Director of Public Prosecutions v Clark
[2016] VCC 880
•24 June 2016
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT BALLARAT CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-16-00562
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| PAUL ANTHONY CLARK |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE PULLEN | |
WHERE HELD: | Ballarat | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 22 June 2016 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 24 June 2016 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Clark | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2016] VCC 880 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Prosecution | Ms R. Maxwell | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr S. Belcher | Scott Belcher Lawyer |
HER HONOUR:
1 Paul Anthony Clark, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of criminal damage. The maximum penalty for that offence is 10 years’ imprisonment. You have also pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated burglary, with a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment, and pleaded guilty to one charge of recklessly causing injury, with a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment.
2 Your crimes arise from events which occurred on 13 January 2016. It is not necessary for me to recount in great detail the facts of this matter as they are on transcript, the matter having been opened in some detail by the learned prosecutor. I proceed to sentence you on the basis of the facts as summarised by the prosecutor and discussed during the course of your plea hearing. It is sufficient for present purposes to simply say the facts in this case, in my opinion, are most serious and disturbing.
3 I turn to a brief summary of your offending.
4 You were born in 1969 and are 47 years of age at sentence. You are married to Susan Clark and with an 18 year old son of that relationship, Jayke.
5 The victim, Adam Wallace (Adam), is 18 years of age and he and your son had been friends for about five years throughout school. Adam had met you and your wife and had known you for about two years.
6 Zachary Neal-Cowley (Zachary) is 24 years of age and a friend of Adam. Zachary met your son through Adam and they frequently used marijuana over the few months prior to this incident.
7 Turning to events leading up to your offending. In late 2015, you and your wife became concerned that Jayke had started using illicit drugs, namely, amphetamines (ice) and cannabis. You said in your record of interview:
“We’ve been having trouble with my son. He’d been doing drugs and I sort of suspected for a while because just his mannerism and he gets very moody and all that sort of stuff …”
You also stated in your interview that a girl your wife knew, who was an ex-acquaintance of Zachary, had tipped off your wife that he had drugs. It “brewed up inside” you, and on the evening of 13 January 2016, in conjunction with your wife, a decision was made to confront Zachary.
8 You did not know if Zachary would be at home and your reason for going to see him, you said, was to talk to him. When you arrived at the house, you saw Zachary looking out the window and also one of your son’s mates Adam, “Who I knew was doing (drugs) because we’d got it out of Jayke that he was doing it …”.
9 Turning to your offending. At approximately 8.30pm on 13 January 2016, Zachary was at his home in Ballarat with Adam, in the lounge room playing video games.
10 You went to Zachary’s address with your wife, parked at the front of the house and walked down the driveway towards the rear of the house.
11 Zachary and Adam heard a car pull up and Zachary saw a man and a woman coming up the driveway when he looked out through the window. Adam looked out and recognised the car as belonging to you and your wife.
12 You walked up the driveway, and pounded on the lounge room window, which caused it to shatter (Charge 1). You yelled “I’m going to fucking get you, don’t ever come near my son again”.
13 Zachary grabbed his phone and headed to lock the rear door.
14 As you walked to the rear door of the house, Zachary and Adam ran to the front door.
15 You forced entry to the house through the locked back door, causing damage to the wooden screen door, glass and wooden frame (Charge 2).
16 You then ran along the hallway to the front door, yelling “Stay away from my son; I’m going to beat the shit out of you”.
17 Zachary opened the front door and ran from the house. Your wife started hitting Zachary, yelling “You’ll never see my son again”. Zachary managed to get to his feet and fled on foot along Hickman Street.
18 Adam also ran out the front door, intending to jump the balustrade. You grabbed him by the singlet and pulled him backwards onto the pergola onto his back. As he tried to get to his feet, you punched him a couple of times to the back of his head.
19 Adam said “I was in Africa; you can’t blame me”, to which you responded “I don’t give a fuck where you were”.
20 Adam got up. You grabbed him again by the head and tried to hit his head against the pergola. Adam was able to get away by running through the front door down the hallway and out the broken back door.
21 Adam then ran along the driveway past your wife, who yelled to him “You’re never allowed to see my son again …” Adam also fled down Hickman Street.
22 As a result of this assault, Adam received a number of scratches and abrasions to his neck, shoulders, arms and wrists (Charge 3).
