Director of Public Prosecutions v Barnett
[2021] VCC 2019
•3 December 2021
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-21-00955
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| TROY BARNETT |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE GWYNN | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 24 November 2021 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 3 December 2021 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Barnett | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2022] VCC 2019 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: Criminal Law
Catchwords: Aggravated burglary; damaging property
Legislation cited: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases cited:DPP v Meyers (2014) 44 VR 486; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; DPP v Bowden [2016] VSCA 283; DPP v Hogarth [2012] VSCA 302; Rossi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 296
Sentence30 month CCO for aggravated burglary; $3,000 fine for damaging property
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms F. Holmes | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Offender | Mr T. Trood | Josh Smith Legal |
HER HONOUR:
1Troy Barnett, you have pleaded guilty on indictment to charges of aggravated burglary and damaging property, both of which occurred on 16 December 2020.
2In sentencing you for your crimes, I am obliged to have regard to the maximum penalty for each of the offences which you have committed. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 25 years imprisonment. Damaging property carries a maximum of 10 years imprisonment. The maximum penalties reflect the seriousness with which Parliament regards these offences.
3The circumstances of your offending were set out in the document entitled 'Summary of prosecution opening' dated 5 November 2021. This is an agreed document and reflects your acceptance of the elements of the offences to which you have entered your guilty pleas, as well as the factual basis on which you fall to be sentenced.
The offences
4In short compass, on 16 December 2020, victims Jayden Lavin and Adam Webster were at Mr Webster's residence in Pakenham. At around 7.40 pm, Mr Lavin noticed a silver SUV pull up abruptly outside the premises. The front door of the residence was unlocked and slightly open to let air in. It is not known if the security door was open or shut, but it certainly was not locked. Mr Webster saw you running towards the house, which he described as being at ‘full pelt’. Mr Lavin had seen you exit the passenger side of the SUV and observed you to be aggressive. You screamed, 'You wanna go, cunt.' Neither Mr Webster nor Mr Lavin had ever seen you before.
5
When you got to the front of the house, you punched the loungeroom window causing it to smash and forming the basis for part of Charge 2, damaging property. Shouting, you grabbed the front door and smashed it against the wall. You then entered the premises, forming the basis for the charge of aggravated burglary. You were smashing things and picked up a plate which you smashed into
Mr Websters phone, also forming the basis for Charge 2, damaging property.
Mr Webster and Mr Lavin ran through the house and out into the back yard. You chased them, ranting. You shouted, 'You wanna fucken go, cunt.' You upturned an outdoor dining table. Mr Webster and Mr Lavin managed to scale the back fence. You punched the fence trying to get at them.
6Mr Webster asked who you were. You yelled in reply to stay away from your niece and nephew. Mr Webster then suspected that you were the uncle of Kaylee Barnett, with whom he had recently been socialising. You are in fact Kaylee's uncle.
7
You then left the premises, leaving in the vehicle in which you arrived.
Mr Webster and Mr Lavin drove to the Pakenham police station to report what had happened.
8You were arrested by police on 17 December 2020. When interviewed by them you made substantial admissions. However, you sought to excuse your actions by telling police that you were addressing concerns that you had for your niece and nephew associating with Mr Webster and that you had not taken your prescribed Seroquel for three days, had about five beers and were tired from work and had heat stroke. The smashed window you said was a result of a fall.
9You spent one day in custody before being granted bail.
Victim impact
10I turn now to victim impact. The prosecution summary describes Mr Webster as being in fear for his life and as Mr Lavin believing that you could have seriously injured them. This is hardly surprising, given the context of the offending which has been outlined to me. Each have also provided Victim Impact Statements. The purpose of a Victim Impact Statement is to give those effected by your crime the opportunity to participate in the criminal justice process by informing the court about the effects of the crime upon them.
11In his Victim Impact Statement dated 15 November 2021, Adam Webster speaks of being terrified to stay alone within the house or to be alone at any time of the day. He has lost confidence to go out and enjoy life and finds that the incident replays in his head. He is now being treated for both anxiety and depression.
12In his victim impact statement of the same date, Jayden Lavin also speaks of being anxious to be at home alone and of being afraid to bring anyone back to his house in case something bad happens. He speaks of his fear that, if you had caught him on 16 December 2020, he could have lost his life.
