Director of Public Prosecutions v Edwards

[2025] VCC 1226

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-24-01335

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

FREDRICK EDWARDS

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE HOGAN
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	25 July 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	31 July 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Edwards
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 1226

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:              One charge of making threat to inflict serious injury, one charge of damaging property, and one charge of conduct placing another in danger of serious injury – Offender is an Aboriginal man who suffered childhood trauma – Application of the principles in Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 – Significant criminal history both prior to and subsequent to the offences – Serious long-term drug addiction

Legislation Cited:      Sentencing Act 1991

Cases Cited:Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571, R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269, NK v R [2025] NSW CCA 77

Sentence: 20 months’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 12 months - s 6AAA declaration of 2 years and 8 months’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 2 years

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Ms A Hando (Plea) Ms J Quinn (Sentence)	Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For the Offender	Mr H Lewis	Slink & Keating Solicitors

HER HONOUR:

1Fredrick Edwards, you have pleaded guilty to:

·        Charge 1, making a threat to inflict serious injury, which carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment;

·        Charge 2, damaging property, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment; and

·        Charge 3, engaging in conduct placing another in danger of serious injury, which carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

2The circumstances of your offending are outlined in the Summary of Prosecution Opening on Plea.[1]

[1]Exhibit “A”.

3The victim of your offending was Mr Nagi, a 41-year-old taxi driver employed by 13cabs.  At the relevant time you were aged 34 years.

4At 4.56pm on 20 June 2022, Mr Nagi responded to a booking for a taxi to an address in Mount Eliza.  He was initially met by a female, and then you sat in the rear passenger seat, but failed to put on a seatbelt.  You became immediately aggressive, telling the taxi driver not to look at the female or you would chop off his head.  You repeated this threat on several occasions, and then lit up a cigarette inside the taxi, whilst making racial slurs to the victim, calling him a “fucking cunt” and telling him to “fuck off back to” (his) own country”.  The threat to chop off Mr Nagi’s head comprises Charge 1, making a threat to inflict serious injury.

5While the taxi was travelling, you opened a tub of food and began using a fork, and threw some of the food around the taxi.  Whilst Mr Nagi was driving at approximately 63 kilometres per hour, you then forcefully pressed the metal fork into his left cheek.  You also threw a lit cigarette at Mr Nagi, which hit him and landed on the floor; and slapped Mr Nagi to the left-hand side of his face, causing redness and soreness, before he arrived at your destination in Hastings.  Your acts with the fork, the cigarette, and the slap to Mr Nagi, comprise the basis of Charge 3, recklessly engaging in conduct placing another in danger of serious injury.

6Throughout the journey in the taxi, apart from throwing food around and spitting towards Mr Nagi, you used your right hand to repeatedly punch the roof-mounted interior light in the taxi.  When you arrived at your destination you punched it, causing it to break, and pulled the remnants of it from the ceiling of the taxi, before throwing it towards Mr Nagi.  This is the basis of Charge 2, damaging property.

7Even after Mr Nagi had parked the taxi, you continued to be verbally abusive towards him, spat at him, and grabbed his face and shirt and pulled his shirt, causing the buttons to break.  These are not the subject of any charge.  There is no victim impact statement, but Mr Nagi was plainly very frightened and intimidated, as he activated the duress alarm and repeatedly flashed the taxi’s headlights and sounded the horn to try to gain the attention of members of the public.  Mr Nagi managed to take his car keys and phone and got out of the taxi when unknown members of the public had stopped.  This resulted in you decamping from the taxi.  Mr Nagi then drove to Hastings Police Station to report the matter.

8You had left a bag of items in the taxi, which included a large brown-handled hunting knife in a sheath.  At approximately 10.00pm that evening you attended the reception desk at Hastings Police Station, appearing to be heavily substance-affected, and advised that you had left property in a taxi.  The officer on duty told you to attend the following morning when you were not substance-affected.  In the meantime, a request had been made of 13cabs for the in-car security footage for the taxi driven by Mr Nagi.  This was ultimately received on 15 July 2022, confirming that you were the offending passenger.

