Director of Public Prosecutions v Bunker
[2023] VCC 1064
•26 June 2023
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT Melbourne CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-22-00178
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| JOSHUA GRAHAM BUNKER |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE CHAMBERS | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 21 June 2023 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 26 June 2023 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Bunker | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2023] VCC 1064 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW - sentence
Catchwords: Plea of guilty after sentence indication – failing to stop after a motor vehicle accident – failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident – summary offence of possessing an imitation firearm – offender ought to have known that serious injury would probably result as a result of the accident – relevant prior matter - no evidence the offender contributed to and actually saw the collision occur or the aftermath of the collision - no aggravating feature of victim being left alone without assistance – diagnosed ADHD impacts upon judgement, behaviour control and decision-making – victim sustained life-changing injuries, including a traumatic brain injury and quadriplegia – community correction order able to meet relevant sentencing considerations of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment whilst fostering the ongoing rehabilitation of the offender
Legislation Cited: Road Safety Act 1986; Control of Weapons Act 1990; Sentencing Act 1991
Cases Cited:Abbott v. The Queen [2021] VSCA 149; Worboyes v. The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; R v. Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; Boulton v. The Queen [2014] VSCA 342
Sentence: Community Correction Order made, with conviction, for 18 months on charges of failing to step and render assistance
Fine of $700.00 imposed on summary offence of possessing an imitation firearm
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr D.P. Hannan | Office of Public Prosecutions Victoria |
| For the Accused | Mr D. De Witt | Victoria Legal Aid |
HER HONOUR:
1Joshua Bunker, following a sentence indication given by me,[1] you have pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to stop after a motor vehicle collision and one charge of failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident contrary to s 61(1) and (3) of the Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic) (‘the Act’). The maximum penalty for both offences is 10 years’ imprisonment.
[1]Sentence Indication hearing conducted on 3 May 2023.
2You have also pleaded guilty to a summary offence of possessing an imitation firearm, contrary to s 5AB of the Control of Weapons Act 1990 (Vic). This offence is unrelated to the other charges. You have consented to having the summary charge dealt with in this Court pursuant to s 243(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009. The maximum penalty for this offence is 2 years’ imprisonment and/or 240 penalty units.
3On Thursday, 4 March 2021 at approximately 2.15 pm, a collision occurred on Clow Street, Dandenong when the victim stepped off the footpath on Clow Street, hitting a steel box trailer being towed by your vehicle and sustained life-threating injuries. It is important to state at the outset that you are not charged with any offence relating to the circumstances of this collision or with causing the injuries suffered by the victim due to the collision.
4The offences with which you are charged arise from the fact you failed to stop and render assistance to the victim following the collision.
5You were born in January 1988 and were 33 years old at the time. You have admitted your prior criminal record.
Circumstances of Offending
6The circumstances of your offending are detailed in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 10 May 2023, which is the agreed basis upon which you are to be sentenced, save for one significant matter to which I return later in my reasons.
7At approximately 2.15 pm on Thursday, 4 March 2021, the victim was walking along Thomas Street, Dandenong with some friends. The group crossed over Thomas Street at the intersection with Clow Street.
8
At the same time, you were driving your Ford Ranger utility while towing a
steel-box trailer along Thomas Street towards Clow Street. You had borrowed the large, framed box trailer from a friend to move your belongings, and were accompanied by a friend, Matthew Lister, who was seated in the front passenger seat. You stopped and parked for a period along Thomas Street for Mr Lister to use the ATM across the road. CCTV footage shows the victim’s group walk past Mr Lister on the footpath, but they did not interact with either of you in any way.
9When Mr Lister returned to the vehicle, you made a left-hand turn into Clow Street, driving west.
10A witness saw the victim begin to cross Clow Street after waiting for your Ford Ranger to pass. However, not realising there was a trailer attached, the victim took another step forward colliding with the front left corner of the box trailer. The victim fell, hitting the ground, and sustained life-threatening injuries as a result. He was treated at the scene by paramedics and then transported to The Alfred Hospital.
11You did not stop your vehicle or render assistance to the victim following the collision. Your conduct in failing to stop after the collision is the subject of charge 1 – failing to stop after a motor vehicle accident. Your conduct in failing to render assistance to the victim after the collision is the subject of charge 2 - failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident.
