Director of Public Prosecutions v Elsayed
[2019] VCC 1305
•16 August 2019
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR 17-01939
CR 17-01940
CR 17-01941
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| OSAMA ELSAYED ANDREW HARRISON JARROD HENNIG |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE STUART |
| WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
| DATE OF HEARING: | |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 16 August 2019 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Elsayed & Ors |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2019] VCC 1305 |
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr A. Albert | |
| For Accused Elsayed | Mr S. Tovey | |
| For Accused Harrison | Mr S. Langslow | |
| For Accused Hennig | Mr J. McMahon QC |
HIS HONOUR:
1Jarrod Hennig, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, which carries with it a maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment; a second charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence, ketamine, which carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment; and a third charge of possession of a drug of dependence, cannabis, which carries with it a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.
2Andrew Harrison, you have pleaded guilty on a separate indictment to one charge of incitement to traffick in a drug of dependence, which carries with it a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.
3And you, Osama Elsayed, have pleaded guilty to a third distinct indictment of traffick in a drug of dependence, which carries with it a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment; possession of a drug of dependence not relating to trafficking, which carries with it a maximum penalty of one year's imprisonment; possession of a drug of dependence, testosterone, not related to trafficking, which carries with it a maximum penalty of one year's imprisonment; and a fourth charge of possession of a precursor chemical, which carries with it a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment; and, finally, a summary offence Charge 5 of possession of cartridge ammunition, which carries with it a maximum penalty of a fine.
4The circumstances of your offending are set out in the summary of prosecution opening on plea, which became Exhibit 1. These sentencing reasons must also be read in conjunction with discussions during the course of the pleas.
5In September 2015 police commenced an investigation into the drug activities of you, Mr Hennig, and your associates. It culminated in arrest phase during April and May 2016. During the course of the investigation police used physical covert surveillance, thousands of telephone intercepts to and from your phones and as well as calls and texts that were intercepted from 12 February 2016 to 3 May 2016.
6There were some 300-plus intercepted calls and texts that were drug related. In addition a listening device was installed in your vehicle which was being used around the time of your arrest for your activities. As well, there were various searches of suspects, premises and vehicles, and recordings of calls made from a custody setting. A number of persons were identified during the course of this investigation, including you Mr Hennig, residing with your partner Rebecca Reid and your young son Ryder.
7You ran a legitimate business in the building construction field called Trade’s Group Pty Ltd and operated from a factory at Airport West. Allied to that business was also your drug trafficking business. You were at the beginning of that business a drug user and that use continued and indeed accelerated during the course of your business. You were arrested on 2 May 2016 and made a no comment record of interview.
8Another person who was associated with your business was Aydin Emin. He resided in Melton and was also a drug user. He was employed irregularly in your legitimate business. He was interviewed on 2 May 2016 and on 16 June 2016, concerning methylamphetamine trafficking, and subsequently on 4 October 2016 in relation to a ketamine seizure.
9You, Mr Elsayed, assisted and partnered in various aspects of Mr Hennig's drug trafficking activities and, as with the other two, you were also a drug user and arrested on 2 May 2016.
10A David Lister, who was at the time a member of Victoria Police, had been approved to have secondary employment as a carpenter and was employed by you, Mr Hennig, in your business of Trade’s Group Pty Ltd. He also was a drug user, was suspended from the police force in October 2015 after a positive drug test and resigned subsequently on 17 January 2016. He at your direction, Mr Hennig, flew to Townsville on some four occasions, which I will come to in more detail, in order to meet with Mr Harrison. He made a no comment record of interview. He subsequently pleaded guilty to number of offences and gave an undertaking to assist with sentence in ways which I will come to in due course.
11You, Andrew Harrison, resided in Townsville, Queensland. You purchased methylamphetamine from Mr Hennig. You came to Melbourne on six occasions, though perhaps not all in relation to the purchases of methylamphetamine from Mr Hennig.
12There are a number of other persons who were in various ways identified, including a Bianca Webb, who was also a customer of yours, Mr Hennig, in your methylamphetamine business. She resided in Corop, which is approximately 50 kilometres from Echuca. There are others who are identified, including an Ali Houli, a David Tribolet, a David Briars, a Nicholas Atrovski, a Matt Shepard, Shashin or “Shane” Rahmani, a Huan Do and a Luke John Debono.
13As I have stated, you, Mr Hennig, pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. A commercial quantity is specified as being either 500 grams mixed or 100 grams pure. By way of contrast a large commercial quantity is set at 1000 grams mixed. Whilst the quantity of methylamphetamine which you transacted over the period from 11 November 2015 to 3 April 2016 cannot be quantified on the evidence of every transaction which occurred, there are eight specific transactions in which it is possible to quantity on a conservative basis the transactions that you were involved in, five being with Mr Harrison and three with Bianca Webb.
14The methodology in terms of quantification is by an approximate calculation of a minimum quantity of methylamphetamine that would be expected to be obtained for the moneys that were paid to you, Mr Hennig, or estimated were paid to you, Mr Hennig, based on the price that you were charging and/or at the market rate of crystal methylamphetamine, or ice as it is known. The price per ounce, or 28 grams, is between $3,300 and $5,500. In a conversation between Mr Harrison and Mr Emin on 30 November 2015 recorded on Mr Harrison's iPad it was indicated that you, Mr Harrison, were paying $4,850 per ounce, or 28 grams.
15This approximates the high range of the range of payments per ounce. By taking that high range of $5,500 it produces a conservative figure in terms of quantum which the prosecution rely on in relation to these eight transactions. In total the quantifiable amount of methylamphetamine transacted by you, Mr Hennig, was 1086.5 grams, being 928 grams that was trafficked to Mr Harrison and 158.5 grams that was trafficked to Ms Webb. In relation to Mr Harrison, the incited amount that you trafficked to him was 588 grams.
16It is of course central to any charge of trafficking in the respective quantity that the accused is proved to have intended to traffic in that particular quantity and thus, though the large commercial quantity of 1000 grams is exceeded in relation to your trafficking, Mr Hennig, the charge relates to a commercial quantity, not a large commercial quantity. Again a conservative approach has been taken by the prosecution, and rightly so.
17Likewise in relation to you, Mr Harrison, in the incitement of Hennig to traffic to you 588 grams, that is in the range of a commercial quantity of above 500 grams mixed. Likewise you are not charged with a commercial quantity in that regard because the prosecution has rightly taken a conservative approach and you have been charged with trafficking other than in a commercial quantity. And so I turn to these eight transactions, five, as I have said, involving Harrison, three with Ms Webb.
