Director of Public Prosecutions v Alexander (a pseudonym)
[2020] VCC 124
•21 February 2020
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ANTHONY ALEXANDER (a pseudonym) |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE DOYLE |
| WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
| DATE OF HEARING: | |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 21 February 2020 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Alexander (a pseudonym) |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2020] VCC 124 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence, persistent contravention of family violence intervention order, stalking, possession drug of dependence, unlawful assault, attempt to pervert course of justice, general deterrence and denunciation, relevant prior conviction against the same victim, plea of guilty
Legislation Cited: s6AAA Sentencing Act
Cases Cited: Verdins
Sentence:32 months imprisonment with non-parole period of 22 months
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms Kathryn Hamill | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr Barnaby Johnston |
HIS HONOUR:
Anthony Alexander[1] you have pleaded guilty to four charges of persistent contravention of family violence order, one charge of stalking, one charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice and two charges of possession of a drug of dependence. The maximum penalties are as follows: persistent contravention of family violence order - 5 years’ imprisonment; stalking - 10 years’ imprisonment; attempt to pervert the course of justice - 25 years’ imprisonment; possess a drug of dependence (alprazolam) - 1 year imprisonment; possess cannabis (small quantity, non-trafficking purpose) - fine of not more than 5 penalty units.
[1] “Anthony Alexander” is a pseudonym
You have also pleaded guilty to two summary offences of unlawful assault for which the maximum penalty is 3 months’ imprisonment. (s24 of the Summary Offences Act provides that the maximum penalty is elevated to 6 months if the assault is on a woman and is sufficiently aggravated so as to render the 3 month maximum inadequate. However, I am satisfied that in the circumstances of these assaults s23 provides an adequate maximum.) You have also pleaded guilty to a summary offence of threat to distribute an intimate image for which the maximum penalty is 1-year imprisonment.
The facts of this matter are set out in the prosecution opening on the plea tendered as Exhibit 1.
Background
At the time of the offending you were aged 37. You and the victim in this matter, Nicole Sutton[2], commenced a relationship in about November 2014, which lasted until April 2017. You had a child together named Matthew[3], a boy, who was 4 years old at the time of the offending.
[2] “Nicole Sutton” is a pseudonym
[3] “Matthew” is a pseudonym
On 11 October 2016, Ms Sutton obtained an intervention order against you which included conditions that prevented you from approaching her or Matthew whilst you were under influence of alcohol or drugs. On 19 December 2017, the Moorabbin Magistrates’ Court made a final intervention order expiring on 19 December 2020, naming Ms Sutton and your son as affected family members. The order was made in court in your presence, and its conditions and conduct prohibited by the order, were explained to you at this time. The conditions are set out in paragraph five of the prosecution opening. The order included conditions that prevented you assaulting, harassing, threatening or intimidating, or contacting the affected family members other than as set out in a court order and not in circumstances where you are affected by alcohol and drugs.
On 11 July 2018, you were sentenced to a total of 5 months imprisonment for breaching the order and using a carriage service to menace. Ms Sutton was the victim. You were released from prison on 11 September 2018, having regard to the pre-sentence detention that you had served. This offending commenced two days after your release.
Circumstances of offending
Charge 1: Persistent breach– 13 September 2018 to 11 October 2018
This charge relates to four occasions when you contacted Ms Sutton in breach of the order. After your release from custody you made an arrangement with Ms Sutton to contact her in relation to Matthew. You and Ms Sutton sent each other a number of emails about childcare arrangements; however, on four occasions between 13 September 2018 and 11 October 2018, you sent messages of an offensive and intimidating nature unrelated to childcare. The messages suggested that Ms Sutton wanted to spend time at the casino and get her “tits done” whilst Matthew was “wearing rags.” The only face to face contact in this period was to facilitate contact between you and Matthew.
Charge 2: Persistent breach– 12 October 2018 to 9 November 2018
This charge relates to five occasions when you contacted Ms Sutton in breach of the order. Email contact became more frequent in October and early November. Five of the messages sent during this period were of an offensive or intimidating nature. In late October Ms Sutton had returned from an overseas trip with Matthew. Her plans for a lift from the airport fell through, so she asked for your assistance to pay for a cab. You arranged to transfer money to Ms Sutton. The exchange of messages about this degenerated with you referring to her “lies”, a reference to your belief that Ms Sutton had had an affair while you were in a relationship together. Ms Sutton ceased email communication with you for a brief period. Instead, she communicated childcare arrangements through your mother. She re-commenced direct email communication with you in late November following a request from your mother.