9You were arrested on 28 August 2022, and, when interviewed, claimed that you remembered arguing with the taxi driver, but not an incident, stating that you would contest everything in court.  You initially identified yourself as having been in the taxi, and then denied that it was you in the screenshots taken from the in-car security footage.

10On 28 August 2022 you were released, pending issue of a summons.  Several attempts to serve the charge and summons upon you were unsuccessful, and, ultimately, on 25 October 2023 a warrant was issued.

11On 10 November 2023 you were arrested, but released on an undertaking of bail to appear at Frankston Magistrates’ Court on 8 December 2023.  You failed to appear.  You were located on 17 December 2023, and, again, released on an undertaking of bail to appear at Frankston Magistrates’ Court on 24 January 2024.  Again, you failed to appear.

12On 8 February 2024 you were arrested and remanded in custody.  Your legal representatives had concerns about whether you were fit to be tried, and you were granted bail on 17 May 2024.  The matter proceeded by way of straight hand-up brief to the County Court so that the issue of fitness to stand trial could be explored.  However, you failed to appear at a directions hearing on 11 October 2024, and, again, a warrant was issued.  On 1 November 2024 you were arrested, having also re-offended on that day.  You were remanded in custody, where you remained until being granted bail on 30 April 2025.  Your bail was again revoked on 13 May 2025 due to lack of compliance with bail conditions.  After psychiatric assessment by Forensicare to the effect that you did not have a defence of mental impairment, the matter ultimately resolved into a plea of guilty on 2 July 2025.

13You are presently aged 37 years, having been born in January 1988.  You come before the Court with a quite extensive criminal history dating back to 2009.  You have been before courts on:

·        dishonesty offences, including aggravated burglary (offensive weapon) and theft charges (particularly thefts of motor vehicles);

·        many driving offences, including dangerous driving, reckless conduct endangering serious injury, driving whilst disqualified, and dangerous driving whilst pursued by police;

·        possession of drugs;

·        wilfully damaging property;

·        assault;

·        reckless conduct endangering serious injury;

·        possessing a controlled weapon;

·        contravening bail conditions;

·        contravening family violence orders; and

·        contravening five community correction orders.

14During a plea on your behalf by your counsel, Mr Lewis, the Court was told that, since the offending for which I must sentence you, you had served a sentence of six months’ imprisonment imposed at Frankston Magistrates’ Court on 27 July 2022.  In addition, having been originally remanded on the subject charges on 12 February 2024, you were granted bail under the supervision of CISP on 17 May 2024 and served 96 days of that bail for which Mr Lewis urged that you should be given some credit.

15In the interests of totality, I do take into account that you have served a six-month term of imprisonment since committing these offences.  However, I cannot agree that, in your case, your period of undertaking CISP-supervised bail was akin to a Community Correction Order.  A final progress report from CISP dated 26 September 2024[2] was unflattering about your extremely limited engagement during this period of supervised bail.  You attended only four appointments in person over the 20-week period and were late for even those; you were regularly not able to be contacted by phone or email after either rescheduling (or more frequently not attending) scheduled appointments; and generally showed a lack of motivation to engage with CISP.  As previously mentioned, you were re-remanded in custody on 1 November 2024.

[2]Exhibit “B”.

16On a date which is not clear from the material tendered, you were granted a National Disability Insurance Scheme package.  It is unclear to me as to what disability qualified you for such a benefit.  Your coordinator from 24 August 2024 has been Mr Christoph Häusler of Gallawah Support Services for Aboriginal people, based in Shepparton.  He referred you to a local support service, the SALT Foundation, in Frankston.  However, the report from CISP noted that you would regularly turn away the support workers from the SALT Foundation when they presented to your home for pre-arranged appointments, and they noted that you appeared to be substance-affected.

17The CISP report indicated that there had been a proposal to release you to the support of Ngwala Willumbong for drug and alcohol support, but your poor engagement with CISP presented a barrier to this.  An attempt was made to link you with the Salvation Army to complete an assessment of housing needs, but the Salvation Army outreach worker said it was difficult to help you because of sporadic contact.  Hence, Mr Brendan Hollis, the Advanced Case Manager who authored the report, recommended that the CISP compliance condition be removed.