23 Police attended at the address and spoke to Zachary and Adam. You had left the premises prior to the police arriving.
24 Photographs were taken of the damage caused to the property and were before me. Damage to the house, which was owned by Joanne Neal-Cowley, was covered by insurance, however, she had to pay $300 excess.
25Attached to the prosecution opening were also a number of other exhibits, including photographs of the injuries sustained by Adam Wallace. Three victim impact statements were also tendered, to which I will later refer.
26 On 14 January 2016, you and your wife, Susan, attended at the Ballarat Police Station by appointment, and were interviewed. You said when at the property, you said “We’ve come round to have a talk to ya”, that they were looking out the window, laughing. You told them it was "serious" and that you had come to talk to them. They were just laughing. You said you tapped on the window too hard and it broke.
27 You said you were "wild" that they just thought it was a joke.
28 Regarding the assault, you said you grabbed Adam, turned him around and that he was pushing you and you were just "grappling more or less."
29 You said Adam was saying he “wasn’t even in the country.” You said you knew he had gone away at Christmas but this had all happened well before then. You told police you got from Jayke that he had been doing it (taking drugs with Zachary and Adam) for quite some time, "most of the year."
30 You indicated your intention to plead guilty to this charge on 7 April 2016. The matter proceeded by way of straight hand-up brief.
31 You have pleaded guilty to these charges and are entitled to have that fact taken into account in your favour and I do so. The community has, by your plea, been spared the time and cost of a trial, and witnesses, in particular your victim Adam, have been spared the ordeal of having to give evidence upon your trial.
32 Further, I take into account in your favour you intimated early your intention to plead guilty to these charges.
33 I also accept in your record of interview, that you admitted your offending to police.
34 In the circumstances, I am prepared to accept that your plea of guilty indicates remorse for your offending.
35 The victims of your offending in this matter have suffered considerably, and I shall return to pass some remarks on that subject shortly.
36 You do not have any prior court appearances and come to the court as otherwise a person of good character.
37I was advised by Ms Maxwell, who appeared for the prosecution in this case, that your wife, Susan Clark, had been charged in relation to this incident and had been placed, as I understood it, on a good-behaviour bond. Both counsel agreed that issues of parity did not apply when sentencing you.
38 A written outline of submissions was prepared by your counsel, Mr Belcher, and addressed by him during the course of your plea hearing. You described the circumstances that led to your offending. You said you and your wife had had a heated argument with Jayke about his drug use in or around December 2015, after your son was described as being “off his head” on Christmas Eve.
39 Your son, Jayke, admitted to you that he had been using illicit substances with Zachary and purchasing illicit drugs from him. The police, Mr Belcher submitted, conceded Zachary was sharing/supplying/selling illicit drugs to your son. This however was later further qualified by counsel following discussion with the informant and Ms Maxwell, and the transcript will reveal that discussion.
40I discussed at some length with both counsel the reason for your attendance at the property on that day. From the material before me it is apparent there was a basis for you being concerned that your son and others were involved in taking illicit drugs. I accept on this particular occasion that they were not merely rumours, but fact, and can understand you would have been very concerned about your son’s drug taking.
41Having said that, you could have approached this matter in a number of ways which would not have resulted in the violence exhibited on this occasion.
42You could, as an example, have spoken to Zachary or Adam’s parents about your concerns, or even attended the police station, although I can understand your reticence in relation to the latter, not wanting to bring your son or his friends to the attention of police.
43Your behaviour at the property, despite your valid concerns, was totally inappropriate and violent, and involved Adam sustaining a number of injuries, as outlined in the prosecution opening and reflected in the photographs before me (Exhibit B). I have no doubt that whilst these injuries are not “serious injuries” as defined in law, Mr Wallace would have been in fear when being assaulted by you.
44 It was submitted by Mr Belcher that your yelling and screaming at Zachary to stay away from your son and stop selling drugs to him then turned into the physical confrontation in which Adam and not Zachary was assaulted.
45 Mr Belcher urged that Adam had received minor injuries. Whilst as I say that is a correct definition, I suppose based on a legal definition, he was of course much younger than you and as I have said, no doubt frightened by your sustained assault upon him.
