Director of Public Prosecutions v Bao
[2020] VCC 1508
•18 September 2020
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-19-02137
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| CONG TANG BAO[1] |
[1] Matter anonymised to protect the identity of the Victim.
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE RIDDELL | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 27 April 2020 and 14 September 2020 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 18 September 2020 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v BAO | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2020] VCC 1508 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW -- Sentence
Catchwords: Threat to Kill -- Recklessly Cause Injury -- Contravene Family Violence Intervention Orders -- Family Violence context -- Serious Violent Offender -- Possess Counterfeit Money -- Drive Unlicensed
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen(1990) 169 CLR 525
Sentence: 6 years and 4 months Imprisonment --- Non Parole Period 4 years 10 months imprisonment
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms H. Baxter | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms A. Sharpley | Slades & Parsons |
HER HONOUR:
Overview
1 Cong Tang Bao[2] you have pleaded guilty to a number of offences of family violence relating to your former partner, Ms Ha Lien Do.[3] You subjected her to physical and psychological violence, and you made serious threats to kill her. On one occasion when you did so, you fired a gun in her direction. She was eight months pregnant with your child. On another occasion you assaulted her. Her children were present. On both occasions you were subject to intervention orders made to protect her and the children.
[2] Pseudonym used.
[3] Pseudonym used.
2 These are serious offences committed by a person with a serious and relevant prior criminal history involving violence. By my sentence I must reflect the community's denunciation of your disgraceful behaviour. I must recognise the need to punish you and to protect the community. The sentence I impose must deter others from committing similar acts of family violence against their innocent partners, and it must deter you from repeating offending such as this.
3 It was properly conceded by your counsel that the only appropriate sentence in the circumstances is one of a term of imprisonment with a head sentence and non-parole period.
Summary of Charges
4 You have pleaded guilty specifically to two charges of make threat to kill, each has a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment; one charge of recklessly causing injury with a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment; one charge of contravene family violence intervention order with a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment; and one charge of possess counterfeit money which has a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment.
5 Charges 1, 2, and 3 on the indictment are 'rolled-up' charges for the purposes of sentencing.
6 You are also charged with two related summary offences of unlicensed driving which carries a maximum of six months' imprisonment.
Background to the offending
7 Turning to the background of your offending. You were born in September 1980 and were aged between 37 - 38 years at the time of offending.
8 The charges relating to family violence reflect two periods of offending – one in 2017 and one in 2019.
9 Your former partner, 38 year old Ms Ha Lien Do, is the victim in these matters. You and Ms Do were in a relationship for approximately five years. She has two children (now aged 12 and 10) from a previous relationship and together you have a son born August 2017 and another son born October 2019.
10 At the time of the 2019 offending you and Ms Do were living separately. She had been forced to seek the protection of Family Violence Intervention Orders against you on two occasions. The first was a two year order granted on 28 February 2017 with herself and her two children listed as protected persons. A condition of that order was that you not commit family violence against the protected persons. That final order expired on 28 February 2019.
11 Prior to the expiration of that order, a second order was made against you on 5 March 2018. The protected persons named in that order are Ms Do and her three children. You were prohibited by that order from going to or remaining within 200 metres of any place where Ms Do or her children lived. You were prohibited from committing acts of violence against the protected persons or damaging any of their property. That final order expired on 4 March 2019.
Circumstances of offending
January 2019 Offences
12 At 12.30 am on 19 January 2019, you and Ms Do were sitting in the bedroom at her Ivanhoe address arguing about your relationship. Your presence there was in contravention of the FVO and is part of the basis of Charge 4.
13 You picked up a portable MP3 player and threw it at Ms Do from about
two metres distance. It hit her on the left side of her face causing three small lacerations to her face and bleeding near her eyebrow. That is the basis of Charge 2, recklessly cause injury.
14 You then said to her 'I will crack your head open and put a bullet in your head'. That threat is part of the basis of Charge 3, making threat to kill.
15 You then proceeded to grab a cord and wrap it around your hand. Ms Do fearing you would use it against her, started screaming loudly. You stated to her that 'If you don't stop screaming, I will put a bullet in your head'. That threat also forms part of Charge 3. Ms Do immediately stopped screaming and you appeared to calm down and left the room.
