Director of Public Prosecutions v Bilston

[2017] VCC 596

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised
(Not) Restricted
Suitable for Publication

AT LATROBE VALLEY
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 17-00874

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

TANIA BILSTON

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE SMALLWOOD
WHERE HELD:	Latrobe Valley
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	16 May 2017
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Bilston
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2017] VCC 596

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr P. Bourke
For the Accused	Mr A. Pyne

HIS HONOUR:

1Tania Bilston, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.  The crime carries a maximum penalty of 25 years. 

2It is a crime which can vary greatly in terms of the moral culpability involved and the gravity of the offence.  Having heard the submissions and read to the materials, it is my view that, in so far as you are concerned, this is at the lowest end of such a charge. 

3In any event, you are 41 years of age, you pleaded guilty at the earliest reasonable opportunity, you have displayed appropriate remorse, and you must of course get the utilitarian benefit of that plea of guilty.

4You have no prior convictions or findings of guilt of any description.

5A summary of the offending is that you attended at a school on 5 December 2016.  Your partner at the time, and you were having difficulties in the relationship, was in the process, as I understand it, of being charged with assaulting a former partner of his. 

6I note that the Crown have told me that his matter has now actually been dealt with, and he received a diversion program.  He also had no prior convictions.

7In any event, you, in a situation of real stress and anxiety, attended at the school where a statement had been made by a teacher, I am assuming, in relation to it.  You asked her if you could talk to her about her statement, and went into a room where the conversation took place.

8You asked her to reconsider her statement, and a conversation took place from there on in, where the complainant, if that is what the proper expression is, said that she "felt pressured".  There is no suggestion that you raised your voice or threatened her in any way, shape or form.  In any event, there was then a suggestion to go and repeat the conversation, where you were effectively asking her to change her statement in front of somebody else. 

9You agreed to do that, and in fact, did do that.  At one stage you said that you were going to see or go to A Current Affair about it.  Clearly there were differing versions as to what had occurred, and you were in a state of real upset.

10In any event, the deputy principal, I think from memory, said that the conversation was over, and you left the school without further incident.  That, as I have said, is the gravity of the offending.  And as I said it is a crime which varies greatly in terms of culpability.  I think general deterrence has to play a role in it, and the fact that you just cannot buy into trying to affect the course of criminal cases has to be recognised.

11Tendered on your behalf were some submissions by your counsel, as well as two very powerful, if I may say so, references on your behalf from members of the community.  There was also a report from Mr Jeremey Parker, which I have taken into account. 

12It could be described in very simple terms.  You are, as I said, 41.  You have three children.  The references tendered on your behalf say that you are a very good mother in very glowing, and I accept, truthful, terms.  You had difficult relationships, you suffer greatly from anxiety, and were suffering greatly from anxiety during the period of time in which this offending occurred.  Mr Parker is of the view that that anxiety is likely to continue for an extended period of time.

13In that situation, where in your mind massive pressure was being put on you in the relationship sense, you acted in a foolish but perhaps understandable way.

14The submissions of your counsel refer to a decision of The Queen v Okutgen back in 1982, which I had not remembered at all until about two weeks ago, when Mr Dane of counsel referred me to it in slightly less justifiable circumstances.  In any event, in that decision Starke J said:

"The first and basic matter that affects my mind in this regard is the fact that the applicant has reached maturity, and indeed, perhaps one might say middle age [he was 40 years old].  With any breach of the law at all, at least with the decent honourable life that he has raised a family, that he has been in constant work while he could work, he has engaged in community activities, particularly in respect of the migrant community.  A man of this age when first convicted can, I think, call in aid his character, and is entitled to ask the court to rely very strongly indeed on the fact that he is of exemplary character, and has been at all times, up until the moment of conviction."

15I think that is apt. 

16In all the circumstances, the prospects of your rehabilitation are excellent, and the risk of you reoffending, certainly in a manner such as this, is totally non-existent.  I do think though, that even though I am going to give you an adjourned disposition with a monetary payment in it, that offending of this type must have an aspect where the court displays that it was not just simply trivial, and accordingly a conviction has to be imposed.  I am somewhat reluctant to do that, but I think general deterrence and just the court record, I suppose, demands that that be the case.

17In any event, the matter will be adjourned for a period of 12 months.  It will be with conviction, and apart from good behaviour, the only condition of it will be that you pay $250 to the Red Cross within a period of three months, and that a receipt be produced to my associate to that effect. 

18HIS HONOUR:  All right, good luck with it all.  Thanks Mr Pyne.

‑ ‑ ‑