Director of Public Prosecutions v Dickinson
[2020] VCC 1867
•24 November 2020
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-20-00897
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| HANNA DICKINSON |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE DAWES | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 9 November 2020 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 24 November 2020 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Dickinson | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2020] VCC 1867 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: Criminal Law - Sentence
Catchwords: Dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception.
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited: Brown v R [2020] VSCA 212; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269.
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr R. de Vietri | Ms L. Catanzariti, Solicitor for the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms K. Rolfe | Michael Brugman Barristers & Solicitors |
HER HONOUR:
1
Hanna Maree Dickinson, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception between 15 January 2014 and
27 October 2018. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years imprisonment.
2 The Crown Opening for the plea hearing has been read to the Court. It is agreed to be an accurate account of events. A general summary of the facts is as follows:
3 A Disability Support Pension (‘DSP’) is payable to those who have a relevant disability, illness or injury and at the time of making a claim, have a continuing inability to work for more than 15 hours per week, for at least the next two years. The rate of benefit payable is affected by factors including income received for employment, by the claimant.
4 In order to receive a DSP a claimant is required to provide supporting medical information as to how their disability, illness or injury affects their capacity to work. In most cases, this medical evidence is subjected to further assessment. Where the claimant is considered to be suffering from a terminal illness, this may not occur.
5 On 2 December 2013, you contacted Services Australia (“The Department”) and advised that you intended to apply for a DSP.
6 On 15 January 2014, your mother attended the customer service centre in Mildura, lodging your application. The Department's notes recorded that your mother believed that you had only three months to live.
7 Your claim, dated 14 January 2014, broadly stated that you had been diagnosed with cancer and were seeking treatment for it.
8 On 22 January 2014, you lodged false documents purporting to be medical information, in support of your claim, namely:
· A report purportedly completed by Dr Elizabeth Hu, general practitioner.
· A report purportedly completed by Professor Alexander Heriot, surgeon.
· An unsigned letter purportedly from the e-mail address [email protected].
9 In the report allegedly prepared by Dr Hu, your diagnosis was described as leiomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcoma. Further, that the average life expectancy of a person with this condition is less than 24 months. Your past, current and proposed treatment was outlined, as well as your level of compliance. It stated that ongoing treatment would hopefully put you into remission. It stated that you had been referred to a surgical oncologist, Professor Alexander Heriot.
10 The report allegedly prepared by Professor Heriot stated that you were diagnosed with a malignant form of small bowel sarcoma, which is leiomyosarcoma and that this kind of cancer is very rare. The MRI report showed that the tumour is 3.1 centimetres in length and had not spread to surrounding lymph nodes. The report recommended surgery as your best chance for treatment, although different cancer treatment trials were under consideration.
11 The letter from Mr Chao stated:
“This is a letter to confirm that Hanna Dickenson has a leiomyosarcomas soft tissue sarcoma. Leiomyosarcomas is quite a rare form of cancer and accounts for 5 to 10 per cent of all soft tissue sarcomas which in themselves are quite rare. Leiomyosarcomas can be quite unpredictable which is why we operated straight away and through radiation and the injection ECB4 the cancer hasn’t spread to other organs as of yet. The sarcomas can remain dormant for long periods of time and can reoccur after years of being dormant.”
The letter stated there were a number of destinations overseas where you could receive appropriate treatment.
12 A letter from your mother was also provided to the Department, in support of the claim. That letter outlined her understanding of your purported diagnosis and of the treatment she believed that you had received in Phuket and Hong Kong. Regrettably, your mother was also a target of your deception.
13 On the basis of the material provided, your claim was granted. It was backdated to 2 December 2013, the date upon which you had first contacted the Department. You were in receipt of regular payments of the DSP for 4 years and 9 months and received a total of $100,230.73. You had no legitimate entitlement to any of these funds.