16 A witness outside the house overheard the screaming and a boy's voice saying, “Please stop, dad'. The witness called '000' and at 1.55 am police attended Ms Do's address. You ran from the premises just before police entered. As a result of being fearful that you may still be in the house,
Ms Do told police 'Everything is ok' .
17 Undeterred by the police attendance, as soon as they left you returned to
Ms Do's address. She told you she had not made any complaint to police. She attempted to secretly send a message to her social worker to request help. You became suspicious and demanded she hand over her phone. Upon seeing the message, you became enraged and stated. 'I'm gonna fucking kill you, I'm gonna blow your brain out now. I'm gonna do it now'. Those threats are also part of Charge 3.
18 You then ran to a caravan parked in the backyard. Mr Do, fearing for her life, was forced to make the difficult decision to leave her children and seek help. She ran to a neighbour's house and requested the assistance of police.
19 They arrived at 3 am and observed a motor vehicle registered XTJ598 leaving the address. You were driving that vehicle despite the fact you have no driver's licence. Police were unable to intercept you.
20 Police observed the laceration to Ms Do's face. Ms Do and her three children were transported to the Heidelberg Police Station for protection. That day, Ms Do and her three children were forced to move to crisis accommodation.
21 Ms Do's injuries were photographed, and she was medically examined. She had three small lacerations over her left eyebrow, associated with mild bruising, and swelling of her eyelids.
22 In a conversation with police, Ms Do disclosed a history of violence against her by you; this included an incident which occurred in June 2017 and which forms the basis of the second set of charges.
June 2017 Offences
23 In June 2017, Ms Do was eight months pregnant with your child.
24 You and she were sitting in a bedroom at the Ivanhoe address. You started an argument with her, accusing her of always wanting to get police assistance. During that argument you produced a handgun. You pointed the handgun at her head for three to four seconds and said - Mr Bao, I would ask you to sit down please, so that I can see you. Thank you very much. I am just going to pause there for a moment. Can you just stand the court down, please. We will just have a couple of minutes.
25 TIPSTAFF: Certainly, Your Honour.
26 (At a later stage.)
27 HER HONOUR: Thank you very much. You can hear me, Mr Bao?
28 In June 2017, Ms Do was eight months pregnant with your child.
29 You and she were sitting in a bedroom at the Ivanhoe address. You started an argument with her, accusing her of always wanting to get police assistance. During that argument you produced a handgun. You pointed the handgun at her head for three to four seconds and said, 'What, you think I’m not going to shoot you?” Ms Do replied, 'Don't be silly'.
30 You then fired the handgun next to her head. The bullet impacted the wall. The gunshot made Ms Do feel scared and she was concerned not to further upset you. Those words and actions form part of the basis of Charge 1, making a threat to kill.
31 Approximately five minutes later Ms Do told you she was going to have a shower. You refused to let her do so and said, 'If you go, I'll fucking shoot ya'. That threat is also part of Charge 1. Ms Do was too frightened to report the matter to police at that time.
32 After Ms Do disclosed this earlier matter to police in 2019, they returned to the Ivanhoe address and examined it. They located what forensic examination confirmed to be a bullet hole in the plaster wall of the bedroom and kitchen cabinet. The bullet had travelled through the wall, entered the kitchen, and travelled three metres before lodging in the cabinet.
33 You were arrested on 22 January 2019 at an address in Epping. Your vehicle was observed parked outside that address.
34 You were interviewed by police making no comment in relation to the 2019 offending and denying the 2017 offences. You admitted driving unlicensed.
35 On 23 January 2019 a search warrant was executed at your address where police located 17 counterfeit $50 notes inside a drawer in your bedroom. That is the basis of Charge 5, possessing counterfeit money.
36 On 23 January 2019, you were formally remanded into custody.
Sentencing Principles
37 These are serious offences. In particular the two charges of threat to kill are serious offences of violence. The prevalence of such offending, coupled with the often devastating impact on victims, means general deterrence, denunciation and community protection loom large in the sentencing process. The sentence I impose must reflect the community's abhorrence at such offending, in particular, when committed in the context of family violence.
