Director of Public Prosecutions v Cammell

[2025] VCC 727

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

CR-24-01470

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

LLOYD CAMMELL

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE BAYLES
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	13 May 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	3 June 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Cammell
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 727

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:   Importation of border-controlled drugs.

Catchwords:   Criminal law – Sentencing – Importation of marketable quantity of border-controlled drugs – Young offender – Autism Spectrum Disorder – Impaired judgment and culpability – Rehabilitation and treatment.

Legislation Cited:   Control of Weapons Act1990 (Vic); Crimes Act 1914 (Cth); Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).

Cases Cited: Azzopardiv The Queen [2001] HCA 25; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; R v SJK and GAS [2002] VSC 94.

Sentence: Total effective sentence of two years and nine months’ imprisonment, released immediately on a three-year recognisance release order in the sum of $1,000 pursuant to s 20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), with conditions of supervision, 100 hours of community work, drug and mental health treatment, and judicial monitoring.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr M. Keks	Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr S. Tovey	Milides Lawyers

HIS HONOUR: 

1Lloyd Cammell, you have pleaded guilty to an indictment containing three charges: importing border-controlled drugs (MDMA and ketamine), which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment; dealing with proceeds of crime ($1450 and a watch), with a maximum penalty of five years; and importing a marketable quantity of border-controlled drugs (ketamine and amphetamine), carrying a maximum penalty of 25 years. Each offence is a Commonwealth offence.

2You also consented to this Court hearing and pleaded guilty to a related summary charge of possessing imitation firearms without exemption or approval, being a silver replica revolver and a black replica semi-automatic pistol (gel blasters), an offence under the Control of Weapons Act (Vic) carrying a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.[1] You also admitted guilt to a schedule offence of trafficking controlled drugs, namely ketamine and methylamphetamine, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, and consented to this Court taking that offence and your admission into account in sentencing on Charge 1 of the indictment pursuant to s 16BA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).[2]

[1]Control of Weapons Act1990 (Vic) s 5AB.

[2]Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 16AB.

3These offences occurred across 2023. You were born in March 2004 and turned 19 early that year. When you first appeared before this Court in January, you were 20 years old, and you are now 21 at the time of sentencing. You come before this Court with no prior convictions.

4A summary of the prosecution opening for the plea on 13 May 2025 was filed and read to the Court by Mr Keks for the prosecution. I adopt that summary as part of these reasons for sentence and will not repeat it in full, save to note that your offending broadly involved the following matters:

5Charge 1 concerns four parcels intercepted by the Australian Border Force between 15 and 23 March 2023, each containing MDMA and ketamine, and addressed to ‘Brittany Burrow’ at a parcel locker operated by you under that false name. Charge 2, the related summary charge, and the schedule offence relate to items found in your bedroom on 12 October 2023 when police executed a warrant at your address, including $1,450 in cash, a watch, two imitation firearms, and small quantities of ketamine and methamphetamine in clip-seal bags. Charge 3 concerns a parcel intercepted by the Australian Border Force on 17 October 2023 containing a marketable quantity of ketamine and amphetamine, addressed to ‘Shani Peters’ at a parcel locker opened and operated by you using that false name.

6During the search of your Lygon Street, Carlton residence on 12 October 2023, police located an iPhone used by you. Analysis of that device showed that between 3 February and 12 October 2023, you routinely communicated via encrypted applications Telegram and Signal about buying and selling drugs, including ketamine, cocaine, and MDMA. You corresponded with individuals known as ‘RICO’ and ‘K’, discussing methods for importing drugs via the dark web for sale in Australia, the types and progress of consignments, and the substances received. You also made statements such as, ‘you gotta have something legal going, unless you wanna be a gaolbird who is in and out of gaol forever.’

7Your communications with RICO included him asking whether he could ‘order some coke and shit to your locker,’ to which you replied, ‘yeah bro, go hard.’ Further messages indicated that you allowed RICO to use your parcel locker for the importation or trafficking of drugs.

8Charge 1 concerns four parcels intercepted by the Australian Border Force, sent to a Fitzroy parcel locker in the name ‘Brittany Burrow’. The charge proceeds on the basis of Joint Commission, alleging that you, RICO, and others, including the suppliers, agreed to import border-controlled drugs to that parcel locker.