13These Victim Impact Statements were read to the court by the prosecutor. You can be under no illusion as to the effects of your offending on both Mr Webster and Mr Lavin. It is clear that the repercussions of your crime upon each of them still continues significantly in their day-to-day lives almost 12 months later.
14I have had regard to the Victim Impact Statements of each of your victims.
Offence gravity
15On any view of it, aggravated burglary is a particularly serious offence. In your case, it is particularised as entry as a trespasser with intent to commit an offence involving intentional damage and knowing or being reckless as to the presence of a person. Your actions occurred in the context of your then belief that Mr Webster had been using drugs with your teenage nephew and had also been involved with your niece. On any view of it, you may well have been ill informed and, even if not, it was not your problem to solve and certainly not in the way that you chose to.
16
I am assisted by the decisions of the Victoria Court of Appeal, including the of DPP v Bowden [2016] VSCA 283, DPP v Hogarth [2012] VSCA 302 and
DPP v Meyers(2014) 44 VR 486. In Hogarth, that court held that sentences generally imposed for confrontational aggravated burglary were too low and that sentencing practices needed to change to reflect the objective gravity of this kind of offending. This was further clarified by the decision of DPP v Meyers, which included a non-exhaustive range of factors to be considered in assessing the objective gravity of an aggravated burglary which is, of course, complete on entry. These factors include:
· the offender's intent at the point of entry, that is, whether to steal or commit assault or cause damage;
· the mode of entry, such as by forcing a door or breaking a window;
· whether the offender was carrying a weapon;
· whether the offender was alone or in company;
· the time of day at which the burglary took place;
· what the offender knew or believed about who would be inside and/or about the person(s), where they would be; and
· whether the offender was someone of whom the victim was particularly frightened.
17In your record of interview with police, as already outlined, you sought to excuse your offending on the basis that you had not taken your medication and had five beers and were tired from work and had heat stroke. I do not have a basis to reduce you responsibility for your offending for any of those reasons. However, I do accept that your offending was largely spontaneous in direct response to information given to you by your sister, the mother of your niece and nephew. Whilst you forced entry, your offending occurred in the early evening, you were on your own, easily identifiable and unarmed.
18In my view, there is a lack aggravating features to the aggravated burglary. I accept, in essence, the submission made on your behalf that the aggravated burglary which you committed is towards the lower end of the scale for an offence of its type.
19Whilst relatively short-lived, taking place in some three to five minutes, your offending has had a profound effect on each of your victims. They were relatively young men. Each of them were unknown to you. At the time of your entry, you could not have possibly known that you had the right target and, as I have already stated, Mr Webster simply should not have been targeted by you anyway. Mr Lavin was very much an innocent bystander, a fact for which you had no regard and, of course, you risked involving your partner in being implicated, given she was the driver of the car.
20Your actions were clearly terrifying and occurred in the home of Mr Webster, an environment in which he was entitled to feel safe, as were his guests. The smashing of his property was an additional act, not a mode of entry and was gratuitous and intimidatory, as it was no doubt supposed to be. It does inform your intent on entry. It also reflects the sheer level of your uncontrolled anger and would have added to the fear which you instilled in each of your victims. Given these circumstances, there is need to give weight in sentencing to the principles of deterrence, just punishment, denunciation and protection of the community.
Plea of guilty
21I turn now to your pleas of guilty. The Sentencing Act obliges me to take into account the stage at which you entered your plea.
22I am told that no committal was held. Instead, you indicated your willingness to plead guilty to the charges on this indictment, following participation in a committal case conference in the Magistrates' Court on 7 May 2021.
23Your plea has utilitarian value in saving both the Magistrates and the County Court the time and expense of contested proceedings. In addition, it has spared the witnesses the need to be cross-examined and, in the case of Mr Webster and Mr Lavin particularly, the need to relive traumatic events.
24Your decision to resolve and plead guilty in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic has additional utilitarian value, as it does provide certainty and finality to all parties in circumstances where the court's operations have ben significantly disrupted and many trial dates remain as yet unfixed.