18I do not intend to exhaustively deal with the material that is in the prosecution opening in regard to these transactions and indeed other aspects of materials which are set out in that prosecution opening; rather, I intend to select various passages which are sufficient for my purposes in sentencing all three of you.
19You, Mr Hennig, had met Mr Harrison apparently as part of your legitimate business dealings. Between 11 November 2015 and 7 December 2015 the first transaction occurred between yourself, Mr Hennig, and Mr Harrison, with Mr Harrison depositing a total of $28,000 in five deposits into Mr Emin's bank account. There were communications between Mr Harrison and Mr Emin's phone and messages sent to your iPad, Mr Harrison, regarding deposits and meetings. From that sum of $28,000, applying the conservative high market rate of $5,500 per 28 grams, it is estimated that the quantity of that first transaction of methylamphetamine was 140 grams.
20There were various trips in between these transactions by you, Mr Harrison, and Mr Hennig, as well as Mr Emin and of course, as I will come to, Mr Lister. The second transaction in fact involved Mr Lister, who between 7 and 8 January 2016 flew to Townsville on your direction, Mr Hennig, to collect payment from Mr Harrison. Mr Lister estimated he collected a minimum of $20,000 cash from you, Mr Harrison, and, using the same calculation method, it is estimated that that second transaction involved a quantifiable amount of 112 grams of mixed methylamphetamine.
21The third transaction also involved Mr Lister between, 28 and 29 January 2016, flying to Townsville at your direction, Mr Hennig, to collect payment from Mr Harrison. Mr Lister estimated that he again collected a minimum of $20,000 in cash from you, which gives the quantifiable amount again as 112 grams mixed of methylamphetamine.
22The fourth transaction involved Mr Lister flying to Townsville at your direction, Mr Hennig, to collect payment again from Mr Harrison. He, Mr Lister, from Townsville exchanged SMS with you, Mr Hennig, asking you to tell him of the arrangements to meet up with Mr Harrison. Mr Hennig asked Mr Emin to make contact with Mr Harrison on Facebook and Mr Lister met with you, Mr Harrison, but you could not raise any moneys to make payment to Mr Lister and in the end Mr Lister returned empty-handed.
23Following that aborted trip you, Mr Harrison, on 2 March 2016, came down to Melbourne to make the payment that was the subject of that fourth transaction. You, Mr Hennig, and Mr Emin met Mr Harrison at the Crown Plaza Hotel where you, Mr Harrison, were staying. A minimum amount was paid by you, Mr Harrison, to Mr Hennig, consistent with the previous payments made by Mr Lister at the minimum conservative figure of $20,000. Again that fourth transaction, working out on the same basis, involves a purchase by Mr Harrison of 112 grams mixed.
24The fifth transaction also, as with the previous four, involved a transaction that was to take place between Mr Harrison and Mr Lister, Mr Hennig having given Mr Lister three packages of methylamphetamine for delivery to Mr Harrison the next day, 4 April 2016. These packages were wrapped in orange-coloured cloth. Mr Lister took the packages to Townsville the next day without the cloth. Upon search of his garage they found two orange cloths with duct tape, consistent with that packaging. Forensic analysis identified both your DNA, Mr Hennig, and Mr Emin's fingerprints and DNA on those items.
25Mr Lister flew to Townsville, where he was arrested at the airport carrying 452 grams of crystal methylamphetamine having a purity of 65 per cent, or 294 grams pure. In relation to you, Mr Hennig, that involves you having the quantifiable amount of trafficking in 452 grams of crystal methylamphetamine, but insofar as Mr Harrison is concerned there is no evidence that he was aware of the exact quantity and therefore the prosecution in relation to you, Mr Harrison, have taken the conservative approach once again and estimated that your knowledge of that aborted delivery involved a figure of 112 grams mixed methylamphetamine.
26Thus in relation to those five transactions the total quantifiable was 928 grams as applicable to you, Mr Hennig, and 588 grams in relation to you, Mr Harrison.
27Insofar as that fifth transaction is concerned, you, Mr Elsayed, also had a role to play. On 23 March 2016 Mr Hennig told you that Mr Lister was going to Townsville for two to three weeks max. You told Mr Hennig that you did not trust Mr Lister and asked Mr Hennig whether they should have Mr Lister followed. On 24 March 2016 you told Mr Hennig that you thought they were making the wrong choice by waiting to send Mr Lister to Townsville rather than going themselves and, the following month on 2 April 2016, you, Mr Hennig, told Mr Elsayed that you were ‘going to see Dave [as in Dave Lister] as he is going way tomorrow'.
28The following day, 3 April 2016, you, Mr Hennig, told Mr Lister that Mr Lister's trip to Townsville was ready to go. You, Mr Elsayed, were aware that Mr Lister was delivering drugs to Mr Harrison. The quantity was not specified in the intercepted communications; however, it is inferred that you, Mr Elsayed, were aware that the quantity was not arranged and that Mr Lister was delivering from the knowledge he displayed in conversations with Mr Hennig concerning drug activities involving Mr Harrison and Mr Lister.
29And so I turn to the final three of those transactions. I should say not in order. On 14 February 2016 you, Mr Hennig, directed Mr Emin to meet Ms Webb in Melton and 'grab the cash'. Later you called Mr Emin and asked how much he had received. Mr Emin said that he did not know, as the moneys were in a sealed bag. Mr Emin later opened the bag and estimated that it was $6,000 in cash.
30Between 18 and 19 February 2016 you, Mr Hennig, SMS’d Ms Webb to go to Melton to see ‘my mate’ ‘at his house’ and get ‘1', i.e. 1 ounce, 28 grams. Ms Webb SMS’d you in reply saying, 'nearly at your mates now if u want to text him'. This is a reference to Mr Emin. She collected the drugs and complained later on to you, Mr Hennig, that it was 1.5 grams short.
31On 3 March 2016 you directed Ms Webb to collect ‘4’ [i.e. 4 ounces] from his ‘mate in Melton', again a reference to Mr Emin, who lived in Melton. Those two transactions involved respectively 26.5 grams, being the 28 grams less the 1.5 grams short, the subject of the sixth transaction, and in relation to the 4 ounces, 112 grams as they relate to you, Mr Hennig.
32On 27 March 2016 you, Mr Hennig, told Ms Webb that they were coming to her residence. She gave you her address. You and Mr Hennig drove to Corop. Mr Hennig called Mr Emin and told him to bring it down and just walk through, to which Mr Emin acknowledged. On 3 April 2016 Ms Webb was to pay you, Mr Hennig, $4,000. This quantified at the high market rate that gives this final eighth transaction, which can be identifiable in terms of quantities, a quantity of 20 grams. Thus in relation to these three transactions the quantifiable amount in your dealings with Ms Webb, Mr Hennig, was 158.5 grams.