9Charge 3 concerns an intercepted consignment from the United Kingdom addressed to ‘Shani Peters’ at a Queensland parcel locker. The consignment contained a box with 28.6 grams of a white crystalline substance testing positive for ketamine hydrochloride and a box with 105.3 grams of a white powdered substance testing positive for amphetamine. The summary of prosecution opening noted that the exact amount of pure drugs is unknown, but must have been at least a marketable quantity. Analysis of your phone revealed messages with RICO and a person using the username ‘Neo’ on Signal discussing the creation of the ‘Shani Peters’ Australia Post account and the consignment’s progress. This charge is also alleged on the basis of joint commission, with you, RICO, and Neo agreeing to import border-controlled drugs to that parcel locker.

10Charge 2, dealing with the proceeds of crime, relates to $1,450 in cash found in a green box under your bed, which also contained ketamine in clip-seal bags and a Rolex watch. The prosecution contends these items are the proceeds of your drug trafficking. The related summary charge of possessing imitation firearms concerns a silver gel ball revolver and a black repeating gel ball pistol, found under your bed with six gel ball shell holders and a detachable box magazine. Each item is considered an imitation firearm as it has the appearance of an operable firearm.

11There is also the schedule offence of trafficking controlled drugs, namely ketamine and methamphetamine, to which you admitted guilt. This relates to items found by police during the search of your premises, including a green box containing 26 small clip-seal bags of a white crystalline substance and a red Dictionary lockable safe containing a clip-seal bag of a white crystalline substance. Analysis showed the green box contained 3.3 grams of ketamine at 55% purity (1.8 grams pure), and the red safe contained 2.2 grams of methamphetamine at 80.1% purity (1.7 grams pure). You agreed to this offence being taken into account in sentencing on Charge 1.

12This matter first came before me as a sentence indication hearing on 31 January 2025.  I received written and oral submissions from both Mr Tovey, who appeared on your behalf throughout these proceedings, and also from Mr Keks, who appeared on behalf of the prosecution.  The matter then proceeded to a plea hearing on 13 May 2025, and I will consider the submissions made by both counsel across these two hearings, including both written and oral submissions.

13Mr Tovey filed an outline of written submissions at the sentence indication hearing dated 20 January 2025, although that document was later overtaken by the outline of plea submissions filed and dated 12 May 2025. I take each of those submissions into account globally. Mr Tovey’s ultimate contention was that while the offending is inherently serious, it must be balanced against your lack of prior convictions and the significant weight to be given to the principles governing the sentencing of youthful offenders and other mitigating factors. He submitted that I should give significant weight to rehabilitation and your personal circumstances, including the specific features of your autism spectrum disorder. Acknowledging that it would be an unusual course, Mr Tovey submitted that you be assessed for a community corrections order or if no other sentence is appropriate in all the circumstances, that I impose terms of imprisonment allowing for your immediate release on a recognisance release order. Mr Tovey made those submissions based on the following matters:

14When the matter first came before me, you were 20 years old, you are now 21, and you were 19 at the time of the offending in 2023. In the submissions of Mr Tovey, and from the reports filed with the Court and tendered at the plea hearing, I was informed that you were first diagnosed with Asperger’s disorder at the age of four, now referred to as autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Mr Tovey submitted that your ASD diagnosis has, in one way or another, shaped your entire life and the way you experience the world around you.

15You grew up in what was described as a strained family environment, with a history of conflict between your parents and both sets of grandparents. Your parents formally separated when you were around 16, and I was informed that you struggled greatly with that breakdown. Your ASD diagnosis was associated with social, communicative, perceptual, and behavioural difficulties. I was told you were bullied at school and displayed oppositional behaviour, resulting in several school changes throughout your primary and secondary years. You had few close friends and found it difficult to understand the social fabric and expectations of friendships. You described feeling unsupported, socially alienated, and rejected. During this period, your home environment was said to be complex and unpredictable.

16A recurring theme in the plea hearing and in Mr Tovey’s submissions was that your childhood and school years were marked by confusion, alienation, and rejection, leading to a strong desire for acceptance. Mr Tovey submitted that you appeared to find acceptance in a peer group that introduced you to the drug milieu, a development likely facilitated by your vulnerabilities and naivety arising from ASD. During this period, you also began using drugs and alcohol.

