Director of Public Prosecutions v Gatt
[2021] VCC 2138
•15 December 2021
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT GEELONG CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-20-01617
CR-20-00337
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| SIMON GATT |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE HAMPEL | |
WHERE HELD: | Geelong | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 29 November - 2 December (Trial), 7-8 December (Plea) | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 15 December 2021 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Gatt | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 2138 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr D. Brown QC | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr R. Barton | Sarah Pratt & Associates |
HER HONOUR:
1Simon Gatt, you have been found guilty by a jury of one charge of aggravated burglary, two of common assault, two of criminal damage and one of theft. All six charges result from a violent, angry and, for the victims, frankly terrifying attack on them in their home late one night.
2Following the jury verdicts you then pleaded guilty to one charge of recklessly causing injury, and one of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, as a result of an angry altercation with your son Simon, which resulted in him being shot in the leg. You have also pleaded guilty to one charge of attempt to pervert the course of justice, which relates to your persistent attempts over a period of many months to have the charges related to the shooting of your son Simon withdrawn by prevailing upon him to change his account of how he was shot. All charges are serious.
3So far as the aggravated burglary and related charges are concerned, the evidence revealed that your then 17 year old daughter Shannae had formed the belief that a 14 year old child she knew had stolen her mobile telephone. The child and her mother denied that she had the phone, but Shannae did not accept their denials. In the early hours of the morning of 30 December 2019, CCTV footage shows Shannae, and a man the prosecution alleged was you, arriving at the house where the child lived with her mother and 17 year old sister. One or both of you banged on the door, demanded the return of the phone, called for the child to come out, and threatened her and her family before leaving.
4At about 11.20 pm the CCTV footage shows three people, people the prosecution alleged were Shannae, you and an unidentified man, arriving at the house. Shannae, and the man the prosecution alleged was you, went to the door of the house. One or both of you banged on the door and Shannae again demanded the child come out and that the phone be returned. She, and the male said to be you, were yelling angry threats to the occupants. The CCTV footage shows the other male smashing one of the CCTV cameras with a block of wood or concrete picked up from the garden. Sounds of smashing glass can be heard on the footage.
5The child's mother opened the front door, believing the security door was locked, it was not. Whether it had been left unlocked or had been forced open is unclear. The man the prosecution alleges was you pushed his way in and headbutted the mother, then struck the 17 year old in the face. They managed to push the man out and lock the door. The three attackers then left, still yelling threats, one of them smashing the windscreen of the occupier's car as they left. During the attack garden ornaments had been thrown at the house smashing three windows, and the Smart doorbell system, a security feature which allowed the occupants to see and speak to people at the door without opening it, had been ripped off the wall and taken.
6Given the involvement of Shannae, who was known to the occupants, in these visits to the house it was not long before police interviewed you. When interviewed you denied going to the house with Shannae and another man at about 11.20 pm and, indeed, denied going to the house at about 4 am that morning. You denied any involvement in the offences committed at about 11.20 pm. When shown stills from the CCTV footage from both 4 am and 11.20 pm you denied that they were images of you.
7You told police that you had taken Shannae to the house at about 10.30 pm that night, that you had politely asked for the return of the phone and had left without incident when the phone had not been returned. You told police that was the only time you had been to the house that day and that no one had accompanied you and Shannae when you had attended. You maintained that position at trial and stood mute.
8By its verdicts the jury was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that you were the man seen and heard on the CCTV footage at 11.20 pm accompanying Shannae, demanding the return of the phone and making threats. By its verdicts it was satisfied you pushed your way into the house, Charge 1 aggravated burglary, headbutted the mother, Charge 2 common assault, struck the 17 year old daughter to the face, Charge 3 common assault. By its verdicts the jury was also satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that, pursuant to an agreement or understanding between the three people seen on the CCTV to threaten or intimidate the occupants of the house, the windows and a CCTV camera were smashed, Charge 4 criminal damage, the car window was smashed, Charge 5 criminal damage, destruction of property, and the Smart doorbell system was ripped off the wall and taken, Charge 6 theft.
9Following your questioning by the police in respect of these offences, of which you have now been convicted, you spent two months in custody, remanded in respect of these charges, before being released on bail in about March of 2020.