46 I was told that since the offending Jayke had stopped taking drugs and his behaviour had dramatically improved.
47 There was a psychological assessment report before me from Ian Joblin, Forensic Psychologist, dated 31 March 2016, who interviewed you on 29 March 2016 for the purposes of this court report.
48 References were made within it to your background and history and elaborated upon by Mr Belcher. Your father passed away in 2014 as a result of cancer. Your mother is in her 60s and lives in the family home in Ballarat. It would appear that at the time of your father’s death, you did not have a close relationship with him.
49 You have a sister who is 43 years of age, who also lives in Ballarat. She suffered a stroke and has been unwell. You reported you initially had a good relationship with her, however had little contact with her now. In the opinion of Mr Joblin, the family dynamics in your case were relevant to your offending. In his opinion, there was a strong psychological basis for your offending as you had a very strong bond with your son, particularly in the absence of a positive relationship with your mother, father and sister.
50Mr Belcher referred to your concern regarding your son’s grades in Year 12 having fallen from A to C level as his drug use escalated. You were concerned he would not be able to achieve the career he had hoped or get into university. You and your wife were frustrated and disappointed in your son not getting into university. Despite this and with cessation of drug use, he had commenced working more hours at a local bakery. Also since your offending his attitude at home had apparently become more positive as I understood it, and that he feels guilty that he put you in this position before me.
51 You were raised in Ballarat and attended a local primary school then Mount Clear College completing Year 12 in 1987. You then studied trade subjects.
52 Upon leaving school, you initially began an apprenticeship as a plumber where you worked for three months, but your employer at that stage decided not to sign you on as an ongoing apprentice. You then worked at Vit Clay Pipes for four years, then Ballarat Pottery for eight months, one year at the Mars Factory, four years at the Rivers Factory and had been working at the flour mills since 1997.
53 You said you had a good relationship with your employer, who was aware of these charges.
54 In the opinion of Mr Joblin, you had an appropriate work ethic.
55 You reported having left home when you were 18, then living with your wife. Initially you rented a flat in Ballarat, then moved to a house in 1993, where you remained for 19 years until building your present home. You and your wife married in 1992. She is employed in a liquor outlet supplier, approximately 15 hours a week.
56 Your son, Jayke, was born in January 1997 and completed Year 12 in 2015. You instructed your son hoped to attend university to study, but meanwhile was working part-time in the bakery as I have said.
57 You have a daughter, born in March 1999, currently undertaking Year 12, working part-time in a supermarket.
58 You described a strong interest in sport, and you enjoyed working on cars. You reported you had many friends and a number of references were placed before me.
59Alcohol did not play a part in your offending. Mr Belcher confirmed there was no alcohol involved in it, albeit you do consume 12 to 24 stubbies of full-strength beer over a week. Mr Joblin did not consider alcohol to be an issue for you.
60 You have Type 2 Diabetes, which you try to manage with a degree of fitness.
61 Mr Joblin referred to a number of issues that, in his opinion, were particularly relevant to your involvement in this offending. Outside that context, it was his conclusion your offending would not have occurred as you did not present with an anti-social personality.
62 Mr Joblin referred to both you and your wife having worked while attempting to raise your two children to the best of your ability. That your son had ambitions to attend Deakin University and that he had been receiving high grades during his school years. There were, as I have said, concern by both you and your wife that during the last half of 2015, when Jayke was completing Year 12, his application to study had lessened and his grades declined. This had also been noticed by teachers at the school who had had discussions with both you and your wife about that. His ability to enter University at the end of Year 12 had been compromised.
63 As I said, as Mr Joblin also noted, you have not had any prior history of attention from the police, nor have any other members of your family. In the opinion of Mr Joblin, there was no suggestion of any anti-social behaviour amongst the members of your family.
64 For both you and your wife to find out your son was using drugs, in the opinion of Mr Joblin was “significant and particularly distressing”, as such behaviour violated your strongly held views.
65 Turning to your report to Mr Joblin regarding your involvement in this offending. You said that on Christmas Eve 2015, (I note when Adam, your victim, was not in Australia) your son, Jayke, had come home late. Your wife believed his appearance was related to drug use. On the following day, she discussed her concerns with you. At that time, Jayke indicated he had been “smoking bud at a friend’s place”. This not surprisingly was a significant issue for both of you. You told Jayke he should not associate with persons involved in the drug environment in Ballarat.