17A report of Dr Adam Deacon dated 27 January 2025 was tendered and relied upon.  He stated and considered the following matters:

a)You struggled socially and academically in the context of your ASD;

b)You experienced a resultant search for acceptance among antisocial peers;

c)You struggled to adjust to your parents' separation and the ongoing instability in your home life;

d)You developed an ongoing pre-occupation or hyper-focus on money as a solution to your social problems;

e)You have a predisposition to being manipulated by antisocial people;

f)You are acquainted with a group of peers who were involved in drug dealing and extol the virtues of this behaviour, in particular the available financial gains, as a result of your ASD took on an outsized significance to you;

g)Your own increasing drug use appears to have had a self-medicating quality to it;

h)Your drive to find acceptance ‘overrode your capacity to consider your situation more thoughtfully and considerately’.

18Mr Tovey conceded that the offending was sophisticated, involving the dark web and the use of mailboxes under false names to facilitate the importation and trafficking offences. However, he submitted that you first became involved in drug-related activity as a minor due to an overwhelming desire for acceptance and to be viewed positively by others, which was unsurprising given your history of bullying and exclusion associated with your ASD diagnosis. He further submitted that these factors, along with your motivation for financial gain and material success, cannot be separated from the features of your ASD and your desire for acceptance.

19In relation to the weight of the drugs involved in these charges, Mr Tovey submitted that the relevant marketable quantities in relation to Charge 3 are measured by the pure quantities of the drugs, and that it is relevant that the pure quantities with respect to the consignment relating to Charge 3 are unknown. Charge 1 is put as an importation simpliciter, and thus Mr Tovey’s submission was that the Court must sentence on the basis that the pure quantity imported was less than the referable marketable quantity, being three grams for ketamine and half a gram for MDMA. With respect to Charge 3, being the marketable quantity charge, Mr Tovey submitted that I should approach sentencing on the basis that it would not be safe to find that the quantity is anything more than a lower-end marketable quantity.

20You pleaded guilty to the charges. You remain a youthful offender in the sense contemplated by numerous authorities on youth. You have no prior convictions, and Mr Tovey submitted that, together with your youth, this should result in rehabilitation being one of the primary sentencing objectives. The authorities recognise that where a youthful offender, particularly a first-time offender, comes before the Court, rehabilitation will usually take precedence over general deterrence, as punishment, particularly imprisonment, may in fact promote further offending. Individualised treatment focusing on rehabilitation is to be preferred where possible, and a youthful offender should not be sent to an adult prison if such a disposition can be avoided, particularly where they are beginning to appreciate the effect of their criminality.

21Mr Tovey referred me to the principles and discussion around the matter of youth in the case of Azzopardiv The Queen (‘Azzopardi’).[3]  I will return to these matters further on.

[3]Azzopardiv The Queen [2001] HCA 25 (‘Azzopardi’).

22Mr Tovey also submitted that you have demonstrated genuine insight and remorse for your offending, and that your prospects of rehabilitation should be regarded as excellent, or at least very good. He noted that while there was secrecy in your conduct during 2023, those close to you are now fully aware of it. Your family has moved in, is supportive, and, in Mr Tovey’s words, has placed ‘guardrails’ to ensure such behaviour is not repeated. He submitted that you have worked to set your life on a more positive and productive path, living independently while undertaking work and study. You have engaged in ongoing therapy with psychologist Robert Leardi, gained an appreciation of the broader impact of your offending, are now abstinent from drugs, and have cut antisocial ties. You have made fundamental changes to your life, have pro-social supports in place, and have demonstrated insight and remorse. Mr Tovey submitted that your risk of reoffending, or any ongoing risk to the community, is low.

23I will now consider the report and evidence of Dr Adam Deacon. Dr Deacon summarised key findings from previous reports, some of which I have also been provided with. He noted that in 2010, you were assessed with a low-average full-scale IQ score of 84, and in 2012, a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder was proposed. It was reported that you had speech difficulties, trouble following multiple instructions, were painfully shy, and spoke inappropriately about topics such as guns. You displayed stilted speech and atypical interests. The initial autistic diagnosis was later revised to autism spectrum disorder, reflecting significant impairments in socialisation, restricted and repetitive behaviours and interests, and a preoccupation with stereotyped interests of abnormal intensity or focus. Cognitive assessment then showed a revised full-scale IQ of 91. It was stated that you met the criteria for Asperger’s syndrome under the DSM-IV, later revised to autism spectrum disorder under the DSM-5.

