Director of Public Prosecutions v Ford
[2024] VCC 1708
•28 October 2024
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-23-01775
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| JASON FORD |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE BLAIR | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 29 July 2024 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 28 October 2024 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Ford | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 1708 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence
Catchwords: recklessly cause injury – trespass – attempt to pervert the course of justice – illicit substance use – high risk offending – early plea of guilty
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1958 (Vic); Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited:Semaan v The Queen [2017] VSCA 279; Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214; R v Renzella [1999] VSCA 85; Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342; Nash v The Queen [2013] VSCA 172.
Sentence: Community Correction Order in combination with imprisonment for a period of 15 months
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Deanna Caruso | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Angus Cameron | Angus Cameron |
HER HONOUR:
1Jason Ford on 29 July 2024 you pleaded guilty on indictment N12412429 to one charge of recklessly cause injury and one charge of attempt to pervert the course of justice. In addition, you agreed to this court dealing with a summary related offence and pleaded guilty to Charge 4 – Trespass.
2In addition, you admitted a significant 46 page prior criminal history.
Circumstances of offending
3The agreed factual basis of your offending is contained in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 19 July 2024. This document was tendered on your plea, what follows is a summary of that document.
4At the time of your offending you were 47 years old. You had known the victim Louise Canham and her partner Jemal Broadwood for about 10 years.
5Sometime between 9.30 and 10pm on 15 October 2022 you, together with Tegan Kenny, attended at Ms Canham’s home in Hamilton. Ms Canham answered your knock at the front door and spoke to your through the closed screen door. You had a brief conversation with Ms Canham and told her you wanted to see Broadwood. Ms Canham told you he was asleep.
6You then opened the screen door and tried to push your way in. Ms Canham attempted to stop you but you were able to shove the door open (SRO Trespass). You entered the hallway and struck Ms Canham to the face with your fist while saying “fuck you”. She fell backwards and hit her head on the bedroom door jamb. Ms Canham thought she may have blacked out and remembered seeing blood in the hallway. She had blood coming from her nose and mouth and her nose and jaw were very sore (Charge 1 – Recklessly cause injury).
7You then left the house with Ms Kenny. Mr Broadwood woke around midnight to find Ms Canham with injuries to the face and her blood in the hallway, kitchen and bathroom of the house. Mr Broadwood has asked Ms Canham what happened. She stated "FORDY", referring to you.
8Approximately two days after the incident, Mr Broadwood took a photograph of Ms Canham’s face showing the injuries from the incident.
9On 18 October 2022, Ms Canham’s work friend attended her home to find out why she had not attended work, photographs of the injuries were taken, and an anonymous Crime-Stoppers report was made. This report resulted in the police investigation.
10On 4 November 2022, Ms Canham made a statement to Detective Sergeant Mark James.
11On 5 November 2022 Ms Canham attended her GP as a result of concerns about her injuries, which included persistent pain, light-headedness, bleeding into her mouth, and numbness of the left side of her face. Her GP referred her for a CT to confirm suspected fractures.
12On 7 November 2022 you were arrested and conveyed to Hamilton Police Station where you were interviewed.
13On 11 November 2022 Ms Canham received a CT scan which confirmed the following injuries: a depressed fracture of the left orbital floor; further fractures through the lateral orbital margin, inferior lateral sinus wall and zygomatic ramus; minor depression at each fracture site; intra-sinus haemorrhage; and a nasal septum deviation to the right.
14On 28 March 2023, the police monitored 28 of your prison phone calls between the date of 13 December 2022 to 20 February 2023. (Charge 2 – Attempt to Pervert the Course of Justice)
15On 15 December 2022, you made a call to associate Danielle Wilson in which you discussed influencing witness Tegan Kenny’s statement to police in relation to the Stephen Street incident. You asked Danielle to tell Tegan Kenny to say you weren’t there on the night and to “stick to the plan”.
16On 7 January 2023 you made a call to Ms Kenny in which you attempted to influence her to lie to the Court by saying that you were at home with her when you both were in fact together at Stephen Street, Hamilton.
17On 6 February 2023, you again called Ms Kenny and attempted to influence her to lie to the Court by saying that you were home in bed, instead of at Stephen Street, Hamilton. You asked Ms Kenny, “are we sticking to the story or what?”.
18On 5 February 2023 you called Aaron Manaia. During that phone call you attempted to influence him to tell police that you were at his house with Ms Kenny at the time of the Stephen Street incident. You told Mr Manaia what Ms Kenny would say and asked him to tell the same lie.