18On 1 November 2024 you had failed to answer bail at a CISP review hearing, and on that same day had committed further offences by attending the home of your victim, where you had a verbal argument and then struck and smashed the rear windscreen of your victim’s vehicle with a golf club.[3]  You were arrested and re‑remanded.

[3]        Exhibit “E”, Police Summary of offending and charge relating to 1 November 2024.

19On 30 April 2025, again, you were granted bail in the County Court on the subject matters.  Her Honour Judge Todd, who granted that bail, did so on the basis that you were to be supplied with intensive support from Mr Häusler, from Gallawah, and also from Mr Broderick, a worker with the organisation Arbias.  Both of these supporters were required to give undertakings to the Court that they would alert the informant to any behaviours of concern by you.  Unfortunately, yet again, you breached this bail, by failing to maintain contact with these support workers, not responding to voice and text messages, and also not being present at the motel where you were due to reside when an Arbias support worker attended to provide services.  As a consequence, you missed an appointment for the purpose of finding accommodation for you.  In addition, on more than one occasion, you had failed to report to Hastings Police Station in accordance with your bail conditions.  Accordingly, bail was revoked, again, on 13 May 2025.  This has resulted in you being in custody for another couple of months leading up to the plea hearing.

20Apart from the CISP report, tendered at the plea hearing was a report by Dr Aaron Cunningham, psychologist, dated 17 November 2020,[4] a report from Sheridan Finlay, senior psychologist at the Mental Health Advice and Response Service at Melbourne Magistrates’ Court, dated 27 June 2022,[5] a report from Ms Daniella Kocic, psychologist with Ferrari Consulting Group Pty Ltd, dated 22 April 2024,[6] and two psychiatric reports authored by Dr Raghuraman, psychiatrist with Forensicare, dated 5 and 13 May 2025.[7]

[4]        Exhibit “1”.

[5]        Exhibit “2”.

[6]        Exhibit “3”.

[7]        Exhibit “B”.

21The prosecution did not dispute, and I accept, that you are an Aboriginal man born in Port Hedland, Western Australia, who had a traumatic childhood involving family violence, early exposure to illicit drugs, parental separation when you were approximately four years old and physical, verbal and other abuse.  Your father was an alcoholic, who was physically abusive towards your mother, and your parents separated when you were approximately four years old.  Your mother re-partnered and your step-father, who was a methylamphetamine user, was physically abusive towards you. 

22Although you are an unreliable historian, who has variously stated to the authors of reports tendered that you were introduced to cannabis at age 6, age 8 or aged 11 or 12, with a habit developing by age 15 years, I accept that you were exposed to illicit drugs when you were still at a crucial stage of development.  Your education appears to have been disrupted and, although you apparently attended school up to Year 9, you did not actually achieve more than Year 7 or 8 level, with challenges to reading and writing. 

23You apparently left school and home by about age 14 and, although you undertook either a full or partial apprenticeship as a bricklayer/tiler, it seems that you have not worked in any significant way throughout the entirety of your adult life, which has involved long-term substance abuse.

24Courts acknowledge that the impact of childhood instability, trauma and disadvantage  can have enduring effects and I give full weight to the principles in Bugmy v The Queen (“Bugmy”).[8]  Having said that, it is plain that, although Dr Raghuraman considered that your difficult childhood attachments and experiences likely impaired your ability to regulate your emotions and, in turn could have made you more susceptible to using maladaptive coping mechanisms such as substance abuse,[9] your personality and psychological profile is a complex one, due to very heavy substance abuse over a lengthy period, accompanied by a failure by you to take advantage of multiple rehabilitative dispositions ordered by courts over many years. 

[8] (2013) 249 CLR 517.

[9] Report dated 5 March 2025, part of Exhibit “D”, page 10, paragraph [78].

25Although the reports of Dr Cunningham and Ms Kocic refer to a diagnosis of Schizophrenia based upon your report of psychosis in the form of auditory hallucinations and delusions, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that you do suffer Schizophrenia or, indeed, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (“ADHD”) or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, as this is all based on self-report by you, an unreliable historian, without any collateral information from any mental health treatment service.  Indeed, when assessed by Sheridan Finlay, psychologist, back in 2022, your history of having been diagnosed by a clinician with Schizophrenia “a long time ago” was about as vague as it could be.  At that time, you denied that you experienced any symptoms of psychosis and the author reported that you did not appear to be thought disordered or experiencing delusional beliefs.[10]

[10]        Exhibit “2”, page 4.