Charge 3: Persistent breach– 10 November 2018 to 8 December 2018
This charge relates to 208 occasions when you contacted Ms Sutton in breach of the order. Between those dates you sent Ms Sutton a total of 170 messages in breach of the IVO; you also made 43 phone calls to her. Ms Sutton described your messages as escalating very quickly from the agreed contact regarding childcare, to calling her a liar, a cheater, a traitor and a dog. You accused her of “sleeping around”. When you discovered from her brother’s Facebook account that she was planning a night out, you called her a “disgusting rude pig” and suggested he was “the babysitter for when you want to get out for one night stands again”. You suggested her “first priority was tits to pick up more men. Mother of the year”
10. You were preoccupied with your suspicion that Ms Sutton had “fukt 20 guys” since you had been in jail, saying also that she should worry about her “fukn son instead of dick”. You expressed suspicion that Ms Sutton had moved Matthew in with another man without your consent, saying “any guy you put near Matthew I will terrorise and bash any chance I get”.
11. In late November 2018, you sent a series of emails referring to your suspicion that Ms Sutton had been sleeping with someone else, including repeatedly asking her to reveal where that person and his family members were living and accusing Ms Sutton of “unloyalty” when she did not provide the information. You repeatedly queried whether she would go to the police when you did not comply with her requests (for example in relation to returning Matthew). You also suggested that the only explanation for Ms Sutton’s alleged expenditure while you were in gaol was as a result of her stripping or from a man.
Charge 4: Stalking – 24 November 2018 to 4 January 2019
12. In November 2018 your mother asked Ms Sutton to call you and she did. This was the start of telephone contact between the two of you. During these calls, you continually asked Ms Sutton her whereabouts. You told her that as the mother of your child, she was required to provide you with this information and if she did not, it would trigger your anger issues. You told Ms Sutton that if she refused your behaviour from that point on would be her fault.
13. During December, you increasingly monitored Ms Sutton’s everyday activities by calling her constantly and demanding to look through her phone when you met for child exchanges. You also asked her to send a photograph of herself at home in bed alone every time you had Matthew for the night. It became apparent to Ms Sutton that you had been locating photographs posted on her Facebook through your mutual friends. You would ask her about people who had liked or commented on her photographs, especially if they were male.
14. From 17 December 2018, you regularly inspected her phone to ensure she had deleted messages from you. This led to her using two different handsets and swapping her sim card between the two, to avoid having to delete the entire contents of her phone. During this period, Ms Sutton deactivated her Facebook account, and deleted any numbers from her phone that she felt you would not be happy with or would question her about. The deactivation of her Facebook account upset you. You messaged her on 19 December 2018 saying, “I told you keep your fb [Facebook] just make sure it shows me respects”; and on 20 December 2018 saying “get that fb happening now [to] show cunts your loyalty and respect is with me and Matthew”. These circumstances and those relating to your later conduct on 1 January 2019 are the basis of charge 4 of Stalking.
Charge 5: Persistent breach– 9 December 2018 to 9 January 2019
15. This charge relates to 1626 occasions when you contacted Ms Sutton in breach of the order. From 9 December 2018 to 9 January 2019, you sent Ms Sutton a total of 451 messages in breach of the IVO, along with sending 9 videos and making 1165 phone calls to her, including one recorded phone call. This included 47 messages on 10 December 2018 and 23 messages on 11 December 2018. The messages reflected the same preoccupations as earlier messages, with you suggesting Ms Sutton was “putrid”, had made herself “a sex object” while you were in prison “flirting with cunts [she’d] fukt in [Facebook].” You said her “cock sucking mouth is vile”, suggested she was “fucking every wog in Melbourne,” and that when you looked at her mouth, all you see is “Arab dicks”. The same day, you sent her a photograph of a tattoo on your leg of a handgun, with her first name tattooed below the trigger. Ms Sutton found this very intimidating.
16. The following day you sent a number of messages apologising for your behaviour, however later that night returned to accusing her of lying and being a “fukn coward”. In an effort to placate you, Ms Sutton ultimately promised not to be with anyone else, and asked that you leave her and Matthew be. Ms Sutton noted that there was a pattern to your behaviour and described you as being “lovely” to her for a period of time, before you would then become “threatening and nasty”.
