Director of Public Prosecutions v Goeldner
[2024] VCC 1749
•31 October 2024
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT BENDIGO
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR 23-00983
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ROBERT GOELDNER |
---
| JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE CARLIN |
| WHERE HELD: | Bendigo |
| DATE OF HEARING: | 15 October 2024 |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 31 October 2024 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Goeldner |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 1749 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: Criminal law
Catchwords: Plea of guilty – rape – sexual assault – common law assault – victim was an acquaintance of the offender – offender aged 74 – no criminal history – positive good character
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act1991
Cases Cited:DPP v Mokhtari [2020] VSCA 161; DPP v Ierardo [2024] VSCA 181; Jurj v The Queen [2016] VSCA 57; Brown v The Queen [2019] VSCA 216; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; DPP v Elfata [2019] VSCA 21; Clarke (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2022] VSCA 89; DPP v Daniels (a pseudonym) [2021] VSCA 272; DPP v Tewksbury [2018] VSCA 38; Lawrence (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] VSCA 291; R v Doran [2005] VSCA 271; McCray (a pseudonym) v R [2017] VSCA 340
Sentence:Total effective sentence of 4 years and 10 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 5 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr D. Cordy | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr P. Skehan | Joliman Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
Introduction
1Robert Goeldner, on 1 June 2021, when you were 70 years old, you digitally raped and assaulted a 66-year-old female acquaintance, whom I shall call Ms White to preserve her anonymity.[1] What you did was most extraordinary, considering up until then you had an unblemished record with no indication that you were capable of such a thing. It was grave offending with consequences for your victim far beyond the immediate physical injuries she suffered. It has also had serious consequences for you, as it has affected your reputation and now at age 74 you face a prison sentence.
[1] In conformity with the Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958, s4(1A), to avoid the possibility of identifying a person against whom a sexual offence has been committed, a pseudonym been used in place of the name of the complainant and the published reasons have been altered from the original by the removal of other identifying information.
2Ms White did not report the incident to police until 20 July 2021. As she had been unconscious for most of your offending she had to piece together what she thought had occurred from her various injuries, fleeting memories and interactions with you afterwards. Seemingly because of COVID-19 and you residing interstate, you were not interviewed until 17 October 2022. You admitted touching Ms White's breast and inserting a finger into her vagina but described her as a willing participant. You denied causing any injuries to her face other than some finger marks to her neck in self-defence after she suddenly started biting your tongue. You said other bruising to her face must have occurred when she fell onto a step on her van. I will return to your account later.
3You were charged and bailed at the conclusion of the interview. There was a contested committal on 9 June 2023 at which Ms White was cross-examined, largely on the issue of consent, and you pleaded not guilty. You were committed to trial in the circuit commencing on 26 February 2024, but the matter resolved shortly prior to that circuit and on 27 February 2024 you pleaded guilty to one charge of sexual assault, one charge of rape and one charge of common law assault.
4A plea on your behalf was conducted before me on 15 October 2024 and it now falls to me to sentence you for your conduct. Your counsel Mr Skehan conceded that imprisonment was inevitable but submitted that it should be a short, sharp sentence.
5In determining your sentence I am required by law to have regard to a variety of factors, which I will outline in these sentencing remarks.[2] Some tend towards leniency and some point the other way. No one factor automatically prevails over any other. Rather, I must have regard to them all and give each the weight it deserves to arrive at a just sentence.
[2] Section 5(2) of the Sentencing Act 1991.
6This case is a good example of just how difficult it can be to balance the competing factors. On the one hand you are 74-year-old man who has never before been in trouble with the law, but on the other hand you committed very serious offences with lasting consequences for the victim.
Circumstances of the offending
7First, I need to return to the circumstances of your offending in more detail.
8The agreed facts upon which I sentence you are set out in the summary of prosecution opening.[3] Briefly, you and Ms White knew each other through your membership of a motorhome organisation.
[3] Exhibit A on the plea.
9In late May 2021 you and Ms White arrived separately at a campsite near Gannawarra in your motorhomes. You were there as part of the organising team for the motorhome organisation. Soon after Ms White arrived a COVID-19 lockdown was declared, forcing you and Ms White to stay put. You were the only two at the site.
