Director of Public Prosecutions v Blight

[2024] VCC 1752

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 24-00835

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

DANIEL BLIGHT

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE QUIN
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	4 October 2024 and 23 October 2024
DATE OF SENTENCE:	1 November 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Blight
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VCC 1752

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:  CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:  Charge of dangerous driving causing serious injury – prior driving history- licence cancelled and disqualified for a period of 2 years

Legislation Cited:

Cases Cited:

Sentence:                 Total effective sentence of nine months’ imprisonment.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms A. Liantzakis	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms D. Egan	Ashkan Tai Lawyers

HER HONOUR: 

1Daniel Leigh Blight, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of Dangerous driving causing serious injury, the maximum penalty is 5 years' imprisonment. Dangerous driving causing serious injury is a serious motor vehicle offence pursuant to s87P(d) of the Sentencing Act1991 and upon being sentenced there is a mandatory licence disqualification for a minimum period of 18 months.

2This matter arises out of a collision that occurred at the intersection of Capital City Cycle Path and St Georges Road in Fitzroy North.  The collision occurred when you drove a white 2021 Porsche Macan Turbo wagon (the Porsche) through a red light and collided with cyclist Ms Saba Harrington.  
Ms Harrington impacted the bonnet of the Porsche and was thrown onto the roadway where she sustained serious injuries.

3The element of dangerous driving is put on the basis that:

a)your driver’s licence was suspended;

b)you failed to stop at the red light;

c)the presence of alcohol and benzoylecgonine (a major metabolite of cocaine) was detected in your blood.

4The circumstances of your offending are set out in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 19 September 2024 (Exhibit A)

5On 27 September 2023 at around 4:10 pm, you were driving two passengers in the Porsche that was owned by a friend.   Another driver, who was one car ahead of you travelling in the same lane, saw you pull out to overtake at the time the lights turned red.  At the same time, she saw a cyclist, Ms Harrington, crossing at the crossing lights.  She then saw the Porsche hit Ms Harrington, who was thrown onto the bonnet of the Porsche then up in the air.   

6Other witnesses heard 'loud revving' before you drove past, followed by a scream and a thud, and a person 'flying through the air'.   Witnesses saw Ms Harrington land on the ground, where they observed her conscious and breathing, but verbally unresponsive.

7Emergency workers arrived at the scene and conveyed Ms Harrington to the Royal Melbourne Hospital for treatment.  When police arrived, you were tested and results of a preliminary breath test indicated a breath alcohol concentration of 0.057 per cent.  You were arrested then conveyed by police to St Vincent's Hospital to provide a blood sample

8A police collision reconstructionist attached to the Major Collision Investigation Unit, examined the collision scene and opined:

9There was evidence of Ms Harrington being struck by the front driver's side of the Porsche before being in contact with the bonnet of the Porsche;

10damage to the Porsche and scuff marks on the road were consistent with the Porsche impacting Ms Harrington, and then her sliding across the bonnet, after initially being impacted by the front of the Porsche; and

11That there were no obvious obstructions to visibility for someone sitting in the driver's seat of the Porsche. 

Speed

12Experts opined that the Porsche was travelling between 43 and 50 kilometres when it collided with Ms Harrington.  This speed is based on the assumption Ms Harrington was travelling on the pedestrian crossing at the time of impact.

Toxicology

13Analysis of the sample taken from you revealed the following concentrations of alcohol and drugs:

a)Not less than 0.064 grams of alcohol (or0.064 per cent).

b)~0.04 mg/L of benzoylecgonine (a major metabolite of cocaine).

INVESTIGATION

Record of interview

14You participated in a record of interview with police and made 'no comment'.

SERIOUS INJURY

15At the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Ms Harrington was admitted and assessed as having serious injuries, including fractures to her left femur (thighbone), left fibular (calf bone), left tibia (shin bone), traumatic brain injury, intracranial haemorrhage, various artery injuries and tears, Aspiration pneumonia; and Post‑traumatic amnesia.

