Director of Public Prosecutions v Groves

[2023] VCC 694

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

Revised

Not Restricted

 Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 22-01738

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

EMMA GROVES

‑‑‑

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE HAMPEL
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	14 April 2023
DATE OF SENTENCE:	27 April 2023
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Groves
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VCC 694

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

‑‑‑

Subject:  criminal law

Catchwords:   guilty plea - arson – intentionally damage property – contravention - personal safety intervention order – mental health – rehabilitation- substance use

Legislation Cited:                   Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)

Cases Cited:

Sentence:total effective sentence of 26 days' imprisonment and two-year Community Corrections Order

‑‑‑

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms E. Addams	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Offender	Mr J. Miller	James Dowsley & Associates

HER HONOUR: 

1Emma Groves, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of arson and one charge of intentionally damaging property.  You have also pleaded guilty to a related summary offence of contravening a personal safety intervention order.  The maximum penalty for arson is 15 years' imprisonment, for destruction of property 10 years' imprisonment, and for contravening a personal safety intervention order 2 years' imprisonment.  Those maximum sentences are one measure of the seriousness with which Parliament and the community regard such offending.

2At the time of these offences, you were living at a property in Seaford.  The property was a two-storey dwelling, with separate residences upstairs and downstairs.  You were living in the upstairs dwelling.  The downstairs dwelling was unoccupied.  There was also a garage that had been converted into a bungalow which was occupied by two women.  You had previously been served with an interim personal safety intervention order in relation to one of those two women. 

3About three weeks after the service of that interim personal safety order on 6 December 2021, you were found outside the front of your residence calling out that you wanted to kill yourself and you wanted to die.  You began throwing things over the fence into the property next door.  The two women who occupied the bungalow were frightened for their safety.  They left their bungalow and went to a neighbour's house to shelter.  After they fled, you threw bricks through the windows on two sides of the bungalow. The windows smashed.  It is throwing the bricks and smashing the windows that gives rise to the charge of criminal damage and also the charge of contravening the personal safety intervention order; Charge 2 and Summary Charge 4, to which you have pleaded guilty.

4You then went upstairs to your home, still shouting that you wanted to kill yourself.  Using a cigarette lighter, you set fire to the curtains in your lounge room, that gives rise to Charge 1 of arson.  The curtains went up and the fire quickly spread beyond the curtains.  Smoke was seen coming out of the building. Some of your neighbours bravely ran inside to get you, and then your cat out. Others called Triple 0.  Having been rescued, you propped on the stairs and would not move, even as the fire and emergency workers arrived. You were very distressed, still screaming, hat you wanted to kill yourself.  When police arrived, they asked you to move from the stairs to allow firefighters to obtain access and you did so.

5You were arrested at the scene, and such was your state of distress that you were initially taken to hospital for assessment.  A forensic medical officer there assessed that you were unfit for interview.  However, they considered that if you had time to rest that you may well be fit by the following day and that turned out to be the case.  It would appear that your distress was due to a combination of emotional distress because of your circumstances and a significant intake of alcohol. 

6The fire caused significant damage to the living and kitchen areas of your residence, as well as structural damage to the roof trusses. The cost of repairing this damage has been estimated to be in the vicinity of $175,000.  That is a significant amount indeed and a measure of the extent of damage caused, the danger that you placed yourself and those kind, brave, well-meaning neighbours who came to your aid.

7When interviewed the following day, you admitted to police that you had thrown the bricks into the bungalow, smashing the windows and that you had set the blinds of your place on fire.  You said to police that you had had what you called 'a bad few weeks', that your youngest son had taken off, claiming that you were a bad mother.  You said that you had been fighting with your neighbours and on that night the two women who occupied the bungalow had set you off.  You said you had been lonely, that your thoughts had been gathering since your son had taken off, that you were not well, had not been well for a long time, that everything had just got too much. 

8When asked about the interim personal safety intervention order, you said you thought it was not an order, just a notice that one was going to be put in place. 

9You were charged and remanded in custody.  You remained in custody for 26 days before being released on strict conditions relating to your welfare on CISP bail and you have remained on bail ever since.  Consistently with the admissions you made to the police, you pleaded guilty at committal mention. And so it is that you now come before this court to be sentenced today.