10Over subsequent days you and Ms White socialised with each other and drank alcohol outside your motorhomes each night. You suggested getting together and having a relationship, but Ms White made it clear that she was not interested.
11On the night of 1 June 2021 you were drinking together again. You were supplying the drink, which included wine, port and whiskey. Ms White poured some of it on the ground. At some point Ms White passed out in her chair and the account of what happened thereafter comes largely from your interview, albeit you falsely claimed she initiated the sexual activity the subject of the charges and was awake during it. That sexual activity comprised you touching her breasts, which is Charge 1, and then getting in front of her and digitally penetrating her vagina in what you admitted to be a rough fashion. That is Charge 2, rape. Quite apart from Ms White's previously indicated lack of interest, as she was unconscious, she was incapable of providing consent to these acts.
12You told police that shortly after you inserted your finger into her vagina, she stiffened and nearly fell backwards off her chair before going limp and appearing to be in a daze. You withdrew your finger and then retrieved a camera from your van and took a photograph of Ms White unconscious in the chair which you later provided to police.
13After some time, you dragged the chair with the unconscious Ms White towards her van. You then removed her clothing and put her naked body on a quilt you had retrieved from your van and placed on the ground next to Ms White's van. You then undressed and laid naked next to her. Ms White has no recollection of any of that.
14Ms White does, however, remember regaining consciousness and realising that you were both naked and that your whole body weight was on top of her and that she fought to defend herself, including by biting your tongue which was in her mouth.
15Your actions in the ensuing struggle constitute Charge 3 of assault. You attempted to hold her arms and, in order to keep her quiet, grabbed her throat and jaw so hard she was unable to move her mouth and then passed out again. She woke up and attempted to defend herself from you on two to three occasions and on each of those occasions you forcefully placed your hands around her neck.
16In the early morning of the next day, 2 June 2021, Ms White woke up on the quilt and then went to bed in her van. When she got up later, she realised her jaw and the inside of her mouth were both sore. Her vagina was also very sore and bleeding and felt like it had been penetrated. She went outside and found her clothing in a pile outside and saw that her chair had blood the size of a grapefruit on it.
17Shortly afterwards, you knocked on her door and asked if she was all right. You said, 'I'm so sorry about last night. Why aren't you angry?' She told you she felt really sore, and you noticed marks on her neck and cheek and a split lip. You responded that 'We didn't have sex. You fell face first in your chair, that's why you would be sore.’ You also told her that she was “very loud, I had to keep you quiet, you are very strong” and that you had dragged her chair from the fire to the back of her van because she had passed out.
18Later that day Ms White felt unsafe and left the site. At 4.05 pm you had a text message conversation with her. You admitted she was asleep in her chair at one point and that she was not able to stand, falling face first into the chair when she tried. You said you lay down naked next to her to keep her warm and that you did cuddle and kiss and you attempted to please her with your hands and mouth but that: 'We DID NOT indulge in intercourse'. Ms White told you to resign from the motorhome organisation and accused you of raping her when she was drunk.
19Over the next few days Ms White developed bruising on her neck, jaw, chin and inside her mouth, which she photographed.
20On 10 and 15 June 2021 Ms White reported the rape and sought medical treatment for her injuries at hospital and her local general practitioner. She was tested for evidence she had been drugged, but no drugs were detected, and was also tested for sexually transmitted diseases.
21On 20 July 2021 Ms White contacted the police assistance line to report the matter, and the next day provided police with the photographs that she had taken on her mobile phone of her injuries. The photographs were examined by Dr Moller from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, who concluded that Ms White had sustained blunt force trauma to her lip, lower cheek/jaw and neck region consistent with a blow or fall. However, given their symmetrical nature and the neck's relative protection from accidental injury, she considered the injuries more likely to have been caused by restraint than an accidental fall. It was conceded by Mr Skehan that you were responsible for all but Ms White's cut lip, which you maintain must have happened in a fall, and I sentence you on that basis.
Your personal circumstances
22Turning to your personal circumstances, which were outlined in defence submissions and four character references that were tendered on your behalf. Your son, Craig, also gave evidence at your plea hearing.