Victim impact statement
19A victim impact statement from Ms Canham was tendered on your plea and read to the court by the prosecutor, Ms Caruso. Ms Canham described that as a result of your offending she isolated herself and didn’t want to answer the front door or see anyone. Ms Canham now has trouble trusting people and suffers from nightmares and is often emotional. As a result she has trouble socialising with people and often just stays inside her house.
20At the time of writing her victim impact statement in July 2024 Ms Canham detailed that some days she still finds it hard to face the world and has trouble communicating with people. She is nervous and very wary.
21In sentencing you I have had regard to the admissible contents of Ms Canham’s statement and the significant impact of your offending upon her.
Nature and gravity of offending
22In assessing the objective seriousness of your offending the applicable maximum penalties are an important yardstick. In this regard the maximum penalty for recklessly cause injury is 5 years imprisonment, for the SRO of trespass it is 6 months imprisonment or 25 penalty units and for the common law offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice it is 25 years imprisonment. Clearly your offending is serious and this fact was conceded by your counsel Mr Cameron.
23Counsel for the Crown, Ms Caruso, submitted that the offence of recklessly cause injury was a serious example of this offence. Ms Caruso contended there were two reasons for this: first, the offending occurred in Ms Canham’s home, a place where she would expect to feel safe and secure and; second, Ms Canham suffered multiple facial fractures. Although correctly considered an injury according to the criminal law it was nonetheless a serious example of an injury.
24In relation to the attempt to pervert the course of justice, Ms Caruso submitted that this offending was not insignificant and involved a degree of preplanning to get your stories straight, which is evidenced in the phone calls. Further, she submitted there were four calls over several months where you sought to influence three people and create a false alibi. Upon checking the depositions, Ms Caruso submitted it is apparent that when compulsorily examined Ms Kenny gave sworn evidence that she was not at Steven Street on the night and upon being shown photographs she did not recognise the house. Additionally, it was Ms Kenny’s sworn evidence that she was likely at home in bed watching Tiktok, she didn’t see a woman get punched and she hadn’t spoken to you since you had been in gaol. Ms Caruso submitted that such evidence from Ms Kenny was false and was reflective of the ‘story’ suggested by you.
25Your counsel, Mr Cameron referred to the Victorian Court of Appeal case of Nash where the court detailed matters that should routinely be taken into account in assessing the gravity of offences of intentionally cause serious injury.[1] Mr Cameron pointed to several factors, including that the offending did not involve a weapon, was of a short duration, and was not committed in company. He acknowledged the offending occurred in the victim’s home, the victim was female and she sustained an injury that was significant, although he submitted the court could not be satisfied to the requisite standard that a loss of consciousness occurred. In consideration of these factors Mr Cameron submitted on your behalf that this, while a serious example, is not one of the more serious examples of recklessly causing injury that this Court would see. He also relied on the opinion of Dr Andrew McAllan that he expected Ms Canham to have a normal recovery from her injuries.
[1] Nash v The Queen [2013] VSCA 172.
26Mr Cameron appropriately conceded that the attempting to pervert the course of justice charge is inherently serious, but submitted this was a relatively minor example. In making this submission, Mr Cameron noted that you were trying to avoid a mid-range offence, that no deception ever occurred, that you made only four phone calls in less than a two month period, the attempted deception involved three would-be accomplices and the victim was not approached or threatened. Further he submitted there was no violence and only limited premeditation could be inferred. Mr Cameron submitted that Ms Kenny did not mention you in her examination and, as a result, your attempt did not actually result in any deception of the court. On the whole Mr Cameron submitted you made four relatively short phone calls, there was no threatening language, the victim wasn’t approached and nothing comes of it in these circumstances as your offending was easily detected and wholly unsophisticated.[2]
[2] Semaan v The Queen [2017] VSCA 279 [39].
27In my view, your offending conduct can only be categorised as serious offending. You together with Ms Kenny attended the victim’s house in the late evening, you breached the sanctity of her home and punched her in the face causing an injury that resulted in multiple facial fractures. To be clear, I am not satisfied to the requisite standard that Ms Canham lost consciousness at the time. Her description of this aspect of the offending is equivocal. Nonetheless, I consider the injury she sustained to be significant.