10Turning then to the second set of charges, you had been on bail for about four months when you had the argument with your son which gives rise to those other charges. You were living in Norlane with your daughter Shannae and your son Simon who was then 20. Shannae had befriended another 14 year old girl and had invited her to stay at the home that she shared with you. You had an argument with Shannae about the child's presence in the home and Shannae and the child went to stay at the Abbotswood Motel nearby.
11You were apparently worried that your son Simon might become sexually involved with the child and you warned Shannae and your son Simon of the implications of his having a sexual relationship with a 14 year old.
12On 31 July 2020 you visited Shannae and the child at the motel where they were living and reminded them of your concerns. You left but returned a short time later. On looking through the window you saw your son Simon and the girl were in bed together. You left, and over the course of the day you and your son argued by text over his involvement with the child.
13At about 9.30pm that night your son Simon went to your home in Norlane to discuss the matter with you. Other people were present and he left, went to Hungry Jack's and returned at about 10 past ten. You heard your son Simon arrive on his motorbike and went to the front door yelling at him to leave. There were other people present and they too told your son Simon to leave, but he did not and the two of you then had a verbal argument.
14You left the house in possession of a shotgun in a bag and continued to argue with your son Simon. The two of you approached each other and began grappling with each other. During the struggle the shotgun was discharged and a shot lodged in your son Simon's left upper thigh. He fell to the ground and began screaming for help. One of the people present drove him to the Geelong Hospital.
15Simon, your son, had a single gunshot wound to his upper left thigh. He was admitted to hospital and had surgery to remove projectiles from his thigh. There were in excess of 40 pellets scattered throughout his upper left leg. He was ultimately discharged to return home on 5 August.
16Dr Williams, the forensic physician employed by the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, reported that your son Simon had suffered a one‑inch shotgun penetrating wound to his left thigh. The trajectory of the wound suggests a craniocaudal direction, that is, from above to below. There were no other fractures or injuries sustained as a result of the shooting.
17When your son Simon was first questioned by the police on the night of the shooting he falsely stated that he had been shot in the vicinity of Eastern Beach Road, Geelong during an altercation with three unknown men. Four days later when police went to the Geelong Hospital and spoke to your son Simon again he told them that the first version of events that he had given was false. He told them that he had gone to the home in Norlane to discuss this issue concerning whether he was having sexual activity with a 14 year old girl. He told police that a verbal argument had developed into a physical confrontation between the two of you and that during the struggle he was shot in his left upper thigh. He said he did not see a gun before being shot and confirmed that one of the people at the house, not you, had taken him to hospital.
18About a month later your son Simon contacted police again and said he wanted to make another statement. On that occasion he said that he had the gun himself and had shot himself. Police noted that at the time of making this disclosure your son Simon appeared to be drug affected.
19Matthew Weir, the bystander who drove your son Simon to hospital had told police that he could hear you and your son Simon yelling and screaming at each other, that although he did not see anything he heard the sound of a gunshot. He said he then looked backwards, by which time you were running back into the house, and confirmed that he had driven your son Simon to hospital.
20After your son had made his second statement, the one where he said that he had been shot in the leg during the altercation with you, you were arrested and questioned. When interviewed you told the police that you had had an argument with your son Simon out the front of the house, that a scuffle had developed between the two of you, that others tried to break the two of you apart, and that you heard a bang and then noticed that your son had been shot. Ballistics evidence indicates that the gun was discharged from a firearm in very close proximity to the exterior of the jeans that your son Simon was wearing at the time.
21You were charged with offences relating to the shooting of your son Simon and remanded in custody. Between 15 August and 24 January the following year you made a number of telephone calls to people which were, of course, monitored on the prison Arunta system. A review of those calls revealed that you repeatedly made attempts to have Simon persuaded to change his story as to how he had been shot.
22On 15 August you rang your daughter Tanisha and told her to tell Simon 'to keep to his first fucking story, not his fucking second'. The following day you called Tanisha again and told her to make sure Simon went down and did what he was supposed to do so that you could get out of prison. You said, 'I don't know what he's going to say, but all I know is he's going to say he shot himself'. The day after that you called Tanisha again, asked whether she had spoken to Simon and said, 'Simon needs to do what he was supposed to do'.
23
Three days after that you again called her and asked whether Simon had done what he was supposed to do, and four days after that again, that is, by
24 August, you again called Tanisha and told her that she needed to take Simon to the police station and get him to do what he needs to do. You told her to pick him up and take him down and do what needed to be done for you.
