Director of Public Prosecutions v Chatfield

[2019] VCC 210

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 17-01656

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

DONALD CHATFIELD

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE GRANT
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	11 February 2019
DATE OF SENTENCE:	22 February 2019
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Chatfield
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VCC 210

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms A Bhai (11/2/19) Mr T White (for sentence)	OPP
For the Accused	Ms Kaddeche Mr W Tighe	Haines and Polities

HIS HONOUR:

1Donald Chatfield, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of home invasion and one charge of intentionally cause injury.  You have also pleaded guilty to one summary charge of commit an indictable offence whilst on bail.

2The maximum penalties for these offences are as follows.  Home invasion,
25 years' imprisonment.  Intentionally cause injury, ten years' imprisonment.  Commit an indictable offence whilst on bail, 30 penalty units or three months' imprisonment.

3Your offending can be summarised briefly.  At about 6.30 am on 12 March 2017, you drove to an address at 381 Occupation Lane, Garvoc.  You were with your uncle, Jamie Chatfield.  Nathan Chatfield lived at the address with his partner and six-year-old daughter.  He rented the property from Daniel Thompson, who lived in a nearby farmhouse.  Nathan Chatfield is your cousin and Jamie Chatfield is his uncle.

4Your counsel told me that you were upset with your cousin because he had taken some property from your home and refused to return it.  Whilst this may offer an explanation for your criminal behaviour, it does not excuse it in any way.

5Before entering the victim's house, the outside light was unscrewed and an outside camera smashed.  The power was turned off.  The two of you then went into the lounge room where the victim had been sleeping.  You were both wearing hoodies and carrying torches.  You had a bandanna covering your face and you were also armed with an axe.

6The victim's partner, Ms Cox, and six-year-old child, who had been sleeping on a mattress in the lounge room, ran and hid under a bed in another room. 
Ms Cox called Daniel Thompson and whispered to him that her husband needed him at the house.

7In the meantime, you grabbed the victim by the shirt, threw him up against the wall, and punched him in the head, neck and jaw.  You threatened him with an axe and held it across his neck.  You sat him on a chair, and when he tried to get up, you cut him across the collarbone and chest.  Your uncle was standing behind you, acting as if he had something up his sleeve.  You demanded drugs, guns and money.  You threatened to chop the victim's fingers off and bury him in the forest.  You continued to hit the victim to the head.  They were hard punches.

8You continued threatening, choking and hitting the victim until Daniel Thompson entered the house.  He called out, "Boys, what are you doing here?"  You had a conversation with him in the kitchen before returning to the lounge room, where you yelled at the victim that he owed you $300.  You started punching the victim, and it was at this stage that your uncle joined in the assault. 
You then pulled your uncle off the victim and walked towards Mr Thompson who walked outside.  He turned the power back on and you both walked to your car and left the scene.

9You were arrested two days later and interviewed, making a "No comment" interview.  You were remanded in custody.

10Your cousin suffered physical injuries, namely, bruising, headaches and scratches to his chest.  He was sore all over.  He and his partner have provided impact statements.  A statement has also been provided on behalf of the six-year-old child.  The three statements detail the profound psychological and emotional impact of the offending upon their lives.

11The adults have had their feelings of safety dramatically compromised.  Even though they bear no responsibility for what you did, they nonetheless feel that they have failed to protect their daughter, a child who has suffered considerable harm from witnessing your violent and aggressive behaviour.

12Clearly, this is very serious offending.  You attended the premises with the intention of entering the home and assaulting the victim. The power was switched off and a camera smashed before you entered the victim's home.  It was early morning.  When you entered, you must have known that it was likely that the victim's partner and young daughter would be present in the house.  You carried on regardless. You were disguised and in company with your uncle.  Alarmingly, you carried an axe. You assaulted the victim with your uncle offering his support. The victims have suffered significant psychological and emotional harm, and one of those victims was only six years old.  When you committed the current offences, you were on bail for other offences.

13The Court of Appeal in Victoria has made it very clear that this type of offending is by its very nature particularly serious.  It offends against the basic notions of civilised and decent society, undermining as it does a person's entitlement to feel safe and secure in their own home.

14In this case, general deterrence - that is, the need to send a strong message to others in the community who might be tempted to behave in the way that you did - is a paramount sentencing consideration.  Just punishment and denunciation are also relevant sentencing considerations.

15You have relevant prior convictions.  They are not as numerous as those of your uncle.  However, they do reveal a concerning propensity for repeated acts of violence.

16In 2003, you were placed on a community-based order (CBO) for offences of intentionally cause injury, assault by kicking, and offensive behaviour. 
The order had a condition that you engage in treatment for drug and alcohol addiction.

17In 2005, you were given a three-month suspended sentence for recklessly cause serious injury and placed on another CBO for offences of recklessly cause injury and assault in company.

18In 2010, you were sentenced to an effective three months' imprisonment, a partially suspended sentence, and a 15-month CBO for offences of recklessly cause injury, unlawful assault, and recklessly cause serious injury.  The CBO had a number of conditions attached, including a requirement to undergo treatment for alcohol and drug abuse.

19In 2012, the partially-suspended sentence of five months was restored and you were also sentenced to a term of two months for an affray.

20Finally, in 2014, you were sentenced to a six-month suspended gaol term for offences that included prohibited person possessing a firearm. 

21Your criminal history means that the principles of specific deterrence and community protection are also relevant sentencing considerations. 

22I now turn to relevant background matters. You were born on 5 June 1984.  You are an Aboriginal man who was raised in Warrnambool, Stawell and Halls Gap.  You are the eldest of six children.  Your mother was your provider.