28You then, whilst in custody, awaiting committal proceedings, in an attempt to avoid the consequences of your actions, asked three others to lie on your behalf and create a false alibi. Mr Ford, this type of offending strikes at the heart of the criminal justice system and whilst no deception was ultimately perpetrated, it appears that Ms Kenny, as a result of pressure from you, fabricated sworn evidence before the Magistrates’ Court. Although I do not consider this to be the most serious example of attempting to pervert the course of justice, I do not accept, as submitted by your counsel, that this is a relatively minor example of the offence.
Personal circumstances
29I turn now to your personal circumstances. You are currently 47 years old and were 45 years old at the time of this offending. You are one of four children to your parents, although your eldest brother is estranged from your family. Your parents remain together and are now aged in their 80’s. You have occasionally lived with them.
30Your childhood was normal and you had good relationships with your siblings. You speak extremely positively of your mother, who you describe as unconditionally supportive. Although there may have been the usual family arguments on the whole your childhood home was a loving environment without family violence.
31As a child, you were generally a good kid, but you had some challenging behaviour and would require a lot of time and attention from either your siblings or parents. You spent a lot of time with your older brothers when growing up, but this changed in your adolescence when your brothers found partners and had less time for you. Around this time, it became more difficult to keep you adequately occupied and you began to engage in delinquent behaviour, which your mother associates with you feeling “deserted”.
32You had a disrupted schooling, as you were disruptive and struggled to sit still, this resulted in your being kicked out of class. You were also given multiple suspensions, one lasting two weeks, whilst being expelled from four or five schools. You completed Year 8 but then left school early in Year 9 to start work as a panel beater. You preferred hands-on learning, as you hated school work and had difficulties with reading and spelling. You were diagnosed with dyslexia as a child. You also had some difficulties with making friends, and you were often bullied for your literacy challenges.
33Whilst in custody you are undertaking English and maths classes, with some improvement in your literacy skills. You have also attempted a few vocational courses, but the difficulties you face in terms of sitting in a class and concentrating still affect you. You have been able to complete a Certificate III in Horticulture whilst in custody.
34Your work history has been varied, including roles in panel beating, hospitality, carpentry, gardening and other odd jobs. Your longest term of employment was around four years before a motorbike accident in 2009 impacted your ability to work. Since that time, you have struggled to maintain steady employment, with you losing jobs due to making errors, returning to gaol, not liking the job or being fired for drug use or not turning up for shifts. You have also engaged in drug dealing for additional income at times. You have received Centrelink payments previously but have never received a disability pension.
35In terms of substance use you were introduced to drugs at a young age, initially marijuana, then amphetamines or speed during your mid-teens. You identify methylamphetamine or ice as your preferred drug, using it to block out negative thoughts and feelings.
36You have some insight into how drug use negatively affects you and your behaviours and have indicated a desire to remain drug-free upon your release.
37You have four sons to two ex-partners. Your eldest son is now 25 years old and you have regular contact with him. Any contact you have with your three younger sons, aged between nine and 12, is supervised by Child Protection.
Forensicare psychological report
38At your plea, I ordered a Forensicare psychological report to assist in your sentencing. On 17 September 2024, you were interviewed by Dr Bonnie Albrecht, a senior forensic psychologist, via Webex.
39Dr Albrecht noted that when young you were considered hyperactive and to possibly suffer ADHD. In the absence of a firm diagnosis you have not received medication for such a condition. You told Dr Albrecht that you are open to an assessment for ADHD as an adult.
40Dr Albrecht assessed both your general and violent reoffending risk using the Level of Service – Risk, Need, Responsivity (“LS/RNR”) tool and the Historical, Clinical, and Risk Scales, version 3 (“HCR-20V3”). After assessing you, Dr Albrecht opined the following:
(a) Your overall profile suggests you fall within the range of Very High risk/needs;
(b) There is a need for wraparound support once released;
(c) Due to a combination of a history of violence and antisocial behaviour, problems with relationships, employment, substance use and treatment/supervision response, your baseline risk of violence is High;
(d) Regarding recent history, while there have been some gaps in your insight and poor treatment/supervision response, your recent compliance in custody has been good;
(e) Your relative stability in custody is likely an artefact of the increased routine and structure of custody, the immediacy or consequences, and the reduced prominence of psychosocial destabilisers; and
(f) Upon your return to the community, you will require intensive, structured service involvement and activities.