24From 26 August, that is two days later on 6 December, you made a further 11 phone calls to Tanisha asking her to arrange for Simon to change his police statement. You also called your daughter Shannae on eight occasions and asked her to arrange for Simon to change his statement.
25The Arunta call records also reveal Matthew Weir, the man who had been present during the shooting and who had driven your son Simon to the hospital, was also contacted by you on a number of occasions.
26
On 26 September you rang him and told him he needed to fix it. On 6 October you rang him and he told you that he would drag Simon junior down to the police station. You said to Mr Weir that you had already told police that he, that is
Mr Weir, was not there in the morning and directed him to speak to the solicitor who was then acting for you to see what could be done.
27On 7 October, the following day, you again spoke to Mr Weir and said, amongst other things, 'Please help me get out of here and I will keep it to me you understand'. You said that you treated him really well and asked him to do this for you. Mr Weir made a promise he would do so and a promise he would speak to the solicitor and get it started.
28The following day, on 8 October, you again called Mr Weir and told him to ring the solicitor, and told him what version of events to give, namely, 'We were all standing at the car. You were trying to break us up and it went off'. Mr Weir promised to do whatever you wanted him to do, and he then said that he was going to get on to the solicitor and you said that you would then call the solicitor and get Simon junior to go down to him.
29Later that same day you rang Tanisha and told her although Mr Weir was supposed to be fixing it that the solicitor was not apparently comfortable with what he was being told. You said to Tanisha:
‘Max needs to go and actually make a proper statement and say that he and Matty were the ones trying to stop us, me and Simon, fighting and there was a fucking bang. The only bang was the fucking thing was inside Simon's fucking pants.'
30In other words, getting him to say that Simon junior had the gun on him and it went off during the struggle. Six weeks later you called your daughter Shannae and told her to get hold of Mr Weir because of the statement he wrote which you described as bullshit and expressed some confidence that the shooting charges were falling apart.
31
A month later, this is by December 2020, you called Shannae, and through her spoke to Mr Weir. You told him you want him to fix your problems and told him to tell another witness that she did not see you loading a gun and that she was to say she was gone before you even went out the front of the house. You told
Mr Weir to get things fixed up before you went to court that Friday and told him that he was to stand up in court and say it was not true.
32The offending behaviour I come to sentence you for, is obviously from this recitation very serious. One measure of the seriousness is the maximum penalties: aggravated burglary and attempt to pervert the course of justice are each punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 25 years, common assault a maximum term of five years, and recklessly cause injury a maximum term of five years, being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm carries a maximum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment and criminal damage and theft also carry a maximum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment.
33The circumstances of the offences have some features which make them - some of them in particular, the aggravated burglary, the common assault charges in the first set and all three in the second set - serious examples of their type.
34So far as the aggravated burglary is concerned, it was a confrontational aggravated burglary on a house where a mother and her children were in their own home. It was committed in company, late at night and accompanied by violent property damage, and by threats to return and to inflict further violence and damage. It was motivated by a belief - and it must be said no more than that because you had no way of knowing whether Shannae's belief was well-founded or not - that a 14 year old had taken her phone.
35If she had, and had refused to return it, it was for the police, not you, to resolve the matter and for the matter to be resolved by lawful means, not by threats, violence and intimidation. It was an extraordinary level of violence and threat over an item as unimportant, in the scale of things, as a mobile phone. I have referred to the violence and the property damage accompanying the aggravated burglary. There are, of course, separate charges relating to them and I am conscious of the need to avoid double punishment.
36Although the injuries suffered by your victims were relatively minor, this was a case of deliberate blows to the head of a defenceless woman and her teenage child in their home. Consistently with the jury verdicts, I am satisfied that you struck them in order to advance your purpose of threatening and intimidating them because of the belief given to you by your daughter that the 14 year old, who was also in the home, had your daughter's phone.
37The features which make the charges in the second set serious are these: first, for the recklessly cause injury, although it is not put that you intentionally shot your son in the leg, the charge is after all one of recklessly cause injury, the risks of being involved in an angry confrontation and struggle, with a loaded firearm, actually materialised here. Having a loaded firearm in one's possession is dangerous at any time. To have it in your possession when you are angry, emotional and engaged in a physical confrontation, even more so.