33Part of your business involving communications between yourself, Mr Hennig, and Mr Emin, Mr Elsayed, Mr Harrison and Mr Lister, involved using BlackBerrys to ensure secure encrypted communication. Mr Harrison, you also used an iPad application for messaging. All of this was designed to prevent the communications on those devices being intercepted. The BlackBerry mobile phone was significantly more expensive than a normal phone.
34During the course of your trafficking, Mr Hennig, you attempted to source drugs from Mr Rahmani and Mr Do, as well as Mr Houli. In relation to you, Mr Hennig, and you, Mr Elsayed, on 2 March 2016 Mr Harrison came to Melbourne and paid you, Mr Hennig, some $20,000 from one of those transactions that I have already specified. The following day, 3 March 2016, Mr Hennig told Mr Elsayed of the funds that he and Mr Elsayed had available to them, there was only ‘85’ there, a reference to $85,000. You, Mr Elsayed, were disappointed with that amount.
35Some 12 days later on 15 March 2016 you, Mr Hennig, told Mr Elsayed that the ‘85’ had turned to ‘40’. 40 had been given to Mr Debono's sister and you, Mr Elsayed, were dismayed that she had spent so much. This indicates that between you, Mr Elsayed and Mr Hennig, there was a pool of money that you both had an interest in associated with this drug trafficking.
36At p.23 in paragraphs 15 and 16 there is further mention of a stock of drugs available to Mr Elsayed which you, Mr Hennig, wished to have access to for personal use. I put this entirely aside. It is not clear at all that this evidence relates to methylamphetamine and may well relate to some other narcotic of no moment to me.
37As with all trafficking in narcotics there were debts, and so it was that you, Mr Hennig, with Mr Elsayed's assistance, recovered or attempted to recover various drug debts including from Mr Nicholas Atrovski, you, Mr Hennig, telling Mr Elsayed that Mr Atrovski was drip-feeding them. You, Mr Elsayed, said you would 'punch the fuck out of' Mr Atrovski. Another person in that regard was a Mr Matt Sheppard. You, Mr Elsayed, when speaking to Mr Hennig about that debt, asked whether Mr Hennig had bashed Mr Sheppard, who said he had collected $1,500 from Mr Sheppard.
38In addition there was an attempt by you, Mr Hennig, to recover, or did recover, drug debts from a Mr David Briars. On 15 February 2016 Mr Briars sent you an SMS that he would have ‘6’, i.e. $6,000, for you, Mr Hennig, in four days and the rest in a couple of weeks. You considered that Mr Briars was avoiding you. On 29 February you directed Mr Emin to make arrangements that would enable him and an associate to speak to Mr Briars face to face about the debt.
39Both you, Mr Hennig, and Mr Emin spoke to Mr Briars on the phone on 15 April, Mr Briars saying he had just been pulled over by Mr Hennig's 'jack’ friend, i.e. Mr David Lister, just after he had left you, Mr Hennig. Mr Hennig asked Mr Briars why he would get a jack to search Mr Briars when Mr Briars owed him money. Mr Briars replied that you, Mr Hennig, could give the money to the jack, a reference to of course a police officer. Mr Emin told Mr Briars that Mr Hennig's friend, i.e. Mr Lister, is not even in the police force anymore and is pretty much in gaol and that he, Mr Briars, might be getting washed and that he, i.e. himself, Mr Emin, had had his car searched often.
40Other assistance provided by Mr Emin included you, Mr Hennig, asking him to deliver drugs, 'one thingo’ to Mr Houli, and to collect money from Mr Houli. Mr Emin told you, Mr Hennig, that he was going to see Mr Houli and that he could call you. No call was made.
41On 1 April 2016 you, Mr Hennig, and Mr Emin exchanged SMS’s, you asked Mr Emin if there was any 'juice', GHB. Mr Emin said that Mr Elsayed had both bottles, to collect a ‘little bit’. This is unrelated to any charge before me. Other aspects of your trafficking, Mr Hennig, was the existence of unexplained cash and thus, on 18 January 2016, there was a cash deposit into your bank account of $13,000. Your financial records were examined by an forensic accountant and it was his opinion that that deposit could not be linked to any known lawful income-producing activities of yours.
42In addition, the following month on 14 February 2016, you in a telephone conversation told your mother, Mrs Jill Hennig, that you were going away for a holiday for a week, that you had $150,000 cash that you wanted to keep safe somewhere whilst you were away, to which she told you to bring it to her property in Gisborne and she would put it where only you would know where it is. In addition, the following month on 2 May 2016 when you were arrested, $5,000 was found in your possession. A search of your mother's house found a further $13,160 that you had left with her for her to hold.
43Finally, you, Mr Hennig, were involved in making payments, including to Mr Lister, of $1,000 for each of the first and second trips to Townsville, where he collected moneys from Mr Harrison, the subject of the transactions 1 and 2. You did not pay Mr Lister for the third trip when Mr Harrison was not able to make payment and you told Mr Lister that he would be paid $15,000 for the fourth trip, which was the last trip, the subject of transaction 5, when Mr Lister was arrested at the Townsville airport. Plainly Mr Lister was going to be paid more for that trip, given the greater role that he had to play not simply as a collector of moneys but as a deliverer of a large quantity of methylamphetamine to Mr Harrison.
44In addition, on 28 February 2016 you, Mr Hennig, spoke to Mr Emin's father, Mr John Emin, saying that you had given his son at least $1,500 per week, that you had given his son easily $10K over the past four to five weeks and $5K over the last two weeks. You further said that you do not know what he does with the cash. Mr Emin's father said that he had $2K left in the cash and paid some for the solicitor. You also said to his father that if he sees his son on his phone or the pokies that he should tell Mr Emin he should find somewhere else to live.
45Examples of other aspects of communications involving you, Mr Hennig, Mr Harrison, Mr Lister, Mr Elsayed and Mr Emin are set out in pp.20 and 21 of the prosecution opening. Coincidentally on 30 April 2016 you, Mr Hennig, together with Mr Tribolet, were driving in a vehicle in which police had installed the listening device that I have earlier referred to. He, Mr Tribolet, was the driver. Police involved in the investigation stopped the vehicle for an apparent routine licence and registration check. The two of you spoke about there being drugs in the vehicle when the police were out of earshot. You were allowed to leave when police had completed licence and vehicle checks and there was no search of the vehicle.