14 You fraudulently created the medical documents which provided support for your diagnosis and these were submitted in support of your application. They were not forwarded by the Department to a medical service provider for further assessment and examination. Had this occurred, the nature of your deception may have been detected at the outset. A number of discrepancies exist in the documentation. These include:
· The report from Dr Hu does not provide a date for the onset of your diagnosis and states that it is presumptive, not confirmed.
· Professor Heriot’s letter states that he is withholding test results until further discussion with another surgeon and will return everything the following week. No further information was provided. His letter is not dated or signed.
· Peter Chao’s email is scant in that his professional qualifications, medical practice and alleged role in your treatment are not identified. The email is unsigned and dated 6 December 2012, although it was provided in support of the application 14 months later.
15 You were not required to regularly report in order to continue the receipt of your DSP payments. You did, however, have contact with the Department during the relevant period.
16 On 29 July 2014, a review of your entitlement was initiated when the Department detected that you were working.
17 On 22 August 2014, in the course of a telephone conversation, you advised that you had commenced working on 28 July 2014, but had not reported this as you were waiting for your payslips to be issued. Further, that it was possible that you would not continue working due to commencing chemotherapy treatment. An overpayment was identified and a repayment plan put in place. A notation was made that your illness was terminal and that you had been working before you began chemotherapy. You continued to obtain DSP payments to which you were not entitled.
18 On 11 August 2017, you contacted the Department by telephone seeking an urgent payment of $200. You advised that you had been on a wait list and that you would soon be eligible for surgery. The Department approved that request on the basis that you were in financial hardship as a result of an exceptional and unforeseen circumstance.
19 On 10 April 2018, you appeared at the Melbourne Magistrates' Court, where you pleaded guilty to seven unrelated counts of obtaining property by deception. These offences were committed between March 2013 and October 2014.
20
You were sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of three months’, to be followed by a 12-month Community Correction Order. You went into custody on that day, before lodging an appeal. You were released on appeal bail on
30 April 2018.
21 On 12 April 2018, the Department was notified of your imprisonment. Your payments were suspended until your release from custody.
22 On 9 May 2018, you contacted the Department seeking a prison release crisis payment. This claim was refused, as it was made out of time.
23 On 24 July 2018, your appeal proceeded in the County Court. The orders of the Magistrates' Court were set aside and a two-year Community Correction Order was imposed.
24 On 1 March 2018, a data matching exercise led to the Department detecting that you had received an income which you had failed to declare. Upon the receipt of information that your appearance at Court on 10 April 2018 related to falsifying a medical condition, the Department expanded their investigation to include the basis of your DSP payment.
25 On 27 October 2018, you received your final payment.
26 On 5 November 2018, the Department suspended your pension, following confirmation that the purported medical material filed in support of your claim was false.
27 On 11 January 2019, your DSP payments were cancelled.
28 Considered objectively, your conduct is gravely dishonest. You made a calculated decision to access a significant financial benefit that you were not entitled to receive. You claimed that you had a medical condition that was potentially terminal. You created and supplied false medical documentation in order to support your claim. This was a sophisticated and sustained fraud, perpetuated over a number of years. You had time to reflect on your offending conduct and chose to persist with it, even seeking additional payments at times. I consider your conduct disgraceful.
29 Your offending did not end voluntarily. The investigation undertaken by the Department ultimately revealed your criminal conduct. You did not inform them of your true state of health and the false basis of your claim, despite your pleas of guilty to other offending during the relevant period.
30 You spent almost three weeks in custody and maintained your deceptive conduct upon your release, in order to access payments. Between 30 April and 24 July 2018, you were on bail pending the appeal from the Magistrates' Court. Further, from 24 July to 27 October 2018, you were subject to a Community Correction Order. These are aggravating features of those parts of your offending which occurred between those dates.
31 You fraudulently obtained a substantial amount of money from the public purse and the community at large is the victim of your misconduct. Frauds of this nature create a heavy burden for taxpayers and the community as a whole. You accept that the gravity of your conduct warrants the imposition of a term of imprisonment.
32 You have voluntarily commenced repayment of the money and $92,178.72 currently remains outstanding. A Reparation Order is sought and is not opposed.