41Dr Albrecht opined that your early entry into delinquency seems to have stemmed from a constellation of unfortunate events. These include a background of learning and attention difficulties including dyslexia and possibly other neurodevelopmental conditions. Your early school and social development were quite disrupted and you relied on family for activity stimulation and social outlets. When these were removed you struggled to cope. By this time you had started to use illicit substances, your use of amphetamine type stimulants in particular were a means for you to help regulate your emotions and as a coping mechanism. It appears that you have not received guidance on how to meet your energy, attention or behavioural needs and so you have struggled with self-regulation into adulthood. Your offending often occurs in the context of limited behaviour and emotional regulatory capacity, at times acute substance intoxication or acts designed to fund substance use. Further, violent attitudes have been evident from adolescence, the abruptness and inflexibility of your decision making and how you navigate interpersonal conflict may have impacted the nature and quality of your personal and vocational supports. These elements have continued into your adulthood and have resulted in vocational maladjustment and repeated entrances into custody.
42Dr Albrecht considered that you are aware of the conflict between your actions, violence against women, and your standards of appropriate behaviour towards women, however, she opined that you seem to be unable to recognise this when insulted, hurt, or angered.
43Dr Albrecht recommended the following to assist in your ongoing treatment and management:
(a) Violence offence-specific intervention, particularly involving emotion regulation and coping, impulse and anger management, and challenging your violent attitudes;
(b) Regular intensive case management including links between the different support services that would be in place, maintaining a meaningful daily routine, and reinforcing the importance of considered decision making;
(c) A psychiatric review given your history of impulse control difficulties and the possibility of neurodivergence, to ensure intervention pathways that best attend to your needs. This can occur whilst you are in custody via referral to Forensicare psychiatry;
(d) A neuropsychological review to better understand your cognitive profile and learning needs, such a report may be requested by Corrections if you are in the community undergoing an order;
(e) Wraparound service involvement and support to ensure shared intervention planning between services; and
(f) Further one-on-one psychological intervention targeting methamphetamine relapse prevention once your ACSO ReStart support ends.
Plea of guilty
44You were originally charged with a more serious offence and post committal; a plea was negotiated to the charges that are currently before the court. In those circumstances, despite having run a contested committal, I consider your plea can be considered a plea at the earliest opportunity. In addition, through your plea of guilty you have avoided witnesses giving evidence at trial and have saved this court the time and cost of what would have been a difficult trial. I accept in these circumstances there is utilitarian value in your plea and you have facilitated the course of justice.
45Accordingly, I propose to allow a significant discount for your plea of guilty.
Prospects of rehabilitation
46Mr Cameron’s submissions on the plea centred on your prospects of rehabilitation. The following documents were tendered on your behalf: CISP report dated 15 June 2023; Letter of Frank Inturrisi from Odyssey house dated 21 March 2024; Letter of Le-Anne Poynton from Odyssey House dated 1 May 2024 and; two notification to prisoner of assay results dated 10 and 16 May 2024.
47Today, Mr Cameron was able to tender a further bundle of certificates awarded to you in custody, which include confirmation of your engagement in 11 sessions of Narcotics Anonymous, participation in the changing gears program and your results for Kangan Institute in relation to a variety of certificates and courses you have undertaken. I accept Mr Cameron’s submission that you have kept yourself busy in custody and this is an indicator of your desire to reform.
48Previously, you completed 14 of 16 weeks on CISP before being remanded in relation to the other offending. During this time, you attended seven of eight case management appointments and spoke openly about your substance use issues. Your discussions involved identifying strategies to reduce your drug use and involving yourself in pro-social activities. You were referred to AOD support services but unfortunately due to waitlist issues you were unable to engage prior to CISP bail ending due to your remand in early June 2023.
49In February this year, you were bailed to undertake residential rehabilitation at Odyssey House. Frank Inturrisi, AOD Clinician from Odyssey House, in his letter to the court spoke of your participation in Odyssey House and your abstinence from illicit drugs. Unfortunately, after 2 months at Odyssey House, you discharged yourself because you were placed on reflections for not abiding by the rules at Odyssey. You found being placed on reflections triggering and compared it to solitary confinement. It was in that context you left the program.
50You applied for readmission to Odyssey House, acknowledging that you made an error and you apologised for disobeying the program rules. Unfortunately, you did not return to Odyssey House and your bail was subsequently revoked on 1 May 2024. You have been in custody on remand since that time. Your counsel submitted that the Court can take into account your time at Odyssey house in accordance with the Akoka principles.[3]
[3] Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214 [109-111].
51Ms Caruso, for the Crown, submitted that you had troubling prospects for rehabilitation. Ms Caruso pointed to your extensive criminal history, which is a total of 46 pages and dates back to 1992 when you were sentenced in the Children’s Court. Of most concern, she submitted, were the high number of breaches of community correction orders, intensive corrections orders, community based orders, and suspended sentences. She submitted these orders had been breached both with further offending and by non-compliance.