25In the recent decision of Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169 at paragraph 39, the Court of Appeal said, and I quote:
'A plea of guilty entered during the currency of the COVID-19 pandemic is worthy of greater weight in mitigation than a similar plea entered at a time when the community and the courts are not afflicted by the pandemic’s effects. A plea of guilty during the pandemic ordinarily should attract a more pronounced amelioration of sentence than at another time.'
26The importance of utilitarian benefit from a plea of guilty at this time was recently reinforced in the decision of Rossi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 296, which repeated the following from Worboyes and, again, I quote:
'[W]hilst the courts of this State continue to labour under the adverse effects of the pandemic, a sentencing court should view a plea of guilty as carrying with it a greater utilitarian benefit than at other times and in other circumstances, and, concomitantly, as attracting an augmented mitigatory effect on sentence, simply because the plea will benefit the bloviate administration of justice. Given the unhappy state of the courts' lists, the courts must, in an endeavour to alleviate the strain on the system, encourage those accused who are guilty to so plead. Such encouragement must come from an actual and palpable amelioration of sentence.'
27There is important utility in a message being sent to those considering their options as to the sentencing discounts which attach at this time which can only be reflected in penalties imposed.
28In addition, you have expressed remorse for your offending in the materials tendered on your behalf. These matters will all be taken into account in your favour.
Personal circumstances
29I turn now to your personal circumstances. You are now aged 36 years. You were born and raised in Berwick, Bundoora and Narre Warren. Your mother, Kaye, performs home duties and your father, Leon, is a retired appliance mechanic. Whilst your parents separated in 2018, they remain living together in Korumburra as your father suffers from testicular cancer and has heart problems and your mother acts as his carer. You are not presently in contact with either of your parents.
30You have five sisters and you are the second youngest in the sibship. You were particularly close to your sister, Candice, only one year older than you. You were her carer for some time. She died in August 2011 from cervical cancer. It appears that you are yet to deal with your grief.
31Your sister Becky, the mother of the niece and nephew who are the source of your anger on 16 December 2020, suffers from multiple sclerosis and uses a wheelchair. You do maintain a relationship with her but otherwise have limited contact with your siblings.
32You left home at the age of 13 years. Apparently there were tensions over your behaviour and drug use, otherwise, I know little of your background up until this point. On leave home, you initially slept at school. You were expelled from school at the beginning of year 9. You had been the subject of bullying.
33A friend's father, Paul, took you in when you were 15 years old. You describe him as caring. He died in 2019. On leaving school, you began working with your father in appliance repairs which you did until you turned 18 years.
34In 2004 you began working in fencing for your then partner's father. Since 2018 you have been employed as a fencing contractor with Progressive Timber and Fencing. In your working life, you have cut off a thumb with a power saw in 2014. Your thumb was reattached. On another occasion, you have cut your leg with a power saw and injured yourself with a coil gun.
35You have a long-standing relationship with drugs and alcohol. You were using cannabis by the age of 13 years. This continued until March of this year. You were using methylamphetamine from the age of 19 years which continued until about 18 months ago. You have also been a regular user of alcohol.
36When aged 20 years, you formed a relationship with Tara, with whom you have a 15-year-old son. You separated from Tara in 2007 and you presently see your son every second weekend. On separation from Tara, you lived with your sister Candice and played a role as her carer until her death. During this time, you did manage abstinence from drugs and alcohol.
37Your next relationship was with Kylie from late 2010 until 2014. You have a nine-year-old son and seven-year-old daughter from this relationship whom you do not see.
38In 2016 you formed a relationship with Sienna Ortega[1] with whom you have twin boys aged about 15 months. Sienna has a 6-year-old son and a 10-year-old daughter from a previous relationship whom you treat as your own. In 2019 Sienna left your relationship due to your behaviour and drug and alcohol use. She did the same after 16 December 2020. This event may well have prompted you to make efforts to change, as have probably these court proceedings.
[1]A pseudonym.
Criminal history
39I turn now to your prior criminal history. You have a prior criminal history spanning some 13 years with five court appearances. The first of those was on 15 March 2006 when you appeared at the Dandenong Magistrates' Court in relation to charges of shop theft, assault and resist police. On that occasion, you were paced an adjourned undertaking for a period of 12 months without a conviction being recorded. You were required to attend counselling, as directed by your doctor. It would appear that you complied with that order. I am told that that should now be considered a spent conviction and should not be taken into account. In any event, it is of little consequence to the sentencing exercise, other than your ability to comply with a court order.
