Director of Public Prosecutions v Abdullah-Watts
[2015] VCC 1677
•20 November 2015
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-15-00511
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| DAWUD ABDULLAH-WATTS |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE LAWSON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 18 November 2015 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 20 November 2015 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Abdullah-Watts | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2015] VCC 1677 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Criminal law – sentencing – intentionally cause serious injury- intentionally cause injury- possess cannabis L – prior history of violence offences - period of imprisonment imposed.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms G Walton | Vaille Anscombe, Acting Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr C McLennan | Chris Mc Lennan Lawyer |
HER HONOUR:
1 Dawud Abdullah-Watts, you have pleaded guilty before me on Indictment to one charge of causing serious injury intentionally, two charges of causing injury intentionally and one charge of possess a drug of dependence.
2 The crimes are serious as marked by the maximum penalties that are prescribed, they are as follows:
· causing serious injury intentionally, 20 years’ imprisonment;
· causing injury intentionally, ten years’ imprisonment;
· possess cannabis, five penalty units.
3 In addition you admitted your criminal record and there are four court appearances spanning the period from 26 May 1997 to 30 April 2014.
4 You have relevant appearances where you have been previously dealt with by the courts for crimes of violence. There are appearances in 1998 for unlawful assault and assault police and 2014 for recklessly cause injury, unlawful assault, intentionally damage property, contravening a Family Violence Order and enter a place likely to cause breach of peace.
5 At the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on 30 April 2014 you were dealt with in respect to those 2014 offences and an aggregate term of 12 months’ imprisonment was imposed. It was partially suspended under s.27 of the Sentencing Act 1991. You served six months' imprisonment, followed by release on a partially suspended sentence that had an operational period of two years.
6 The current offending was committed during the operational period of that suspended sentence and that is an aggravating factor.
7 You are now due to appear at the Magistrates’ Court on 24 November 2015 in respect to breach proceedings relating to the partially suspended sentence and there is an additional charge of theft of some petrol.
8 I shall now proceed to sentence you on the basis of the summary of the prosecution opening that was read to the Court.
9 The offending occurred in the context of you having a drug-induced psychosis. You were using cannabis and ice at the time and had not slept for three days. You were living in a share house in Thomastown with others, including the victim of the first charge, Zammer Raoof.
I will now deal with the circumstances of Charge 1, intentionally causing serious injury
10 At around 8.40 pm on 2 November 2014, Mr Raoof was at home lying on the couch watching television. You were there as well as two of his friends, Kristina Stankavaska and Ahad Mohamad.
11
Ms Stankavaska was sitting at the coffee table in the lounge room and
Mr Mohamad had gone outside to talk on his phone and to have a cigarette.
12 You were in the kitchen on your phone. After you finished your call you got into an argument with Mr Raoof. You began pacing backwards and forwards between the kitchen and Mr Raoof, clenching your fists, breathing heavily, and going red in the face. You picked up a large kitchen knife from the kitchen bench and called him an “Illuminati dog” and moved towards him with the raised knife in your right hand. You raised your hand above your head and struck Mr Raoof in the chest. He put up his hand to defend himself and sustained a laceration to the right hand. He put up his knees to protect himself and you grabbed his left hand and stabbed him in the face, then to the left side of his chest, the left hip and the back of his right shoulder. All the while you were yelling, swearing and abusing him. Mr Raoof grabbed you to try and stop you stabbing him.
13 Ms Stankavaska ran out of the house and told Mr Mohamad what was going on. When he entered the unit you were still standing over Mr Raoof with the knife raised in your right hand and he yelled at you and caused you to look around at him. He then went towards you, grabbed your left hand and pushed you against the wall and yelled, “Drop the knife. Drop the knife”, at which time the knife fell to the ground. He yelled at you, “What the hell are you doing?”. You then paced up and down the hallway saying repeatedly, “I’m sorry, I've gotta get the fuck out of here” and you ran out the front door.
14 Mr Raoof was terrified at the time and thought he was going to die. He was taken by ambulance to the Royal Melbourne Hospital where multiple stab wounds were treated. He had stab wounds to the left cheek (that was a full thickness laceration to the muscle) the right upper shoulder; left front shoulder and chest; left back near his armpit; left hip and right hand. His wounds have resulted in permanent scarring.