38 The objective gravity of your offending is high, and in my view, places the charges of threat to kill at an upper range of seriousness. That is particularly so for the 2017 offence which was accompanied by a number of aggravating features which I will shortly outline. I have given consideration to the 2019 offence which did not have immediate accompaniment of a weapon. In my view, that is still a serious example of threat to kill for reasons which follow.
39 In relation to each of the threats to kill, they were committed in breach of a Family Violence Order, in place to protect the victim. In 2019, there were two such orders in force. Both offences were committed in the broader context of family violence.
40 The 2017 offence represents the words spoken, namely repeated threats, as well as your accompanying action. In particular your threat to shoot the victim was accompanied by pointing the loaded gun to her head for several seconds, and then by discharging the weapon close to her head. At the time you fired the gun, it was so close to her head that she immediately had ringing in her right ear. Those factors elevate that offence to one of real gravity. Your later threat to shoot her when she asked to shower is reprehensible.
41 The fact Ms Do was heavily pregnant at the time underlies your complete disregard for her wellbeing. She was a vulnerable woman at that time. She was your partner, pregnant with your child. She was entitled to love, care, and protection from you, but instead you inflicted terror on her.
42 Charge 3 of threatening to kill her in 2019 represent three instances of making threats to kill. That is, the threats are repeated. They are very serious in nature, referring each time to putting a bullet in her head or 'Blowing her brains out'. They show your complete disdain and disregard for her. Although you were not in immediate possession of a weapon at that time, those threats were made by a person who had previously demonstrated capacity and willingness to use and discharge a firearm to create fear in her. In that sense, they are extremely menacing. As Ms Do says in her Victim Impact Statement, that event from 2017 is 'seared' in her mind. In light of that event, these threats are very grave. Ms Do was also aware by that time in general terms of your past violent offending, a fact you would have understood would increase her anxiety and fear of what you were capable of.
43 The threats on that occasion in 2019 were made in the presence of at least one child, likely her then nine year old son, who had to beg you to stop. Another child was heard screaming. The fact that children were thus affected and witnessed your violent behaviour elevates this offending, as well as your moral culpability.
44 The third threat on the occasion in 2019, was made even after the police had attended at the property. That shows your brazen disregard for the law. The repeated threats must have been taken extremely seriously by Ms Do, and obviously created fear for her.
45 I agree with the prosecution submissions, the objective gravity of those threats reflects both your high moral culpability and displays a cruel disregard for your victim.
46 The 2019 threats were accompanied by throwing an MP3 player at her and by the injury caused when that hit her face. That injury, while at the lower end, is not the lowest type. The circumstances in which it was inflicted make it more serious.
Victim Impact
47 I have received a victim impact statement from Ms Do. It speaks in compelling terms of the devastating impact your offending has had on her and on her children, and your children.
48 Although I am to sentence you for these two separate events, her victim impact statement describes the broader context of your relationship. That context is amply borne out by the need for her to repeatedly seek the protection of the courts through Family Violence Orders. Sensibly, your counsel conceded that I can have regard to the broader context of your relationship in order to assess this offending in its realistic setting.[4]
[4] I have not had regard to paragraphs 8-10 in the Victim Impact statement in so far as they relate to allegations of other individual offending.
49 Ms Do says that within a short period of time in your relationship with her, your behaviour escalated to a point where she was terrorized daily. You were violent, intimidating, and abusive towards her in a number of ways. She now recognises that she was in survival mode, avoiding anything that might provoke you. She says. 'I had little sense of self… focussing on ensuring the protection of my children.' Like many women in her position, she hoped you would change, however. your abusive behaviour was constant and continuing.
50 Of the specific events in 2017 she says 'The day that Cong took his gun and shot it at me is seared in my mind. The abuse has scarred the minds and hearts of my two older children. This terrorizing has impacted our lives immeasurably'.
51 After the offending in 2019, she was forced to pick up her three young children and seek refuge in crisis accommodation. She says they left with the clothes on their back and were then at the mercy of non-government organisations assisting women and children escaping violence. It was in that timeframe that she learned she was pregnant with your second child. She says 'The angst, fear, are beyond explaining. However, I chose to bring this unborn child to birth'.