46You drove to Mr Emin's address. There Mr Emin asked you whether police had searched the vehicle. You said that it was lucky that the police did not. Mr Tribolet told Mr Emin that the police would have found 'heaps' and showed Mr Emin something in the vehicle, to which Mr Emin exclaimed, 'Look at that … Oh my god … take it inside'. Later there were sounds indicating that there was some work being done on the vehicle.
47A few days later, on 2 May 2016, police arrested you, Mr Hennig, and seized the vehicle. Police subsequently reviewed the listening device recording, which indicated of course that there had been drugs hidden in the vehicle. A further search was conducted of the vehicle, including removing panels. Police found a sock in a panel that had a Ziploc bag which contained 575.4 grams of ketamine of 20 percent purity, i.e. 115.1 grams pure. This bag was forensically examined and DNA profiles found that it was 100 billion times more likely that Mr Emin was a contributor to the DNA profile than not. This of course relates to the Charge 2 in relation to you, Mr Hennig, of trafficking in a drug of dependence between 30 April 2016 and 2 May 2016, namely ketamine.
48On the date of the execution of the search warrant at a premises you are linked to on 2 May 2016 in Kings Park police found a hydroponic cannabis plantation in the premises, Mr Hennig. There were some 22 cannabis plants and four leafy cannabis stems weighing a total of 8.5 kilograms. In addition there was hydroponic equipment including 37 shades, 31 transformers, 34 high-powered globes, electronic switchboard, electronic bypass of the electrical power and a grow chart program. This relates to you, Mr Hennig, on the Charge 3 of possession of a drug of dependence, not trafficking. Other aspects to your possession are set out in paragraphs 49 and 50.
49In relation to the search this premises, Mr Hennig, again on the same date, 2 May 2016, police found a precursor chemical phosphoric acid, which relates to the Charge 4, possession of a precursor chemical, as well as possession of a small quantity of 0.2 grams methylamphetamine, subject of Charge 2, and 3.2 grams of testosterone, which is the subject of Charge 3 on your indictment.
50Pages 52 to 53 set out the procedural hearing dates and plea offers, with you, Mr Hennig, making the first plea offer on 25 June 2018, which was accepted the following month. After further discussions a further plea offer was made which was accepted on 13 July 2018. You had been arraigned seven days later on 20 July 2018 and pleading guilty.
51You, Mr Elsayed, after settlement negotiations a plea offer was made and accepted over the period between 10 and 12 April this year, you pleading guilty on 16 April 2019. You, Mr Harrison, made a plea offer on 24 April 2019 which was accepted.
52You, Mr Hennig, have pleaded guilty to trafficking in a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine over a period of approximately five months from 11 November 2015 to 3 April 2016. In addition, you have pleaded guilty, as I have indicated, to trafficking in ketamine between 30 April and 2 May 2016.
53You, Mr Harrison, have pleaded guilty to incitement to traffic in a drug of dependence between the same two dates as the trafficking by Mr Hennig, between 11 November 2015 and 3 April 2016; on the other hand you, Mr Elsayed, have pleaded guilty to a more confined period of offending, trafficking in a drug of dependence, Charge 1, between 17 February 2016 and 2 May 2016, something in the order of two and a half months.
54You, Mr Hennig, were the principal. This was your business. You drew in, as you required, others to assist you in your trafficking business. Mr David Lister was sentenced by me in the charge of trafficking in methylamphetamine on 22 December 2016 and was sentenced on that charge to two years' imprisonment. The sentence that I imposed in relation to his matters, was substantially discounted because of his cooperation and his preparedness to further cooperate in then ensuring trials involving you, Mr Hennig, and others.
55Parliament has adopted a quantity-based regime in setting the maximum penalties. The social evil, the trafficking in narcotics, whatever the narcotic be, are so often manifested in this court. Typically ice rears its head in this court day after day after day. In sentencing Mr Lister I note the devastation caused by this particular drug, saying in paragraph 19:
'There is hardly a plea that comes before me involving accused using narcotics these days where the narcotic is not Ice. This is a potent drug. It is cheap, it is euphoric and it is highly addictive. It ruins lives as the passing parade of persons coming before this court and the Magistrates' Court amply demonstrates, should anyone bother to sit in court and hear the misery that Ice causes to individuals, their family and the wider community. It is a sad thing to say but it appears that Ice usage has reached epidemic portions in our community. Those who think they can dabble in it will soon discover there is no dabbling in Ice. It will hook them and then destroy them as so often occurs’.
56And so it is with all three of you, all three of you. Two quite young men and you, Mr Harrison, otherwise men of integrity and capacity to have had your lives potentially destroyed. In quoting what I have done I do no more than acknowledge the social harm that flows from trafficking in whatever narcotic as exampled by this drug.
57I intend to take a break for five minutes.
58(Short adjournment.)
59And so I turn to you, Mr Hennig. Your prior criminal history involves two matters in the Magistrates' Court in July 2005 and August 2010 which are of no moment to in relation to the sentences that I intend to impose upon you. You are a 35-year-old man. You completed your schooling to Year 10. You then went on to complete a roof tiling apprenticeship. In 2003 you started your own business, Western Roofing, a roof tiling business which continued to 2005 before that business went into liquidation. You were a young man then, only 20 years of age when you started that business. It failed due to your inexperience in record-keeping.
60You then worked for a year as a roof inspector. This predominantly involved preparing reports on conditions of roofs for insurance purposes. Between 2006 and 2009 you then commenced a new business called Trade Repair Services. You were only 22 when you started this business. This business involved you inspecting predominantly houses for repairs for insurance companies and, in particular, one such company. You would go to the damaged property, damaged by storm or whatever, and were responsible for making assessments and coordinating contractors to tend to the damage.
61You had a group of some 50 such contractors. This business went into voluntary liquidation in 2009 as a result of the primary insurance company that provided you with this work rationalised from 50 to 10 persons who they engaged for the insurance repairs.
62On 21 August 2008 your father died. In 2010 you established a new business called Trade’s Group. Again this was a building construction business which focused on insurance repairs. Your son was born in September 2015. You are the second of four children. Your father was a police officer. Though you looked up to him, he was apparently a violent drunk. It would appear there were two sides to him, one you admired, the other you feared, as did your other siblings and your mother.
63Following the death of your father your drug use increased steadily and, as a result, inevitably your business suffered. Your relationships suffered, as is typical of the development of ice addiction and its consequences. Your partner, the mother of your son, Rebecca Reed, has remained solidly behind you, visiting you every second week whilst you have been in custody.
