Director of Public Prosecutions v Fiore

[2022] VCC 958

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

CR-21-01021

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

PETER FIORE

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE S JOHNS
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF PLEA:	20 June 2022
DATE OF SENTENCE:	20 June 2022
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Fiore
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2022] VCC 958

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:  Criminal Law Sentence     
Catchwords:   Common assault – Complicity – Plea of guilty     
Legislation Cited:                Sentencing Act 1991          
Sentence:  Fine of $7,000 without conviction.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	J. Harkess	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	R. Richter QC with C. Hooper	Garde-Wilson Lawyers

HIS HONOUR:

1.Mr Fiore, you pleaded guilty on indictment to a charge of common assault.

2.The charge relates to what I've already described as an ugly incident occurring when you travelled to Melbourne with Mr Corbett for unrelated purposes.  It is an ugly incident that occurred in September 2019.  And since that time, there has been protracted proceedings.  There was to be a trial but I accept that there has been negotiations for some time and a number of charges you faced are no longer proceeding and you're being dealt with for the charge of common assault, which has a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.  And the basis of your complicity in that common assault is set out adequately in Exhibit A, which is the prosecution opening, dated 17 June at 2022.

Circumstances of Offending

3.I am not going to summarise the circumstances of your offending.  I have viewed the CCTV footage, which provides a basis for understanding that your role was peripheral.  But whilst peripheral, it is none the less criminal activity and as I have already pointed out the entire circumstances properly viewed, are described as an ugly incident.  It is one that has had significant impact upon the victim.  The victim is your victim as well, although the victim impact statement speaks to impacts that go well beyond your criminality.

4.You have one prior matter that is before me, that we have referred to in the course of your plea, but also in the course of the resolution conference and it is a matter that whilst part of your history, it is appropriate for me to know and understand, it is not a matter which has great significance in this sentencing process. 

Personal Circumstances

5.I was told of your personal circumstances, most noteworthy, that notwithstanding the 1989 matter, you showed that you could be an upstanding and productive member of your community and you qualified as an oral surgeon and worked in that capacity for around three decades I was told.  You are also a family man who has raised children, now adult children who are all doing well in life, and you have got other significant business interests that you are now pursuing.

Other Sentencing Considerations

6.I take into account your plea of guilty.  I also take into account what I accept is your previous good character.  I apply the principles of general deterrence, specific deterrence and denunciation. 

7.General deterrence does not have a great role to play in your case, but it is nonetheless important for the reasons touched on by the prosecution, that this is criminal conduct.  It is conduct that was engaged in, in support of others who were pursuing far more serious criminal conduct than you engaged in.  It is important that that conduct is both denounced on behalf of the community, but also that a message is sent that it will not be tolerated and that others should understand that there will be consequences if they at least turn a blind eye or worse, as in your case, support and assist. 

8.Specific deterrence I accept has a very minimal role to play, that given your history and current circumstances.  I've got no doubt that prospects of rehabilitation are none other than excellent given your history, and that this is a blemish, an incident that, to a significant degree unfolded around you in circumstances where you were not anticipating that it was going to unfold around you in the manner in which it did.  Nonetheless, once it did, your conduct was criminal.  You could have stepped back.  You could have withdrawn.  One would expect a person of your character to at least show some signs of wanting that assault to come to an end.

Sentence

9.In all the circumstances on the charge of common assault, I fine you $7,000 without conviction. 

10.I have concluded that that fine should be imposed without conviction based on your, what I have referred to as your previous good character.  The significant professional history you engaged in, but more importantly at your age, you are now endeavouring to embark on new pursuits.  I accept what Mr Richter said about the health interventions in your life or the ill health I should say, that ended one career, you are now endeavouring to embark on another that may involve travel, it probably will, and will involve you engaging in the business world in various capacities. 

11.I accept and a conviction would make that pursuit more difficult.  When I look at this matter, the nature of the charge, in its circumstances, your commission of it, and your personal circumstances, I have concluded that it is appropriate to impose that fine without conviction.

12.Were it not for your plea of guilty, I would have fined you $10,000 with conviction.

13.Now, are there any other orders I need to make Mr Harkess.

14.MR HARKESS:  Can I ask for a stay of one month Your Honour.

15.HIS HONOUR:  Yes, stay of one month, yes.

16.MR HARKESS:  No further orders, Your Honour.

17.HIS HONOUR:  No other orders?

18.MR HARKESS:  No, Your Honour.

19.OFFENDER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20.HIS HONOUR:  All right, thank you.  All right, that concludes the matter.

21.OFFENDER:  Thank you.

- - -