52 So fearful is she that she has continued to cut herself and her children off from any extended family. She says of the trauma suffered by herself and her children, 'We will live forever with the experience of Cong's terrorizing and isolating us from our families. I live forever with the experience of having been… abused… and left dealing with the effects and impact of
post-traumatic stress disorder'.
53 The Victorian Court of Appeal has consistently made clear that offending in the context of family violence will attract serious consequences and even harsher penalties where it involves the breach of an order which exists for the victim's protection. The prevalence of such offending most often committed behind closed doors is difficult to detect. Sentences must not only ensure the safety of victims and deter others from committing such acts in intimate relationships but should also encourage victims to speak out knowing they will be heard, and their trauma recognised.
54 I am mindful of not double punishing you for the offence of breaching the Family Violence Orders as well as the substantive offences. However, there must be some cumulation for that offending in recognition of the significance of that order. Both orders not only prevented you from behaving violently towards Ms Do, but the second prohibited you from being within
200 metres of her premises. That is for the purpose of avoiding the exact type of confrontation which evolved. Breaches of those orders must be given effect in sentencing if they are to achieve their desired objectives.
55 I also refer to your possession of counterfeit money, namely approximately $850. The potential for movement of counterfeit money within the community is serious. Your possession of those items in my view demonstrates your level of enmeshment within the criminal milieu.
Personal Circumstances
56 You are now 39 years old, days away from turning 40. You were born in Vietnam, the younger of two sons. When you were one year old your mother took you and your brother and left Vietnam as a refugee. You do not know why she left, nor why your father did not accompany you. Your mother does not like to discuss those events; however, it is your belief that she fled in the aftermath of the Vietnam war.
57 You and your mother and brother spent a year in a refugee camp in Malaysia before locating to Australia. You moved to live with an uncle in
East Hampton.
58 Your mother had and still has little English. She worked long hours as a textile worker and although you described yourself as close to her, it is apparent that you and your older brother were left largely to your own devices.
59 During your primary schooling you suffered the torment of racial bullying, with the result that you did not engage once you reached secondary schooling. You literally attended only several days of secondary school.
60 You left the family home around age 13 and you started hanging out with your older brother and associating with an older group of boys. Those older boys provided connection and a peer group which you had otherwise lacked. However, they were using drugs and engaging in anti-social and criminal activity and you soon followed.
61 You were introduced to heroin in your early teens and that has been an addiction which has dogged you ever since. You say you were first incarcerated when you were about 12.
62 The Department of Human Services was involved with your family at some stage, attempting to get you and your brother back into school and to have your mother supervise you more closely. Those efforts were unsuccessful.
63 When you were 20 years old you discovered your brother dead from overdose. He was no doubt the person closest to you and his loss was both traumatic and shocking to you. You still experience flashbacks to those events.
64 You managed to abstain from the use of heroin for about 12 months after his death. At some stage, however, you commenced use of methylamphetamine. That addiction has been ongoing in cycles you describe as binges. Your use of heroin recommenced, and you were using until the day of your arrest on these matters.
65 Although it was not suggested that your early years reach the level of disadvantage contemplated in Bugmy v The Queen[5], I do take those matters into account in a general sense in understanding your history and evolution to the life you have more recently led. That is, I take into account you are someone whose early life commenced as a refugee, then living in a foreign country where you were vilified on account of your race. Your schooling was interrupted, and you did not receive much guidance or supervision. That disadvantage has left a mark on you, particularly in relation to introduction to drugs and crime at a young age.
[5] Bugmy v The Queen[1990] HCA 18; (1990) 169 CLR 525
66 Since that time, you have spent a considerable period of your life in custody. You have very little employment history though you have completed a welding certificate during time in custody.
67 Your time in custody has resulted in you becoming paranoid and panicky. You have felt your life in danger on many occasions due to your lifestyle and associations. You stated to Forensic Psychologist, Dr Aaron Cunningham, that it is hard to separate fantasy and reality with regard to your paranoia.
68 According to Dr Cunningham, you have little by way of life skills and little knowledge of where to seek help and support, or to function independently in the community. He opines that your presentation is of being institutionalised, and your risks of ongoing drug use, reoffending, and imprisonment will not decrease until you are able to cease drug abuse and association with
drug-abusing peers. In his opinion you would not be able to achieve those goals without significant case management and motivation to rehabilitate. Those matters are relevant to my consideration of your sentence, and both setting the head sentence and the non-parole period. Ideally you would be transitioned from imprisonment back to the community with structure and supervision in place.