40There was then a significant gap in your offending behaviour. Some 11 years later, you appeared at the Dandenong Magistrates' Court on 11 May 2017 in relation to charges of unlawful assault and intentionally damaging property. You were again placed on an adjourned undertaking for a period of 12 months and ordered to undertake an anger management course.
41On 5 October 2017, you appeared at the Dandenong Magistrates' Court in relation to two charges of contravening a family violence final intervention order. You were placed on an adjourned undertaking for a period of 12 months and again ordered to complete an anger management course.
42It is not suggested that you contravened either of those adjourned undertakings.
43You next appeared at the Dandenong Magistrates' Court on 27 February 2019 in relation to a charge of exceeding the prescribed concentration of alcohol, driving whilst disqualified and driving on a path. At that time, you were convicted and placed on a Community Correction Order for 12 months with both work and treatment conditions. I am told that you have been contravened on this order but an outcome is yet to be determined until May of next year.
44On 10 April 2019, you appeared at the Ringwood Magistrates' Court for a charge of shop theft. You were fined $400 without conviction.
45You are not to be punished for this criminal history a second time. It is relevant to the sentencing exercise in the weight that should attach to specific deterrence, denunciation and protection of the community. It is also relevant to the assessment that needs to be undertaken as to your prospects of rehabilitation to which I will now turn.
46Your criminal history is relatively limited and dispositions afforded would indicate relatively low level offending. It is largely, but not entirely, unrelated to your offending of December 2020. You have abided by three sentencing orders. By the same token, you have had opportunities to focus on treatment which, given your actions on 16 December 2020, appear to have had some limits in their effect. Your offending of 16 December 2020 is obviously the most serious to date.
Tendered documents
47Tendered on your behalf were a number of materials in support of your future prospects.
48A psychological report authored by Ms Gina Cidoni, psychologist, dated 9 November 2021 sets out much of your personal background.
49In Ms Cidoni's opinion, you present with chronic substance abuse problems, in remission, and generalised anxiety disorder. You perceive situations as more threatening than they actually are. You have difficulty in letting go of worries. You have difficulty concentrating and sleeping and problems with uncertain situations.
50She opined that your offending was related to you drinking heavily on 16 December 2020 where you were then disinhibited and acted impulsively. This much is obvious. Ms Cidoni was of the view that your underlying generalised anxiety disorder is likely to have contributed, causing irritability and restlessness and a tendency to overact and perceive situations are more threatening than they actually are.
51I do not see either of these identified problems as reducing your moral culpability. It is difficult, in any event, to disentangle the effects of alcohol from any impact of your generalised anxiety disorder. As opposed to your record of interview, you told Ms Cidoni that you consumed 15 beers prior to your offending.
52Apparently, you were admitted to a psychiatric unit post-offending but no materials have been provided to support that and I simply do not take that into account.
53Ms Cidoni described you as remorseful and recommended that you continue with drug and alcohol counselling.
54Francois Joubert, psychologist, has also provided a letter dated 28 October 2021. You were referred to him by your doctor on 22 December 2020, just six days after your offending. By the date of his letter you had attended upon Mr Joubert for treatment for depression and insomnia on six occasions. He was also of the opinion that you were suffering from undiagnosed anxiety.
55You expressed your desire to him to have a better future and showed insight in realising that some of your past behaviours were dysfunctional and counterproductive, both socially and personally. You were described by him as forthcoming and engaged throughout the sessions and further treatment was recommended.
56You also expressed your disappointment and remorse to Mr Joubert. You identified that your actions impact on people other than yourself. Mr Joubert was of the opinion that, with correct support, your risk of reoffending was minimal. I understand that you intend to continue treatment with Mr Joubert on receipt of a new mental healthcare plan.
57A letter offered by Mary Hall, drug and alcohol clinician with SURE/EACH Services, dated 11 November 2021, confirms that you approached their service in late November 2020 in the lead-up to your offending. Counselling sessions commenced on 2 December 2020 and you accessed six counselling appointments. You expressed to her concern about your substance misuse and how that effected your behaviour. You worked in sessions to reduce your alcohol intake and to cease the smoking of cannabis. You acknowledge that these substances reduce your inhibition and placed you at risk of harm to yourself and others. You also acknowledged the need for mental health treatment. I understand that you intend to continue with Ms Hall.