12When you drove away following the collision, Mr Lister had his head down, counting the cash he had withdrawn from the ATM. He did not see the collision but felt a bump at the rear of the vehicle which he thought was the trailer clipping the curb. As you drove Mr Lister home to his place, you did not have any discussion with him about what occurred.
13Various witnesses heard the noise caused by the impact of the collision. In summary, they include the following witnesses:
·
Renee Teaia, who was walking along Clow Street at the time of the collision and heard a ‘thud’ before turning and seeing the victim in
mid-air.
·Gary Cartes, who heard a ‘loud bang” as he walked with Renee Teaia on Clow Street, before seeing the victim hit the road landing next to the gutter.
·Syed Sarwari, who heard a loud thud as he was walking on Robinson Street, near Clow Street, that he says sounded like a car accident.
·Daliborka Panic, who was sitting in a café 20-30 metres from the collision and describes everyone in the café turning to see what happened.
·Deng Amol and Jermiah James, who were in the victim’s group, who described the impact as “very loud, like a bomb or something” and “like a boom”.
14Some of these witnesses also describe your reaction to the collision. These include:
·Renee Teaia, who was walking west along Clow Street and says that following the collision she heard the driver of the Ford Ranger say, “Stay off the fucking road”, and that she ran towards the Ford Ranger, and yelled “Stop. You hit someone!”. She says the driver told her to, “Fuck off”, and stuck up his hand in an obscene gesture directed at her;
·Syed Sarwari says he was standing on the driver’s side of the Ford Ranger, about 15 metres away, and after the collision, saw the driver look to the right and say, “What the fuck”, and then quickly turn left toward the train station.
·Daliborka Panic, who was seated in the café 20-30 metres away, says she saw the driver, whose windows were down, yell out, “fuck”, and “fucking idiot”, before driving off without stopping.
15I return to the relevance of these observations later in my reasons.
16The police subsequently conducted an investigation of the collision scene. No damage was located on either the Ford Ranger or the trailer attributable to the collision. A forensic officer identified DNA linked to the victim on the left corner of the trailer, however a collision reconstruction expert, Dr Jenelle Hardiman, was unable to determine the degree of overlap between the front or side of the trailer. The exact speed at which the trailer was being driven is not known, but because it had turned the corner and had not yet entered the yaw, it was assessed that the speed must have been less than 28 km/hour.
17The prosecution accepts that speed was not a contributing factor to the collision and there is no suggestion that the manner in which you drove contributed to the collision or the significant injury sustained by the victim.
18An expert forensic physician, Dr Rachel Marr, says the injuries sustained by the victim were acutely life-threatening, and without the timely medical interventions he received, the victim would almost certainly have died. In the event, the victim sustained life-changing injuries, including a traumatic brain injury and quadriplegia, for which he required multiple surgeries, a prolonged stay in intensive care and lengthy rehabilitation. He now lives in supported residential care.
Arrest and Procedural History
19You were arrested later that evening on 4 March 2021 after police located your vehicle at an address in Hallam. During a search of your vehicle, an imitation firearm was found in the pocket of the rear driver’s seat which forms the basis of the summary offence of possessing an imitation firearm.
20On 5 March 2021, you participated in an interview with police, during which you admitted driving the Ford Ranger and trailer in Clow Street, Dandenong at the time of the collision. You told police that you were waiting for someone when a ‘a group of Africans’ came past, and you felt intimidated by one of them. You said that when you turned the corner, one of the group stuck his chest out and walked into the middle of the road, and said you thought he was going to attack or hit your car. You told police you heard a bump towards the trailer side, and that the trailer rattled, but that you did not stop, and just kept driving.
21You told police you did not want to stop with a gang of people around who “looked like they wanted to beat [your] head in”. You also denied owning the imitation handgun, saying it had been left in your car by other people.
22After being charged following your police interview, your matter proceeded by way of contested committal in the Magistrates' Court on 11 February 2022.
23The matter was listed in this Court for judge-alone trial with a three-day estimate, commencing on 15 May 2023. Following a sentence indication given by me on 3 May 2023, the matter resolved to a plea on that date.
Nature and gravity of the offending
24I turn now to assess the objective gravity of your offending and your culpability for your conduct.