16On 6 November 2023 (40 days after the collision), Ms Harrington was discharged and transferred to the Epworth Acquired Brain Injury Unit for further treatment.  In March 2024, Dr Rachel Teo her treating practitioner, provided a statement that set out Ms Harrington's injuries sustained as a result of the collision, the full details are set out in paragraph 27 of Exhibit A or the Prosecution Opening.

17Of note was that she expressed Ms Harrington's post-traumatic amnesia as indicative of a 'very severe Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)'.   That Ms Harrington required a speech pathologist for language and communication, management of a gastroenterologist to assist with swallowing and overcome malnutrition problems.  That her development of left-sided weakness after the collision gradually improved with rehabilitation, although, her left shoulder remained weak and was confirmed as subacromial bursitis.  That Ms Harrington now requires equipment for personal tasks such as a shower stool, toilet frame and nonslip shower mat.  An X-ray on 29 November 2023 showed healing of many of her bone and head fractures with minimal residual displacement. 
Ms Harrington was referred for ophthalmology assessment and required the use of an eye patch for her double vision – she will require ophthalmology clearance and occupational therapy driving assessment before she is cleared to return to driving herself. 

18Ms Harrington was discharged from the Epworth ABI unit on 5 January 2024 to commence outpatient rehabilitation including input from neuropsychology, speech therapy, physiotherapy, hydrotherapy, occupational therapy and from a social worker.

19Ms Harrington's Traumatic Brain Injury classification is severe and 'it is a permanent injury'. Although there has been some recovery, there remains residual deficits of mildly reduced processing speed and memory recall, with changes to her personality which still impact on her social interaction.

VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS

20A number of Victim Impact Statements were filed (see Exhibits B-G).  All of them except one were read by the prosecutor.  Victim Impact Statements were provided by Ms Harrington, her mother and stepfather, aunts, work colleagues and friends.

21Ms Harrington describes the extensive and devastating impact that this has had on her life and those connected with it.  She laments that her child Grace's life has been turned upside down with the sudden loss of the person who was her principal carer, and that her husband's life was rocked with the uncertainty regarding her survival and concerns whether their daughter was going to have a mother.  Her marriage, and relationship with her daughter have been dramatically impacted, as has her level of dependence on others including family members and friends.  Her appearance has changed, and she is unable to do many of the activities she used to with her daughter.  She recognises she is fortunate to have family members who have provided her a significant amount of practical assistance though is stressed regarding the amount of time others have provided, previously being independent – her social activities are limited and she is unable to drive.  She feels paranoid and more sensitive, feelings that she had previously not experienced in relationships with friends and family.  She concludes that one thing that takes away a lot of joy, satisfaction, finances and social connections is that she is unable to attend work for so long given her injuries and rehabilitation progress.

22I do not propose to go through each other individual statement but want to assure the authors that they are compelling reading, eloquently setting out the impact that this offending has had on Ms Harrington and in turn, or as a consequence, the impact this has had on them, especially immediately after the incident.  This is particularly so regarding the uncertainty associated with Ms Harrington's injuries and her likely recovery.  In particular I note the concluding remarks of her mother:

This is my statement as a mother whose only daughter was mowed down on her bike by an SUV.  The statement of a mother, of any mother, who is struggling to convey to another the absolute devastation that such a thing leaves her with: alive, yes; but a victim emotionally fragile, fearful and utterly disabled from being anything but a shell of what she was, and what she could have been.

Personal circumstances

23I received the following material filed on your behalf

a)Psychological Report of Dr Austin Campbell dated 27 September 2024

b)Psychological Report of Dr Caroline Aazami dated 21 May 2024

c)Bundle of material including a Certificate of Road Trauma Course, an apology letter and character references. 

24You are the eldest of two children and maintain a close relationship with your family.  You grew up in Canberra and completed your schooling to Year 10.  You moved to Queensland soon after you left school when you were 19. 

25You commenced a panel beating apprenticeship though did not complete it.  You then worked as a labourer full time, learning to be a tiler, which has been your primary area of employment.  You have been successfully employed in this area to date, though you have experienced some periods of financial uncertainty. 

26You have a 17-year-old daughter.  You began relationship with her mother soon after you moved to Queensland.  That relationship ended in about 2012 due to stressors of the business though you have maintained a positive relationship with your daughter and have co‑parented her with your ex-partner.