64It is useful at this point to turn to some of the character evidence that has been tendered on your behalf. It became Exhibit JH3. Your partner Ms Reed writes in a heartfelt letter, among other things:
'Throughout my relationship with Jarrod over 9 years it has constantly been up and down. The highs have been amazing, he was always kind and generous and would compliment me and show me love. The lows were horrible he would disappear for days and not contact me at all. Leading up to his arrest I was regularly going back to my mum and dads to stay for comfort and support with Ryder. Jarrod would be absent for up to 5 days at a time with no notice or reason. I would call him constantly to tell him to come home, however, he would never answer.
65Later she writes at p.2:
'Now visiting him in remand, I can see he is now clean and has been off drugs throughout his time incarcerated and has returned to his former self. He is cooking his own meals, talking about going to the gym and physically looks fit with a clear mind. He now understands the enormity of his actions and the impact this has had on his son, family, others and myself. He has reflected on this and since repaired relationships through his genuine remorse, sending letters to those he had impacted and demonstrated through his behavior and attitude. Many conversations I have since had with Jarrod during our visits and phone calls he is talking to me about how he wishes to take Ryder to school and do normal family things with Ryder and I. He has even expressed his intent to want to help others affected by drugs and their families, he has said he believes with the courses he has done in remand around drug use and the impacts to people mental health, this is something he is now passionate about learning from his experiences. Knowing how strong willed and determined Jarrod is I have no doubt this is something he will pursue given the chance when he is released. Jarrod has ensured he is able to contribute during his time in prison, taking small jobs where he can, gardening, mowing, cleaning and so on, he enjoys keeping busy and doing these jobs.’
66Your sister, Chelsea Amos, has also written a heartfelt and very lengthy letter. She writes:
'Not long after dads passing Jarrod and I had some indifferences and his attitude and personality began to change over the coming years. It became clear he was dabbling in drugs, it started as weekend use I believe and slowly Mondays seemed to be harder for him to get up. Then this progressed into weekdays, weeks on end and then he would sleep for days and tell me he was sick, I would say go to the Doctors and he would not.’
67Later, in the last page of her letter, she writes:
'This hasn't been an easy road but I have seen the changes in him since his incarceration and genuine remorse for what he has done and determination to remain off drugs and resume his healthy lifestyle of gym and eating which he has maintained through the last 3+ years in prison. [And later] Seeing his physical change when visiting him over the past few years, he looks the best I have ever seen him in his adult life, healthy fit and built muscle tone. He had said on and off he wanted to go to the gym prior to all of this but never quite committed, I can now see this change and his commitment to a new healthier self both physically and mentally. I can look into his eyes and see the brother and best friend I once had, the one I miss so dearly.’
68How often have I read such letters. It is a tragedy. Your brother has also written along similar lines and a friend of yours, Chelsea Carberry has written, saying in the last paragraph:
'I know from the conversations with his family that Jarrod has since expressed his remorse for the anxiety and distress he caused Alysha, Chelsea and his mum. I believe that Jarrod is a good person and unfortunately over the years a slow deterioration of his addiction has essentially led to his incarceration.’
69I have also read the psychological report of Carla Lechner, which became Exhibit JH2. She details in the personal history the violence in the home that you suffered and witnessed. In relation to offending behaviour she writes:
Mr. Hennig stated that being in prison “I’ve mostly learnt to be normal again … I enjoy being with my family, feel like I’ve got my brain back”. He is working in the maintenance department and has completed a number of courses including “Ice and me”. He stated that he deeply regrets “that I was helping people to get to the same position as me … a nightmare past 7-8 years … the mind frame I have now, I’d never had done it … I’m ashamed, it was obviously wrong”.’
70Your mother is noted as saying, p.6, 'She has noted a huge change in him in custody – “he admitted that it took him to go to jail to stop”.’
71At interview you indicated, p.7:
'He stated that despite the anxiety of his pending Court hearing, he is feeling the best he has felt, both physically and mentally, for the past eight years.’
72In paragraph 5 of the Summary Opinion section Ms Lechner writes:
‘If he is able to remain abstinent from drugs, Mr. Hennig presents with a favourable prognosis for the following reasons: i) he has a supportive family and partner; ii) he has good employment prospects and a good work ethic; iii) he is keen to engage with treatment services; iv) he recognises the need to sever ties with all the drug sub-culture; and v) he has insight regarding the wrongfulness of his actions both legally and morally'.
73I accept what Ms Lechner has there written. Indeed Jacinta Crealy, the Gambler’s Help Therapeutic Counsellor with the Latrobe Community Health wrote in her letter, which became Exhibit JH6:
‘Jarrod has attended all appointments, and always presents as well groomed with a polite and friendly manner. He has developed a trusting relationship with the writer, and has spoken openly about his life prior to his sentence, and the positive lessons he has learned while in Fulham Correctional Centre. These include a critical reflection of past activities, and a positive response to the shock of incarceration. Jarrod has reflected that his time in prison has been a key factor in providing a solid pathway to rehabilitation'.
74You have been drug free since your incarceration as the assay results demonstrate, Exhibit JH4. In addition, as each of you have completed a large number of courses as set out in the certificates that became Exhibit JH5, there has for you, and also for Mr Harrison and Mr Elsayed, been a considerable delay of some three years and three months. In the judgment of Warren CJ and Redlich JA in Rodriguez v DPP (Cth) [2013] 40 VR 436, paragraphs 36 to 37 Their Honours wrote:
‘Delay is normally relevant in two ways. First, it is relevant to rehabilitation that has occurred during the delay and the effect that has in turn on specific deterrence. Secondly, delay is relevant in the sense that the anxiety and uncertainty of having the prospect of a sentence hanging over one’s head during the period of delay is akin to punishment in itself.
A sentencing judge need not make separate reference to each of the limbs of delay when stating that delay has been treated as a mitigating factor. However, where the judge refers specifically to one limb and does not refer to the other, the circumstances of the particular case may give rise to a question as to whether the limb not mentioned has received any weight in the sentencing synthesis'.
75In that regard in relation to all three of you, I take into account the delay in both ways. It is relevant for each of you in terms of your rehabilitation during this lengthy period. Each of you, as I will come to the others too, have made use of your time in prison profitably to rehabilitate yourself. This in turn reduces but does not eliminate the need for specific deterrence, deterring you from further offending. That is so in particular in relation to you, Mr Hennig, given the prolonged period of your offending and the gravity of it.
76Nonetheless, you as well, Mr Harrison, have made excellent use of your period of imprisonment. Indeed it may be said, and properly said, that you have been a model prisoner. All three of you have been awaiting your fate for a very considerable period of time.