26The reports of Dr Raghuraman, comprising Exhibit “D”, indicated that, although you had given a history of hearing voices whilst you were in custody, a Peninsula Health CATT Community Mental Health Discharge Summary dated 7 October 2024, had noted you had a principal diagnosis of personality disorder, with a presentation indicative of a predominant substance-related presentation.[11]   That same report went on to note that, following assessment on 13 November 2024, at Metropolitan Remand Centre, you were noted to be  “quite thought disordered, paranoid and actively responding to unseen stimuli”.  The assessing psychiatric registrar suggested ongoing management and antipsychotic medications and close monitoring of your mental state.

[11]        Report dated 5 May 2024, part of Exhibit “D”, page 6, paragraphs [46]-[48].

27Notwithstanding this, Dr Raghuraman’s first report noted that, on 5 December 2024, you had elevated mood and grandiose, persecutory and bizarre delusions and hallucinations, and had been referred to the Acute Assessment Unit at MAP.  However, Dr Raghuraman recorded that a subsequent review on 9 December 2024 had noted:

“Mental state did not reveal any psychotic or effective symptoms.  Recent deterioration in MRC was likely reflective of substance intoxication/withdrawal – has now stated that he used methamphetamine while in MRC.”[12]

[12]        Report dated 5 March 2025, part of Exhibit “D”, page 7, paragraphs [50]-[51].

28It was noted by Dr Raghuraman that earlier assessments by Dr Nethasinghe in February, March and April 2024 suggested a likelihood of substance-related behavioural disturbances, and that you “had admitted to use of illicit substances whilst within the prison settings to multiple clinicians, as documented, which could have likely prolonged the resolution of substance-related behavioural disturbances in prison settings despite reported ongoing adherence to antipsychotic medication”.[13]  Indeed, notes of a consultation by Dr Grace Carroll, psychiatric registrar, on 10 December 2024, recorded that you had only partial insight and were accepting antipsychotic medication, and had agreed that you do not have Schizophrenia, and that medication is to provide protection against repeated drug-induced psychosis while you continue to use drugs.  The note indicated that her impression was of recurrent drug-induced psychosis but an absence of Schizophrenia, and that you had agreed with this.[14]

[13]        Ibid, pages 7-8, paragraphs [54]-[56].

[14]        Page 12 of extract from Justice Health records, Exhibit “C”.

29Dr Raghuraman, in his second report, gave a diagnosis of substance-induced psychotic disorder, noting that you had exhibited disorganised thought processes mainly in the context of substance use, and that these symptoms had not been observed and had not persisted during periods when you were not actively abusing substances and were adherent to your treatment.  The highest that he put it was that Schizophrenia was a differential diagnosis, which you could possibly develop due to repeated episodes of psychotic symptoms in the context of chronic methamphetamine use, and the ongoing insults to your brain due to active ongoing substance use, despite being adherent to treatment.[15]

[15] Report dated 13 May 2024, part of Exhibit “D”, page 7, paragraph [55].

30He also thought it possible that you had a personality disorder with features of emotional dysregulation, impulsivity and low frustration tolerance, but detailed a personality assessment tool would need to be completed for such a diagnosis to be definitive.  He noted your report that you had been “heavily using drugs” at the time of offending, and considered it likely that you could have experienced some psychotic symptoms because of your use of substances, rather than due to an enduring psychotic illness.  However, he thought it “highly unlikely” that it was directly related to your behaviour that led to the offences and that you could reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure that your conduct that led to the offending, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong.  He did not believe that you had a defence of mental impairment.[16]

[16]        Ibid, page 8.