10You have a significant criminal history, commencing in 1994 when you were only 18, just old enough to be in the adult courts. It covers a range of offending over a considerable period of time.  Between 1994 and 2021, you have been before courts and dealt with, amongst other things, for six charges relating to causing injury, two of robbery, one of false imprisonment, two of damage to property, a number for possession and use of drugs, for use of indecent language, and for dishonesty offences, 12 times for offences of begging alms; seven times, relevantly for these purposes, of breach of a family violence intervention order and 13 times for breaches of court orders imposed when you were sentenced  to that were designed to encourage rehabilitation, that is for breach of community correction orders and suspended sentences. 

11That is a very unpromising history.  What is important though in looking at that is also analysing the timeframes over which the offending occurred.  Most of the offending occurred between 1985 and 2001.  There was nothing between 2001 and 2007.  That 2007 entry on your criminal record relates to driving and related offences, rather than offences of the broad range that I have already detailed. 

12Nothing again after that until 2010, nothing between 2010 and 2012. Then a steady pattern again of appearances between 2012 and 2021.  So one can see periods of stability, of remaining offence-free and periods of infrequent appearances followed by or sandwiched, really, at the start and in more recent times with more regular and persistent offending. It is clear there is something happening behind all of that analysis in itself, is indicative of some significant underlying problems, successful attempts at times to deal with them but followed by relapses. 

13You have received multiple community corrections orders, and other non-custodial options a number of suspended sentences and you have also been sentenced to actual terms of imprisonment.  Nothing to date has seemed to be successful in the longer term in deterring you.  It is clear therefore that specific as well as general deterrence as well as just punishment, denunciation and protection of the community all must be given weight in sentencing you today. 

14Despite the obvious emotional distress that you were in on the night and the pressures that material before me shows you were under, and against the history, a significant history of emotional and psychiatric disturbance, behavioural disturbance, psychological conditions, difficulties in relationships with partners and with your children, there is no excuse for your behaviour on this night.  Your neighbours were entitled to feel safe in their home.  They were so frightened that they fled, and understandably so, it would appear. 

15That you knew that they had left by the time that you smashed the windows makes the offending in relation to the criminal damage less serious but nonetheless it is just wilful, wanton destruction of other people's property.  Causing them distress and inconvenience and causing financial loss either to them or to the owner of the property, who had to make good the damage before they could return to safely live in their home again. 

16Again in relation to the property, despite the fact that it was clearly a combination of alcohol and emotional distress that led you to express the desire that you wanted to harm yourself, sadly what you did often happens when people are in such a state of despair. You not only put yourself at risk, you put others at risk. You caused wilful, wanton destruction of other people's property. It is clear that these sentencing principles of denunciation, deterrence, condemnation and just punishment need to be acknowledged and reflected in the sentence. 

17You have a long history of being subject to personal safety intervention orders or family violence intervention orders, that is, having had them made against you. You were obliged to abide by their terms. You have a significant history of being dealt with for breaching such orders.  In those circumstances I consider that your response to police about thinking it was only a notice of intention to apply for one to be at best disingenuous.  You well knew because of your history that you were not allowed to do anything to threaten the woman the subject of that order, to put her in fear, to abuse her or to damage her property. 

18Again, the existence of the order, against that history of past orders and being dealt with for breaches should have made you fully aware of the consequences of your behaviour and stopped you from acting as you did, but it did not.  The occupants of the bungalow and indeed the owner of the property that you damaged did not file victim impact statements, but it is not necessary to receive victim impact statements to understand from the perspective of the two occupants of the property the fear and distress that they suffered or to understand from the perspective of the owner of the property the significant impact of your destruction of their property as a result of your conduct on this night. 

19Whilst as I said, I accept you were motivated by a desire to harm yourself, that the arson was not for gain, or revenge, that it was not just an act of wanton destruction of property for its own sake and that you did not intend to cause harm or death to anyone.  Arson is a very serious offence. The fact that such damage was caused by the simple, impulsive act of setting the curtains alight with a cigarette lighter, shows just how dangerous fire is in a home and the harm that can be done, the risk to persons as well as the damage to property. 

20It caused substantial damage to another person’s property, it was rendered uninhabitable You risked not only sending your home up in flames, but also setting the neighbouring properties alight.  Therefore, there was a risk to other people and other properties.  It is for all these reasons that those sentencing principles that I have identified are so important here.