24A speech pathology report dated 12 December 2023 was based on 77 sessions conducted between August 2017 and December 2021, comprising both individual and small group therapy. The report assessed your social and emotional reciprocity, describing you as a literal communicator who may misunderstand questions, have difficulty interpreting social situations, controlling emotions, and become hyper-focused on money, in which context, reasoning skills were lost. It recorded that you were ‘involved with a boy who wanted to engage in financial fraud, easily manipulated to be involved as all he saw was the gain.’ You were described as having difficulty perceiving, interpreting, and responding to non-verbal cues, misinterpreting others’ motivations, and ‘missing cues indicating that people are taking advantage of him.’ In relation to developing and maintaining relationships, it stated that you had ‘difficulty reading the social motivations of others,’ were ‘highly motivated by money,’ and that this hyper-focus made you more susceptible to manipulation and impaired decision-making. You were ‘socially motivated to be accepted by peers,’ but your autism affected your capacity to engage with them, and you ‘didn’t want his peers to know he is autistic.’

25In his opinions and recommendations, Dr Deacon stated that your developmental trajectory toward involvement in drug dealing occurred within a complex array of intersecting factors. He noted that you had struggled socially and academically at school for an extended period in the context of ASD.

26Against this backdrop, Dr Deacon stated that your mindset was focused on material gain rather than weighed by any meaningful consideration of moral wrongfulness or likely legal consequences. He opined that your offending can be understood, at least in part, as relating to your ASD diagnosis and associated social difficulties. You persistently felt rejected throughout childhood and struggled to find acceptance and positive regard from peers. You gravitated toward an antisocial peer group at school, where you experienced a sense of belonging. Dr Deacon further stated that your ASD predisposed you to specific interests, including an idiosyncratic hyperfocus on money. You had been struggling financially following a marked reduction in work shifts after the COVID period, and the prospect of earning money quickly was therefore immediately appealing.

27Dr Deacon stated the opinion that your underlying ASD can be considered a relevant predisposing vulnerability factor for you to be exploited by anti-social people. Dr Deacon states, ‘he was very likely psycho-socially immature, naïve and poorly equipped to navigate the complex social milieu relating to his drug dealing school peers and older criminal acquaintances. His drive to be accepted and acquire more money likely overrode his capacity to consider his situation more thoughtfully and separately. Whilst he understood his conduct was wrong and he was liable to be potentially caught at some time in the future, he didn't much consider these consequences – he was instead driven by social acceptance and a newly found capacity to live a relatively lavish lifestyle that led to further positive regard from peers and a sense of feeling more powerful and special.’ Dr Deacon stated, ‘his ASD-related cognitive rigidity likely impacted his capacity to consider alternative perspectives. His judgment was likely impacted to some extent by his illicit drug use, but it is difficult to retrospectively appraise his mental state whilst drug affected.’

28Dr Deacon also stated that you have acquired helpful insights into your criminal conduct following your arrest. You have engaged in therapy with clinical forensic psychologist Robert Leardi and gained a clear appreciation of the impact of your offending on your family, friends and society more broadly. You have also gained insight into the superficiality of organised crime and the disingenuous nature of relationships within it. Dr Deacon stated ‘he impressed as being committed to positive change, as demonstrated by his immediate abstinence from illicit drugs and disassociation from previous anti-social ties. He has maintained steady employment. He appears to be well supported by family and friends. I consider his prospects to be very good and risk of re-offending to be low with ongoing professional and family support.’

29Dr Deacon also stated, ‘Mr Cammell’s young age, psychosocial immaturity and ASD can be considered prominent vulnerabilities. If he were sentenced to prison, he would very likely struggle to competently navigate the complex social dynamics of the prison setting. He may be vulnerable to exploitation and harm, and his mental health could foreseeably deteriorate in prison.’

30Mr Keks, appearing on behalf of the prosecution, filed written submissions at the sentence indication hearing and made oral submissions at both hearings. The prosecution emphasised the importance of general deterrence and the need for a sentence involving immediate custody.