27You have a six-year-old son.  You were in a relationship with his mother from late 2015 until 2022.  Since the beginning of 2024 you have cared full time for your son, a task made more difficult in practical terms given you do not have a car licence.  Your most recent relationship lasted about 18 months.  It was during this time your substance use increased.  That relationship broke down following this offending and your release on bail.

28You were diagnosed with ADHD as a child and were medicated to manage your symptoms.  You ceased medication when aged 16 years then started experiencing difficulties with emotional regulation.  As you matured you have been able to better control your emotions.  As noted above you do not appear to meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD.

29You described to Dr Campbell the trauma related symptoms following this offending and your impending Court appearance. You have commenced psychological intervention as a result of these experiences. You have exhausted funding available through your mental health plan though intend to continue with another plan. You did not describe experiencing trauma related symptoms to a degree of a diagnostic PTSD, and you indicated you felt capable of managing the distress associated with reminders of the offence. Dr Campbell opines you currently suffer from 'mild levels of anxiety and severe levels of depression.' Dr Campbell [35].

30You do not regard your alcohol consumption as problematic, and maintain you are a social drinker.  You indicated on this day of the offending you had two schooners of beer with lunch and had eaten a small amount of food.  Similarly, your use of other illicit substances, cannabis and cocaine has varied in quantity since you were about 19 years, but you describe yourself predominantly as a social user.  You maintain the last time you used cocaine was two days before this offending when you were visiting friends in this State.  I was informed that you have been abstinent from any drug use and have not driven a car since this offending.

31As to the offending at the time you were visiting friend in Victoria and your son was being cared for by your ex-partner.  You had lost your licence through demerit points, but you thought it had been restored the day of this offence.  You accept you were wrong about the date. 

32You maintain that you did not feel affected by alcohol or drugs.  When you were driving, you were familiar with the road and the Porsche.  You maintained a tram was obscuring your vision and you sped up approaching the lights.  I understand that once the relevant evidence was available for you to view, you accepted that there was no tram in the relevant area at the time of your approach to the traffic lights.

Prior history

33You have a significant driving history from Queensland occurring prior to this offence in September 2023.

34Between March and September 2023, you were fined for speeding five times, on one of those occasions it was by more than 20 kilometres an hour and not less than 30 kilometres an hour;

35In 2022 you were fined for speeding four times;

36In 2021 you were fined for speeding three times;

37In 2020 you were fined for speeding three times, on one occasion over 20 kilometres and not less than 30 kilometres and for failing to stop at a red light;

38In 2019 you were fined for speeding three times, on one occasion over 20 kilometres an hour and not less than 30 kilometres an hour. 

39As I indicated in the course of the plea, you have an appalling driving record.

40You also have other prior Court matters relating to drugs and domestic violence.  I note that on 9 March 2023 you were convicted and fined for various matters but also in respect of failing to provide a password.  At Southport Magistrate's Court you were sentenced to imprisonment for five months suspended for 15 months.  This offending occurred during the operational period of that suspension.  Your counsel indicated that no action had yet been taken in relation to that sentence and this offending at this time.

41Given your prior history, specific deterrence and protection of the community are important sentencing considerations.

Plea of guilty - remorse

42I take into account your plea of guilty and that it was at the earliest opportunity.  There is a significant utilitarian value in your plea with no witnesses being required to relive this traumatic incident.  You have saved the cost to the community of a trial and legal proceedings and facilitated the course of justice in this State.  Your plea is also indicative of you taking responsibility for, and having an understanding of, the impact on Ms Harrington and her family of your actions.  That finding is consistent with the sentiments you expressed to relevant professionals and to others.

43I accept you are genuinely remorseful for your offending.  As revealed in the reports from Dr Campbell and Dr Aazami, your apology letter and in character references, you have expressed remorse, shame and guilt about this offending.  I was informed your mental health deteriorated when you spent five days in custody immediately following this incident.  That you were preoccupied with the wellbeing Ms Harrington and the consequences of your actions to both yourself and your son. 