15 The laceration to the left side of his face was a penetrating wound extending into the left maxillary antram, which is the largest part of the paranasal sinus, resulting in a comminuted fracture of the left maxilla, which is the upper jaw. He also sustained un-displaced fractures to the right and left nasal bones and he was hospitalised for two days.
16
When he made his statement to police, approximately four weeks later,
Mr Raoof told them that the left side of his face was still numb.
17 Unfortunately there is no up-dated material on how he is recovering from his wounds and he declined to make a Victim Impact Statement.
18 Nonetheless, I consider, having regard to your actions and the injuries he sustained, that these events would have been terrifying for him and they have caused serious injury as described.
I will now deal with the circumstances of the two charges relating to intentionally cause injury.
19
After you left the house you walked down the street and into a nearby shop, the Melbourne Kebab Station. Mr Lobosco and his partner were in the shop placing an order at the counter and there was another customer present,
Mr Farias, who was standing behind Mr Lobosco.
20 You tapped Mr Lobosco on his shoulder and he turned around. He was immediately punched to the nose by you and then to his left eye. He fell to the ground and hit the back of his head. That constitutes the facts of Charge 2. You then tried to hit Mr Farias. He moved back against the wall and covered his face with his fists. You hit him twice to the top of his head, once to the left side of his cheek and once to the left forearm. That constitutes the facts of Charge 3. You then left the store.
21 Mr Lobosco bled from the nose following the assault and a CT scan revealed a suspected un-displaced nasal bone fracture that was treated by conservative management. He also incurred a black eye and experienced headaches for about two weeks after the incident. He has not provided a Victim Impact Statement and declined to do so when requested. The injury to Mr Farias was minor and he, too, declined to provide a Victim Impact Statement.
22 I have had regard to the circumstances in which they were both injured and consider that they both would have been shocked and upset by your actions.
23 Not long thereafter you were observed by two protective officers standing in the middle of High Street yelling, wearing a blue t-shirt, no pants, black underwear, white socks and no shoes. Following some discussions, they sprayed OC foam on you and wrestled you to the ground. Police arrived shortly thereafter and you were arrested. At the time of your arrest police discovered a clear plastic bag tucked into your underwear that contained a small amount of cannabis. That constitutes the facts of Charge 4.
24 You were taken to Epping Police Station and following an examination by a forensic medical officer you were found not fit to be interviewed. You were remanded in custody and have remained in custody since that date.
25 Having regard to the circumstances of your arrest, there was some investigation as to whether or not you were fit to plead. Dr Ahmed Mashhood, a psychiatrist, assessed you on 15 April 2015. He concluded that you were fit to plead and that you did not have a defence of mental impairment available to you.
26 Your matter was committed for trial at committal mention on 25 March 2015 and proceeded by way of straight hand-up brief. Following negotiations, the matter resolved and you pleaded guilty to the four charges on the indictment on 26 August 2015 and it is accepted that the plea was entered at an early opportunity.
27 Mr Abdullah-Watts, the charges, in particular those that deal with the crimes of violence, are serious, and I consider the circumstances of Charge 1 to be a very serious example of this serious offence. Mr Raoof did nothing to provoke your assault. He was unarmed, lying down on the couch at home, when you stabbed him multiple times in a frenzy. It is only by good fortune that the injuries you inflicted were not fatal. He has been left with multiple areas of scarring and, in particular, the scarring across his left cheek is still noticeable, and that was demonstrated in the photographs that were tendered. He will have to live with the effects of his injuries and the scarring for evermore.
28 As for the other two men, the customers at the kebab shop, they were not known to you and were subjected to your unprovoked assaults. They were merely going about their ordinary everyday life when they were assaulted.
29 In sentencing you, therefore, there is a real need to emphasise both general and specific deterrence.
30 Mr McLennan, on your behalf, put a number of matters in mitigation. I accept that your plea was entered at a reasonably early opportunity following the committal process once negotiations concerning the fitness to plead and mental impairment aspect were addressed.
31 By your plea of guilty, I do accept that there is real utility; witnesses were spared the inconvenience and further trauma of having to give evidence on your trial and you saved the State the expense and inconvenience of a trial. You have facilitated justice and therefore your sentence will be discounted accordingly.