21What then is relied on to counter the weight to be given to those important sentencing principles?  First is your plea of guilty.  It was entered very early, and it was entered on the back of full admissions made by you.  Therefore, its utilitarian value is significant.  You served the interests of justice, avoided the cost of a trial and given the other material before me I accept it is indeed a genuine acceptance of responsibility and is therefore able to be used as evidence in itself of remorse, along with the other evidence of your conduct, your change, since being charged.

22A plea of guilty in this time when COVID has moved from being a pandemic to being endemic is significant and also must be given weight.  By pleading guilty and indicating your intention to do so early you saved the community the time and cost of trial. You have also not added to the backlog these courts are experiencing by reason of the delays in the administration of justice, criminal justice, as a result of the pandemic. 

23It is also significant that by reason of COVID, time in prison is still more onerous than it was pre-COVID because of the restrictions on freedom of movement, on access to courses, access to visits and also because of the added risk within the vulnerable cohort of prisoners, a greater risk of the spread of the virus and a fear of not being able to take such steps as one might want to take on one's own to secure one's safety.  All of that is property to be reflected in a reduction of the sentence otherwise appropriate.

24The second and third matters that were relied upon were the circumstances of the offending itself and your personal circumstances.  I accept so far as the circumstances of the offending, particularly in relation to the arson that despite the extent of damage caused to the property, your moral culpability is reduced because of your circumstances.  The evidence that you lit the fire in that state of distress that I referred to is unchallenged and you did it in circumstances where you were expressing an intent to take your own life.  It was not, as I said, for purposes of gain, with intent to kill, harm, scare or get revenge on others or simply destroy someone else's property for the sake of it. 

25Your moral culpability in respect of the breach of the intervention order and the charge of destruction of property, is in a somewhat different category. Although again what you did occurred in that state of distress fuelled by alcohol and emotional distress, your conduct was directed at destruction, causing harm and fear of harm to other property and other people rather than directed towards causing yourself harm, as it was with the arson. 

26Although you knew that the occupants had fled and the bungalow was empty, there was a history of bad blood, and that conduct was clearly directed at the occupants of the bungalow.  It was, unlike the arson, an act of wanton destruction of someone else's property, and a challenge to the right of those occupants to peaceful enjoyment of their home. And it has the added aspect of the deliberate flouting of an order designed to stop you doing anything to cause damage to the property of the occupant or to distress or cause her fear or harm.

27Therefore in some senses it can be seen that your moral culpability is higher in respect of the charges carrying the lower penalties, the destruction of property and the breach of the intervention order than the arson.  I accept that the offences of property damage and arson were spontaneous, that the damage to the bungalow was caused with bricks that were apparently to hand, not something that you had sought, stockpiled or planned.  Similarly, the setting fire to the property was with a cigarette lighter to the curtains, no accelerant was used, no evidence of any planning or anything done to fuel the fire beyond that.

28Having noted that mitigatory matters, clearly the seriousness of the offences cannot be diminished but your moral culpability is, particularly in respect of the arson, reduced and the categorisation of the gravity of the offending, particularly in respect of the arson, is reduced by reason of those factors I have identified.  What the most powerful matter though in mitigation is relating to your personal circumstances and demonstrated, sustained change in your behaviour since being charged or more importantly since being released on CISP bail after nearly four weeks in custody. 

29Against that unpromising, long history of criminal behaviour that I have detailed, evidenced both by the number and nature of your prior convictions, and by your persistent failures to comply with rehabilitation-focused sentences your desire to change, and the demonstrated capacity to change since your release on bail is all the more remarkable.

30Not surprisingly, given the criminal history that I have detailed and what I have already said about your state of distress and the role alcohol played in the offending, you have a history of instability in your life, of periods of what can only be described as aimlessness, of substance abuse and of antisocial behaviours and attitudes. 

31It would appear that you had a comfortable and stable upbringing, provided by your mother, who remained your primary carer Following the end of her relationship with your father when you were only two.

32Although you did not like school, you report being bullied, and changing schools a number of times, it appears that there was no intellectual impediment to your capacity to learn, nor was there any lack of support provided for you.  But you were clearly an unhappy child and did not take to discipline well.  Much later in your life you were diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum disorder and that may well explain some of what can be described as challenging, defiant and risk-taking behaviours in your youth. 