17. On 13 December 2018, you messaged Ms Sutton saying she had had her new
“tits” for three months and said you were sure:
“4 guys have watched them swinging in there face or holding them whilst you’re giving head. That’s why you won’t let me see your phone”.
18. Around this time, you asked her to have sex with you to prove she wasn’t seeing anyone behind your back. Ms Sutton ultimately resumed a sexual relationship with you, feeling she had to do so to “keep the peace,” because she didn’t want you coming around and confronting her family members as her family were not aware of the extent of her contact with you since your release from custody. Ms Sutton described 16 December 2018 as “the worst day” in terms of contact from you, that by this stage you were using two phones to call and message her. She estimated you called her in excess of 100 times using both numbers, and she eventually put her phone on silent.
Unlawful assault – 20 December 2018
19. On 19 December 2018 you had custody of Matthew. You asked Ms Sutton to come over to assist you, because Matthew was misbehaving. When she came over you requested sex and she refused. The following day, you questioned her about what she had done while you had been in prison. She said she had been in text message contact with some other men; however, nothing had eventuated from it. You accused her of disrespecting you and Matthew and you punched her in the ribs, giving rise to the first charge of unlawful assault. Ms Sutton ran from the room when this occurred, collected Matthew and ran to the car to leave. You also got into the car and for about ten minutes prevented her from leaving. Matthew was crying and upset whilst this was occurring.
20. In messages on this day, you called Ms Sutton, amongst other things, a “piece of dirty shit” and a “whore,” and suggested the only way you would “stop thinking about this cock all over you is you on mine”.
Threaten to distribute intimate image – 27 December 2018
21. On 22 December 2018, you asked Ms Sutton to allow you to film sexual activity between the two of you because that would prove her “loyalty” to you and if she agreed, you would stop harassing her about other men. Ms Sutton ultimately agreed. On 27 December 2018, you called her phone and left a voicemail message saying,
“If you don’t know [show] me the iPad and let me have a look around your room, your mum will come across your home porn movie, I promise you”.
22. You sent this message aware of the Ms Sutton’s concern of being ostracised by her family.
23. On 28 December 2018, you wanted to see Matthew. Ms Sutton suggested you meet at Half Moon Bay in Black Rock. This upset you because you associated that location with former partners of Ms Sutton. You bombarded Ms Sutton with calls and 53 text messages saying you were going to go to her house. Your messages included video messages saying you were looking for her and you had gone to her sister’s house, and further messages saying you had seen her car in Mordialloc (albeit this would not have been the case).
Unlawful assault – 28 December 2018
24. You arrived at Ms Sutton’s home at around 9:30 pm. She asked you not to come inside. You ordered her into your car and drove off, saying you had organised someone called “V” to beat her up. Ms Sutton tried to get out of the car and you grabbed her by the wrist to prevent her from doing so, while speeding through a red light. Ms Sutton started to scream. You stopped the car and ordered Ms Sutton to drive. She ultimately agreed, and drove back to her street. You got out of the car and followed her to the front door, asking her to please not call the cops.
25. You sent her several messages later that evening referring to the previous incident, the majority of which were threatening and further messages on 29 and 30 December 2018 and 26 messages on 31 December including where you said:
“you fuk someone in the next year I will do more than put a hand on you”.
Charge 4- Stalking – further conduct
26. Your conduct on 1 January 2019 is put by the prosecution as being part of the stalking charge. On this day, you began texting Ms Sutton early in the morning, asking whether she was going to “lag” on you, and saying you had been past everywhere she could be and asking where she was. You started to call at 7:00 am when Ms Sutton was at work. She answered one of the calls around midday and you said you were out the front of her work, and that you wanted to see Matthew (who was at work with her). You eventually took Matthew for the afternoon. Ms Sutton went to your house to collect him later that day. As she was driving home you pulled up next to her at the intersection and shouted, “Why the fuck aren’t you picking up your phone?”
27. Ms Sutton dropped Matthew home and then went out for a couple of hours. While she was gone you drove around looking for her. You went to her mother’s house and asked where she was. You also spoke to her grandmother (Ms Sutton was living with her grandmother at the time), and went to her sister’s house. After she got home, she was outside her house and noticed you sitting in your vehicle across the street. You got out of the car and ran towards her, shouting. She ran to her mother’s house and rang triple zero. She made an initial statement to police that day. You continued to call and text her whilst she was at the police station.