31Ms Kocic, in her report, ultimately concluded that your “substance use history was captured as cannabis use, stimulant (amphetamine-type) use, anxiolytic, sedative, and hypnotic use and alcohol use disorders”.  She considered that further assessment was needed to determine whether you met the criteria and severity for your use of methamphetamine, alcohol, GHB and buprenorphine.  I have already noted that I do not accept the diagnosis of ADHD and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.  Ms Kocic provided no content for either of these disorders and indeed, noted that you were “unable to identify any specific symptoms pertaining to either diagnosis”.  She stated that, due to your presentation at the time of her assessment, it was not possible to undertake specific psychometric assessments to determine your ADHD/PTSD profile and “further assessment would be required to see whether you did meet the clinical threshold to warrant a diagnosis”.[17]

[17]Exhibit “3” page 12, paragraph [116].

32Ms Kocic considered that you were a vague historian and that your memory of events was only partially reliable, albeit limited.  She did not observe that you were experiencing any auditory hallucinations at the time of interview or that you were responding to external stimuli.  She stated that, “there did not appear to be any perceptual disturbances such as hallucinations, delusions, thought alienation or passivity experiences at the time of assessment”.[18]  She considered you displayed low average intelligence but did not undertake any cognitive assessment.  She noted inconsistent histories obtained from you.  You initially claimed that you denied the offending, believing you were falsely accused and believed that you had been in prison at the time of offending.  You later claimed that, in the aftermath of the offending, you had “felt sad” to learn of the offending and expressed remorse towards the taxi driver who “doesn’t deserve to get abused”.[19]

[18] Ibid, page 7, paragraph [80].

[19]Ibid, page 7, paragraphs [73] & [77].

33Ms Kocic considered that you displayed difficulties with insight in relation to your offending behaviour and towards mental health intervention (i.e. medical compliance).  She considered that your general risk of reoffending is high, based on you reporting “major mental illness” by way of depression, anxiety and stress, a long standing history of unemployment and homelessness and a history of polysubstance abuse, together with your history of auditory and visual hallucinations and limited insight in relation to the need for mental health treatment.  She inferred that your substance use had “developed as a means of self-medication for [your] lack of support, routine and structure perpetuated by [your] psychological distress”.[20]

[20] Ibid, page 13, paragraph [118].

34Having undertaken the rigorous analysis which is necessary to determine whether there is a nexus between any mental impairment and the offending, I am unable to determine such a nexus is proven on the balance of probabilities.  It is plain that, at the time of your offending, your admitted heavy use of substances clouds the issue of whether underlying psychological distress was causally related to your offending.  The fact is that illicit drug use had become a long-term lifestyle for you.  Hence, limbs one to four of R v Verdins[21] (“Verdins”) have no application.

[21] (2007) 16 VR 269.

35Your lack of insight and denial of your offending is concerning.  Dr Raghuraman’s report dated 13 May 2025 notes that you had denied making any threats or attempts to seriously injure the cab driver, and that he had “abused (you) throughout the ride calling (you) names like black c*nt”.[22]  This history traverses your pleas of guilty and does not inspire optimism for your rehabilitation, at this stage.

[22]Pages 4-5 paragraph [27].

36Thus, although I have stated that I give full weight to the principles in Bugmy because of your childhood trauma and disadvantage, the reduction in moral culpability due to these factors must be offset to some considerable extent by the weight to be given to general deterrence and protection of the community.[23]  Unhappily, you have been a menace to the community over many many years, despite multiple attempts to assist you with your drug problem, psychological distress and homelessness.  All of these have been unsuccessful, even where very intensive support has been provided to you, as was the case with CISP and, more recently, from Mr Hausler of Gallawah Support Services, the SALT Foundation, and a support worker from Arbias.

[23]See NK v R [2025] NSW CCA 77 at paragraph [112].

37Notwithstanding that multiple people were trying to help you to ensure your attendance at appointments, you simply did not engage and failed to cooperate so that very little gains were made, other than managing to link you with Centrelink, Ngwala and the Dandenong and District Aboriginal Cooperative.  The latter, according to the report of Mr Hausler, had mapped out an alcohol and drug treatment and therapy strategy with the Austin Hospital, but it did not even begin before you were again remanded in custody.  It is important to bear in mind that it is only three months ago that you were given the opportunity, on 30 April 2025, to again be bailed and engage with these various support workers, but by 13 May 2025 you had failed to do so.

