with a non-parole period of nine years and 10 months.
89Of the related co-accused, NGUYEN, THONG and PHAM they were involved in post importation conduct such as moving the shipment and attempting to possess two-thirds of the consignment. Their roles are very different from yours. Their sentences also factored in other sentences for unrelated trafficking in a large commercial quantity of drugs of dependence. I do not consider the sentence to be of much relevance in the sentencing exercise here, but for completeness I do note their sentences.
Sentence
90I have done my best to synthesise the very high objective gravity of your offending with the mitigating factors you rely on and impose a sentence that reflects just punishment. Whilst you do present with some strong mitigating factors including a deprived childhood, an IQ of 71 and PTSD, it must be remembered that none of these matters prevented you from knowingly involving yourself at a senior, responsible level in what was a deliberate enterprise involving an extremely large drug consignment, undertaken for financial reward. Your communications with others and the things that you did demonstrate that you were clearly capable of undertaking the role you did. General and specific deterrence, along with punishment, denunciation and to a degree protection of the community, are very important sentencing objectives that must still be reflected in the sentence I impose.
91I will now proceed to sentence.
92On Charge 2 (State offence), you are convicted and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. I direct that the sentence commences today 16 October 2025.
93I set a single non-parole period for the State offending of one year.
94On Charge 1 (Commonwealth offence), you are convicted and sentenced to 22 years' imprisonment. I direct that the sentence on Charge 1 commence at the expiration of the non-parole period on Charge 2.
95I set a single non-parole period for the Commonwealth offending of 11 years.
96This makes a total effective head sentence of 23 years' imprisonment and a total effective non-parole period of 12 years' imprisonment.
97I declare pursuant to s18E of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), that you have served 855 days in custody (excluding today).
98Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), but for your pleas of guilty, I would have imposed a total effective sentence of 27 years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 17 years' imprisonment.
99Are the calculations adding up, Mr Sprague.
100MR SPRAGUE: Yes, Your Honour, no difficulty with those.
101HER HONOUR: Mr Sprague and Mr Farrington, I just note, I know I was asked to declare Mr Barnett as a serious drug offender, but the problem with doing that as I understand it, is that because if Charge 1 went first it would entirely subsume the sentence on Charge 2, so I have put them around the other way, and because I have done that - - -
102MR SPRAGUE: He has been sentenced first on the State offence.
103HER HONOUR: Yes.
104MR SPRAGUE: Yes, I follow, Your Honour.
105HER HONOUR: Yes. And in my view because the serious drug offender provisions do not have a lot of work to do in a case like this, because I was not imposing wholly cumulative sentences, I was not imposing a disproportionate sentence, I have regard to totality. I formed the view that it really was not going to be a matter of great moment.
106MR SPRAGUE: Yes, Your Honour.
107HER HONOUR: Is there anything else?
108MR FARRINGTON: No, Your Honour.
109HER HONOUR: I will adjourn.
- - -
0
13
0