66 Eventually, Jayke revealed where he had obtained the drugs. Your wife accessed your son’s bank accounts and noticed a series of withdrawals. She concluded those were used to pay for drugs, and subsequently Jayke admitted that he had been using amphetamine and MDMA in powder form. To you, your son’s use of drugs was an appalling and abhorrent concept, and you became disappointed and distressed over your son’s involvement with drugs.
67 You told Mr Joblin when you went to the house you were not there to demonstrate aggression but, rather, wanted to talk to Zachary, to persuade him from further interaction with any member of your family.
68 In the opinion of Mr Joblin, you leaving your home and driving to the house was not reflective of any anti-social personality but, rather, strongly reflective of the values you and your wife placed on family and concern that the values had been violated.
69 In the opinion of Mr Joblin, your behaviour at the address was consistent with your disappointment and anger with the person you believed was supplying your son with drugs. I note however, it was Adam who was the recipient of your violence.
70 In the opinion of Mr Joblin, your involvement in this offending was as a result of significant and strong psychological provocation. The offences, he submitted, represented a “crime of passion."
71 Outside the context of these offences, that is, your son’s use of drugs, Mr Joblin concluded your offending would not have occurred as you did not have an aggressive anti-social personality. You referred to your intention to seek appropriate assistance for your son and his drug use, and Mr Joblin was aware appointments had been made with your general practitioner for referral for counselling for the family to address these issues. I was advised your wife has received some counselling recently.
72 There were a number of references tendered before me at your plea hearing.
73 A reference from Dr Rob Campbell, dated 3 February 2016. You have been a patient of his for over 7 years, and he found you compliant in treatment, dependable and of good character.
74 There was a reference from Paul Panozzo, Allied Mills, Ballarat, dated 9 March [I assume 2016, although not specifically stated]. He had known you for approximately 17 years through work. He described you as having a strong sense of family with aspiration for your two children. You were remorseful and embarrassed by your offending. You were a valued member of the "Ballarat team" in your employment. Your offending, he said, was out of character.
75 There was a reference from Margaret Murphy, dated 7 April 2016, your aunt. Your offending is out of character. You have always worked hard to support your family. You have always been there for her when needed. She will remain supportive of you.
76 There was a reference from Leonie Counsel, dated 25 January 2016, who has known you for approximately 20 years, as your neighbour. She described you as a devoted family man, hardworking, honest and reliable, and that you are a valued member of the neighbourhood. You are generous and honest.
77 There was a reference from Leah Clark, undated, your cousin. You pride yourself on your family and are an excellent father to your two children. Your family is important to you. You were hardworking. Your offending was out of character.
78 I turn to the impact of your offending on your victims. Their statements are eloquent and these brief sentencing remarks do not do justice to them. I have, however, read each of them.
79 There was a victim impact statement from Adam Wallace. As a result of your offending he was depressed and anxious and now had few friends. He no longer wanted to be in Ballarat. He no longer heard from his friends. Jayke was his best friend and he now avoided Adam.
80 He receives assistance from a psychologist to deal with the sequelae of your offending. He felt paranoid when away from his house, fearing you were looking for him. He still has bouts of panic and felt scared to go about his daily life.
81 There was also a reference from Andrew and Pauline Wallace (Adam’s parents). Your offending had an adverse ongoing impact upon their lives. They were distressed to see their son’s injuries. Their son struggled to know who to trust and his network of friends had been destroyed.
82 As a result of your assault upon Adam he had become withdrawn, emotionally and socially. To help cope with his feelings, Adam had been spending as much time as he could in Melbourne with his brothers as he did not feel safe at home.
83 There was a victim impact statement from Joanne Cowley (mother of Zachary). She found it difficult to understand how a parent could act in the way you did on this day, even when concerned for your son’s drug use. Her son had been traumatised and frightened by your offending.
84 She referred to the damage to her property.
85 The effects upon a victim are a relevant sentencing consideration (s.5 Sentencing Act 1991). I am conscious, however, I must not allow the effects upon a victim to swamp the sentencing process.
86Mr Belcher’s primary submission was that the appropriate sentence for your offending would be a substantial fine, and urged I could consider this “without conviction”.