77Whilst the pleas in relation to you, Mr Hennig, cannot be described as early pleas, they are pleas that have resulted after negotiations and it is to be borne steadily in mind that cases of this complexity require time for counsel and instructing solicitors to digest the materials, to receive instructions, to negotiate and to arrive to, as to the three of you, resolution of these matters.
78The utility of your pleas of guilty is considerable. In each case trials would have ensued and, in my estimate, such trials could have taken as long as two to three months and there may have been successful applications for separate trials. Thus the utility in these cases for each of you is high. I use your pleas of guilty in this case, Mr Hennig, in addition as further evidence of your remorse. You are now remorseful, you are now insightful. You are prepared, with your experience, to assist others who have gone down the same track as you.
79As will be revealed, different sentences must be passed on each of you, given your different roles, the duration of your offending and, in some cases, the additional charges that are present. In relation to you, Mr Hennig, you were sentenced to driving matters and on 23 February 2018, on appeal from the Magistrates' Court, you received an eight-month period of imprisonment. It is necessary to ensure in terms of totality that the sentences I impose reflect to a degree the need for me to take into account that period of imprisonment. I do so in this case by reducing the base sentence on the charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity by five months.
80In due course I will come to other sentencing considerations that I must take into account, but at this stage it is appropriate for me to move on to your background, Mr Harrison. The five transactions that are the subject of the incitement to traffic involves sums on the conservative estimate being paid or to be paid by you of $108,000, being $28,000 for the first transaction, $20,000 for the second, third and fourth, and, assuming the same quantity in the second, third and fourth, on the firth transaction $20,000 again, a not inconsiderable sum of money to purchase methylamphetamine on those five occasions.
81The quantities intended to be possessed are quantities that approach commercial quantity, but of course you have pleaded guilty not to a commercial quantity. You had time to reflect on what you were doing, you continued to place orders with Mr Hennig. In Mr Langslow's pithy direct plea, he drew attention to your plea of guilty to that single charge. He pointed out, to your credit, that you have no priors whatsoever and that you entered your plea of guilty, as I have specified. He too relies on delay, I have already addressed this matter, and points to the period of the offending being in November 2015 to 3 April 2016.
82He points out that you were not part of the operation of the syndicate save that you were one of the syndicate's customers, and that is patently so. You are 43 years of age and reside, as I have said, in Townsville. You are the youngest sibling. Your father passed away at age 13. Your mother and brother also reside in Townsville. You are a qualified fitter and turner, having completed that apprenticeship after leaving school at the age of 16. You have worked consistently in the mining industry both in Australia and overseas, including Indonesia.
83You have three daughters of a relationship which ended in 2000 who are now aged 12, 15 and 19. There had been a breakdown in that family and relationships have been strained. You had a workplace injury in 2016 which caused financial difficulties for you and divorce proceedings and retrenchment in 2015 causing financial strain that led to the sale of your home and the decision to take time off work and travel.
84You then led a party lifestyle associated with excessive drug use. Your use of drugs in the early life was extremely limited. You have done part-time work doing flood repair work in Queensland and it was there in that context that you met Mr Hennig. You had discussions about running a joint business trade across eastern states, doing flood repair work. Eventually your business talk evolved into drug supply by Mr Hennig to you. Upon your release from custody you intend to return to Townsville and obtain employment in the mining industry again.
85Whilst in custody you too have remained drug free. It is pointed out that this offending occurred in the context of your own drug addiction, as is the case with all three of you. It is pointed out that your period of incarceration in Victoria is more onerous because you do not have any supports in Victoria and you have no physical contact with your family. You too have done courses and have clean drug assay reports. Your prospects of rehabilitation are good, subject of course to you remaining drug free.
86In relation to you, Osama Elsayed, you are a 29-year-old man. You come from a strong and supportive family. You have a strong work history. You commenced, and have nearly completed, your qualifications as an electrician, not finishing the final segment of that qualification resulting in you not being able to sign off on any electrical work that might be done by you or others. Thus you can easily be employed, for you would be paid less than a fully qualified electrician.
87You had been in a downward spiral. You are largely aimless, unemployed and heavily addicted to drugs. You have been sentenced in relation to another matter by His Honour Judge Lyon on 7 November 2018 in relation to a charge of robbery, recklessly causing injury and a summary offence of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail. This offending that His Honour dealt with occurred whilst you were on bail in relation to the offending before me.
88His Honour set out your personal background and in the end, for the charges before him, sentenced you to a total effective sentence of two and a half years, or 30 months' imprisonment, and set a minimum non-parole period of 19 days, declaring 322 days of pre-sentence detention. This has produced a difficult scenario for me in terms of sentencing you, which I will come to in due course. There is a clear resolution of this matter which ensures that the sentences that have been passed by His Honour Judge Lyon and myself today are, in total, appropriate .
89You are 29 years old and 26 at the time of this offending, being the youngest of five children. Your parents immigrated from Lebanon. You have had the benefit of a supportive and stable childhood in the family home. You completed your Year 12 at Keilor Downs College in 2008. It was in the final period of your schooling that you became involved in taking drugs on a recreational basis. You would use cocaine, but by the age of 23 you were using 2 to 3 grams of that substance per week.
90Upon finishing your Year 12, you found work as an electrical apprentice and continued in this sort of work until about 2014, when a close friend passed away. You first used methylamphetamine when you were 24. As has been put in the written submissions by Mr Tovey, following the death your use of drugs has escalated substantially and ‘slowly, but surely, his life began to spiral out of control'. You apparently had known Mr Emin and Mr Hennig and, since school days, been friends.
91In paragraph 8 to 10 Mr Tovey put the summary of the offending and the significance of the offending in a most helpful way, submitting at paragraph 11 that, 'In the circumstances outlined above this is a mid-range example of traffic simpliciter’. I agree with that assessment. As with the other accused, Mr Tovey has pointed to your pleas of guilty as indicative of remorse and the acceptance of responsibility and, in the circumstances of the material which I will come to, I accept that; as well as the utility value, as I have already referred to; and the delay.
92You had one court appearance in September 2015, which is obviously drug related, and you were directed to be placed under a community corrections order, which was treatment orientated. You have attempted your rehabilitation on other occasions unsuccessfully, but you have achieved a large measure of rehabilitation as set out in Exhibit OE2, a letter from Amanda Brown, Senior Clinician with Lamberti & Associates, in which the last couple of paragraphs she writes:
'Mr Elsayed has routinely attended to relapse prevention, monitoring and counselling appointments with a writer at Lamberti associates. He has adjusted well to life in the broader community and is in my view stable. He has proven his motivation to remain drug free through his continued attendance to appointments with the writer along with the attendance at NA meetings and is assessed as being the maintenance stage of recovery from substance use disorder. . .