52Further, Ms Caruso submitted that your time on CISP bail must be seen in light of the further offending you committed at the time, which involved charges of trafficking drugs and latter drug driving.
53In response, Mr Cameron submitted that despite your age and significant prior criminal history, there is hope for your rehabilitation. Mr Cameron pointed to the fact that this was the first time you had engaged in residential rehabilitation and that you had clearly benefitted from it and gained some insights into your substance abuse and that you had a significant period of success on CISP bail. Further, he submitted upon release you will have the support of ACSO ReStart. You have been working with ACSO whilst in custody and have identified that your transitional support will revolve around housing, mental health, employment and AOD support.
54In my view, your prospects for rehabilitation are guarded at best. You are now 47 years of age and hopefully now recognise it is time to change. Your prior history is extensive, on my count you have been gaoled on approximately 11 to 12 occasions, serving no more than 7 months each time. You have been sentenced to seven Community Corrections orders some of which have been breached and reimposed on more than one occasion. For example, your seventh CCO had been breached three times and your sixth CCO, had been breached four times. You have had five suspended sentences and four intensive corrections orders. This may account for the total provided by Corrections of 18 previous community orders.
55A recent chronology reveals that you are still struggling to remain offence free. You were released in May 2022 from your prior term of imprisonment. Five months later you committed the offending before the court. In early November 2022 you were arrested and remanded in custody. It is whilst in custody at this time that the attempt to pervert the course of justice offending occurs. You were assessed for CISP bail in mid-February 2023 and released on CISP bail on 20 February 2023. Whilst on CISP bail in early June you were charged with trafficking and bail offences. You were returned to custody. On 12 October 2023 you were again remanded. The trafficking and bail offences were dealt with at Warrnambool Magistrates’ Court on 30 October 2023. You were sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, although 150 days were reckoned by the court raising issues of both totality and Renzella considerations.[4] Your bail was revoked on this matter on 30 November 2023 allowing the pre-sentence detention to directly accrue on this matter.
[4] R v Renzella [1999] VSCA 85.
56On 7 February 2024 bail was granted for you to reside at Odyssey House and participate in residential rehabilitation. You lasted two months and then left despite your apparent desire to return this could not be achieved. Your bail was revoked on 1 May 2024. You have remained in custody since that time. A bail application on 27 May 2024 was unsuccessful, you had missed a telephone assessment for Odyssey House and CISP bail was not sufficient to mitigate the risk of you being admitted to bail.
57Today I was advised by the prosecution that you have 353 days of pre-sentence detention directly referrable to this matter. Further there is an amount of 30 days where you were in custody but you were not on remand for this matter and not undergoing sentence for any other matter. I intend to take this time into account. I accept that you have since the commission of this offending been in and out of custody and have had other matters dealt with that raises the issue of totality. This chronology and the risk assessment of Dr Albrecht highlights that you continue to be a significant risk of re-offending. It is not entirely clear why you offend and I am concerned that you may have undiagnosed issues such as ADHD or a brain impairment in light of the issues raised by Dr Albrecht. It is hoped that further investigation will occur as suggested by Dr Albrecht, I intend to provide a copy of her report to Corrections.
58I agree with the submission of your counsel that you have taken steps towards rehabilitation that you have not done before. You are to be commended for your compliance with CISP albeit that you offended during the course of that episode of care. Further, your time at Odyssey House is significant. Necessarily, this time had restrictive and punitive aspects in addition to its rehabilitative focus. It was submitted that I should take this time into account pursuant to the principles in Akoka v The Queen.[5] Although this time does not represent or equate with pre-sentence detention, I agree it is time that should be taken into account as part of the instinctive synthesis of sentencing and also as a means to encourage both you and others in your position to participate in such programs.
[5] [2017] VSCA 217.
59I accept that you have support in the community through your family and you have been undertaking courses in custody to better yourself. Further, you have engaged with ACSO and will have the support of the ReStart program. It is my view that the court should not give up on your rehabilitation; the real issue is how to best facilitate your reform whilst protecting the community from the high potential that you will re-offend.
Sentencing principles
60I consider the relevant sentencing principles that must be applied in your case are general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation, protection of the community, and just punishment. I also consider the principles of totality, parsimony and proportionality are relevant as part of the sentencing exercise. As I have said I am of the view that community protection is a relevant consideration in your case in light of the nature of this offending and your prior history.