33You left home at 16, moved rapidly into substance abuse, and by your late teens had developed a heroin habit, which plagued you until your late 20s.  You became pregnant soon after leaving home, had a child, but were unable to care for him. Your life was generally unstable and blighted by substance abuse until your late 20s.  After that there appears to have been periods of stability, evidenced in part by the gap in offending that I have already detailed.  There were periods when you had stable accommodation and much to your credit you overcame your heroin addiction and your addiction to other “hard” drugs, many of which you tried and used for extended periods. 

34After your late 20s you formed new relationships, some of which were marred by violence.  Two more children were born, two more sons, one now 21, and the third, still legally a child, a 16-year-old, who is present in court with you today, as he was on the plea.  It would appear that your life generally, and your relationships with partners and with your sons, particularly your youngest, were difficult.  You remained susceptible to abuse of alcohol and cannabis in particular, and there have been multiple protective concerns notified to what is now the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing in relation to that youngest child. 

35There were periods where your personal relationships were marred by violence, you being subjected to it, your children being exposed to it.  There were periods where you were engaged in paid employment, but it appeared to be intermittent and at times erratic and that had an obvious knock-on effect in terms of stable pro social friendships, relationships and housing. 

36Your youngest son was experiencing behavioural difficulties of his own, some manifesting from a very young age with substance abuse and his own involvement with the youth criminal justice system.  A report from the DFFH was provided on the plea.  That reported there had been 31 reports to child protection and five s38 consultations over the years.  The common theme of the reports were your youngest son's father and your involvement in substance abuse, his exposure to family violence from his father, you and your former partner. 

37You were identified as having a punitive parenting style, experiencing poor mental health, exposure of the child to inappropriate sexual material at home from a young age and engaging in harmful sexual behaviour.  That culminated in child protection involvement at the time that you committed these offences and that child protection involvement remained after you were released on bail. 

38What is significant is that, as the intervention in place at the time of the offending noted, transience, mental health problems, substance use, family violence, parent/adolescent conflict and risk-taking behaviour, including substance and criminal behaviour by your son were all of concern.  He ultimately became the subject of a protection order.  A family re-unification order was eventually made.  He is now being transitioned back into your care and there is now a family preservation order in place which is soon to expire, on 5 July.  You are also on a CCO for offending predating this which was imposed after your release on bail. 

39The Child protection report acknowledges

Ms Groves has taken great steps throughout child protection involvement to address or mitigate the protective concerns listed above.  She has engaged with all current requirements of her CCO.

40The current requirements of your CCO include participation in an anger management course.  DFFH notes the liaison they have had with corrections and the positive advice they have had about your engagement with corrections under your CCO. 

41They note then that you have obtained social housing through Housing First.  The child has been able to return to live with you at the property, and  that you and your youngest son have been referred to the family preservation and family re-unification response model to assist with the transition.  They note that you have maintained stability in your circumstances for a period and you remain employed part-time and that they will continue to support you until July, that is for the remaining time that your child is subject to the protection order. 

42Importantly they acknowledge your meaningful engagement with child protection. They have continued to see you maintaining a positive trajectory for your and your family's circumstances.  As I said in the course of the plea it is rare to see a report in such positive terms and given that history and the number of involvements and the instability in your life, that speaks volumes. 

43Alcohol abuse has clearly long been a problem for you and whilst it is remarkable that you have been able to overcome your heroin addiction clearly you are susceptible to abuse of substances. Alcohol and cannabis have been continuing problems.  The combination of CISP bail conditions, conditions of the CCO that you are currently on and the requirements of DFFH in relation to showing that you are capable of responsibly caring for your child have led to a very positive engagement both in functional family therapy and in drug and alcohol treatment and counselling. Your desire to be a good, supportive force for your son and for the two of you to be able to live together, for you to parent him and model good and loving parenting is clearly a very powerful motivating desire. Despite the difficulties that you have had in the past, this time you seem to have been able to maintain that commitment.

44That is borne out again by the letter from your mother.  Again, as I said in the course of the plea, it is rare to have such a clear-sighted, insightful, loving but firm boundary setting report from a parent.  Your mother said amongst other things: 

Emma does have insight into her wellbeing and mental health, and it appears that she is beginning to take responsibility for her environment and relationships and to improve her wellbeing.  Emma's independent problem-solving can be impacted by her anxiety and she has long been dependent on external support workers to sort out her financial and social problems.  I am hopeful that as she continues to be employed and to live independently in a positive way that her emotional skills will strengthen.  I am aware the conflictual relationship which Emma has had with her son over the past few years has contributed to her anxiety and dysregulation.  Emma needs to receive support from an external mental health practitioner so that she can renegotiate her relationship with him as he moves into young adulthood. 