25Two separate obligations are imposed on drivers where there is a motor vehicle accident resulting in injury. Section 61(1) of the Road Safety Act 1986 requires a driver to immediately stop the car and immediately render such assistance as they can.
26As the Court of Appeal observed in Abbott v The Queen[2], “the section is designed to force people to stop and render assistance and the extent of the injuries is relevant to the assessment of the gravity of the offending”. The Court of Appeal went on to note that breaches of s 61(1) and (3) are “regarded very seriously and substantial terms of imprisonment have been imposed” for contraventions of these obligations.
[2][2021] VSCA 149 at [82]
27As already observed, the injuries sustained by the victim following the collision were catastrophic and life changing. This much is clear from the summary and the victim impact statement tendered at the hearing of your plea.
28However, in this case, the prosecution concedes you had no actual knowledge that the victim had sustained a serious injury as a result of the collision. Rather, it is submitted that you ought to have known that this was the probable result of the collision.
29The prosecution also accepts that although the injuries sustained by the victim were extremely serious, you did not know, and could not have known, the extent of the serious injury suffered by the victim at the time you failed to stop and render assistance. In light of the circumstances in which the collision occurred, and having viewed the photographs of the large trailer which would have obstructed your view of the most likely collision point, these concessions are appropriately made. There is no evidence you actually saw the collision occur or the aftermath of the collision.
30Fortunately, other by-standers were on hand to assist the victim. Emergency services were quickly contacted and assistance provided. The offending lacks the aggravating feature of the victim being left alone without assistance. This is significant in this case in light of the expert opinion evidence that without timely medical interventions, the victim would almost certainly have died.
31The area of dispute on your plea relates to your state of knowledge of the fact a collision had occurred. The prosecution relies on the evidence of your response to the loud “thud” or “bang” heard by multiple witnesses to argue the only available inference to be drawn is that you were aware that the victim had struck your vehicle. As it would be an aggravating feature of your offending for such a finding to be made, I must be satisfied that this is the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the entirety of the evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
32As stated, a number of witnesses to whom I have referred, recalled hearing a “bang” or a loud “thud” at the point of the collision. In your record of interview, you told police you also heard “a bump towards the trailer side”. Mr Lister, the passenger in your car, also says he “felt a bump” which he said, “felt like the trailer had hit the corner”. The prosecution contend that you knew the ‘bump’ was the sound of the victim colliding with the trailer.
33Moreover, the prosecution relies on your responses following this, including multiple witnesses stating they heard you swear, saying words to the effect of “fuck” and “fucking idiot”. Mr Lister also states you did a “whole lot of swearing”. Significantly, the prosecution relies on the evidence of Renee Teaia who says she heard you yell, “Stay off the fucking road”, before she yelled at you to stop saying, “You hit someone”. In her statement, Ms Teaia says you responded to this by telling her to “fuck off” and gesturing in an obscene fashion at her.
34Finally, the prosecution argues that the responses you gave during the record of interview are not truthful, particularly as the CCTV fails to corroborate the assertions made by you that the group had acted in an intimidating way, or that one of the group had “stuck his chest out and walked out into the middle of the road”.
35Having viewed the CCTV footage, I agree there is nothing to suggest that the group, either when passing Mr Lister or when crossing Thomas Street, interacted with you in any way or acted in an intimidating manner. There is no basis to your assertion that they did so, or that “one stuck his chest out or walked into the middle of the road”. I reject these explanations given in your record of interview and put these responses aside in my assessment of your state of knowledge.
36In my view, the fact that other witnesses heard a loud “bang” or “thud” is equally consistent with your explanation of having heard a “bump” to the rear of the trailer, or of believing that one of the group had kicked your car. It is relevant to note that Mr Lister independently concluded that the noise was consistent with the trailer hitting the corner.
37Perhaps more relevant to this issue, is the evidence of other witnesses, particularly Ms Teaia, of your responses afterwards and of you yelling abuse at her after being told you had hit someone. In my view, the fact other witnesses heard you swearing is equally consistent with your stated explanation that one of the group had kicked or hit your trailer, and that this was the trigger to your swearing.
38I also have regard to the evidence of Mr Lister that you had no conversation about this accident as you continued to drive to his house, consistent with the prospect that you were not aware that your trailer had been struck by the victim.