33 Your history of dishonesty is extensive. The instant offending commenced in 2014 when you were 20 years of age and had no prior convictions. It continued until you were 25. You are now 27 years of age.
34 As I have already mentioned, you pleaded guilty in 2018 to seven counts of obtaining property by deception. You purported to be suffering from terminal cancer and traded on the lie, saying that you required financial support in order to undergo urgent life-saving treatment. The victims in this case were friends of your family from whom you dishonestly obtained a total of $41,770.
35 On 26 February 2020, you pleaded guilty at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court to seven further counts of obtaining property by deception. The offending occurred between May 2015 and March 2018 and the total amount of money you received was $10,168.96. You were employed as a property manager at the time and transferred bond money paid by tenants into your own bank account.
36 On that day, you also pleaded guilty to one count of attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception in July 2019. You falsified an application for a car loan, in the amount of $30,000. The commission of this offence occurred in the course of the Community Correction Order imposed in July 2018.
37 You were sentenced for those offences to a total effective term of imprisonment of three months.
38 A Notice of Appeal was lodged and you were released on appeal bail.
39 On 22 June 2020, your appeal was heard in the County Court, as well as a hearing relating to the contravention of the Community Correction Order. The Correction Order was cancelled. You were resentenced for the original offences and for the breach. You were also sentenced for the new offences. You received a total effective sentence of eight months’ imprisonment. You are currently undergoing that sentence and your earliest release date is 14 January 2021.
40 I have been provided with the sentencing remarks made by Judge Lacava for both appeals, which I have read. He describes your offending conduct as despicable. You did not take the opportunity that was provided in 2018 to rehabilitate and learn from your mistakes, as you breached the Community Correction Order and reoffended. In his view, your prospects for rehabilitation were poor and community protection was a relevant sentencing consideration.
41 You have one other matter outstanding. It relates to two charges of deception said to have occurred in November 2018 and two charges of deception said to have occurred on 26 February 2020. It is listed for mention at the Magistrates' Court on 11 March 2021. I do not take this matter into account when determining the appropriate sentence here.
42 The Department contacted you about the current offending in November 2018 and you declined to participate in a formal interview. Investigation into your offending concluded in August 2019 and the matter was referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration. You were charged on summons on 6 February 2020. This was served on your solicitor on 13 March 2020.
43 While there was a delay of around 15 months until the charge was laid, this is not unusual for this type of offending. Even though the delay may have caused you some anxiety, particularly in light of your mental health, you reoffended during that time.
44 I accept that your plea of guilty was entered at an early opportunity on 20 July 2020. That plea has a significant utilitarian benefit. You have saved the Court and the community the time and expense of running a trial. In those circumstances, you have facilitated the efficient administration of justice and are entitled to a benefit for that. This is particularly relevant given that jury trials have not been proceeding, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. You have taken full responsibility for your criminal conduct. Further, you have agreed to make reparation and have currently repaid approximately $8,000.
45 You were born on 27 September 1993 in Swan Hill and raised on a farm in the Mallee region. You are the youngest of three children. Your parents separated in 2019. Recently, you have resided with your mother in Melbourne. You were not in a relationship at the time you were incarcerated.
46 As a child, your home life was lonely, as your parents were often out working on the farm. You are much younger than your siblings and spent long periods of time alone at home. You attended a number of schools, completing Year 12 in 2011. You obtained a creditable ENTER score of 83.2 in VCE.
47 Throughout your years at school, you were teased and bullied about your appearance and body weight. You developed an insecurity as a result of this, which has continued. You recall taking money from your parents from around the age of 12 years. You would spend that money buying lunch for other children at school, attempting to ingratiate yourself with your peers. You were also fixated on acquiring materialistic things, in order to keep up with your peer group.
48 After leaving school you commenced studying to be a chiropractor at RMIT but dropped out after several months, as you were unable to maintain the commitment required. At the age of 18 or 19, you began frequently using drugs in a social context, including cocaine and MDMA, as well as excessively consuming alcohol. You believed that drugs and alcohol would help you to expand your social circle and increase your popularity.