58A certificate from Monash Health confirms that you attended their Withdrawal Unit between 22 February 2021 and 1 March 2021. In addition, a letter from your general practitioner, Dr Mirranay, confirms that you are having regular counselling and are under a naltrexone program. You are also prescribed Seroquel, mirtazapine and Valium.
Prospects for rehabilitation
59The prosecution described your prospects for rehabilitation as guarded at the time of your initial plea. I do not agree.
60Whilst I do accept that your rehabilitation is in its infancy, given your long-standing problems, you have clearly commenced that journey and you are making every effort to improve your life and that of those around you. You have established therapeutic relationships which appear to be effective. I accept that you are highly motivated at this time for positive change. That motivation appears to have come from the desire to get your relationship with your partner and children back on track and the wake-up call produced by the serious nature of your offending and the risk that that posed to your way of life.
61
Evidence was called from your employer, David Bone, of Progressive Timber and Fencing. His evidence was impressive. You have worked with his company for some three and a half years as a sub-contractor. He described you as an excellent employee from a skills and trade point of view. You are highly competent and great with customers. You have kept him advised of your charges and court proceedings and he was aware that you took part in alcohol rehabilitation.
Mr Bone sees you regularly during the working week. He has never observed you as drug or alcohol affected and would see this as grounds for dismissal if you were. You are, in his words, critical to his business, such that you would retain your employment if gaoled. Equally, I'm told today that he could accommodate your need to comply with any correctional service order.
62You are well respected within your workplace. Mr Bone's evidence was indeed a positive reflection on your character and skills within your chose trade - a presentation which is far removed from your behaviour of 16 December 2020.
63Your full-time employment obviously allows for you to provide for your family and children.
64Your partner Sienna Ortega was also called to give evidence at your plea hearing on 24 November 2021. You have been together for about six years but she left the relationship after your offending until you could detoxify from alcohol.
65From May this year you have been undergoing a process of reunification, noting that there is a current intervention order in place in which she, her children and your children are protected persons. You cannot have contact with them if drug and/or alcohol affected.
66Ms Somerville's evidence was that she has seen change in you without your use of alcohol and with the benefit of counselling. She says you now think first and do not just act on your emotions. She described you as an almost completely different person. She has not seen any signs of a return to drug or alcohol use and has indicated that this would finish the relationship if you did.
67As I referred to earlier, I see your relationship with Ms Somerville and your children as a considerable motivator for you to maintain an offence free and, importantly in your case, drug and alcohol free lifestyle.
68Based on the materials tendered on your behalf and the evidence called, your prospects of rehabilitation would appear sound at this point in time. That assessment is contingent on you maintaining a treatment regime and your current motivation.
69
You have written a letter of apology to your victims, acknowledging your remorse and regret. Whilst in some ways this can be seen as a relatively self-serving document and to have limited weight in the sentencing exercise, it is important for each of your victims to know that that is the approach you have taken. Your offer to make restitution for the damage you cause during your plea hearing can also be described as relatively self-serving, but if it does occur and least covers
Mr Webster or his insurance company for financial loss.
Submissions
70The prosecution submitted that at the time of your plea, a proper reflection of all relevant sentencing principles would see the imposition of a head sentence with a non-parole period.
71On your behalf, it is submitted that a significant Community Correction Order would meet these aims.
72In order to be better informed, I have had you assessed for your suitability for a Community Correction Order. A Community Correction Order brief pre-sentence assessment outcome report dated 26 November 2021 details that you have had a limited history with Community Correctional Services. You are deemed to be a suitable candidate for a Correction Order.
73I have also been provided with a brief report from the Mental Health Advice and Response Service dated 29 November 2021. That report details your recognition of the direct link between your offending and substance use behaviours. You are assessed as being well engaged in psychological intervention for symptoms relating to anxiety and depression. In the opinion of the author, you present as someone who has worked hard to address your issues with addiction and mental illness. You have remained abstinent for some time and area well engaged in treatment and psychological intervention. It opined that you would benefit from ongoing assessment and treatment of your mental health to promote wellbeing and reduce your risk of reoffending. This reinforces my assessment as to your current prospects for rehabilitation.