39As to Ms Teaia’s account, although consistent with a state of actual knowledge, I am not satisfied her account can be assessed as reliable, particularly having regard to the conflicting account given by her partner, Mr Gary Cartes, at the committal hearing. Mr Cartes was standing next to Ms Teaia at the time of the collision, but makes no reference to a conversation between Mr Teaia and you, or of hearing her tell you that you had hit someone. Like other witnesses, Mr Cartes only heard you swear. When asked about Ms Teaia’s account of the incident, Mr Cartes stated, “…she remembers a very fantastical kind of version of events that I’m not exactly sure I witnessed”, and that, “…we’re both very much aware of how our minds can play tricks on us basically”.
40Mr Lister also makes no reference to a conversation with Ms Teaia following the collision in his statement, or of hearing her tell you that you had hit someone. When questioned during the committal hearing, Ms Teaia had no recollection of Mr Lister being in the vehicle at all.
41In the circumstances, I am unable to find Ms Teaia’s account of her conversation with you after the collision is a safe basis to conclude you knew you had hit the victim.
42On balance, I cannot be satisfied to the requisite standard that you had a state of actual knowledge of the collision. You have entered a plea on the basis that you ought to have been aware of the collision and I have proceeded to sentence you on that basis.
43Irrespective of my finding on this issue, the prosecution accepts this is a less serious example of the offences of failing to stop and render assistance to the victim. In light of my findings, I agree with this characterisation of your offending, and consider your culpability for your offending to fall at the lower end.
44That said, it cannot be lost that the collision had horrific consequences for the victim. Understandably, this is the focus of the victim’s impact statement. However I reiterate you are not charged with, and are not being sentenced for, having caused or contributed to his injuries by your driving. You are being sentenced for your conduct following the collision in failing to stop and render immediate assistance to the victim. Nonetheless, in the broad sense, I take into account the impact of the collision on the victim, whose victim impact statement refers to the life-changing effect of his injuries, of the frustration, anger, isolation and continuous pain, which impact on every facet of his life.
45In sentencing you I must send a clear message to other drivers of the vital importance of stopping and rendering assistance to victims of motor vehicle collisions where the driver ought to appreciate the collision was likely to result in significant injury to the victim.
Personal circumstances
46I turn now to your personal circumstances.
47As stated, you were born in January 1988 and are now 35 years of age.
48You are the second eldest child in a family of four brothers. Your parents separated when you were one, and you were subsequently raised by your mother and her new partner. You had limited contact with your father during your childhood and early teenage years. You reconnected with your father in your later teenage years and now maintain a positive relationship with him.
49Despite your parents’ separation, you experienced a positive childhood and were raised in a loving, supportive household by your mother and stepfather. You completed secondary school up to Year 11 before leaving to join the workforce.
50After leaving school you obtained several qualifications in areas such as warehousing, transport, logistics, forklift driving and mining. You obtained your first job at the age of 18, working with a company called ‘Fantec’ where you made industrial fans. You then worked as a forklift driver for 12 months, followed by four years working across a range of jobs, including labouring work and employment as a kitchen hand. Your last role was working in construction. In 2022, you completed a mining certificate, and have plans to work in the mining industry upon your return to Queensland.
51You have a history of sporadic drug use, having begun using methylamphetamine at the age 17, with some periods of daily use. You have also abused GHB on occasion.
52You have had a number of significant relationships. At the age of 20 you left home to and lived with your girlfriend for six years in Dandenong. You lived with another partner and her grandmother for four years, but the relationship ended, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic. Your drug use increased around this time.
53At the time of this offence, you were sleeping in your car and experiencing a period of homelessness. After this offence, your car was stolen and you moved to live with your father in Phillip Island for six months, where you worked for your father.
54In March 2022, you moved to Curra in Queensland to live with your mother and stepfather. You report that you have since been abstinent from all drug use and have removed yourself from all drug-related associations.
55You have admitted your prior criminal history which includes a relevant matter of failing to report an accident to police and a charge of failing to have a vehicle under proper control, arising out of an incident where you hit a traffic pole and did not report the matter to police. For this offence, you were sentenced to a $500 fine without conviction in the Dandenong Magistrates’ Court on 16 November 2018.