In these circumstances, I consider that your prospects of rehabilitation are very guarded and it would not only be setting you up to fail, but be placing the community at danger, to release you into the community to be housed in a motel, again, for any period, as suggested in Mr Hausler’s report.  As I have already stated, you have a substance abuse problem which has been present for well over two decades.  You have taken very little responsibility for your own life.  Notwithstanding that your four children were the subject of a Care and Protection Application some years ago, you seem to think that securing long term stable accommodation will mean that they can come and stay with you and, indeed, put as one of your NDIS goals that you “would like support at home to take care of household responsibilities, including cleaning and yard maintenance, as well as support to cook meals and do shopping”.[24]  This shows a serious sense of entitlement and dependence on others.

[24]Exhibit “4” at the bottom of page 2 (albeit that the Report is unpaginated).

38This offending is serious.  It must have been totally unnerving for the taxi driver, Mr Nagi, to have you abusing him and damaging the interior of his taxi.  However, I consider that your conduct in committing Charge 3 is the most grievous of the three offences.  Taxi drivers supply a service to the community albeit a paid one.  They are vulnerable to people who are substance affected and badly behaved.  It is all the more terrifying when someone is substance affected because a victim is powerless to reason with such a person.  Your behaviour in pressing a fork against the driver’s cheek, throwing a lit cigarette at him and hitting him in the face whilst he was driving were acts which could easily have caused the driver to swerve or lose control of the car and resulted in injury to himself, the occupants of his taxi and other road users.  In these circumstances, I consider your offending to be mid-range in relation to Charge 3.  Even allowing for some mitigation of moral culpability due to the principles in Bugmy, your moral culpability is still significant.  This sort of conduct must be called out, taxi drivers must be aware that they will be supported and vindicated by Courts when their chosen employment is interfered with in this serious way.  You appear to have no true remorse, notwithstanding your pleas of guilty and what was recorded by Ms Kocic well over 12 months ago.  You have very little insight into your own offending behaviour and the need for consistent treatment and this is demonstrated by your subsequent offending and failure to comply with bail conditions.

39Given that your offending on Charges 1 and 2 occurred in the same time interval and context as Charge 3, justice requires significant concurrency even though they are all discrete offences.  However, I consider that the only appropriate sentence is a term of imprisonment which will involve more time in custody than what you have already spent on remand.

40In determining that sentence I have taken into account that there has been some delay in this matter due to the need to investigate whether you were fit to participate in a trial, with that issue having been raised by Ms Kocic in April 2024, but resolved by the reports of Dr Raghuraman in March 2025.  Soon after the resolution of that issue, you pleaded guilty to the charges.  It is now over 3 years since this offending.  However, it should be noted that part of the delay was attributable to you repeatedly failing to comply with bail conditions and to attend court hearings.  Also, there was delay in obtaining an opinion as to your fitness to stand trial due to you failing to attend two appointments for assessment.  It was only after you were remanded in custody on 1 November 2024 that the assessment forming the basis of Dr Raghuraman’s first report took place in January 2025.

41Your pleas of guilty have utilitarian value which must be taken into account in your favour, even though, as I have already stated, I am not convinced that there is true remorse.  Further, whilst I am not satisfied that the material justifies diagnoses of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or Schizophrenia or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, it is plain that you do suffer symptoms of anxiety and mood regulation which necessitate the prescription of medication, which, as at May 2025, included Quetiapine 500 milligrams per day and Aripiprazole 10 milligrams per day.[25]  I acknowledge that suffering these psychological symptoms, regardless of what label may be put upon them, does make serving a term of imprisonment more onerous for you than for a prisoner who does not have such symptoms.  Accordingly, I take into account that factor in accordance with limb five of Verdins.  You apparently endured a burdensome early period in custody after being remanded on 1 November 2024, however, it would appear that, in part, the deterioration in your psychotic symptoms was due to you illicitly using drugs whilst in custody.  Nevertheless, you plainly have a vulnerability to psychosis which must be borne in mind.

[25]Report of Dr Raghuraman dated 13 May 2025, part of Exhibit “D” page 5, paragraph [36].