28. On 2 January 2019, police contacted you and said you were under investigation for breaching the intervention order, and as a result, you were not to contact Ms Sutton anymore. An arrangement was made for you to present yourself to Moorabbin police station the next day. Police also spoke to your lawyer who advised that you would be attending the appointment but you failed to do so.
Attempt to pervert the course of justice – 4 January 2019
29. On 4 January 2019, you called Ms Sutton constantly throughout the day, using a private number. You arrived at her workplace during the afternoon. On that day you told her she had over-reacted by going to the police and that she had to retract the statement she had provided. You said that you would re-write the statement for her and she could collect the re-written statement from your house. Ms Sutton collected the document you referred to from your house the following day.
30. The document is partly addressed to Ms Sutton, and partly written in the first person as Ms Sutton. It contains a self-serving account of some of your conduct and attributes blame for the conduct with Ms Sutton, including assertions that she had “pushed” for you to see Matthew, had failed to mention to police the days you spent together or the “phone calls that were mutual”. The document lauds you as a good father and praises you saying you, “came out of prison 100% focussed and stuck to the order in every way”. It explained the incident on 1 January 2019 as you getting “frustrated and angry” and becoming “erratic”.
31. You were arrested by police in Dingley on 7 January 2019. Police found a bag belonging to you inside of which was cannabis and a container of Xanax tablets. You made admissions that these items belonged to you. The possession of these drugs gives rise to charge 6 and charge 7.
32. You were interviewed at Moorabbin police station. Your interview was largely a self-serving account in which you attributed blame to Ms Sutton. You did however make admissions to some of your conduct. You described the statement you drafted for Ms Sutton as being designed to ascertain if you were on the same page as Ms Sutton, so you did not end up back in jail. A summary of what you said in the interview is set out in paragraphs 47 to 52 of the prosecution summary and I do not propose to repeat those details.
Victim impact
33. Although Ms Sutton did not make a Victim Impact Statement, her police statements detail the impact of the offending upon her. She refers to being in fear of you and feeling “weak and vulnerable”. She describes your constant verbal abuse, vile language and intimidating behaviour and harassment as having “broken” her. She is concerned that her son will grow up believing your conduct is acceptable, and that this is how women should be treated.
Gravity of the offending
34. Mr Johnston realistically conceded the seriousness of your offending accepting that it was persistent and sustained and ‘scary’ for Ms Sutton. He conceded that your offending involved serious examples of serious offences.
35. I accept the submission of the prosecutor, Ms Hamill, who pointed out that this was family violence offending which is prevalent in the community and in your case there are a number of aggravating features.
36. Your child Matthew was present for some of the offending and your campaign of harassment was relentless and prolonged continuing until your arrest. It was accurately described by the prosecutor as a barrage of communications. The offending escalated as the months went by. Your obsessive jealousy and your desire to control Ms Sutton were extreme and emerge unmistakeably from the summary of your offences, the content of the communications and, indeed, from the raw anger displayed in the video message which was tendered on the plea, one of a number you sent to her. Your conduct included monitoring Ms Sutton’s whereabouts and physical assaults. You did indeed treat the victim as if she was your property. Your need to control her motivated your threat to distribute the video of sexual activity to her mother.
37. Your effort at attempting to pervert the course of justice was amateurish and unsophisticated. It’s hard to think that any investigator would have viewed the document you drafted as authentic. Nonetheless, that offence was serious enough, particularly in the circumstances where you presented it to the victim only two days after you had been accused by the police and after you had engaged a lawyer. This context is important in assessing this offence. This was a last ditch effort to control Ms Sutton and save your own skin.
38. In all the circumstances of this matter I assess your moral culpability for this offending as high.
Personal circumstances
39. You are now aged 38.
40. You were born in London and came to Australia at the age of 10 with your mother and father. You have a younger sister Claire, a child psychologist, who was present in court to support you.
41. I am told your father was a violent man who regularly physically disciplined you and also assaulted your mother in front of you. Your parents broke up when you were 12 and your mother re-partnered.