I have continually supported Emma financially for a very long time.  I am now unable to do this as I have retired from full-time work.  It is imperative that Emma continues to value her employment and her developing independence and stable living environment.  She needs to continue to adopt full responsibility for her wellbeing, physical health and financial security.  Emma is articulate and has some insights into her behaviour.  At times she can be under-responsible, but I believe that her willingness to remain employed and to live independently will increase the responsibility she takes for her actions.  Emma needs to limit her alcohol consumption, continue to practise problem solving, with the support of external supports and continue to be employed and to pursue some creative interests.  I want Emma to develop some self-confidence and self‑responsibility and I am really hoping that this will be the last time that she appears before a court. 

45Some people, Ms Groves, are late maturers.  You sound like one of those.  Your mother's insight and her confidence tends to support that view and the sentence that I have fixed on will, I hope, encourage that maturation.  It is significant, having quoted extensively from the letter that your mother provided to note that you went to country Victoria to live with your mother when you were released on CISP bail and remained there for about nine months.  There you engaged in treatment, you obtained employment and were eventually able, with assistance, to move back to Melbourne to get your own stable accommodation, obtain regular employment in Melbourne and engage so positively and constructively with DFFH and then with corrections.

46The reports are quite extraordinary in charting the progress that you have made.  All of the reports I have referred to so far have referred to poor mental health and behavioural problems.  I have touched on them briefly.  I have been assisted also by reports from Dr Aaron Cunningham and by Dr Judy Rakoff.  I do not propose to quote extensively from them.  I think I have probably said enough in these reasons about your personal circumstances to make it clear that the expert reports provide the authoritative statements in relation to your underlying conditions to which I have referred. They enable me to express the confidence I have in the significance of your sustained commitment to change and also your acceptance of your need for help. 

47Dr Cunningham reports that your alcohol use seems to be under control, that your history of abuse of heroin and amphetamines is long behind you and notes the significance of your positive engagement with Taskforce, to address your cannabis use.  He also reports that your long diagnosed history of depression is being successfully managed with prescribed and properly supervised administration of medication and some psychotherapy.

48Your long-term diagnosis of ASD manifests itself in emotional dysregulation and managing stress and again that ties in to the materials that I have already identified in terms of what you understand you need and what you have been prepared to do and maintain.  It explains therefore the importance of you continuing to engage with those professional supports to assist you to understand and manage your own behaviour.

49Proof of your success to date is before me:  the return of your son, the engagement with DFFH, engaging in the family therapy/counselling with Caraniche, engagement with Taskforce, the obtaining and maintaining of stable accommodation and stable employment.

50I have also been provided with a reference from your employer about your commitment to your employment. The fact that your job remains open to you and you are seen as a valued member of the workforce, again speaks volumes not only in itself but seen against your history.  It is important to note that you appear to be finding work rewarding and working in the environment you do, something you can manage although you do still have to deal with people. But you are managing and navigating those relationships and working as part of a team.  You are punctual and engaged. Your work is secure.  Again, that is a very positive factor. 

51It is for all of those reasons that I have decided that, although the seriousness of the arson particularly and in my mind the significance of yet another breach of a family violence intervention order means that they must be marked by a term of imprisonment. It would be counterproductive at every level to interfere with the rehabilitation so well and consistently undertaking by returning you to prison. 

52Therefore, whilst imposing a term of imprisonment, it is confined to time served and the balance of the punitive aspect of your punishment is to be served along with the rehabilitative or encouraging rehabilitative aspect of your punishment by way of a two-year community correction order.  You have been assessed as suitable for a CCO and despite your long history of CCOs in the past and your breaches of many of them, given your engagement with the current one and the interrelationship between corrections and DFFH. I have every expectation that corrections will continue to work with DFFH to ensure that the conditions under your CCO are imposed in consultation with DFFH and work together rather than impose additional, onerous and difficult to meet conditions.