He is positive and future-focused and is committed to rehabilitation. He has substantially improved and begun the process of reclaiming his life.’
93Exhibit OE4 are a large quantity of drug tests which demonstrate that you have been drug free from February 2018 to 2 July 2019. In addition, whilst you have been in custody you have completed a number of courses, as set out in Exhibit OE5. I accept that you are remorseful.
94Your lifestyle in drugs has been shambolic. It has been submitted that the period of four months in residential rehabilitation should be taken into account. In accordance with the principles articulated, in the joint judgment of Warren CJ, Kyrou and Redlich JJA of Nathan Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214 at paragraph 83.
95This aspect of your rehabilitation was dealt with by His Honour Judge Lyon at paragraph 31 where His Honour stated:
'As 31 As I have noted, you committed further offences in 2016 and were bailed to Recovery Oz. It is somewhat disconcerting that the report of Amanda Brown refers to you having completed four months of residential rehabilitation at Recovery Oz in May 2016. I say it is disconcerting, because it appears that you used your time there to exploit Aaron Hanns the victim in this matter who you met whilst you were in residence at Recovery Oz’.
96It is not apparent to me that His Honour took into account the matters referred to in Akoka's case, but I intend to. In the circumstances of this particular case I have adjusted the sentence downwards by two months to take into account that period of time at that premises.
97Returning to the question of totality, the sentence that His Honour Judge Lyon set was one of two and a half years' imprisonment. I, in sentencing you, must place myself in His Honour’s position and assume of course, as I do, the appropriateness of the sentence that he imposed and then impose the sentence which I consider appropriate for the offences for which I must sentence you. There is a need for some level of concurrency, but in this particular case it is plain that the offending that you committed was discrete from the type of offending that I must sentence you for, although related to aspects of drug use and the like.
98In that regard I have contemplated how I should achieve such a total sentence. I would have ordered 10 months of the sentence that I impose upon you to be served concurrently with the sentence that His Honour imposed were I in the same shoes as His Honour but also sentencing on the same date for all the matters before me. As happenchance, the head sentence of two and a half years is approximate 10 months away from completion as at this date, happenchance because it is precisely the period that I was considering ordering in terms of concurrency.
99It has been submitted by Mr Albert and agreed by Mr Tovey that the appropriate course in this particular case is to order concurrency with the sentence in order to achieve the desired result of a sentence of five years with a minimum of three years had that sentence be passed by His Honour in November 2018.
100General deterrence, deterring others, is the principal sentencing factor I must, and do, take into account. It must be made plain that those who engage in this evil trade will receive significant sentences. This is particularly appropriate in relation to you, Mr Hennig. This was your business.
101There is also a need to denounce your involvement in this insidious trade and that there be just punishment for each of you. The prospects of each of you for your rehabilitation are I think very good, subject to one caveat: if you return to your use of drugs, your lives will again spiral out of control and you will reoffend. That is a certainty.
102Taking all these matters into account, stand Mr Hennig, on the charge of trafficking a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, Charge 1, I sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of eight years and one month. That is the base sentence. On the charge of trafficking in ketamine I sentence you to be imprisoned for one year and six months, of which six months will be cumulative upon Charge 1. On the charge of possession of the drug of dependence, Charge 3, I sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of one year, of which four months will be cumulative upon Charge 1.
103This produces a total effective sentence of eight years and 11 months and I direct that you be eligible for release on parole after six years. Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act I declare that but for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to 11 years and six months' imprisonment and set a minimum non-parole period of eight years. I declare pre-sentence detention of 956 days.
104Would you provide the chart to counsel for Mr Hennig. Take a seat.
105Stand, Mr Harrison.
106On the charge of incitement to traffic in a drug of dependence I sentence you to four and a half years' imprisonment. I set a minimum non-parole period of two years, nine months, and I state that but for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to six and a half years' imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of four years. I declare pre-sentence detention of 687 days.
107Provide the chart to counsel, please.
108Stand, please, Mr Elsayed.
109On the charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence I sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of three years, four months and four days, which is the base sentence. In relation to the charge of possession of the small quantity of methylamphetamine, I find that charge proven and dismiss it pursuant to s.76 of the Sentencing Act. On the charge of possession of a drug of dependence, namely testosterone, I sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of seven days, which is wholly concurrent. On the charge of possession of a precursor chemical I sentence you to be imprisoned for a period of one month. That one month is also wholly concurrent with Charge 1, the base sentence. On the summary charge of possession of cartridge ammunition I sentence you to a fine of $500.
110This produces a total effective sentence of three years, four months and four days. I set a minimum non-parole period of one year, four months and 8 days. I declare pre-sentence detention to be 19 days. I direct that the sentences that I have imposed today be served wholly concurrently with the sentences presently being served. This means your anticipated earliest release date is 4 December 2020. But for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to four years' imprisonment and set a minimum non-parole period of two and a half years.
111Take a seat. Now provide the chart to counsel for Mr Elsayed.
112Are there any corrections, Mr Albert?
113MR ALBERT: Did Your Honour in relation to Mr Elsayed's sentence term it 'sentence remaining to be served'?
114HIS HONOUR: I think I'd rather use the phraseology 'to be served with the sentence currently'. That's the normal phraseology, Mr ‑ ‑ ‑
115MR ALBERT: Yes. I just listened to it, I think does that refer back to the total sentence by Judge Lyon? That's the only query.
116HIS HONOUR: No, no.
117MR ALBERT: If it's just me, just my peculiarity, I won't take it any further, Your Honour.
118HIS HONOUR: Well, what I think I'll do, Mr Albert, I will - because of the complexities of Mr Elsayed's matter, I will indicate that it is anticipated that he will be released ‑ ‑ ‑
119MR ALBERT: Whenever, yes.
120HIS HONOUR: ‑ ‑ ‑ in - and that will be part of the records, and that his earliest release date will be as indicated in the emails and subsequently.
121MR ALBERT: Yes, Your Honour. Could Your Honour, in the sentencing, revise sentencing remarks in relation to Mr Hennig the possession of methylamphetamine, Maynard Place. I think Your Honour during the sentence said that it was his premises.
122HIS HONOUR: Sorry.
123MR ALBERT: In relation to Mr Hennig, the possession of methylamphetamine charge ‑ ‑ ‑
124MR McMAHON: Trafficking?