Rehabilitation

44Your counsel submitted that your 'unenviable' traffic history, the fact and consequence of this offending has been life altering for you and that you have good prospects for rehabilitation.  In support of that submission she relied on:

·Your plea of guilty at an early stage;

·The impact of your short period in custody of five days

·Remorse and high level of insight into this offending;

·Meaningful engagement with the psychologist and commitment to continue treatment;

·Completion of the road trauma awareness course

·Strong employment history and work ethic including ongoing commitments;

·Family support including your excellent relationship with your daughter and her mother who live in Brisbane.

45Given the nature of this offending and your prior driving history I regard your rehabilitation prospects as fair.

Custody more burdensome

46I take into account that you have, in more recent times, had the primary care of your son in Queensland.  I was informed at that the plea hearing that his mother is available to care for him.  I accept the burden of imprisonment will be greater on you given your concern about your son's care and his well-being. 

Objective seriousness of Offending

47It is undisputed that offending of this kind is serious by virtue of, amongst other things, the consequences, whether they be serious injury or death.  The objective gravity of this offence is determined by the degree of dangerousness of the driving and the seriousness of the injury caused. 

48Your counsel submitted this instance, relative to other charges of 'dangerous' driving, featured low moral culpability having regard to all the relevant circumstances. That your offending can be contrasted to offending of this kind involving aggravating features as outlined in DPP (Vic) v Neethling (2009) 22 VR 366 at [31]. The prosecution accepted that many of those features were not present.

49However, the incident occurred on a main suburban road on a Wednesday afternoon at about 4 o'clock.  There was no obvious obstruction to your sight.  The risk to other road users, including pedestrians was very high.  There is little in the circumstances of your driving to reduce your moral culpability, which I regard as being neither significant or low. 

50The impact on Ms Harrington and been extremely serious and devastating as indicated in the victim impact statements from herself, family and friends.  The effects remain with extensive rehabilitation continuing and difficulties with daily tasks.

51This could not be described as a case of momentary inattention.  As noted in Lee inattention at any time is dangerous, prolonged inattention is highly dangerous. Again in Lee [2021] VSCA 156 at [20]–

The first obligation of a driver is to pay attention to the road ahead, and to be aware of the movements of others who are on or near the road.  The inherent dangerousness of a motor vehicle travelling at speed makes it imperative that the driver remain in control of the vehicle at all times.  The obligation to maintain control is an obligation which each driver owes to each other road user and to those in the vicinity of the road.[1]  Compliance with that obligation is essential to community safety.

[1]Towle [2009] VSCA 280, [57].

52The court was referred by both counsel to a number of cases which I have read and taken into account.  Because no cases are identical each must be considered by its own unique circumstances and the personal circumstances of the offender.  They do however provide some guidance and relevant sentencing principles.

SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS & PRINCIPLES

53In cases of this nature general deterrence and denunciation are important sentencing considerations.  People who are minded to drive in a dangerous manner, placing a number of people at risk, must be on notice that they will receive stern punishment.  As noted previously specific deterrence is also of significance, it is necessary for me to balance those considerations with matters personal to you, your plea and your high level of remorse. 

54Your counsel submitted that having regard to all relevant matters, including sentencing principles and mitigating factors, you should be sentenced to a community corrections order (CCO), with the possibility of it being transferred to your home State Queensland (see Exhibit 3).

55Your counsel relied on the principles from Boulton and relevant authorities in support of that submission.  I had you assessed by Corrections and you were assessed as suitable.  The Prosecution submitted that the only appropriate sentence for this offence, given the objective seriousness of it and the impact on the victim, was the imposition of an immediate term of imprisonment.

56If you could please stand, Mr Blight.

57In respect of the offence of dangerous driving causing serious injury, you are convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of nine months.

58I declare pre-sentence detention of five days.

59Your licence will be cancelled for a period of two years.

60If you had not pleaded guilty to this matter I would have imposed a sentence of 18 months with a non-parole period of 10 months.

61Is there anything else?

62COUNSEL:  Nothing further, Your Honour.

63HER HONOUR:  Thank you.  I will stand down, thank you.

‑ ‑ ‑