23I have also had regard to the information in the Psychosexual Evaluation Report of Dr Simon Kennedy. You met with Dr Kennedy in person on 20 March 2024 and his evaluation took place over 2 and a half hours.
24You are now 74 years old.
25You were born in Kotara South, New South Wales and grew up with the love and support of your parents and two siblings. You were well cared for as a child and reported no major problems within the family. You have a brother and a sister with whom you remain close. Indeed, they and their partners travelled from New South Wales to support you at your plea hearing. Your mother and father passed away in 2001 and 2004 respectively.
26You left school in Year 9 and have been gainfully employed for most of your adult life. You are a fitter and turner by trade and have worked as a self‑employed craftsman since age 27. You retired when you were 60 as a result of back injuries and arthritis in your hands. You received a disability support pension between the ages of 60 to 65 and started receiving the age pension when you turned 65. According to your brother Geoff, since retiring you have embraced your passions, including a love of travel and camping.
27You got married in 1987 and have three children from that relationship. Although you and your wife separated after about 10 years, you remained on good terms with her until her death in 2022. Your son Craig described you as a loving father who played an active role in the lives of his children. You are obviously close with your three sons, now aged 46, 49 and 50, who all travelled from Newcastle to support you at your plea hearing. You have seven grandchildren.
28You have been in a relationship with your current partner, Robyn, intermittently over the last 12 years. Prior to being remanded on these matters, you resided with her on a property in Blackbutt, New South Wales.
29You have made a notable contribution to your local community over the course of your life. Your brother Geoff describes your commitment to community service as 'exemplary'. You have been a dedicated member of the Lion's Club for many years and through this organisation, you have contributed to the Rural Fire Service and State Emergency Services, particularly during the recent disaster events in New South Wales and Queensland. When your children were younger you volunteered as a scout leader and travelled overseas with the Marching Koalas High School Band, amongst other things.
30In addition to your support for these community organisations, your friend Greg says that you have always been a kind and considerate friend. In his character reference he says that you and your wife were the first ones to turn up to help following a house fire. Your friend Julie describes similar examples of your kindness and willingness to help those around you.
31You are known to drink socially, but you do not appear to have any issues with drugs or alcohol. You have a pacemaker and take medication for your heart, cholesterol and blood pressure. You also suffer from arthritis.
32According to Dr Kennedy you suffered from depression when you separated from a partner in 2007, but upon your retirement and involvement in the motorhome club this resolved, and you have had no subsequent issues with your mental health until the current proceedings. In that regard Dr Kennedy assessed you as having an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood secondary to the stress of the charges and potential for incarceration.
Objective gravity of your offending and moral culpability
33In determining any sentence the objective gravity of the offending and the moral culpability of the offender are critical.
34Rape is an inherently serious offence. It is a deeply personal crime which at the very least involves the violation of a person's body and right to sexual and physical autonomy. The seriousness with which Parliament regards the crime is unambiguously reflected in its maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment and the fact that it is a Category 1 offence meaning it must be punished by a custodial sentence not in combination with a corrections order and that it has a standard sentence of 10 years.[4]
[4] Sections 3(1)(d) and 5(2G) of the Sentencing Act 1991.
35Parliament aside, our Court of Appeal has also often and repeatedly affirmed the seriousness of the offence. In 2020 in a case called Mokhtari it said:
'The very act of rape is inherently serious, simply by virtue of the invasion of the victim's bodily integrity without consent. It is, quite simply, an act of violence, whether or not accompanied by other violent conduct. The violation is physical, emotional and psychological. It follows that, aggravating features apart, all acts of non-consensual penetration are objectively serious, irrespective of the form and the extent of the penetration.'[5]
[5] DPP v Mokhtari [2020] VSCA 161 at [41].
36Although not as intrinsically serious, the offence of sexual assault is also a serious crime, as is reflected by its maximum penalty of 10 years.
37The offence of common assault is punishable by a maximum penalty of five years, making it less inherently serious than your other two crimes.
38Ms White was vulnerable not only because she was intoxicated but also because she was a woman alone with you at night in a relatively isolated recreation reserve. Whilst you did supply the alcohol, I cannot be satisfied that there was any premeditation to what you did and proceed on the basis that it was opportunistic. That said, having identified the opportunity, you took full advantage of it, never thinking better of what you were doing.