56You also received traffic infringements for drink driving in September 2014 and for exceeding the speed limit by 45 kms or more in August 2018. Following this incident, you were charged with driving under the influence of drugs on 28 May 2021, for which you were fined $800 and your licence was cancelled and you were disqualified from driving for 12 months on 14 February 2022.
57You have a further subsequent matter relating to a charge of unlawful assault and contravening a family violence intervention order, arising from offending against your ex-partner in July 2021. In February 2023 you pleaded guilty to these charges and were sentenced to an adjourned undertaking without conviction.
58Following the incident with your former partner you ultimately moved to Queensland in May 2022 to distance yourself from negative influences. At present, you are living with your brother and his family in Melbourne, in order to finalise these proceedings. You plan to return to Queensland when you are able to.
59You were assessed for the purposes of this plea by psychologist, Ms Gina Cidoni, on 18 April and 2 May 2023. Ms Cidoni’s report dated 2 May 2023 was tendered at your plea hearing. Having conducted psychological tests, Ms Cidoni diagnosed you with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, characterised by persistent patterns of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.[3] Ms Cidoni also diagnosed you with a Stimulant Use Disorder that is now in remission.
[3]Exhibit 1 – pg 5, at [64]-[69]
Matters in mitigation
60Having assessed the objective gravity of your offending, I turn now to the various matters raised on your behalf in mitigation of sentence.
61First and foremost is the fact you have entered a guilty plea to these offences. Whilst yours was not an early plea, there is significant utility in your plea. Given the timing of your plea, you saved the court and the community the cost and time associated with a judge-alone trial. Your plea has facilitated the course of justice. Through your plea, you acknowledge responsibility for your offending.
62In a letter written to the court you have also expressed remorse for your offending.
63As the Court of Appeal has explained, an offender who pleads guilty at present is entitled to an additional sentencing discount given the lengthy delays in the justice system that continue as a result of the pandemic.[4] You are entitled to, and will receive, a significant sentencing discount by reason of your guilty plea.
[4]Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169
64Secondly, based on the opinion of Ms Cidoni, you meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD. Ms Cidoni expresses the opinion that this condition “plays a role in impacting [on your] judgement, behaviour control and decision-making”. The effect of your ADHD, and resulting impulsivity, operates to some extent to reduce your culpability for this offending and the weight that attaches to general deterrence, based on the principles enunciated in the case of Verdins[5].
[5]R v. Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
65Moreover, Ms Cidoni states that ADHD medication is not usually available in Victorian prisons, and accordingly, any term of imprisonment would likely add to the burden of this condition and the burden of any imprisonment. This opinion enlivens limb 5 of Verdins in moderation of your sentence.
66Finally, I assess you have reasonably good prospects of rehabilitation. As Mr De Witt emphasised in his submissions, you have remained offence free since July 2021, a period of two years. After moving to Queensland, you ceased all drug use, with the support of your family. You also engaged in 11 sessions of counselling with clinical psychologist, Dr Todd Jacobson, whose report dated 13 April 2023 was also tendered at your plea hearing. Dr Jacobson notes that he did not consult with you after you relocated to Queensland, but expresses the opinion that your mother is a stabilising force in your life, and is highly involved in your rehabilitation.
67A number of references were provided on your behalf by those who have known you since relocating to Queensland.
68Executives of the Curra Country Club provided a reference which outlines your voluntary work with the club at community events and charity days, describing you as responsible, enthusiastic and courteous. The authors speak of you having turned your life around, stating the move to Queensland has only done good things for you. You are regarded as a valued member of their community. Other references refer to the assistance and kindness you have shown others, including an 11-year-old boy with autism, with whom you have spent hours teaching art.
69Your mother states you continuously express remorse for the incident, which she says has had an emotional impact on you. Despite this, she states you have given your time volunteering in the community, including helping elderly members with gardening and general maintenance. You retain your mother's strong support.
Sentencing submissions
70In cases such as this, the sentencing considerations of general deterrence, just punishment and denunciation are given significant weight. In light of your prior history, including an offence of failing to report an accident, the sentence I impose must also deter you specifically. However, I accept that greater weight is to be given to general, rather than specific deterrence given the positive progress in your rehabilitation whilst residing with your family in Queensland over the past two years.