32 I further accept the plea is indicative of some remorse on your behalf.
33 I have also taken into account the letter that you wrote, being the letter of apology, and I accept that you now feel remorse and sadness for the pain that you inflicted upon Mr Raoof and that you now have insight into the effects of your wrongdoing.
34 I accept that your drug-induced psychosis was the explanation for your offending behaviour on this occasion. As was discussed in the plea hearing, I do not consider that the principles of Verdins apply so as to reduce your moral culpability. You have a long history of drug abuse and a history of substance-induced psychotic disorder with use of amphetamines and cannabis.
35 Dr Mashhood states in his opinion that your earlier admission to hospital when you were 19 for drug-induced psychosis was denoted as acute schizophrenic episode, although now he says it can be stated with confidence that the psychotic symptoms you suffered were not enduring in nature and were present as a result of substance abuse.
36 As a 19 year old you were treated for drug-induced psychosis at the Early Psychosis Prevention & Intervention Centre. From the past and your experience with drugs you would have been aware at the time of these offences that when you take drugs there is a risk that you may have further psychotic episodes, and in those circumstances I do not consider your drug taking as a mitigating factor.
37 I have had regard to your personal history and background. Your father and his current wife, your mother, and your father's former wife, whom you treat like a step-mother, have all been in Court during the plea hearing and they remain supportive of you. Your father has indicated a willingness for you to live with him on your eventual release.
38 You are now 36 and you were raised by your father in Coburg with your two half-brothers. Your mother is a schizophrenic and was unable to provide care for you throughout your childhood.
39 You were educated up to Year 11 at Princes Hill High School.
40 You left a pre-apprenticeship in carpentry and did not complete an adult VCE course.
41 At age 19 you left home to be with your then partner, Sahar, whom you later married. You converted to Islam during your relationship. You lived in a home that you bought in Meadow Heights for about six years with your wife. You separated from her in 2013 and you are now divorced. There are four children of the marriage, Ahmed (aged 14), Maryam (aged 11), Abdel Rahman (aged ten) and Yusuf (aged five).
42 The charges that were dealt with at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court in April of 2014 concern an incident between yourself and your former wife. On 27 October 2013 you attended her address in Meadow Heights and demanded to be let into the home. You were denied access so you then kicked the side laundry door and went into the main bedroom, kicking that door in too. You then choked your wife and hit her numerous times and made various threats.
43 As a consequence of your actions on that occasion you have not seen your children for some years and that causes you some upset and concern.
44 With regard to your work history. You have worked in a butcher’s shop for about six months and Red Rooster for some time. You had long-term employment as a security officer for six years between the ages of 24 and 30, including work as a supervisor. You left that employment in the context of your licence expiring and in relation to drug and alcohol issues. You have been unemployed for two years and receiving Newstart allowance when the offending occurred.
45 You have had a long-term drug and alcohol history. You began using cannabis at age 14, you were addicted by age 17, and as previously stated your first psychotic episode occurred when you were 19. You had a period of abstinence when you converted to Islam, but relapsed, and from about the age of 27 onwards you have continued to use and abuse cannabis daily and you have dabbled with methamphetamines over the past four years.
46 You told Dr Mashhood you were using cannabis daily, three grams per day, before you were remanded and that on the day of the offending you had smoked about three grams of cannabis and also smoked about a twentieth part of a gram of amphetamines and you had not slept for two or three nights.
47 This is the second time you have been in prison. You did spend six months in prison following the October 2013 matters, in respect to which I have earlier referred.
48 On this occasion you have used your time in custody productively and I have had regard to the various courses that you have done and the bundle of certificates produced to the Court confirm that you have undertaken courses involving education concerning the effects of drugs and harm reduction, anger management, problem solving, prison legal education and family law assistance.
49 You have been held on remand at the Metropolitan Remand Centre, and I accept following the riots in July 2015, that the conditions in which you are currently being held, including lockdown of 23 out of 24 hours, have been onerous and I have taken that into account.
50 Dr Mashhood performed a mental state examination on 15 April 2015, during which he stated your mood was normal, you were not displaying any symptoms of mania, depression or anxiety and there was no evidence of any formal thought disorder. He considered you demonstrated good insight into your past drug use and your previous psychiatric history.
51 His opinion is that you are a person with a history of substance-induced psychotic use disorder associated with amphetamines and cannabis. He noted that you were not taking any medications currently. He did not consider that you suffered from any formal mental illness.