38That your son or any of the bystanders was not seriously injured or killed is due to nothing more than chance. No explanation was advanced for how you came to be in possession of that firearm, or why it was loaded, or why you were carrying it in a bag when you emerged from the house to argue with your son. No innocent explanation has been put for your possession of that firearm or your carriage of it at the time. Unexplained possession in those circumstances, in my view, makes this a serious example of the charge of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm.
39You were prohibited by reason of the making of a personal safety intervention order which was taken out following the attack which is the subject of the other charges. That means that both at the time of making the interim intervention order, that is, at the time that you were charged in relation to the aggravated burglary in January 2020, and the final intervention order only four months earlier in March 2020, you had been advised that you were prohibited as a result from possessing a firearm. The recency of the making of the personal safety intervention orders, and so of the notice to you that you were prohibited, adds too to the seriousness of the notice.
40Finally, the attempt to pervert the course of justice charge is a very serious example of its type. It is often said, and rightly, that a charge of attempt to pervert the course of justice goes to the very heart of the administration of justice. To threaten people to make them change stories or to try to make them change stories, to interfere with the proper determination by a court of the evidence, is a very serious interference with the administration of justice.
41This was a persistent course of conduct. It involved direct threats and importunings using other people, including your daughters, one of whom was still a minor, the other a young adult, as well as acquaintances, to put pressure on your son to change his evidence, to give a false account of how he came to be injured, so as to have the charges relating to shooting him withdrawn and secure your release from prison.
42It is clear, therefore, that, subject to considerations personal to you, general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment all loom large in the sentencing mix.
43A detailed and very helpful psychological report by the psychologist Laura Fleming was tendered on the plea. It detailed your background and circumstances, and provided a helpful context for evaluating your conduct, and I draw on that extensively.
44You are now 53. Your childhood was marred by deprivation and disadvantage. By the age of 12 you had run away from what appears to have been a neglectful home and exposure to abuse in informal care. By the age of 12 you were made what was then called a ward of state and you were variously placed in Baltara, Turana and St Augustine's here in Geelong. It would appear that formal state care was no better at protecting you from abuse than had been the informal care in which you had at times been placed, and you report that you were described as uncontrollable and discharged from State care by the age of 16.
45Not only were relationships interfered with, but your schooling was obviously interrupted by neglect and by your own challenging behaviours as a result of that. It is clear that you wanted family and connection. By the age of 18 you had fathered the first of what eventually became nine children you have fathered. With some of those children you have had little contact, but for others, including your son Simon and your daughters Shannae and Tanisha, you have been clearly deeply involved in their lives and from what I understand perhaps their primary carer for much of that time. You express a strong and protective love for them.
46Of note, in the course of the plea Shannae not only attended but spoke over in order to tell you that she loved you. Your son Simon in other calls monitored through the Arunta system also expressed his love for you and in the testimonial filed after the plea continued to express his love for you and to say that you had always been there for him and some of his siblings.
47
Your relationships with the mothers of your children have been described by
Ms Fleming as unstable. Some of your children in turn have been subject to abuse and that is something which has clearly caused you, as well as them, much distress. There was reference during the aggravated burglary and related charges trial to a traumatic episode where you and Shannae were threatened and your house burnt down by someone known to you.
48I have no doubt that lack of good parental modelling in your own childhood has hampered you in achieving optimal ways of dealing with conflict and modelling good behaviour for your children, despite your obvious love for them.
49However, it is troubling that, despite the deep distress that you have expressed over the abuse that Shannae has been exposed to and subjected to by adults, and over the criminal behaviour directed towards you, that you could subject the victims in the aggravated burglary case, a woman and children, the children Shannae's age and younger, to such a terrifying and violent ordeal in their own home. Your own traumatic experiences and Shannae's do not appear to have led you to any empathy for the victims here.
50Similarly, in relation to the shooting and attempt to pervert the course of justice charges, that you could imperil and injure your own son, and then seek to suborn him, using, amongst others, your daughters to assist you, for your own benefit demonstrates that, despite or as well as your express love for them, you were putting yourself and your own interests first. Your inability to see or have regard to the negative effect on those you profess to love of your conduct stands out starkly from the recitation of these offences.
51Given what I have said already about your disadvantaged childhood, it is not surprising that you also report a long history of substance abuse and a sizeable criminal history, which commenced when you were 19.The substance abuse and criminal history clearly have links to each other. Your offending spans a wide range of offences, mainly driving offences, dishonesty, drug trafficking, cultivation and possession.