71On your behalf it was submitted that all relevant sentencing considerations could be met by the imposition of an appropriately conditioned community correction order. The prosecution agreed with this sentencing submission in circumstances where it was accepted by the Crown that you bear no culpability in respect of the collision and that your offending is a low-level example of the offences of failing to stop and render assistance following a collision. It is agreed you had no actual knowledge, nor could have known, the extent of the injuries sustained by the victim.
72This is not a case where you demonstrated a callous attitude or complete indifference to the plight of the victim.
73I accept the joint position of the parties. At the sentence indication hearing I indicated that, subject to you being found suitable, I would impose a community correction order with conditions that included both therapeutic conditions and unpaid community work. You have now been found suitable for such an order.
74In imposing a community correction order, I consider it is able to meet the sentencing considerations of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment, whilst fostering your ongoing rehabilitation. In reaching this conclusion, I have had regard to the guideline judgment of the Court of Appeal in Boulton, where the Court observed:
'… a CCO may be suitable even in cases of relatively serious offences which might previously have attracted a medium term of imprisonment … The sentencing judge may find that, in view of the objective gravity of the conduct and the personal circumstances of the offender, a properly-conditioned CCO of lengthy duration is capable of satisfying the requirements of proportionality, parsimony and just punishment, while affording the best prospects for rehabilitation'.[6]
[6]Boulton v. The Queen [2014] VSCA 342 at [131]
75You have consented to a community correction order being made. The report of Corrections further indicates that you may apply to have your order transferred to Queensland after three months, once you have completed all hours of unpaid community work. In my view, your ongoing rehabilitation is best supported by permitting you to return to Queensland, given the stability and family support available to you there, and the prospect of employment in the mining industry.
Sentence
76Accordingly, balancing the matters to which I have referred, whilst having regard to the maximum penalty for the offences, you are sentenced as follows:
77On Charge 1 – failing to stop after motor vehicle accident and on Charge 2 – failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident, you are convicted and sentenced to a community correction order of 18 months’ duration.
78It is a condition of the community correction order that you be assessed for ongoing drug and mental health treatment and rehabilitation, in addition to completing 120 hours of unpaid community work. I also direct that you undertake programs as directed to reduce your risk of reoffending. You will be supervised for the duration of the order.
79I direct that 50 hours of treatment may be offset against any hours of unpaid community work pursuant to s 48CA of the Sentencing Act 1991.
80In addition to the conditions that I have imposed, there are standard conditions of a community correction order. First and foremost, you must not commit any other offences punishable by imprisonment during the life of the 18-month order. You must report within two working days of today to your nearest Community Corrections office. You are required to advise your supervising Corrections officer of any change to your residential or work address and you must do so within two clear working days.
81It is a term of all community correction orders that you must submit to visits as directed, and you must obey all instructions and directions of your Corrections officer. You are not able to leave the State of Victoria without the permission of your supervising Corrections officer.
82You should be aware that the order can be breached if you do not comply with either the conditions of the order or if you offend whilst it is in place. If you do so, you will return before me for breaching the order. I may have to re-sentence you on these charges, and I may have to sentence you for breaching the order.
83On Summary Charge 4, possession of an imitation firearm, you are convicted and fined $700.
84Pursuant to s 61(6) of the Road Safety Act 1986, your licence is cancelled and you are disqualified from driving in the State of Victoria for a period of 8 years. This period applies in circumstances where your prior conviction for failing to report an accident is a relevant prior offence.
85Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, I indicate that had you not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would otherwise have imposed is a sentence of six months’ imprisonment followed by a two-year community correction order.
86Mr De Witt, the community correction order will be forwarded through to your instructors for signing by Mr Bunker.
87Are there any questions that either counsel have in relation to the sentence I have imposed?
88MR DE WITT: No, Your Honour.
89MR HANNAN: No, Your Honour. There is a forfeiture order that was filed with the court for the imitation firearm.
90HER HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Hannan. Mr De Witt, that is not opposed?
91MR DE WITT: It is not, Your Honour.
92HER HONOUR: Thank you.
93Finally, I make the forfeiture order sought by the prosecution in relation to the imitation firearm, noting that order is not opposed.
94I thank counsel for their assistance in this matter. We will now adjourn the court.
- - -
4
0