39You abused the trust Ms White had placed in you as a friend and fellow member of the motorhome club. You knew she was not interested in you and you knew she was so drunk as to be unconscious, but you did not care. You treated her like an object, first touching her breasts, then digitally penetrating her and finally assaulting her. Whilst the rape may have been short-lived, it was violent, so violent that it caused her vagina to bleed. Further, it occurred in the midst of a protracted ordeal during which you repeatedly violated Ms White's personal space and dignity. It is hard to fathom why you would take a photograph of her unconscious and semi-naked body in the chair after raping her and your explanation for why you later undressed her and lay down naked on top of her, namely, to keep her warm, is quite frankly laughable.
40Finally, when Ms White struggled against your body, instead of desisting you sought to restrain her with enough force to cause bruising to her jaw and neck area. I am not sentencing you for causing those injuries, but they are relevant to the degree of force you applied, which must have been significant and sustained.
41Notwithstanding that your behaviour was reprehensible, there is a wide spectrum of seriousness within any offence and your offences are no exception. On the basis of the agreed summary, I regard your rape as falling somewhere less than the mid-range of objective seriousness for that offence. Whilst it cannot be divorced from the rest of your actions on that night, I must be careful not to doubly punish you for conduct for which you have been charged separately.[6] I regard your common assault as a serious example of that offence and the offence of sexual assault as towards the lower end.
[6] See DPP v Ierardo [2024] VSCA 181 at [115].
42To be clear, I am not saying that your conduct in any respect was not serious and nor does the absence of certain aggravating features detract from the gravity of what you did.[7] Rather, I am simply assessing where in the scale of offending it sits.
[7] See Jurj v The Queen [2016] VSCA 57 at [80] as to relevant factors in assessing gravity for the offence of rape.
43In terms of your moral culpability, there is no discernible reason for your actions other than to obtain sexual gratification at the expense of another person. It may be that your own consumption of alcohol lessened your inhibitions, but that is no good explanation and certainly no excuse. You knowingly exploited Ms White's intoxication to satisfy your own desires without regard for her wishes. This was selfish, entitled behaviour and reflects extremely poorly on you. There is nothing in your personal circumstances of psychology to lessen your moral culpability and I regard it as high.
Impact of your offending[8]
[8] I am required to take into account is the impact of your offending on your victims and their personal circumstances, s5(2)(daa), (da) and (db).
44Turning to the impact of your offending, Ms White read her victim impact statement aloud at the plea.
45Quite apart from its more immediate effects, what you did has had profound consequences for Ms White. She used to enjoy a lifestyle of travelling by herself in her motorhome, but you have taken that away from her. She now will only travel with a friend, no longer volunteers to run events, is fearful, suffers flashbacks and panic attacks and sees a psychologist. She is also mistrusting of relationships and feels angry and betrayed, given your offending occurred when she was volunteering for the motorhome club, and she was supposed to be safe.
Current sentencing practices
46I am required to have regard to current sentencing practices which may be gleaned from statistics or other cases or both. This is to promote consistency of approach in sentencing. Since 1 February 2018 rape has been a standard sentence offence under the Sentencing Act 1991 with the standard sentence for an offence of mid-range objective seriousness set at 10 years and a presumed minimum non-parole period of the total sentence of 60 per cent.[9]
[9] Sections 5A and 11A of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). The percentage increases if the total effective sentence is more than 20 years. The methodology for sentencing standard sentence offences is not that I engage in a two-step process of first assessing the objective seriousness of your offence compared to some hypothetical mid-range offence and then work up or down depending on your personal circumstances or other factors. Rather, I take into account the standard sentence and the default non parole period in the same way as I do the maximum penalty, and indeed all other relevant sentencing factors to arrive at an appropriate sentence by a process known as instinctive synthesis. See Brown v The Queen [2019] VSCA 216.
47In the case of offences subject to the standard sentencing regime such as yours, I am limited to a consideration of other sentences imposed under that regime, that is, sentences imposed for offences committed after 1 February 2018.[10]
[10] Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s5B(2)(b).