31Mr Keks highlighted that the offending occurred over a course of conduct from March to October 2023. He submitted that it was a sophisticated enterprise involving the sourcing of drugs from the dark web and trafficking them in Australia for profit. He noted a level of organisation, deception, and intent to conceal the conduct. Although there is no direct evidence of the method of distribution, this was not solely an online offence, as you set up parcel lockers in false names, ordered drugs online, intending to collect and traffic them, and sought to profit from their sale in Australia. It was accepted that the scheduled offence of trafficking in controlled drugs involved relatively small quantities; however, in relation to Charge 3, being the charge of importing a marketable quantity of border-controlled drugs, Mr Keks challenged the defence submission that the importation was limited to a bare minimum marketable quantity. He submitted that, based on the surrounding evidence, there must have been a considerable quantity of drugs, and although the precise weight is unknown, the amount was likely more substantial than the bare minimum of a marketable quantity. He submitted that this should be regarded as a serious example of that offence.

32The prosecution accepted that you pleaded guilty, albeit not at the earliest opportunity. You have no criminal history. You remain a youthful offender, and the principles in cases such as Azzopardi apply. You were 19 at the time of the offending, 20 when you first appeared before the court for a sentence indication hearing, and you are now 21. The prosecution submitted that the mitigating weight of youth is diminished by the seriousness of the offending and the corresponding importance of deterrence, denunciation, just punishment, and protection of the community.

33The prosecution also accepted the relevance of your mental condition and acknowledged your ASD diagnosis. It was submitted that while ASD provides relevant context and may partly explain your offending, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that it was sufficiently connected to, or causative of, the offending so as to reduce your moral culpability or the weight of deterrence as a sentencing factor. The prosecution accepted that you may have been vulnerable to antisocial influences; however, it was their position that several factors contributed to the offending, including financial difficulties and drug use. While acknowledging your vulnerability to the influence of others, the prosecution submitted that there is no sufficient evidence to find that the offending resulted from exploitation by others.

34In this regard, the prosecution challenged the contention or the matter of direct connection between your condition of ASD and the offending conduct.  Mr Keks submitted that there is no evidentiary foundation to conclude that it directly contributed to the offending or reduces the moral culpability.  Mr Keks submitted that there should be caution around the submission that you did not understand the gravity of what you were doing.  There was sophistication in the methodology, and messages demonstrate that you had an awareness and understanding of the wrongfulness of your conduct and show that you understood the need to keep this conduct concealed and secretive. Mr Keks submitted that a significant part of your motivation for the offending should be viewed as being lifestyle and financial rewards to be gained from the offending.

35The prosecution accepted the application of Limb 5 of Verdins but did not accept the engagement of Limbs 1 to 4.[4] That is, the prosecution did not accept that there was a direct connection between your ASD diagnosis and the offending sufficient to warrant a reduction in the assessment of your moral culpability.

[4]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269.

36The prosecution provided a table of comparable cases, noting that I must have regard to current sentencing practices throughout the Commonwealth. Comparable cases may guide the application of relevant sentencing principles and indicate a range of sentences against which a proposed sentence can be assessed. However, current sentencing practices are only one factor, not the controlling factor, and each case must be considered on its own facts and circumstances. I must apply sentencing principles to the circumstances of this case and endeavour to impose a sentence that is individualised and just in all the circumstances.

37Mr Tovey also provided a table of comparable cases. I have reviewed each of the documents provided by both parties and, in some instances, read the full reasons for sentence. Subject to the observations I have made and that both parties acknowledge regarding the role of comparable cases, this review primarily illustrates how sentencing principles and objectives have been applied in different circumstances, and I have regard to those cases to the extent they assist in the application of sentencing principles.

38I turn to the analysis of these matters and the contentions of counsel. The first observation is that this is serious offending. The importation into Australia of illicit drugs by ordering them online and having them delivered with the intention of selling and distributing them, presumably to end users, and for profit, constitutes serious criminal conduct. Drugs are a scourge on the community; they destroy lives, tear families apart, and often lead to further criminal offending, which is frequently damaging, destructive, and violent, affecting the broader community. The courts must send a message through sentencing that reflects the serious and harmful nature of this conduct. Any sentence imposed must convey to you, and to others in the community who may be minded to commit similar offences, that such conduct will attract stern punishment.