23You told Mr Warren Simmons, a consultant psychologist who saw you on
19 December 2018 that your childhood was tough.  You never knew your father when you were young, and except for your grandfather, you did not have a positive male role model in your life.  Your first stepfather was violent towards you, and as a consequence, you lived for some of your childhood with your grandparents.  Your second stepfather was also violent.  Both men drank heavily and this meant that you grew up in an environment where heavy drinking was normalised.

24You were not a good student, although you did manage to complete Year 10.  You left school in Year 11 and commenced a plastering apprenticeship which you did not complete.  Since that time, you have worked in various different places and in various different jobs.  You have held responsible positions within Aboriginal organisations. This reflects the fact that there have been periods in your life when you have been productive and responsible.  Unfortunately, they have been undermined by relapses into substance abuse and related criminal offending.

25Alcohol was a significant problem for many years.  Its abuse explains the instability in your working history.  It also explains your prior offending.  You told Mr Simmons that you commenced drinking heavily at the age of 12, and that this continued until you met the mother of your two children, when you moderated your drinking.

26By the time of the current offences, you had apparently ceased drinking alcohol altogether.  However, you replaced the abuse of that substance with the abuse of the drug ice.  After your release from prison in 2012 or thereabouts, you returned to Warrnambool and discovered how prevalent the abuse of ice had become among your friends, including your partner.  You commenced using the drug, and its abuse has been a feature of your life ever since.

27Mr Simmons is undoubtedly correct when he identifies the close link between your substance abuse, whether it be alcohol or ice, and your offending.  In his report, he says this, and I quote:

"Certainly, Mr Chatfield's substance abuse has been problematic for almost two decades now and it would appear that despite some treatment over the years and Mr Chatfield's attempts to address what goes on his life, he has generally relapsed back into substance abuse which results in further offending."

28It is this history and your inability to use community supports to break this pattern of behaviour that explains what I am guarded about your prospects for rehabilitation.

29There are a number of matters in mitigation.  Although you ran a contested committal, it seems that there was always an intention to plead guilty to an appropriate indictment.  In these circumstances, you are entitled to an appropriate sentencing discount for your plea of guilty.  The plea is also an acceptance of responsibility and it is indicative of your remorse. In addition, it has saved the victims from the trauma of giving evidence at a trial, and saved the community the cost involved in running a criminal trial.  You will be given credit for all of these matters.

30On 11 May 2017, whilst on remand for the current offending, you were dealt with in the Magistrates' Court for various matters including prohibited person carry a firearm, prohibited person possessing a firearm, handling stolen goods, dealing with the proceeds of crime, possess ammunition, and possess methamphetamine.

31The magistrate sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 15 months' imprisonment with a nine-month minimum term before you would be eligible for release on parole.  Fifty-eight days pre-sentence detention was declared. 
That sentence expired on or about 12 June 2018.

32Although this is not a prior conviction, it is a matter relevant to my sentence because of the operation of the principle of totality.  That principle requires me, when constructing my sentence, to consider the total sentence that would have been imposed had all of these offences fallen for consideration on the same occasion.  I must ensure that the total sentence I impose is just and appropriate for all of your offending.

33I must also take into account two important additional matters.  First, because you were on remand for the current offences, you could not be considered for parole on the magistrate's sentence.  That means you have served the full 15 months of that sentence.  And secondly, because it has taken some time for the current matters to come before this court, you have lost the opportunity for some concurrency between the orders made in the Magistrates' Court and the orders that I will make today.

34Finally, you consented to having the charges heard in the Koori Court.  In doing so, you agreed to participate in a process that involved appearing before elders from the Koori community.  It was obvious to me from the way you participated in the process that you were sorry for what you had done, and that you do have insight into the issues in your life which you need to address. Your substance abuse is one such issue, and appropriate engagement with therapeutic services is another.  If you are able to act on your insights, your prospects for rehabilitation will be enhanced.  However, I cannot help but note how hard it has been for you in the past to avoid relapses into substance abuse and the associated offending that flows from that abuse.  You have experienced these difficulties, even though you have had strong and steadfast support from your mother.

35Your counsel submitted that a combination order would be appropriate in this case.  It was a bold submission and cannot be accepted.  Your offending is too serious for such an order to be considered.  The only appropriate order in your case is an imprisonment term with an appropriate non-parole period.  In fixing sentence, I have taken account of the fact that this is your first lengthy period of imprisonment.

36Will you please stand?

37Mr Chatfield, on the charges of the indictment, you are sentenced to the following periods of imprisonment.

38Home invasion, four years and six months.

39Intentionally cause injury, nine months.

40On the summary offence, one month.

41I order three months of the sentence on Charge 2 on the indictment be served cumulatively upon the sentence on Charge 1.

42This makes a total effective sentence of four years and nine months.

43I fix a minimum term of three years before you will be eligible for release on parole.

44I declare 254 days pre-sentence detention.

45If you pleaded not guilty and been found guilty after trial, I would have sentenced you to a total effective term on the current matters of six-and-a-half years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years and nine months.

46I make the forfeiture orders sought by the Crown.

47Pursuant to s.464ZF of the Crimes Act, I order that you undergo a forensic procedure for the taking of a scraping from your mouth.  If you fail to cooperate in the taking of the sample, the authorities may use reasonable force to obtain it and the sample may be a blood sample.  I make the order because of the seriousness of the offending, your prior criminal history, it is not opposed and it is in the public interest.

48Is there anything more, gentlemen?

49MR WHITE:  No, thank you, Your Honour.

50HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.  Mr Chatfield can be removed. 

‑ ‑ ‑