52 He stated that when he examined you that you were aware of the nature and quality of the alleged offending and knew that such conduct was morally wrong. He states that there is no evidence to suggest that you did not have a similar awareness of the moral wrongfulness of your actions at the time of the events and confirmed your major problem area being cannabis and amphetamine use disorder.
53 An earlier report from Dr Cunningham, the psychologist who interviewed you on 29 May 2014, was provided to the court. That report was prepared for consideration relating to some outstanding infringement warrants. His opinion was that you presented with a DSM-V diagnosis of schizotypal personality disorder that continued from adolescence and persisted up until the time he saw you. Given that Dr Mashhood has had the advantage of seeing and accessing all the relevant information concerning your past psychiatric history, I prefer and adopt his expressed opinions.
54 As was discussed in the plea hearing, I consider that at the time of the offending you were suffering an acute episode of drug-induced psychosis and that explains your offending, but I am not prepared to accept that it reduces in any way your moral culpability.
55 Mr McLennan accepted that this was serious offending that warranted the imposition of a gaol term. He submitted that it could be either addressed through the fixing of a non-parole period or a gaol term combined with a Community Corrections Order. He submitted your prospects for rehabilitation are good if you continue to abstain from drugs.
56 Ms Walton, on behalf of the Crown, submitted that the first charge is a serious example of that offence and your drug use was neither a mitigating nor an aggravating factor. Given that you have a history of drug-induced psychosis the principles of Verdins do not apply. She submitted that community protection was the main sentencing consideration and accepted provided you abstained from drugs you do have good rehabilitation prospects. She further emphasised the need for general and specific deterrence to be emphasised in any sentence.
57 Mr Adbullah-Watts, overall, I do consider that your prospects for rehabilitation are somewhat guarded. Those prospects are entirely reliant on you abstaining from taking any illicit drugs.
58 In sentencing you, I have had regard to the nature and gravity of the offending, the injuries inflicted, your circumstances, your prospects of rehabilitation and, finally, the need for community protection.
59 The offence of intentionally causing serious injury is a very bad example of this offence. The other offences of causing injury are not as serious and fall within the lower end of seriousness for those types of cases and the sentence I impose will reflect that.
60 In sentencing you I must impose just punishment and on behalf of the community formally denounce your behaviour.
61 Given that your offending concerned a serious frenzied and unprovoked knife attack on an innocent person and unprovoked attacks on two innocent people lawfully going about their lives in a public place, each of whom have suffered the described physical injuries that I have earlier referred to, coupled with the fact that you offended whilst on conditional release during the operational period of the partially suspended sentence imposed for violence offences, I do consider a gaol term to be served with a non-parole period to be fixed as being the most appropriate form of punishment.
62 This is not the sort of case that warrants the imposition of a gaol term to be followed by a Community Corrections Order.
63 Mr Abdullah-Watts, in respect to Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to six years’ imprisonment. That is the base sentence.
64 Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.
65 Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment
66 In respect to Charge 4, you are convicted and discharged.
67 I make the following orders for cumulation - three months in respect to Charge 2 and one month in respect to Charge 3 are cumulative upon each other and upon the sentence that I imposed in respect to Charge 1, making . a total effective sentence of six years and four months’ imprisonment and I fix a non-parole period of four years' imprisonment.
68 I declare that you have served 383 days pre-sentence detention and direct that that be entered into the records of the court.
69 Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, but for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a sentence of imprisonment of eight years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of six years.
70 I make the disposal order sought and I make the order sought pursuant to s.464ZF(2) of the Crimes Act 1958. That last order means that you must undergo a forensic procedure for the taking of a scraping from the mouth and I make that order on the basis of the seriousness of the circumstances of the offending and the fact that the order is made by consent. I consider the granting of the order is in the public interest.
71 All that remains for me to do now, Mr Abdullah-Watts, is to inform you at the time of the request for the taking of a scraping of the mouth you will be given a little cotton bud to be placed inside your mouth. If you do not consent to that mouth scraping under supervision of an authorised member of the police force, then the sample can be taken by blood sample and police may use reasonable force to enable that procedure to be conducted. Hopefully that will not be necessary.
72 That completes the sentence. There are no other matters? I have signed the orders and provided those to my associate. Thank you both.
73 COUNSEL: Thank you, Your Honour.
- - -
0
0
0