39It is troubling that you engaged in this activity over a significant number of months. It involved your use of, and interaction through, what is referred to as the dark web to order drugs online from overseas suppliers and have them imported into Australia. You set up parcel lockers with Australia Post in false names and interacted with others to arrange the importation, delivery to false-name lockers, and measures for concealment and secrecy to avoid detection. As discussed extensively at the plea hearing, you appeared to be motivated, at least in part, by financial gain, material success, and acceptance by others.

40Having said that, I accept Mr Tovey’s submission that these matters must be considered in light of your ASD diagnosis and personal history. A tension arises regarding your vulnerability to influence and exploitation by others. Evidence from various reports and Dr Deacon indicates that people with an ASD diagnosis, including yourself, are generally likely to be vulnerable to manipulation. However, I also accept Mr Keks’ submission that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that you were actually exploited or manipulated by others in this offending.

41It seems to me that this is, nevertheless, a complex matter, and certain aspects of your ASD diagnosis must be kept in mind. These include that it is a lifelong condition and that you have struggled academically and socially throughout your schooling. I have been informed that you were often teased and bullied and did not understand how things worked at school. You have also experienced complex issues within your family. I accept that you were motivated, at least in part, by a desire for acceptance and positive regard from peers, against the backdrop of a history of significant social difficulty.

42I also accept that the motivation for financial and material gain must be considered in the context of your ASD diagnosis. Part of the traits of your ASD include a hyper-focus on and motivation around money, and I note Dr Deacon’s evidence that this can be a feature of ASD, where people become, in his words, ‘locked in and hyper-focused.’

43Dr Deacon also gave evidence in court regarding the feature of cognitive rigidity, and I note his evidence on prospects of rehabilitation. He explained how the cognitive rigidity associated with autism can be amenable to rehabilitation when circumstances change. In that regard, this offending, previously conducted in secrecy and now exposed, was addressed by Dr Deacon, who stated, ‘Now everyone knows what’s going on, you have now worked extensively with a psychologist around issues relating to the offending.’

44Dr Deacon also gave evidence regarding the relevance of your fixation on money and the desire for financial and material gain. He stated that you were likely locked into this mode of thinking, struggled to form secure connections with peers, and that these factors likely over-rode your capacity for sound judgment. He noted that you were not ignorant of the wrongfulness and illegality of your actions, but this focus over-rode your attention to potential adverse outcomes. He stated that this impaired your judgment relative to a person without ASD. Dr Deacon also acknowledged that your drug use during this time likely contributed to the offending, although its precise effect is difficult to assess.

45You pleaded guilty to these charges and have no prior convictions. You come before the court for sentencing for the first time. In this regard, the principle of parsimony is relevant to the sentence to be imposed. You are still a very young man, a youthful offender, and your youth is a relevant factor in sentencing.

46I note the extensive discussion of youth as a mitigating feature and its role in sentencing in Azzopardi.[5] I will not recite the paragraphs in full, suffice to say that I have particular regard to paragraphs 34 to 44. This discussion includes the proposition that where the degree of criminality makes the objectives of deterrence, denunciation, just punishment, and community protection more prominent, the weight of youth is correspondingly reduced. This does not mean that youth is entirely disregarded as a factor.

[5]Azzopardi (n 3).

47The court in Azzopardi identified three key considerations underlying the principle of youth and its relevance in sentencing. The first is an acknowledgment of aspects of immaturity. In R v SJK and GAS, the court stated, ‘By reason of the stage of development that an offender may have reached, he or she may not fully appreciate the seriousness and real consequences of the offending actions. However, it does not follow that this is always the situation or that as teenagers offenders cannot be held appropriately accountable for their conduct in engaging in serious criminal activity.’[6] The second consideration is the potential for young offenders to be redeemed and rehabilitated. The third is a recognition that incarceration in an adult prison is more likely to impair, rather than improve, a young offender’s prospects of successful rehabilitation.

[6]R v SJK and GAS [2002] VSC 94.

48I also observe that the cases cited and discussed in Azzopardi, which I have considered, support the principle that as the seriousness of the offence increases, the weight to be attached to youth and rehabilitation correspondingly decreases. On my assessment, these cases almost exclusively involve crimes of violence, often extremely serious, callous, and brutal, particularly in DPP v SJK and GAS.