49 You currently present as having a polysubstance dependence disorder which requires treatment.
50 You have a Certificate IV in property services. You have engaged in regular employment, working as a property manager for several real estate agencies and then in different roles for disability services, until you were incarcerated this year. You were also in receipt of a Newstart Allowance after your plea hearing took place in April 2018, as you lost your job.
51 Your explanation for your offending is that you had fantasies about having a lot of money and the happiness it would bring. You thought that money would enable you to have more friends, to be more likeable and have a better life. You wanted to ‘party hard’ and maintain an extravagant lifestyle.
52 In order to prepare for your court cases, psychological and psychiatric reports were requested by your solicitors. I have been provided with the following reports:
· Dr Karen Scally, clinical neuropsychologist and forensic psychologist, dated 16 July 2018
· Ms Jennifer Sankaran, registered psychologist, dated 19 February 2020
· Dr Alan Jager, forensic psychiatrist, dated 15 June 2020
· Dr Susette Sowden, clinical and forensic psychologist, dated 13 October 2020.
53 I have also received letters from:
·Dr Burns, GP, dated 23 July 2020
·Dr Patel, GP, dated 1 November 2020
·Ms Amy Kendrick, clinical psychology registrar, relating to your engagement in Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (‘DBT’), dated 26 May 2020.
54 Dr Scally included the following findings and observations:
·There was no evidence of formal thought disorder or perceptual disturbance.
·You reported intense feelings of shame and guilt for your actions. It was clear that you regretted what you had done.
·You reported that you had been a different person at the time of the earliest offending and that you had grown substantially by getting a job and living independently.
·You were motivated by your desire to maintain a standard of living and trying to keep up with a wealthy peer group with whom you socialised.
·You presented with a significant history of psychological maladjustment which stems in part from severe bullying.
·Borderline Personality Disorder (‘BPD’) traits, associated dysfunction, depression and anxiety likely contributed significantly to your offending.
·Your significant history of suicide and self-harm ideation.
·Severe anxiety and depression symptoms and fluctuating suicidal ideation had lessened since your last court appearance, the ensuing media coverage and loss of job. You would not cope well with a custodial sentence.
55 At that time, you had no prior convictions. You did not disclose offending that was later detected to Dr Scally, including the current offending. You continued to offend after this assessment.
56 Ms Sankaran included the following findings and observations:
· You reported a long history of self-harm and suicidal ideation but that you had never attempted to take your own life.
· No signs of frank mental illness. Your IQ is at the upper end of the normal range.
· Impairment to your capacity for generally good judgement and ability to regulate emotions could be explained in the context of borderline personality features.
· Reported attending Dialectical Behavioural Therapy for your Borderline Personality Disorder since January 2020 and making progress.
· You related your prior offences to emotional dysregulation, selfishness and attempts to “buy and maintain” friends.
· You present with a history of borderline and narcissistic personality features.
· You satisfied the DSM 5 criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder, being a moderate to severe condition.
· You are likely to present with challenges in terms of safe management in the community. You might benefit from Dialectical Behavioural Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder.
You did not disclose the current offending to Ms Sankaran.
57 Dr Jager included the following findings and observations:
· You disclosed being sexual abused at the age of 19 and that you were tackling the issue with Dialectical Behavioural Therapy. In Dr Jager’s opinion you suffer from chronic PTSD as a consequence of the rape.
· You admitted gestures of self-harm which you initially referred to as attempted suicide. You admitted abusing drugs and alcohol.
· You have a constitutional condition of Borderline Personality Disorder. Symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder can be brought under some control by Dialectical Behavioural Therapy. You admitted that you have learnt a lot through that therapy.
· Your polysubstance abuse is in partial remission.
· You require management by a consultant psychiatrist.