42. You got to year eight at school after which you started an apprenticeship with a blind company. Then, in your late teens, you worked with your father who was a spray painter. You have also worked in security at various different venues and have worked as a labourer, in particular for a building company run by a man named Jim Dougal[4] who has provided a reference on your behalf. You have also worked for your friend Alex Burgess[5]who runs a business installing gates. He is your closest friend of twenty-four years and has provided a reference on your behalf. You have a solid work record which is in your favour and is a factor which I have had regard to in assessing your prosects of rehabilitation.
[4] “Jim Dougal” is a pseudonym.
[5] “Alex Burgess” is a pseudonym.
43. You have had problems with drugs since your teenage years. This started with cannabis and by your late teens you were using amphetamines. More recently, and in the timeframe of this offending, you have been a regular user of methyl amphetamine. Your use of this drug is said to have compromised your decision-making and contributed to this offending. I accept that your use of drugs was a contributing factor but in my view drug use alone does not explain your protracted and relentless conduct towards Ms Sutton.
44. Your mother now lives in Bonn Beach and when you are released from the sentence that I will impose for these offences you intend to go and live with her.
Mental health
45. Your counsel, Mr Johnston, relied upon the neuropsychological report dated 25 June 2018 of Ms Jane Lofthouse. This report was prepared in relation to the prior offending in 2018. Ms Lofthouse assessed you as having a low IQ in the borderline range. She felt your verbal IQ score was likely a result of restricted education, behavioural deregulation and cannabis use. She offered the view that intellectual deficits, drug and alcohol use and psychological issues have destabilised your behaviour and placed you at risk of overreacting and reaching ill-considered and impulsive decisions. Mr Johnston, correctly in my view, did not argue the principles in Verdins[6] are applicable in this matter. Nevertheless, I have taken into account the matters referred to by Ms Lofthouse in a general way as matters personal to you.
[6] R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
46. Mr Alexander you have been on remand for 410 days. You have completed a number of courses whilst in custody. You are currently working as the Yard Billet at Atwood – MRC. You have spent a majority of your time in custody at MRC but did spend 3 ½ months at Fulham Prison. Your efforts in prison are to your credit and I have had regard to them in assessing your prospects of rehabilitation.
Guilty plea
Remorse and insight
47. Mr Johnston submitted that your plea was at the earliest opportunity and that it has significant utilitarian value. I accept this submission. You have spared Ms Sutton the trauma of reliving these events and a trial would have been complicated and lengthy.
48. In addition, he submitted that your plea of guilty was indicative of remorse. I’m prepared to accept that you have some remorse for your conduct as indicated by your plea of guilty and by the letter of apology which Mr Johnston tendered and read to the court on the plea hearing. However, true remorse is always difficult to gauge and the complicating feature here is that any feelings of remorse are not accompanied by insight into the fact that this relationship is over and that you are not able to contact the victim in this matter.
49. Around Christmas of 2019 you sent a letter to Ms Sutton which was intercepted by prison authorities. There is no dispute that you are the author of that document. The letter is an exhibit. In my view it is clear from the form and content of the letter that as recently as Christmas 2019 you still did not understand that you are not allowed to communicate with the victim. It is also clear to me that at that time you still had hopes of resuming the relationship with her. The repetitive nature of your behaviour, the fact that it started two days after you finished your last sentence and your effort to communicate with the victim last Christmas after spending the majority of the year on remand for these offences, leads me to the view that your obsessive attitude to Ms Sutton continues. I will return to the significance of your lack of insight to your rehabilitation.
Criminal history
50. Your offending commenced two days after you were released from a five-month sentence for similar offending against the same victim. The offending here is more serious and represents an escalation of your conduct towards Ms Sutton. Your prior conviction is a significant matter in this case. It is directly relevant to my assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation and the weight to be given to specific deterrence and community protection.
51. Apart from the prior conviction in 2018 you also have a range of other prior convictions, including offences of dishonesty, firearm offences, assault offences, a threat to cause serious injury and trafficking drugs. You have received sentences of immediate imprisonment on four occasions including the sentence in 2018. Your overall criminal record is also relevant to my assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation and to specific deterrence.
52. The gaol sentences previously imposed have not deterred you from committing further offences. The sentence of five months which you received in 2018 seemingly had no impact on your obsessive and controlling behaviour towards the victim in this matter.