52You have only one previous conviction for personal violence and that was 20 years ago in 2001. That was a charge of intentionally cause injury involving a fight with the father of your then partner. Mr Barton advised that there were similarities to this offending, in that it occurred in the context of a confrontational argument. You have prior convictions for possession of weapons in 2008 and 2009 and for possession of a firearm in 1994.
53You have not been sentenced to a term of imprisonment since 1995. Although you are far from a first offender, and your offending spans a range of offences, most of it is relatively minor and bears little similarity to these much more serious offences. Most of it is a long way back in time. Your criminal history also reveals extended periods where you were not before the courts and where it appears you had stability in your life.That ties in with what you report about the efforts you have made over the years to provide a stable home for those of your children with whom you were able to maintain contact and for whom you have expressed such a protective love. Of note, you have not been sentenced to a term of imprisonment since 2005.
54Although I was told you have some employment history, and describe yourself as self-employed, substance abuse and lack of formal qualification appear to have interfered with your ability to hold down meaningful and sustained employment.
55Ms Fleming in her report expressed a psychological opinion, having taken an extensive history from you, which she summarised in these terms:
Mr Gatt presented as a 52 year old single male. He has experienced a prejudicial childhood, with sexual abuse from a neighbour that led to behavioural disturbances, and further sexual and physical abuse when made a ward of the State, as he cycled through numerous institutions. Mr Gatt ceased schooling and commenced substance use at a relatively young age, reducing any ability to engage with prosocial peers or institutions that he could have been exposed to alternative prosocial modelling.
From early adulthood Mr Gatt has had numerous unstable relationships. His substance use and chaotic psychosocial circumstances have continued to lead to distress. Mr Gatt's own institutional abuse has been exacerbated by abuse his children have received and has perpetuated his own negative sense of self and shame and guilt at failing to protect them.
It is inferred that impulsivity, dysregulation and emotional avoidance inherent in his psychiatric profile have predisposed him and led to the development of substance use as a form of self-medication in view of his low coping resources. His emotional development was further compromised by traumatic experience of sexual abuse. Research has repeatedly identified PTSD as a core manifestation of sexual abuse trauma and, undoubtedly, the victimisation Mr Gatt suffered in the context of child sexual abuse from infancy further contributed to the ensuing pattern of instability, isolation, maladjustment and emotional disturbance.
Mr Gatt's PTSD symptoms are relevant to the offending. They can fluctuate in intensity and frequency, however, are particularly prone to exacerbation under situations of extreme stress or in comorbidity with other mental health issues or substance use. Emotional dysregulation involving repetitive negative thinking, such as worry and rumination, implicated in PTSD impairs problem-solving and healthy information processing (Nolen Hoeksema, Wisco, & Lyubomirsky, 2008), and can lead to an increase in negative emotions and deter prosocial responses (Witvliet et al 2008).
Positively Mr Gatt is open to sharing his past experiences and has insight into his present circumstances with a willingness to seek treatment and improve his mental state. Mr Gatt would like to change his reliance on substances and is willing to seek treatment.
56I accept those opinions and consider they do temper the weight that should otherwise be given to denunciation and general deterrence and also affect the way just punishment should be assessed in this case. Mr Gatt, you were subjected to abuse at an age where you were far too young to be able to develop proper coping mechanisms and many of the patterns of your adult history clearly date back to that. It is very clear that the effect of childhood abuse is life long and must be taken into account in sentencing and I do so.
57Ms Fleming assessed you as posing a moderate to high risk of reoffending. The dynamic risk factors that she identified, that is, those which can be targeted for change, are unemployment, substance abuse, inadequate social support or connection, lack of prosocial friends and the need for mental health treatment. It is clear, therefore, looking at that risk of reoffending and the risk factors that exist but which can be targeted, that specific deterrence, as well as general deterrence, must carry weight.
58Although your prospects for rehabilitation must be seen as guarded, I take into account your openness to acknowledging your problems and to engaging in psychiatric and psychological treatment and, it would appear, in programs to address your substance abuse. It was acknowledged that imprisonment was inevitable for each set of charges.