48I have had regard to the most recent Sentencing Advisory Council Statistics of the higher courts (30 June 2023) for all your offences. They indicate that of the 189 charges of rape dealt with as a standard sentence 94.7 per cent received a term of imprisonment ranging from 1.67 to 15 years, with 6 to 7 years being the most common sentence at just over 20 per cent. Over 80 per cent of charges of sexual assault resulted in a sentence of imprisonment, with the most common term being less than one year. Over 74 per cent of charges of common assault resulted in a sentence of imprisonment ranging between one month to 3.75 years.
49Of course, statistics are of limited assistance because they never tell you anything about the details of the case. That said, the range of terms of imprisonment could broadly be expected to reflect the full spectrum of seriousness of the cases involved. It is also likely that some of the sentences may have been reduced because of the combined effect of the Worboyes[11] principle and the increased burden of imprisonment during COVID.
[11] Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169.
50Of more use than statistics are sentences imposed in comparable cases. Whilst no two cases are ever truly the same and other sentences are not precedents to be applied or distinguished, sentences imposed in comparable cases may provide a convenient yardstick against which to measure any sentence proposed in the instant case.
51Mr Skehan referred me to three rape cases which had been considered by the Court of Appeal involving different types of vaginal penetration, one object, one digital and one penile, where the sentences imposed or confirmed on appeal ranged from two to three years.[12] There is no need for me recite the details; however, upon examination only one of the rapes occurred after 1 February 2018 and that was a sentence of three years, which was described as merciful by both the sentencing Judge and the Court of Appeal. Suffice to say none of those cases were really comparable to yours and in my view all were less serious instances of rape than yours.
[12] DPP v Elfata [2019] VSCA 21; Clarke (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2022] VSCA 89; DPP v Daniels (a pseudonym) [2021] VSCA 272.
52Further, whilst it was not argued on your behalf to the extent it may be thought that digital penetration is a less serious form of rape, the courts have made it clear that offence gravity is to be determined by the whole of the circumstances rather than the type of penetration, although that is not irrelevant.[13]
[13] For example, DPP v Tewksbury [2018] VSCA 38 at [67] and Lawrence (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] VSCA 291 at [21] to [22].
53Ultimately my duty is to impose a just and appropriate sentence on you in the unique circumstances of this case.
Plea of guilty, cooperation and remorse
54You are entitled to a discount in your sentence for the fact you have pleaded guilty. In so doing you facilitated the course of justice and took legal responsibility for your crimes. There is a significant utilitarian benefit in your plea of guilty; however, it could not be said that it was an early plea and, further, your victim was required to give evidence at a committal hearing.
55I am also not persuaded that your plea of guilty was accompanied by any real remorse in the sense of a true acknowledgment and appreciation of the harm you have caused to Ms White. It is true that you did say sorry the next day, but then, having had ample time to reflect up on the events, you falsely told police that Ms White was the initiator of the sexual activity and a willing participant. You maintained this version at committal and, it seems, until shortly before the matter was due to run as a trial.
56It is also true that the admissions you made in your record of interview formed the basis for the charges to which you ultimately pleaded guilty; however, it could not be said that your record of interview contained any expressions of remorse. To the contrary, you minimised your conduct and were insulting and blaming of Ms White, who you said you didn't even like. The only thing you claimed to have done wrong was not call an ambulance when she passed out. You said your failure to do that 'Is what's got me into all this crap [and] I've got myself into all this shit over trying to keep this woman warm'.
57Mr Skehan submitted that your admissions entitled you to what is called a Doran[14] discount. As I said during the plea, this is more akin to the situation in the case of McCray,[15] of a person making admissions out of self-interest. You knew Ms White had sustained observable injuries and you also knew she had accused you of rape shortly after the events. Nevertheless, the fact remains that without your admissions of the physical conduct the prosecution would not have had a case or certainly not the case that was prosecuted. I consider that you are entitled to an additional discount for that fact, but not for any remorse, as I am not satisfied there is any.
[14] R v Doran [2005] VSCA 271.
[15] McCray (a pseudonym) v R [2017] VSCA 340.
Your character and risk of reoffending
58Your prior and indeed subsequent good character is a significant matter in mitigation. You are not only a person with no prior or subsequent convictions, you are a person with positive good character. You have been a worthwhile, contributing member of society in a variety of ways. You are also a good family man who is obviously much loved and a role model for his children.