Prospects of rehabilitation
53. It was submitted by Mr Johnston that you have good prospects of rehabilitation. Mr Johnston acknowledges, however, that this is largely dependent on your ability to remain drug free whilst in the community. It is in your favour that you have shown a degree of remorse, that you have undertaken courses whilst in custody, that you have clean drug urine screens reflecting an abstinence from the drugs in prison and that you have an offer of employment and stable housing available for you upon release. Also, this will be the longest sentence you have received and your first sentence involving a period of parole which complicates the assessment of your prospects. Perhaps this sentence will be a salutary lesson to you and the supervision on parole will prove to be the help you need to stop offending.
54. However, in the circumstances of this case, I cannot agree with the submission that your prospects of rehabilitation are good. In my view the sustained nature of your offending and its commencement two days after being released from prison, your prior convictions and the lack of insight into your offending exemplified by the Christmas letter mean that I can only take a guarded view of your prospects of rehabilitation.
Sentencing
55. Mr Johnston realistically conceded that the only appropriate sentence is a term of imprisonment with a head sentence and a minimum non parole period. He essentially submitted that there should be a ‘longer than otherwise’ period of parole to allow for your return to community within a structured environment. Given your criminal record, and the aggravating features of your offending along with my assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation, I am not persuaded by this submission, but in fixing the non-parole period I have taken into account that this will be the first time you have received a minimum sentence and that it is now quite some time since you have been placed on any supervisory order.
56. The prosecutor, Ms Hamill, pointed out the importance general deterrence and denunciation for offending such as this.
Sentencing considerations
57. The purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are just punishment, deterrence both specific and general, rehabilitation and denunciation of your actions and the protection of the community. In sentencing you, I must have regard to a range of factors such as the seriousness of your offending, your culpability for it and your personal circumstances.
58. I am also required to balance the interest of the community in denouncing your criminal conduct with the interest of the community in seeking to ensure as far as possible that you as an offender are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.
59. I am required to take into account current sentencing practices in fixing your sentence. I was referred to two cases in the course of the plea which had some similarity as they involved family violence offending. Additionally, Mr Johnston provided me with the case summaries for sentences for attempting to pervert the course of justice. I have had regard to the cases and summaries provided and to current sentencing practices. Of course, each case must be considered in the light of its own particular circumstances. Current sentencing practices are just one of the factors I am required to take into account when fixing the sentence for your offending.
60. Considerations of general deterrence (the need for the sentence to deter other likeminded individuals from similar offending) and denunciation are important sentencing objectives that must be emphasised in offending of this nature. Just punishment is also relevant. Specific deterrence, which is need to deter you from further offending in the future, is also a relevant consideration.
Totality
61. Your offending is properly characterised as a course of conduct. In formulating the sentence in this case I have had regard to the totality principle which requires me to ensure that your overall sentence remains ‘just and appropriate’ for the whole of your offending. I am also mindful of the need to avoid double punishment given that there is some factual overlap between offences. Any orders for cumulation must be moderated to the extent necessary to give effect to the principle of totality.
Sentence
Mr Johnston, please stand:
On charge 1 I sentence you to 2 months imprisonment
On charge 2 I sentence you to 2 months imprisonment
On charge 3 I sentence you to 6 months imprisonment
On charge 4 I sentence you to 4 months imprisonment
On charge 5 I make this the base sentence and sentence you to 18 months imprisonment
On charge 6 I sentence you to 10 months imprisonment
On charge 7 I sentence you to a fine of $250
On charge 8 I sentence you to a fine of $250
On summary charge 59 I sentence you to 4 months imprisonment
On summary charge 48 I sentence you to 2 months imprisonments
On summary offence 4 I charge you to 2 months imprisonment
The base sentence is that of 18 months’ imprisonment on Charge 5. I order that two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 3 and six months of the sentence imposed on Charge 4, four months of the sentence imposed on charge 6, two months of the sentence impose on the summary charge of threaten to distribute intimate image, one month on each of the summary offences of unlawful assault be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Charge 5 and upon each other. Hence, the total effective sentence is 32 months’ imprisonment.
I fix a minimum non parole period of 22 months.
I declare a period of 410 days pre‑sentence detention to be time reckoned as already served.
Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I state that, had it not been for your pleas of guilty, the total effective sentence imposed would have been 4 years with a non-parole period of 3 years.
2
0
0