125MR ALBERT: No, sorry, possession of cannabis charge, possession of cannabis charge.
126HIS HONOUR: Yes.
127MR ALBERT: Yes. So Maynard Place, Your Honour said it was his premises. It's said he's linked to those premises.
128HIS HONOUR: All right. Well, Ms Jackson, can you remember that? Yes, thank you, Mr Albert. Anything else?
129MR ALBERT: Yes, there are also those orders for disposal and forfeiture.
130HIS HONOUR: Yes, does anyone wish to say anything about those orders?
131MR ALBERT: In relation to some of the summary offences remaining, what's proposed, Your Honour, is my instructor will provide your associate with a list of those summary ‑ ‑ ‑
132HIS HONOUR: What remaining summary offences?
133MR ALBERT: Summary offences to withdraw.
134HIS HONOUR: Yes. Yes, yes, yes. You can do that. That will be noted on the court records.
135MR ALBERT: Thank you, Your Honour.
136HIS HONOUR: Anything else, Mr McMahon?
137MR McMAHON: No, Your Honour.
138HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Yes, you can remove all three, please. I have not said as much, but I will include in my sentencing reasons a statement that these sentencing reasons must be read in conjunction with the discussions during the course of the pleas. 2 o'clock, please, Mr Rouse. Yes, I thank all counsel for their assistance during the course of this complicated matter.
‑ ‑ ‑
JARROD HENNIG Indictment No: C1610664A | |||||||
| Charge | Detail | Incident | Maximum Penalty | Sentence | Cumulation/ Concurrency | Additional | |
| 1 | Trafficking in a drug of dependence Commercial Quantity (500 gm mixed or 100 gm pure) s.71AA | 11 November 2015 to 3 April 2016 Methylamphetamine (1086.5 gm) (commercial quantity) The total quantifiable amount of methylamphetamine Hennig trafficked is 1086.5 gm. The methylamphetamine trafficked over the charge period cannot be quantified on the evidence for every transaction that occurred. It can be quantified for 8 transactions. - 5 of the transactions were with Harrison. - 3 of the transactions were with Webb.
| 25 years | 8 years 1 month imprisonment | BASE SENTENCE | 8 years 1 month imprisonment | |
| 2 | Trafficking in a drug of dependence s.71AC(1) | 30 April 2016 to 2 May 2016 Ketamine (575.4 gm of 20% purity - 115.1 gm pure) Found in car in which police has installed a listening device. | 15 years | 1 year 6 months imprisonment | 6 months cumulative | 6 months imprisonment | |
JARROD HENNIG Indictment No: C1610664A | |||||||
| 3 | Possession of a drug of dependence s.73(1) | 2 May 2016 Cannabis L. Found at 7 Marnard place, Kings Park. Hennig has been linked to the premises. 22 cannabis plants and 4 leafy cannabis stems. Total weight 8.5 kg. The Act provides that possession of 10 plants is prima facie evidence of trafficking. | 5 years and/or 400 p.u (not personal use) | 1 year imprisonment | 4 months cumulative | 4 months imprisonment | |
| 6AAA Total effective sentence: 11 years 6 months imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 8 years imprisonment | Total effective sentence: 8 years 11 months imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 6 years imprisonment PSD 956 days | ||||||
| ANDREW HARRISON Indictment No: G11222541 | |||||||
| Charge | Detail | Incident | Maximum Penalty | Sentence | Cumulation/Concurrency | Additional | |
| 1 | Incitement to traffick in a drug of dependence s.321G(1)(a) | 11 November 2015 and 3 April 2016 Methylamphetamine Harrison incited Hennig to traffick *588 gm. 5 transactions with Hennig. *There is no direct evidence of – (1) communications with Harrison concerning Lister’s delivery of drugs. (2) what Harrison was told about the quantity Lister was delivering. Therefore, the quantity that Harrison was inciting Hennig to traffick in Lister’s Townsville delivery is to be inferred from the circumstances, in particular previous transactions with Lister. It is inferred that the minimum quantity that Harrison was expecting Lister would be delivering is an amount consistent with previous payments he had made to Lister i.e. minimum of $20,000. The minimum amount of crystal methylamphetamine that would be purchased for $20,000 at high market price is 112 gm. | 15 years | 4 years 6 months imprisonment | - | 4 years 6 months imprisonment | |
| 6AAA Total effective sentence: 6 years 6 months imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 4 years imprisonment | Total effective sentence: 4 years 6 months imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 2 years 9 months imprisonment PDS 687 days | ||||||
| OSAMA ELSAYED Indictment No: G11162069 | |||||||
| Charge | Detail | Incident | Maximum Penalty | Sentence | Cumulation /Concurrency | Additional | |
| 1 | Trafficking in a drug of dependence s.71AC | 17 February 2016 to 2 May 2016 Methylamphetamine ‘Lister’s drug delivery’ Elsayed was aware that Lister was delivering drugs to Harrison. The quantity was not specified. It is inferred Elsayed was aware that the quantity was in the range that Lister was delivering from the knowledge he displayed in conversations with Hennig concerning drug activated, Harrison and Lister. | 15 years | 3 years 4 months 4 days imprisonment | BASE SENTENCE | 3 years 4 months 4 days imprisonment | |
| 2 | Possession of a drug of dependence s.73 | 2 May 2016 Methylamphetamine (0.2 gm) Found in police search of Elsayed’s residence | 5 years and/or 400 p.u or I year and/or 30 p.u. (if D establish on BOP not related to trafficking) | Dismissed Pursuant to s.76 of the Sentencing Act 1991 | |||
| 3 | Possession of a drug of dependence s.73 | 2 May 2016 Testosterone (3.2 gm) Found in police search of Elsayed’s residence | 5 years and/or 400 p.u or I year and/or 30 p.u. (if D establish on BOP not related to trafficking) | 7 days | Concurrent | - | |
| OSAMA ELSAYED Indictment No: G11162069 | |||||||
| 4 | Possession of a precursor chemical s.71D | 2 May 2016 Phosphorous acid (113 gm) Found in police search of Elsayed’s residence | 5 years or 600 p.u | 1 month imprisonment | Concurrent | - | |
| Sum Off 5 | Possession of cartridge ammunition | 2 May 2016 | 40 p.u | $500 | |||
| 6AAA Total effective sentence: 4 years imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 2 years 6 months imprisonment | Total effective sentence: 3 years 4 months 4 days imprisonment Minimum non-parole period: 1 year 4 months 8 days imprisonment PSD 16 days | ||||||
| These sentences are to be served concurrently with sentences presently being served. | |||||||