· If sentenced to imprisonment, you will not be able to obtain the comprehensive treatment to manage PTSD nor will you be able to access the essential Dialectical Behavioural Therapy for the Borderline Personality Disorder.
· Therefore, imprisonment will be more difficult for you
You did not disclose the current offending to Dr Jager.
58 Dr Sowden was requested to prove a report for the current matter and has had reference to the earlier medical material.
59 In the course of your assessment, you were reluctant to discuss your past history of deceptive conduct. You appeared to be ashamed of this conduct.
60 She found no evidence of psychosis, although suicidal ideation was evident. Cognitively you appeared to be oriented in time and place, with your insight and judgment being observed to be poor.
61 You acknowledged that you forged medical material in order to access and receive the disability support payment. You knew that when you were engaging in your deceptive behaviours, you should not have been doing what you were doing but continued to do it anyway.
62 You admit knowing that it was wrong, saying that you were desperate for money at the time of your offending. You admit that you were excited by the adrenaline rush when you engaged in your deceptive behaviours. Further, that you can be manipulative and that you have lacked remorse, although you say that have recently felt remorse. You are ashamed of your actions and stated that you engage in a lot of self-judgment, punishing yourself for your conduct.
63 Your reported that you have recurrently suicidal thoughts and have made two past attempts at suicide. You said you have had suicidal ideation since the age of 22. You stated that you have been self-harming while in prison by slitting your wrists.
64
You told Dr Sowden that when you were 19 years of age, you were raped. You said that you did not report the sexual assault to the police, as you felt ashamed. You describe suffering flashbacks, with intense psychological symptoms and ongoing nightmares as a result of this assault. You say that it was after this assault that you commenced conning people and authorities out of money. In light of your disclosure, Dr Sowden has diagnosed you as having a
post-traumatic stress disorder.
65 In Dr Sowden’s opinion, you suffer from a Borderline Personality Disorder with schizotypal personality features, in conjunction with narcissistic and anti-social personality features. These mental health issues adversely affected your mental functioning at the time of your offending and are significantly related to your criminal conduct. In Dr Sowden’s opinion, your disturbed personality functioning provided the basis for your deception resulting in the current offending.
66 Dr Sowden's opinion was that your fear of abandonment, characteristic of a Borderline Personality Disorder, in conjunction with your fantasies that somehow money would enable you to have more friends, in the context of your antisocial and narcissistic personality tendencies, is significantly related to your offending. I accept this. I also accept that your schizotypal personality features affected your mental functioning at the time.
67 In Dr Sowden's opinion, your Borderline Personality Disorder with schizotypal features will weigh more heavily on you in custody than a person in normal health because of your adverse psychological conditions. She stated:
“The severity of her Borderline Personality Disorder conditions are such that a sentence involving incarceration will in all probability trigger severe suicidal ideation urges and intent along with further self-harming.”
I accept this.
68 There is no dispute that the evidence in relation to your mental health confirms that you have a Borderline Personality Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
69 The effect of your impaired mental functioning on your offending behaviour is relevant when considering a number of sentencing propositions. The Court of Appeal have recently stated that impaired mental functioning consequent upon a personality disorder can impact a person's behaviour to the extent that Verdins[1] principles become applicable.[2]
[1]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269 (‘Verdins’).
[2]Brown v R [2020] VSCA 212.
70 Your counsel has submitted that in light of your Borderline Personality Disorder, the principles in Verdins[3] are enlivened. Further, that sentencing considerations relating to moral culpability, general and specific deterrence and punishment should all be moderated. It is also likely that imprisonment will have a significant adverse effect on your mental health, rendering you more vulnerable to suicidal ideation and attempts, as well as serious self-harm.
[3]Verdins (n 1).
71 The prosecution concedes that in light of your diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder with schizotypal features, this impairment is relevant when considering the principles outlined in Verdins.[4] This diagnosis may lead to some limited moderation of moral culpability, general and specific deterrence and punishment.
[4]Verdins (n 1).
72 Further, that imprisonment will weigh more heavily on you than a person of normal mental health as a result of adverse psychological condition.