87In my opinion, to impose a fine on any of the charges before me would result in a manifestly inadequate sentence. Also, in my opinion, a non-conviction disposition would not adequately reflect the seriousness of your offending.
88Should I not consider a fine to be appropriate, Mr Belcher urged that I consider the imposition of a community corrections order "without conviction" and without the need for you to perform any unpaid community work.
89Ms Maxwell submitted a community corrections order was “Well within the appropriate disposition for this offending”, taking into account all matters in mitigation of sentence and also the gravity of your offending. Ms Maxwell however, submitted it should be with a conviction recorded and that there be anger-management assessment, and if required, treatment, plus community work, and supervision attached to such an order.
90I discussed with Ms Maxwell the other possible conditions that could be attached to a community corrections order, and she agreed that none of those conditions appeared appropriate in your case. I agree.
91I arranged to have you assessed for your suitability or otherwise for a community correction order. I received a report which states you are suitable for such an order, and you consented in the presence of the assessing officer to being on the order, being aware of the conditions that would likely attach to it. I further discussed the conditions with counsel today, as suggested by the assessing officer in that report.
92As well as matters personal to you, including your prospects of rehabilitation, which I find to be very good, I must also take into account the need for general deterrence when sentencing you. General deterrence is an important sentencing consideration for the offences that are before me. In particular, I refer to the charge of aggravated burglary.
93Turning to specific deterrence, I note you do not have any prior court appearances, nor is there anything subsequent or pending. In my opinion the need for specific deterrence need not loom large in the sentencing process.
94I must also consider the question of the protection of members of the community from you, and bear in mind the likelihood of your re‑offending. I am comforted in that regard by the report of Mr Joblin. I again note your otherwise prior good character and lack of any prior or subsequent court appearances.
95I am called upon by the Sentencing Act to manifest the community’s denunciation of your conduct and generally to impose a just punishment.
96So in all the circumstances, taking into account not only the gravity of your offending but also all matters in mitigation of sentence, I determine that the appropriate sentence is as follows. Now I have to explain the proposed sentence to you first of all and then I will formally hand down the sentence, subject to your response to a couple of questions that you will hear.
97So what I am proposing, on Charges 1, 2 and 3 that you be convicted and placed on a community correction order for 2 years and that order starts today which is 24 June 2016.
98Now there are a number of core conditions that apply to this order, they apply to anyone who is on a community correction order and they also apply to you and I have to tell you what they are.
·First of all, you must not commit, whether in or outside Victoria, during the period of the order, an offence punishable by imprisonment. I simply say beware, there are all sorts of offences that could fall within that category that do not relate to the same sort of offending that is before me. For example I think driving whilst disqualified, should you ever do that, that has a gaol term attached, whether you get one is a different story, but has the potential. Something like that can bring you back before me to be re-sentenced on these three charges. I can tell you that if you come back before me breaching this order, you will go to gaol.
·Second, you must report to and receive visits from the Secretary to the Department of Justice, or his or her nominee, during the period of the order. That means you have to accept instructions given to you by Corrections workers for two years.
·You must report to the Community Correction Centre at Ballarat within 2 clear days, by 4.00pm on 28 June 2016, and the Community Correction Centre is at 206 Mair Street Ballarat. If you do not report, you breach the order, you are back before me and it is not looking good.
·Next, you must notify the Secretary, or his or her nominee, of any change of address or employment within clear two working days after that change. If you move your address, you change your job, tell them within two days.
·You must not leave Victoria except with the permission of the Secretary to the Department of Justice, or his or her nominee, a Corrections worker. No holidays interstate unless you get permission. Be careful, you leave the state, cannot be found, breach the order, back before me, I do not have any other choice. I have to resentence you and it only gets worse.
·You must comply with any direction given by the Secretary that is necessary for the Secretary to give to ensure you comply with the order. If the Corrections officers tell you to do something, do it. They will not ask anything unrealistic
99 Now, there is another condition that will attach to this order, and that is that you have to perform 200 hours of unpaid community work over a period of 18 months as directed by the Regional Manager (s.48(c)).
100In my opinion no other conditions are required or appropriate.
101 Now, you just have to keep listening. I can only impose a community correction order if you agree to such an order being imposed. So I have to tell you just a little bit more about that order.