49That is not to say the principle does not apply to other forms of serious offending, such as drug offences. However, the principle that each case must be assessed on its own facts requires me to consider the specific features of this offending alongside your personal background and history. I must construct a sentence that appropriately weighs each sentencing objective, reflects the gravity and seriousness of the offending, and sends a message to both you and the community that such conduct is serious and will attract stern punishment. I must also account for your personal background, youthful age, and lack of prior convictions.

50In that regard, as I have stated, you have no prior convictions, you pleaded guilty to these charges, and you are said to have demonstrated some insight into the impact of this offending, both on the community generally and on those close to you, including your family and wider personal network. I accept that, through this conduct, you have shown some remorse.

51You have made changes to your life and participated in ongoing counselling. It appears to be around 18 months since the offending, and I understand there has been no further offending. You have demonstrated the capacity for reform. In this context, reform or rehabilitation means living in the community without committing further offences. I am prepared to assess your prospects of rehabilitation as at least very good and to give you the opportunity to avoid immediate imprisonment and demonstrate these prospects. This is an opportunity to sustain the changes you have made and stay out of trouble in the future.

52I stress, Mr Cammell, that this is exactly what it is, an opportunity. The sentence I have constructed and will shortly impose does not end the matter. If you were to re-offend in the near future, you would be in breach of the orders I am about to impose. You could be brought back before this court and may be required to serve the terms of imprisonment that are being imposed today. If you comply with the conditions of the order and do not re-offend, you will not be required to serve imprisonment at this time.

53Noting that Charge 1 is a charge of importation of a border-controlled drug simpliciter, this remains an inherently serious offence for the reasons I have already outlined. I note the maximum penalty for this offence and the relatively small quantities of drugs involved. I also note the scheduled offence, which is likewise inherently serious, and again I note the maximum penalty and the relatively small quantities involved. I intend to impose a sentence that is proportionate and appropriate to the seriousness of this offending.

54Charge 3 must be regarded as the most serious charge before this court, carrying a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment. It involves the importation of marketable quantities of two drugs, ketamine and amphetamine. I note the submissions of both parties regarding its position within the range of offences of its kind. While no precise determination can be made as to the quantity, I accept Mr Keks’ submission that the evidence suggests it was a quantity of some significance. Notwithstanding this, it would not be safe to make any precise or positive finding adverse to the accused about its exact position in the range of offences, other than to say it is an offence of some significance, and again noting its inherently serious nature with a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment.

55This is a case, as I have outlined, that involves balancing a number of significant and competing sentencing considerations. It is not an easy outcome, but for the reasons I have outlined above, I have formed the view that it is appropriate to impose a sentence under which you will not immediately go to prison. Your release into the community will instead be conditional upon compliance with a number of conditions that I am about to state. I have concluded that a sentence can be constructed that achieves the purposes of punishment, deterrence, and denunciation, while also giving prominence to your youth and lack of prior convictions. In this regard, I have considered the discussion in cases such as Azzopardi regarding the decreasing weight of youth as a mitigating feature for serious offending. However, I am satisfied that in all the circumstances of this case, significant weight can still be placed on your youth to allow for a sentence that does not require immediate imprisonment.

56I have had regard to the submissions of both parties on the appropriate ultimate disposition. I am satisfied that the seriousness of the offending requires terms of imprisonment for each of the charges on the indictment, and I intend to impose individual terms of imprisonment to reflect the objective seriousness of each offence. I also consider it appropriate to order that you be released immediately on a recognisance release order, subject to conditions requiring your participation in certain treatment and supervision components.

57I had you assessed for a community corrections order, including consideration of your suitability and the ability of Corrections to supervise conditions attached to a recognisance release order. I have considered whether a CCO is appropriate for any of the charges, but I have ultimately concluded that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to impose individual terms of imprisonment for the Commonwealth charges, with orders for cumulation, and to then order your immediate release on a recognisance release order, subject to the conditions I am about to state.

58The sentence that will be imposed will be as follows:

59In relation to Charge 1, being the charge of importing border-controlled drugs, MDMA and ketamine, together with consideration of the schedule offence, you will be sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.

60In relation to Charge 2, being the charge of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, you will be sentenced to three months’ imprisonment.