Sentencing
74In terms of sentencing, the basic purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are punishment, general and specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In sentencing you, I must have regard to a range of matters such as the seriousness of the offending, your culpability for it, your personal circumstances and, of course, those of your victims. I must also balance the interest of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interest the community clearly has in ensuring, where possible, that offenders are rehabilitated and are safely reintegrated into society.
75I have taken into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in s5 of the Sentencing Act where relevant to your cases. I have taken into account current sentencing practices for the offences to which you have pleaded guilty and the principles of totality, proportionality and parsimony.
76Courts now have more discretion in terms of choosing a sentencing disposition which does enable all the purposes of punishment to be served simultaneously in a coherent and balance way and in preference to the option of imprisonment, which is naturally skewed towards retribution and deterrence, factors which now have less weight in the overall sentencing mix for you.
77Whilst the path to rehabilitation may still present its challenges, you have commenced that journey and it seems your ability to access appropriate services has already had a role to play, a role which should continue. In my view, that is not only in your interests, it is in the interests of the community. A Community Correction Order can be punitive, can achieve deterrence and may be suitable, even in cases of relatively serious offences such as these which might previously have attracted a medium term of imprisonment.
78Accordingly, you are sentenced as follows:
·On Charge 2, damaging property, you are convicted and fines the amount of $3000
·On Charge 1, aggravated burglary, you are convicted and placed on a Community Correction Order for a period of two years and six months. During this order, you are:
(a)to compete 300 hours of community work;
(b)undergo treatment and rehabilitation for drug and alcohol use;
(c)to be assessed and treated for your mental health;
(d)to be assessed and, if need be, referred to offence specific programs; and
(e)to be supervised by the Office of Corrections.
One hundred hours of treatment is to be offset against the community work component.
79In addition to the conditions that I have imposed, there are, what we call, standard conditions. The first and foremost of those is you must not commit any other offences during the 30 month period which could be punished by imprisonment. You must also report within two working days to the nearest Community Corrections Office. You are required to advise your Corrections Office of any change of address, of where you are living or working and you must also do that within two clear working days.
80It is a term of all Community Correction Orders that you must submit to visits as directed and you must obey all of the instructions and directions of a Community Corrections Officer. You cannot leave the State of Victoria without prior permission of your Corrections Office.
81In my view, this order presents you with a chance to continue to change your life in a positive fashion, should you choose to take up that opportunity and the supports that should be made available. The order can be breached if you do not comply with it in terms of the conditions or reoffend whilst it is in place. If you do, you will come back before me for breaching the order. I may have to resentence you and I may also have to deal with a separate charge of contravening a Corrections Order.
82Now, I can only place you on that order if you consent and in a moment I'll give you the chance to speak with your legal representatives. Before I do so, s6AAA of the Sentencing Act requires me to state the sentence that I would've imposed if you'd not pleaded guilty. If not for your pleas of guilty, you would've been sentenced to two years imprisonment with 14 months before being eligible for parole.
83MR TROOD: Thank you, Your Honour.
84HER HONOUR: I'll give you a copy so that you can take it.
85MR TROOD: Thank you.
86HER HONOUR: Anything arising, Ms Holmes?
87MS HOLMES: No, Your Honour.
88HER HONOUR: Thank you.
89MR TROOD: No, Your Honour. Mr Barnett consents to that order and those conditions. If Your Honour please.
90
HER HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Trood. Whilst I understood the submission you made today about deferral, I'm putting the ball back in Mr Barnett's court. In my view, he's still got some work to do. In my view, he's still a little bit
self-focused but, as I said, this should provide him the opportunity to make good of the gains he's already made and I saw that as the best way to actually protect the community. In the nicest possible way, I do not want to see you again, Mr Barnett.
91OFFENDER: No, Your Honour, you won't.
92HER HONOUR: All right, well thank you very much to you, Ms Holmes, for your assistance today.
93MS HOLMES: Thank you.
94HER HONOUR: Thank you, you Mr Trood, for your assistance on both occasions and, at times, your patience. I'll close the court for 10 o'clock on Monday morning.
- - -
0
5
0