59I urge Corrections to adopt the recommendations in Ms Ferrari's report as to the assistance that you should be provided, psychological and psychiatric treatment and assistance, assistance by offering you programs to deal with healthy relationships and to deal with substance abuse, so as to better equip you for parole and better equip you for release into the community so that you can indeed look forward to a better and more fulfilling life upon your release.
60In fixing the sentences that are appropriate I also take into account, so far as the shooting and attempt to pervert the course of justice charges, that you pleaded guilty. In doing so I take the pleas of guilty as an acceptance of responsibility. They have utilitarian value. They advance the interests of justice generally and in these circumstances where there was familial involvement the fact that your son Simon was not required to have to choose between telling the truth and protecting his father was an important factor.
61I also take into account the fact that you have been in custody for two months after being charged with the aggravated burglary charges and then again since the end of July last year. All of that has been during COVID time and that means that the impact of being in custody has been significant and much more onerous than it otherwise previously had been. The effect of COVID in custody in future will also clearly make imprisonment more onerous than in a pre-COVID world and I take that into account and temper and moderate the sentences accordingly.
62It is also obvious that I must apply the principles of totality and parsimony whilst imposing individual sentences that reflect the criminality of each offence. In dealing with COVID and the impact again on your guilty plea I also, of course, take into account that you saved the time and cost of a trial and that in terms of the backlog in the court is a significant matter also that warrants recognition.
63I am mindful of the distress that you displayed when you explained the five quarantines that you had already been subjected to in custody, the quarantine requirements each time you moved either to court or from prison to prison, the lack of visits that you have been able to have, the restricted courses and, of course, the inability to feel that you are able to control your own environment and the risk of contracting COVID in an enclosed environment such as a custodial setting. That is, is despite what have been commendable efforts by Corrections to protect prisoners and to protect those working in prisons.
64Balancing then those matters as best I can, I have fixed on the following sentences. Can you now please stand, Mr Gatt. On CR-20-01617, that is the aggravated burglary and related charges, on all six charges you are convicted. On Charge 1 of aggravated burglary you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of three years. On each of Charges 2 and 3, common assault, 4 and 5 of criminal damage, and 6 of theft, you are sentenced on each of those charges to a term of imprisonment of six months.
65I direct that one month of the sentence on Charge 2, one month of the sentence on Charge 3 and one month of the sentence on Charge 4 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence on Charge 1. That makes on that indictment a total effective sentence of three years and three months.
66On CR-20-00337, that is the charges of recklessly cause injury, being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm and attempt to pervert the course of justice, you are convicted of all three charges and sentenced as follows: on Charge 1, recklessly cause injury, imprisonment for a period of 18 months; Charge 2, prohibited person in possession of a firearm, imprisonment for nine months; and Charge 3, attempt to pervert the course of justice, imprisonment for three years.
67On that indictment the base sentence is Charge 3 and I direct that six months of the sentence on Charge 1 and three months of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence on Charge 3. That makes on that indictment a total effective sentence of three years and nine months. Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, on that indictment had you pleaded not guilty and been convicted I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of six years' imprisonment.
68Now dealing with cumulation between the two indictments, I direct that one year and nine months of the sentence on CR-20-01617, that is, the aggravated burglary and related charges, be served cumulatively on the total effective sentence on CR-20-00337, that is, the shooting and attempt to pervert the course of justice charges. That makes a total effective sentence on the two indictments of five years and six months and I fix the period of three years as the time that you must serve before being eligible for parole.
69I declare that you have spent 73 days in pre‑sentence detention on CR-20-01617 and 497 days on CR-20-00337. That makes a total pre‑sentence detention in respect of both indictments of 570 days and I direct that that be counted and reckoned as part of the sentence already served. As indicated in my ruling on the hearing of the plea, I make a forfeiture order in respect of the work boots on CR-20-01617.
70Are there any further orders that are required to be made?
71MR BROWN: No, Your Honour.
72HER HONOUR: Are the sentences I've pronounced correct in form?
73MR BROWN: Yes, Your Honour.
74HER HONOUR: And have you had a chance to check the arithmetic?
75MR BROWN: Yes.
76HER HONOUR: Arithmetic correct?
77MR BROWN: And it's correct, yes.
78HER HONOUR: Thank you. Do you agree with all of those things, Mr Barton?
79MR BARTON: Yes.
HER HONOUR: Thank you. All right. Thank you. Can you remove Mr Gatt, please. - - -
0
0
0