61In relation to Charge 3, being the charge of importing a marketable quantity of border-controlled drugs, ketamine and amphetamine, you will be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.

62In relation to the related summary charge of possess imitation firearm without approval, you will be convicted and fined $1,000.

63It is my intention to structure the sentence so that eight months of the sentence imposed on Charge 1 will be cumulative upon the sentence for Charge 3, and one month of the sentence for Charge 2 will also be cumulative on each of those two orders, making a total of nine months cumulative on the two-year term. This results in an effective total sentence of two years and nine months’ imprisonment, and the period of recognisance will be for three years.

64I propose to fix the recognisance sum at $1,000. This sum does not need to be paid at this time, but if you were to breach the recognisance, you may be required to pay it, together with other consequences that I will outline shortly.

65As I indicated, I had you assessed for a CCO and your suitability for conditions attached to a recognisance release order. The period of good behaviour is three years, and the conditions are:

(a)That you attend as directed for supervision.

(b)I note the submissions that Mr Tovey made this morning about unpaid community work, and what I will do is I am going to fix the number of 100 hours of unpaid community work.

(c)There will also be a condition that you attend as directed for treatment for drug use.

(d)That you attend as directed for mental health treatment. Now, I will make an order as I think I am able to do, that any hours successfully completed in the service of the treatment conditions count as hours towards the 100 hours of unpaid community work.

(e)also intend to impose a judicial monitoring condition on this. 

66I note that judicial monitoring conditions are traditionally associated with CCOs, but I see no reason why such a condition cannot be imposed in this case. I therefore intend to bring the matter back for judicial monitoring in six months’ time.

67The purpose of bringing the matter back in six months’ time is to allow me to provide a level of supervision and monitoring of your compliance with these conditions. This serves primarily as an incentive for you to participate fully over the next six months, knowing that the matter will return before me.

68Mr Cammell, I just want to try and explain the effect of this order to you in broad terms.

69The first aspect is that I have imposed terms of imprisonment totalling two years and nine months, which will be imposed for this offending. 

70If you enter into a recognisance release order on the terms I am about to describe, you will not have to serve the period of imprisonment immediately, but it will remain in place for three years. The recognisance, which is essentially an undertaking by you to be of good behaviour for that period, requires that you do not commit any further offending, that you attend at the Collingwood office, and that you refrain from committing any criminal offence punishable by imprisonment within the next three years.

71The second condition is that you attend Corrections at the Neighbourhood Justice Centre in Collingwood within two clear working days of today, which is by Thursday. Following this initial attendance, you must continue to attend as directed for supervision, and participate in any treatment for drug use and mental health as directed.

72There will also be a condition that you re-attend this court for judicial monitoring in six months’ time, on 3 December at 9.30 am. Corrections will prepare a brief report detailing your attendance and participation over that six-month period, which will then be brought before me.

73Mr Cammell, the purpose of this order is to punish you for the crimes you have committed and to send a clear message, both to you and to others, that such offences carry serious consequences. The order also provides an opportunity for you to pursue rehabilitation and treatment in the community and to avoid immediate imprisonment. If you comply and do not re-offend, you will not have to serve the term of imprisonment. However, if you re-offend or breach any condition of this order, you may be brought back before me and required to serve some or all of that term.

74Do you understand those conditions?

75ACCUSED:  Yes, Your Honour. 

76HIS HONOUR:  And will you enter into that recognisance and make those undertakings to comply with those conditions?

77ACCUSED:  Yes, Your Honour. 

78HIS HONOUR:  The order of the court will be that the sentence imposed on Charge 3 of two years will commence today, the sentence imposed on Charge 1 of 18 months will commence 14 months from today, and the sentence imposed on Charge 2 of three months will commence 30 months from today, making a total effective sentence of two years and nine months. The hours of treatment are to be counted toward the 100 hours of unpaid community work, and that will be recorded on the order. The recognisance will be for a period of three years, while the period of supervision and the expectation of completion of the community work will be for two years. Those are the orders of the court.

79Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I am required to state the sentence I would have imposed had you not pleaded guilty but instead been found guilty of these charges.[7] While this is a complex and at times difficult exercise, to the best of my ability, I state that, had you not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of three years’ imprisonment and required you to serve nine months before release on recognisance.

[7]Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 6AAA.

‑ ‑ ‑