Prior Criminal Offending
69 Your criminal history is lengthy, relevant, and concerning starting with a number of dishonesty and resist police charges which saw you in youth detention at age 18. You have served multiple terms of imprisonment for trafficking heroin and various assaults. You have possessed prescribed weapons without exemption. Your dishonesty continued involving going equipped to steal, handling stolen goods, and possessing proceeds of crime. You have a number of driving prior convictions. You served terms of imprisonment in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.
70 In 2005 in this court you were sentenced on very serious charges of aggravated burglary, armed robbery, intentionally cause serious injury, false imprisonment, trafficking heroin, thefts, and assaults, and sentenced to a total effective sentence of nine years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of six years' imprisonment. That sentence was confirmed on appeal.
71 That sentence related to a series of extremely serious offences. They involved you in company with others committing what would be now three separate home invasions. The target victims had some connection to you or your co-offenders through drug use. One victim was the subject of two separate home invasions committed some months apart. Occupants were seriously assaulted and robbed during those events, including infliction of injury with swords, knives, baseball bats, and hammers. You were disguised. During the second incident you made a serious threat to injure the female occupant lest she identify you.
72 I have had the benefit of reading the sentencing remarks to obtain an understanding of that offending. Those offences do not aggravate the offending before me. However, their relevance is to my assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation and in turn, the need for specific deterrence and community protection.
Serious Offender Status
73 You fall to be sentenced as a serious offender pursuant to Part 2A of the Sentencing Act 1991 on each of the Threat to Kill Charges, that is Charges 1 and 3. Threat to Kill is a 'Serious violent offence' under Schedule 1 of the Sentencing Act. The serious offender regime applies to a 'Serious violent offender' who is being sentenced for a further 'Serious violent offence'. In your case that status comes about because in 2005 you were sentenced to a term of imprisonment for another serious violent offence, namely intentionally cause serious injury, to which I have just referred.
74 There are two consequences in relation to sentencing an offender as a serious offender under Part 2A of the Sentencing Act. The first is that I must consider protection of the community as the primary sentencing purpose and may impose a longer sentence than otherwise to achieve that sentencing purpose (Sentencing Act s.6D). The second is that there is a presumption of cumulation for every term of imprisonment imposed for relevant offending. There must be good reason to order concurrency, but I am not required to find that there are exceptional circumstances to justify an order for concurrency.
75 The prosecution did not urge on me a disproportionately long sentence and I will not impose one.
Plea of Guilty
76 You entered a plea of guilty to these charges on 24 October 2019 prior to any witnesses being cross examined at a committal hearing listed that day. The matter had previously been listed for committal on 8 August 2019. Your counsel informed me that information was provided on 24 October, which had not been previously available to defence and which resulted in a resolution to the current indictment, which had otherwise not been contemplated or possible.
I accept in those circumstances yours can be viewed as an early plea.
77 I also accept that it is a plea to the 2017 matters which you may have tried to contest given the passage of time. That is also considerable and to your advantage.
78 It was not argued that your plea is an expression of remorse. There is no evidence before me of any remorse, and the report of Dr Cunningham makes clear you have limited insight into the effect of your behaviour on Ms Do. Comments made to Dr Cunningham, in my view, show you still engage in victim blaming.
79 However, I take into account the utilitarian benefit of your plea. You have saved the community the cost and time of a trial. That is particularly significant during this period of COVID-19 when all trials in this court since March have been vacated.
80 More importantly, your plea has avoided any need for Ms Do to give evidence either at committal or in front of a jury. In matters such as this, where a victim will have to re-live not only the violent and traumatic offending, but where she would likely have had to relate the humiliating and degrading circumstances of her relationship, a plea is significant. She is saved the additional trauma of those processes and the additional delay that that would have caused. I take those matters into account.
COVID-19
81 I also take into account that you are in custody during the COVID-19 pandemic. As with the broader community, prisons are places of heightened anxiety in the COVID-19 setting. Prisoners are unable to make autonomous choices about social contact and distancing.