102 I should advise you that if you contravene or breach that order by committing further offences you can be charged and a sentence of imprisonment is one of the options that can be imposed for the breach itself.
103 You can also be re-sentenced for the offences that are before me. And, on the options available, this includes a term of imprisonment.
104 So you have got to be extra careful for the next 24 months. No committing any further offences that might incur a term of imprisonment, otherwise you are back before me, I have to re-sentence you on these three charges and you know where you will end up. You have got to be extra careful.
105 I also advise that if you fail to comply with any direction of the Secretary to the Department of Justice, that is a Community Correction worker or officer, then a substantial fine can also be imposed (s.83A(e) and A(f)).
106 Now are you aware of all of that?
107 OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
108 HER HONOUR: Do you agree to being placed on that order being aware of all those conditions that attach to it?
109 OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
110 HER HONOUR: So you consent to being on the order?
111 OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
112 HER HONOUR: You understand the conditions that are on the order?
113 OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
114 HER HONOUR: You understand what will happen if you breach the order?
115 OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
116 HER HONOUR: This is all being recorder, all right? It is a very short hearing if we come back, I just replay those three lines you see? But I do not think I will see you again.
117 I formally then pronounce sentence, on Charges 1, 2 and 3 with conviction you are placed on a community correction order for 2 years with all those conditions I have just discussed with you. The order commences today, which is 24 June 2016.
118Pursuant to s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991, had you pleaded not guilty to these three charges, but if you had been found guilty of those by a jury, I would have sentenced you not to a community correction order. Rather, I would have sentenced you to a term of gaol of 4 years and set a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.
119Should I need to revisit this sentence in the future, which I hope I do not, I declare pursuant to s.18(4) Sentencing Act 1991 you have not spent any days in custody to be declared by way of pre-sentence detention. I just want that confirmed, I did not think he had, but if I have to revisit it, which I hope I do not, I only need to look at that paragraph rather than all the file work papers.
120The prosecution made application for a compensation order. This was not opposed by your counsel on your behalf, I make the order in the terms sought.
121The prosecution also made application for a disposal order. This was not opposed by counsel on your behalf, and I make the order in the terms sought.
122The prosecution also made application pursuant to s.464ZF Crimes Act 1958 for the taking of a forensic sample. I heard submissions from Ms Maxwell and also Mr Belcher, the latter opposing the making of the order. In all the circumstances of this case, and taking into account your lack of prior criminal history and the risk of your re-offending, as described by Mr Joblin, I do not make the order.
123Now is there anything unclear? Anything counsel needs, anything counsel wants clarified?
124MS MAXWELL: No, Your Honour.
125MR BELCHER: Your Honour, I just want to say very quickly for the record - - -
126HER HONOUR: Sure.
127MR BELCHER: - - - in terms of my submission on the sentence about the corrections order, my argument always was that if the court was minded to impose a corrections order, it would include community work but I was asking more - - -
128HER HONOUR: Not much.
129MR BELCHER: Yes, but I wasn't - - -
130HER HONOUR: Yes, to take into account the fact that he worked so long. Yes, no that is right. No correct - yes.
131MR BELCHER: But I wasn't submitting a corrections order without community work.
132HER HONOUR: Well if I said that, I am sorry about that, I always understood even particularly you reinforced it today in your submissions that you were not suggesting there is no work.
133MR BELCHER: Quite so.
134HER HONOUR: I got that, anyway it did not come out that way.
135MR BELCHER: Thank you, Your Honour.
136HER HONOUR: I was aware of it. 200 hours over 18 months. Now what is happening now is Ms Jackson is going to come back to you, Mr Clark, you have to sign for the paperwork, Mr Belcher can go back with you and assist you if he wants or you want.
137MR BELCHER: Thank you, Your Honour, I will do that.
138HER HONOUR: Sure. Thank you very much. Yes, all right, thanks for your help, Mr Belcher, as usual very helpful.
139MR BELCHER: You're most welcome, Your Honour.
140HER HONOUR: Yes, you are excused, thanks a lot for that.
141MR BELCHER: Always a pleasure, thank you very much.
142HER HONOUR: Thank you. Thanks, yes, you may leave Mr Clark, do not come back before me. Thanks Ms Maxwell, you can go too if you want.
143MS MAXWELL: Thank you, Your Honour.
- - - - - -
0
0
0