73 I accept that your dishonest conduct is in part, a product of your mental impairment which in turn is a product of your Borderline Personality Disorder with schizotypal features. Further, that your Borderline Personality Disorder is directly related to your offending and an integral part of explaining your offending conduct. I agree that your moral culpability is reduced and that the sentencing principles of deterrence and punishment should be moderated accordingly.
74 It appears that symptoms of a Borderline Personality Disorder can be brought under some control when receiving offence-specific treatment. In a letter to the Court from Forensicare, dated 13 October 2020, it confirms that you have engaged with psychological services while in custody. These interventions focus on mental health issues.
75 You have been in receipt of medication for anxiety and depression since 2018. Your dose has increased while incarcerated. It is clear that a custodial sentence will be a greater burden on you than to others in normal health. Further, offence specific treatment and interventions are not available to you while incarcerated. These factors are also relevant when imposing sentence.
76 You are most fortunate to have the ongoing support of your mother, who was not aware that you were engaging in this misconduct. You took advantage of her, enabling your fraudulent activity. She has remained in contact with you while you are in custody through regular ZOOM calls. You intend to return to live with her when you are released. You want to re-enter the workforce and say that you 'simply want normality'.
77
In the letter to the court from Ms Kendrick, she confirms that as a result of your personality disorder, you participated in 19 weeks of a 36-week program of intensive training, known as Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (‘DBT’). DBT is an evidence-based treatment for borderline personality disorders. In
Ms Kendrick's opinion, you made progress engaging in this therapy and it is an appropriate treatment for you. You intend to continue with it upon your release from custody.
78 When considering your prospects of rehabilitation, Dr Sowden believes that upon receipt of appropriate treatment, your risk of reoffending can be reduced and your prospects are good. In the absence of strong support and appropriate therapy, Dr Sowden believes that you are a medium risk of reoffending. Treatments that are considered to reduce your likelihood of reoffending include completing the DBT program as well as ongoing weekly clinical psychological treatment.
79 In your assessment with Dr Jager and Dr Sowden, you disclosed that at the age of 19 you were sexually abused. They both state that you appear to have suffered symptoms of PTSD, in response to the alleged sexual assault. In Dr Sowden's view, the PTSD symptoms appear to be abating in their severity.
80 In the course of your plea, your counsel submitted that you do suffer from PTSD but that it is not a diagnosis that is linked to your offending. It is not, therefore, relied on in that regard.
81 The prosecution submit that your diagnosis of PTSD should be rejected by the Court, as you failed to disclose the relevant information to Dr Scally and Ms Sankaran. The allegation is based solely on your self-reporting.
82 When considering this aspect of your plea, I note that Ms Sankaran opined that:
“While Ms Dickinson engaged in clinical interview I have no way of confirming her historical details and as such the possibility of exaggeration minimisation or confabulation cannot be immediately ignored.”
83 Your history of dishonesty is extensive. It is difficult to reach a solid conclusion about this allegation.
84 In the two earlier assessments, you did not disclose this incident to either psychologist. There has been no independent evidence provided to support this claim. In the absence of this and in light of your history of inventing facts that you use to benefit yourself, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the incident occurred. I am not satisfied, therefore, that you suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.
85 Your counsel has submitted that your early plea should also be viewed as an indication of remorse. It is consistent with your commencing reparation voluntarily. Medical materials reveal that you regret your actions and are ashamed of your conduct. These expressions of regret appear consistently in the reports however, when you did not fully disclose your dishonesty. You have also continued to offend. It is difficult to accept this submission and to assess the weight of your remorse.
86 In my view, while you may feel sorry for your current predicament and the resulting substantial media interest in your offending, that does not translate to full or insightful remorse for your offending. As I have already noted, however, you have taken responsibility for your conduct at an early stage.