61Mr Ford, your conduct towards Ms Canham, a woman in her own home who was clearly much weaker than you and someone who was previously your friend was despicable and appalling in the extreme and it is strongly denounced by this court. Your behaviour in trying to avoid the justice by having people lie on your behalf is also appalling and similarly is to be denounced.
62I have taken into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in s 5 of the Sentencing Act,[6] where relevant to your case. I have also taken into account as far as possible the current sentencing practices for the offences, particularly the charges of recklessly cause injury and attempting to pervert the course of justice, to which you have pleaded guilty.
[6] 1991 (Vic).
63Your counsel referred to the case of Boulton and submitted that a community correction order may be suitable even in cases of relatively serious offences which might previously have attracted a medium term of imprisonment.[7] Further, Mr Cameron submitted general deterrence has been affected largely through the period of imprisonment you have served already. Mr Cameron further submitted this deterrence could be bolstered by the imposition of a community correction order.
[7] Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342.
64Given my concern at your prior history and your repeated breach of community based dispositions I sought an extended pre-sentence report from Corrections. Not surprisingly Corrections have grave concerns at your ability to comply with a further corrections order. They advised the court that you have had 18 community based dispositions 6 of which were completed and 12 of which were contravened. Further, they consider that you have little insight into your offending and only superficially engaged during the assessment. They too assessed you as a high risk of general re-offending. In summary, Corrections advise that you represent too great a risk to the community to be mitigated by an imposed Community Corrections Order. They consider your significant history of drug use, your lack of compliance with several previous community orders and the absence of any valid protective factors in the community as the main reasons. They consider you to be in the pre-contemplative stage of change and say that you have shown a lack of insight and a lack of motivation towards significant change at this time.
Disposition
65After consideration of what is the right penalty for you in this case, and balancing as best I can the nature and gravity of the circumstances of your offending; the victim impact statement from your victim Ms Canham; your moral culpability; your prior history; the circumstances of your plea of guilty; the documentation tendered on your behalf; the pre-sentence reports from both Dr Albrecht and Corrections; and the submissions of both your counsel and the prosecution, I have come to the conclusion that a Community Correction Order, in combination with imprisonment is the appropriate penalty in your case.
66In relation to the charges of recklessly cause injury, trespass and attempting to pervert the course of justice, you are convicted and sentenced as follows: on the charge of recklessly cause injury you are sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, this being the base sentence; on the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice you are sentence to 10 months imprisonment and; on the charge of trespass you are sentenced to 2 months imprisonment. I order that 3 months of the sentence imposed on charge 2 be served cumulatively. This makes a total effective sentence of 15 months imprisonment.
67In addition, I order that you be placed on a Community Correction Order for a period of 15 months from today. The conditions of this Community Correction Order include that you:
(a) Attend for supervision;
(b) Submit for assessment and treatment for mental health;
(c) Submit for assessment and treatment for drug abuse; and
(d) Participate in programs to reduce reoffending;
(e) Judicial monitoring.
The date you will be required to attend court for this purpose is 19 March 2025 at 10am. That will be on the order and we can do that via video link.
68In addition to the conditions that I have imposed, there are standard conditions with which you must comply. The first and foremost of these is that you are not to commit another offence punishable by imprisonment for the period of the Order, which is 15 months. You need to report to your nearest Corrections office, which I understand is Coolaroo CCS. You must report there within two working days of your release from custody.
69You are required to advise your supervising Corrections Office of any change of address where you are living or working within two clear working days. And it is a term of all Community Correction Orders that you must submit to visits as directed and obey the instructions and directions of the Corrections officer and you cannot leave the State of Victoria without prior permission.
70Mr Ford, I don’t need to tell you what happens if you reoffend, but if you reoffend you will breach the Correction Order, if you do not comply with the conditions you will breach the Correction Order, and if you do that you will come back before me and you might be resentenced in relation to these original charges.
71I can only place you on a Correction Order if you agree – so do you understand what is involved in the Order?
72ACCUSED: Yes, I do, Your Honour.
73HER HONOUR: And do you consent to such an order?
74ACCUSED: Yes, I do, Your Honour.
75Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991 I indicate that if you had not pleaded guilty to these charges and had been found guilty by a jury, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of imprisonment of two years and six months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months.[8]
[8]Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 6AAA.
76I note that you have served 353 days on remand and I reckon this amount of time as pre-sentence detention. This means you will have approximately three months more to serve before being released onto the Community Correction Order.
0
5
2