82 Visits are currently suspended where you would have expected visits from your mother. Although contact is now offered via iPads and Facetime, your mother does not have the technical capacity to engage that way and so your communication with her has been limited to phone calls. I take those matters into account. I also take into account that education and rehabilitation programs were suspended for a period, though they are now operating again with some limitations. Access to work and recreational facilities have also had limitations. Lockdowns are occurring in an effort to enforce social distancing. I take those matters into account.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
83 Your prospects of rehabilitation are extremely guarded in my view. You have shown a distinct disregard for the law and for court orders. That is demonstrated not only by your criminal history which shows multiple breaches of court orders, but specifically here by the contravention of two Family Violence Intervention Orders. Similarly it is shown by your continuing to drive without a licence.
84 Your drug use is a significant barrier towards your full rehabilitation and until you find the motivation to address that issue, your life is likely continue on its current path. You have had two negative drug screens in custody during 2020 which is encouraging. You will need considerable support to make that change. Happily, you have the ongoing support of your mother, and she offers you accommodation. Perhaps with age your attitude will start to shift.
Current Sentencing Practices
85 I was provided with a sentencing snapshot from some years earlier, which was the latest available. I was also taken to the Judicial College Summaries for similar offending in similar sentences. Each, of course, has its similarities and differences. I am required to take into account current sentencing practices and to impose just punishment. That is what I have endeavoured to do.
86 Sensibly it was conceded that a period of imprisonment with a non-parole period is appropriate. That is correct and is the only sentence to meet the sentencing synthesis here. You have now served 605 days by way of
pre-sentence detention since you remand in January 2019.
87 There is a need here for cumulation as between the events of 2017 and 2019. I will moderate the extent of cumulation applicable as between Charges 2 and 3, given they was part of the same event.
88 I am mindful of issues of totality in sentencing you for a range of offences.
Sentence
89 In all the circumstances, Mr Bao, I propose to sentence you as follows:
90 On Charge 1 – Threat to Kill in 2017 – you are convicted and sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment;
91 On Charge 2 – Recklessly Causing Injury – you are convicted and sentenced to 22 months' imprisonment;
92 On Charge 3 – Threat to Kill in 2019 – you are convicted and sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment;
93 On Charge 4 – Contravene Family Violence Intervention Order – you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment;
94 On Charge 5 – Possess Counterfeit money – you are convicted and sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment;
95 On summary charges of unlicensed driving – you are convicted and sentenced to 2 months' imprisonment on each charge.
96 I make the follow directions in relation to cumulation. Firstly, I direct that Charge 1 of four years' imprisonment is the base sentence. I direct that four months of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively. I direct that
18 months of the sentence on Charge 3 be served cumulatively. I direct that six months of the sentence on Charge 4 be served cumulatively. Those are cumulatively on the base sentence and on each other.
97 The total effective sentence, Mr Bao, is one of six years' and four months' imprisonment, and I direct that you serve a minimum term of four years' and ten months' imprisonment, before becoming eligible for parole.
98 I declare you have already served 605 days imprisonment on remand and that such period should be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
99 On both of the threat to kill charges you are sentenced as a serious offender and I direct that that fact be entered into the record.
100 But for your plea of guilty, the overall sentence I would have imposed would have been one of eight years' and eight months' imprisonment, with a
non-parole period of six years' and six months' imprisonment.
101 I propose to make the forfeiture order in the terms which were sought and if I can just have any information, Ms Baxter, in relation to the license.
102 MS BAXTER: Not seeking a license cancellation order, Your Honour, under the specific provision with which he is charged. There is no basis.
103 HER HONOUR: All right, thank you very much. Any issues to raise, counsel? And I am happy just to pause while you check the maths.
104 MS SHARPLEY: I am sorry, Your Honour. I did not catch on Charge 5, whether Your Honour ordered any cumulation.
105 HER HONOUR: I did not.
106 MS SHARPLEY: Thank you.
107 MS BAXTER: Your sentence accords with my maths, Your Honour.
108 HER HONOUR: Thank you very much.
109 MS SHARPLEY: Yes, Your Honour. Mine too.
110 HER HONOUR: All right, thank you very much. Thank you very much counsel, for your assistance in this matter. We will now adjourn, thank you.
---
0
2
0