87 As a direct result of your offending, you have been the subject of significant media interest, from the time these offences first came before the courts. I am told that the extent of the media reporting in the past has caused you great concern and affected your mental health. It has been submitted on your behalf that the extensive media coverage is extra‑curial punishment; that it has and will continue to contribute to your suicidal ideation and risk of self-harm. In light of these consequences, it is a mitigating factor.
88 The prosecution agrees that the media coverage which has exposed your offending and informed the broader community, has had a psychological impact on you.
89 You have a history of self-harm. In Ms Kendrick’s opinion, your risk of suicide is likely to significantly increase through the media coverage of your case and through imprisonment. Letters from your general practitioners indicate that your court case and media coverage have been detrimental to your mental health. Your criminal conduct and the associated publicity have affected your reputation and you lost your employment in 2018.
90 In Dr Sowden’s view, the extensive media coverage of your offending and the impending sentence of imprisonment are both likely to have a negative effect on your mental health. It is difficult to disentangle which of these outcomes is likely to have a greater impact.
91 You have been publicly disgraced. The risk that any offender confronts is of publicity being part of the criminal process. Your misconduct has generated wide publicity. I accept that being the subject of acute public interest has added to the stress associated with these proceedings and to the criminal process overall. While the adverse publicity is the product of your sustained course of dishonest conduct, it is likely to continue to have an impact on your mental health and I provide a modest sentencing benefit for that.
92 You are currently undergoing your first sentence of imprisonment, although you have spent some time in custody in the past. You are residing in the Rosewood Unit, which is part of the Mental Health and Wellbeing precinct at Dame Phyllis Frost Centre. You advise that you have been under frequent observation and have engaged in regular consultation with psychiatrists, psychologists, and mental health clinicians while in custody. Protective measures are available in this setting.
93 You are employed at the cafe in the visitors’ centre of the prison. Your case management review, on 16 October 2020, reveals that you are doing well and improving your skills in the course of that employment. You have been put in a position of trust and take your job seriously. You wish to maintain this position while you are imprisoned.
94 You have completed a number of single unit courses and received certificates relating to vocational training. You are described as a generally cooperative prisoner who is well behaved. You appear to struggle with your mental health issues and are currently working on strategies to deal with this.
95 In order to assist your transition into the community, you have been assessed and referred to the Relink Program and will be considered for an extended Reconnect package. You have also been referred to the Supporting New Futures Program run by Jesuit Social Services who will assist you in finding employment upon your release. You indicate that you intend to recommence DBT and other appropriate mental health treatment when you are back in the community.
96 It is conceded that your offending is serious. The principle of general deterrence is a significant factor in this type of criminal conduct. Denunciation and punishment must also be given weight in the sentencing process. Specific deterrence is also relevant, given the duration of your offending. Protection of the community assumes importance in the sentencing mix. In light of your history, the capacity of treatment to reduce your risk of reoffending is unclear.
97 Your counsel’s submission is that your rehabilitative needs are significant and complex. Your prospects of rehabilitation will be assisted by appropriate treatment and I accept that rehabilitation remains a relevant sentencing consideration. In light of your persistent dishonesty over a lengthy period, coupled with your contravention of the Community Correction Order, which provided you with supervision while in the community, I am not persuaded that your prospects are positive.
98 A term of imprisonment can only be imposed if the court is satisfied that no other penalty is appropriate. I am required to consider all other available sentencing dispositions, in all the circumstances of this case.
99 In light of the objective gravity of the offence, I am satisfied that a term of imprisonment is the only appropriate disposition. This was a sustained and deliberate fraud against the social welfare system. The offending here is aggravated in that it was motivated by greed. You were also engaged in paid employment during the offending period.
100 I accept that your supervision upon release will be of benefit, both to you and to the community. I intend to release you on a Recognisance Release Order. I do not intend to impose treatment related conditions as part of that order, as that will be a matter for your medical practitioners to determine.
101 I take into account that measures taken by Corrections to deal with the COVID‑19 pandemic will continue to add to your hardship as a prisoner, particularly as you are undergoing your first sentence of imprisonment in these conditions and that your incarceration will continue. The prosecution concedes as much.