59As I said during your plea, it is hard to reconcile the man your family know you as with the man who did this to Ms White, yet you are one and the same.
60I consider it is very unlikely that you will offend again, not only in this manner but at all, and therefore, despite your lack of remorse, I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as excellent.
Delay
61I take into account that you are being sentenced more than three years after the offences. You have not had the charges hanging over your head the whole time, but you have for the last two years. Whilst a large part of the reason for the delay after you were charged was your decision to contest the charges, I accept that it was an anxious time. The delay has meant that you are being sentenced as an older person and, by virtue of you not committing any other offences, confirmed that this matter really was an aberration.
The burden of imprisonment
62In determining the appropriate sentence I must consider how a term of imprisonment would be likely to impact you.
63Being sentenced to a term of imprisonment for the first time is hard for anyone but must be particularly hard for a person of your age with no prior involvement in the criminal justice system. You have no health issues that cannot be dealt with in prison and nothing that will mean your time in custody will be harder for you than any other prisoner, but your advanced age will no doubt mean that the worry of the impact of a term of imprisonment on the rest of your life will be increased. I was informed that your parents both died at an age not that far away from your age now.
64Further, because you will be incarcerated in Victoria and all your family live in New South Wales, your experience of prison will be more isolating.
Purposes of sentencing
65Turning to the purposes of sentencing, I am obliged not to impose a more severe sentence than is necessary to achieve the sentencing purposes of just punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community.
66Generally, a custodial sentence must only be imposed as a last resort and then be the absolute minimum required. Further, when there are multiple charges such as here, the total effective sentence must not offend the principle of totality, meaning you must not be punished any more than is proportionate and appropriate to your overall criminality.
67In your case those general sentencing principles are qualified by some specific provisions applicable to your charge of rape, as I have already outlined. However, even without those specific provisions, your offending clearly warranted a term of imprisonment.
68The sentence I impose must have the effect of denouncing your conduct and deterring other like-minded individuals from acting as you did. In my view the short, sharp sentence Mr Skehan urged upon me would not do that. Your offending was just too serious. Conduct such as yours not only impacts the individual victim, it affects the whole community and particularly women's sense of security.
69Because I accept that this was a one-off event for you, the principles of specific deterrence and community protection have virtually no role to play in your case. Finally, my sentence must be just by taking into account not only the gravity of your crimes, but the mitigating factors I have already outlined in detail.
70I am obliged to say how my sentence on Charge 2 relates to the standard sentence of 10 years. In instinctively synthesising all relevant matters, in my view a sentence significantly below the standard sentence of 10 years is warranted. Because of your age and excellent prospects of rehabilitation I also consider that it is in the interests of justice to depart from the presumed minimum non-parole period of 60 per cent of the head sentence.
Sentence
71Weighing up the competing considerations as best I can, you are convicted on each charge and sentenced to terms of imprisonment as follows:
| Charge on Indictment | Offence | Maximum | Sentence | Cumulation |
| 1 | Sexual assault | 10 years | 6 months | 1 month |
| 2 | Rape | 25 years | 4 years | Base |
| 3 | Common law assault | 5 years | 2 years | 9 months |
Total Effective Sentence: | 4 years and 10 months’ imprisonment | |||
Non-Parole Period: | 2 years and 5 months’ imprisonment | |||
| Pre-Sentence detention declaration pursuant to s 18(1) of the Sentencing Act 1991: | 16 days | |||
| 6AAA Statement: Pursuant to Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, but for the plea of guilty, the sentence imposed would have been 7 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 5 years. | ||||
| Other relevant orders: · Disposal order | ||||
72I declare that you have already spent 16 days in custody in respect of that sentence not including today and that that be entered in the records of the court.
73If you had not pleaded guilty to the offences I would have sentenced you to a total effective of seven years with a non-parole period of five years.
74The prosecution have sought a disposal order in relation to the blue camper chair that Ms White was sitting on and I will make that order.
75Mr Goeldner, you understand the sentence that I've imposed, total effective sentence being four years and 10 months with a non-parole period of two years and five months? All right, I'll leave the Bench.
‑ ‑ ‑
0
12
0