42Your counsel submitted that the appropriate sentence should involve a straight term of imprisonment not exceeding the time in custody which you have already served.  Ms Hando on behalf of the prosecution submitted that a combination sentence was an appropriate disposition.  I do not agree with either submission.  As I have said, as recently as May 2025, you were not adhering to your bail conditions even with a great deal of support in place.  You have previously breached five Community Correction Orders.  Your counsel stated that you have some connection with your mother and a sister, who were on a Videolink at the plea hearing.  There was no suggestion that they were in a position to offer any particular support by way of accommodation, although Mr Hausler’s report mentions that your mother had offered to pay for you to stay for a weekend at “the Ibis” in Dandenong after your release.[26]  I note that, back in April 2024, Ms Kocic stated, “Mr Edwards reported that he has remained in contact with his mother, however, he has no family support whilst in custody, advising he has no phone number”.[27]  It would appear that this situation has changed, however, the idea that you should be released into the community to live in a motel pending more stable accommodation is totally unacceptable, given that this was the last arrangement when you re-entered the community and you were incapable of complying with your bail conditions.

[26]       Exhibit “4”, bottom of page 3, albeit unpaginated.

[27] Exhibit “3”, page 3, paragraph [27].

43Whilst giving full weight to the principles in Bugmy and being mindful of your general psychological distress, pleas of guilty and delay, the fact of the matter is that, during the period of delay, you have not demonstrated any very significant steps towards rehabilitation.  With maximum support, you  have managed to make a very preliminary contact with Ngwala and particularly DDACL, where a plan for alcohol and drug treatment therapy at the Austin Hospital was devised, but never commenced.

44I note that in Ms Kocic’s report she stated that:

“Mr Edwards instructed that he and his family have land in WA which is used by mining companies (such as BHP and Rio Tinto).  He instructed he receives royalties from the mining companies for the use of the land, whereby he and his family individually receive a lump sum of $70,000 to $80,000 every three months.  Despite this report of financial gain, he stated he uses the money to purchase drugs, rather than seek stable accommodation.”[28]

Yet, in the same report, she recorded that you had been a recipient of Centrelink payments, which you use to financially support yourself.  This is an unexplained juxtaposition.  Now, you have a National Disability Insurance package at your disposal as well.  There is no evidence that any of the money which came your way from mining royalties was used to support your four sons aged 14, 12, 10 and 7 following the breakup of your relationship with their mother in 2019.  Given that in 2024 Ms Kocic reported that you had not seen them for four years, it would seem to be an unrealistic goal of yours to expect that they might come and live with you in the immediately foreseeable future, particularly given your untreated significant substance abuse problem, as well as your psychological issues.  You have a long way to go in rehabilitation before you can expect to be a responsible parent entrusted with the care of the needs of four precious children. 

It seems to me that you need a further period where you are forced to remain free of illicit drug use and compliant with medication before being released into the community.  This will hopefully ensure that you are in a better position to take advantage of the support which is available to you through the various organisations mentioned in Mr Hausler’s report.

[28]Exhibit “3” page 3, paragraph [26].

45In my view, the gravity of the offending and your very guarded prospects for rehabilitation, at this stage, mean that a longer term of imprisonment is appropriate.   After taking into account all aggravating and mitigating factors, I consider that the appropriate sentence is one of a term of imprisonment involving a head sentence with a non-parole period.  I have no confidence that, even with the support outlined in Exhibit “4”, you will comply with a Community Correction Order.  You have not previously had the benefit of a period of supervision by way of parole.  It seems to me that, if you are granted parole with those supports, then there may be some prospect that you might be able to turn your life around.  Obviously, whether you are granted parole will be a matter for the Adult Parole Board.  If you are granted parole, I would urge that the supports identified by Mr Hausler be utilised to try to assist you to settle lawfully back into the community.

46On Charge 1, threatening to inflict serious injury, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of four months.

47On Charge 2, damaging property, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of three months.

48On Charge 3, recklessly engaging in conduct placing another in danger of serious injury, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 18 months.

49The base sentence is that imposed on Charge 3.  I direct that one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 1 and one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Charge 3 and upon each other.  The total effective sentence is 20 months’ imprisonment.  I direct that you serve a period of 12 months’ imprisonment before becoming eligible for parole.  I declare a period of 355 days to be reckoned as time already served under the sentence imposed this day.

50Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act I state that, had it not been for your pleas of guilty, the total effective sentence imposed would have been 2 years and 8 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years.

---