102 I am aware that the first 14 days you spent in custody were in 24-hour lockdown, due to quarantine requirements. I do not provide any specific sentencing benefit for this or for the possibility that lockdown may occur again. As I understand it, when this occurs you may receive sentence reductions as a result of the administrative decision of the prison authorities.
103 It is clear, however, that the current time will be more stressful for you than it would be if you were in the community. This is not only due to your personal position of confinement but also to the hardship you may feel being absent from your mother at this difficult time. The emotional impact of being unable to have any personal visits so far and for the foreseeable future will increase the burden of imprisonment. You are also likely to feel more vulnerable to the possibility of infection of the virus, in light of your incarceration. These hardships justify a sentencing benefit overall.
104 I am aware that vocational and educational programs are more limited at the current time although you have been able to undertake some courses. Fortunately, you have been able to access psychological treatment and are currently engaged in employment.
105 The principle of totality needs to be considered. I take into account the sentence that you are currently undergoing. I have endeavoured to tailor your sentence to ensure that it is proportionate overall.
106 I have considered the cases provided by the prosecution. The authorities confirm the need for general deterrence to have paramount consideration in cases such as these.
107 I am unable to backdate a federal sentence; that is, to start it from a date earlier than its imposition. The sentence that I will impose commences today and runs concurrently with your current sentence.
108 Balancing all these factors as best I can, I sentence you as follows:
109 You are convicted and sentences to two years and six months imprisonment.
110 The sentence commences today.
111 I direct that you be released after serving one year in gaol, upon you entering into a recognisance in the sum of $1000, to comply with the following condition - that you are to be of good behaviour.
112 The Recognisance Release Order is for three years.
113 Ms Dickinson, are you prepared to be of good behaviour?
114 OFFENDER: Yes.
115 HER HONOUR: I need to explain the sentence to you. The sentence that I've just imposed means that you are required to serve 12 months in custody from today's date. You will then be released into the community but with the balance of the term of imprisonment hanging over your head. You have promised to be of good behaviour for the next three years. If you commit any further offences during that three-year period, you will be in breach of this sentencing order. Do you understand that, Ms Dickinson?
116 OFFENDER: Yes.
117 HER HONOUR: You do not have to pay the sum of $1000 now, but you may have to if you fail to comply with the conditions of this order, which essentially means that if you reoffend during the next three years. . If you do commit any further offence in that period, you will be brought back to this court for resentencing. You will be at real risk of being sent to gaol to serve the balance of the sentence, which will be a further 18 months. Do you understand that, Ms Dickinson?
118 OFFENDER: Yes.
119 HER HONOUR: Thank you.
120 The declaration that I make under s.6AAA is, had the matter not proceeded as a plea of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of three years and three months and ordered that Ms Dickinson serve 15 months.
121 I make an order for reparation as requested by the prosecution in the sum of $92,178.72.
122 Are there any other orders Mr de Vietri?
123
MR DE VIETRI: Your Honour, just on a point of clarification on the conditions of the reconnaissance release order. It was simply to be of good behaviour. The reason I ask is, Your Honour made reference earlier on about the benefit of potentially being released with supervision, but as I understand it,
Your Honour hasn't ordered any supervision by Corrections Victoria - - -
124 HER HONOUR: No.
125 MR DE VIETRI: - - - simply on release on recognisance to be of good behaviour.
126 HER HONOUR: Correct. I've determined it's appropriate for her medical practitioners to impose and supervise her treatment when released from custody, rather than it being part of this order.
127 MR DE VIETRI: As Your Honour pleases. Thank you, nothing further from the prosecution.
128 HER HONOUR: Thank you. Is there anything further, Ms Rolfe?
129 MS ROLFE: There’s not, Your Honour.
130 HER HONOUR: Thank you. I will adjourn the court. Ms Rolfe, I'll give you an opportunity to speak with your client once everyone else on the link is excused and I will adjourn the court now.
131 MS ROLFE: Thank you, Your Honour.
- - -
3
0