53I therefore come formally to sentence.  Emma Groves, on the charges to which you have pleaded guilty, you are convicted.  On the charge of arson you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 26 days followed by release upon a community correction order for two years on conditions I will shortly recite.  On the charge of intentionally damage property you are sentenced to serve a community correction order for a period of two years. On the related summary charge of contravening a personal safety intervention order you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of seven days. 

54I have already said so, but I want to make it clear that that sentence of seven days is concurrent with the term of imprisonment for the arson.  That makes a total effective sentence of 26 days' imprisonment and I declare that you have spent 26 days in custody and direct that that be counted and reckoned as part of the sentence already served.  In other words, you are sentenced to time served and are not to be returned to custody.

55The terms of the community correction order are these, the order is to last for two years.  It commences today, 27 April 2023 and ends on 26 April 2025.  The mandatory terms that apply to all community correction orders are these:  you must not commit another offence for which you could be imprisoned during the time the order is in force, and that is just about anything, including, significantly, breach of an IVO.  You must comply with any obligation or requirement prescribed by regulation 127 of the Sentencing Regulations.  That means you must not be impaired by drugs or alcohol when attending on corrections or participating in any course or program directed by them under this order and you must submit to drug or alcohol testing if directed to do so.

56You must report to and receive visits from the secretary or delegate.  You must report to the Moorabbin Community Correctional Services Centre at Moorabbin Justice Centre, 1140 Nepean Highway, Highett, within two clear working days of the commencement of this order.  You must let community corrections know within two clear working days if you change your address or change your job.  You must not leave Victoria without first getting permission to do so from the secretary or their delegate and you must obey all lawful instructions from and directions of the secretary or delegate. 

57In addition to those mandatory terms, I impose the following additional terms. You must perform 200 hours of unpaid community work over the period of two years as directed by the regional manager. If you fail to comply with this unpaid community work condition the secretary for the Department of Justice or their delegate may give you a direction to perform additional hours of unpaid community work in accordance with s83AU of the Sentencing Act.  You must be under the supervision of the community corrections officer for the period of the order, that is for the two years. 

58You must undergo assessment and treatment including testing for drug abuse or dependency as directed by the regional manager.  You must undergo assessment and treatment including testing for alcohol abuse or dependency as directed by the regional manager and you must participate in programs and/or courses that address factors relating to your offending as directed by the regional manager.  I order that all hours of treatment and rehabilitation satisfactorily undertaken by you are to be counted as hours of unpaid community work for the purposes of the unpaid community work condition. 

59HER HONOUR:  Do you understand the effects and condition of the order that I have just read to you?

60OFFENDER:  Yes, I do – yes, Your Honour.

61HER HONOUR:  Do you consent to it being made?

62OFFENDER:  Yes, I do, Your Honour.

63HER HONOUR:  All right, I am going to hand that to your counsel, have that brought down to you and once you are sure you understand it, ask you to sign it please and return it to me. 

64HER HONOUR:  If it is not clear already from what I have said in my reasons for sentence, it is my understanding that community corrections and DFFH will continue to liaise so that they will work together in relation to the treatment and rehabilitation conditions on the order. So there should not be additional conditions imposed in relation to drug or alcohol treatment and counselling or other programs addressing re-offending if you are already doing such programs either through DFFH or under the existing CCO.  So it is not as if you will have to do extra in addition to what you are currently doing but you may have to do them for longer because of the term of this order.

65OFFENDER:  Yes.

66HER HONOUR: I declare pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act that but for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of six months' imprisonment followed by release upon a two-year community correction order.  Are there any further orders that are required to be made?

67COUNSEL:  No, Your Honour.

68HER HONOUR:  The only other thing I wanted to say is this:  I have not referred to your son who is here in court by name, nor have I mentioned your other children by name.  That is not out of disrespect to them but because your youngest son is still a child at law, and he is entitled to anonymity.  These reasons for sentence will be available in the public domain.  They are published as all reasons for sentence are. 

69He will not be named so he continues to be able to learn to chart his course and a better course in life without having been inadvertently brought to public attention by the publication of these reasons for sentence by naming him. But I do want to make it very clear I was not intending to devalue him, or depersonalise him.  He is clearly one of the most important motivating factors in your life and it sounds like the two of you are lucky that you have been able to work to a better way of having a meaningful relationship together.  I hope that continues.  Thank you, we will adjourn.

‑ ‑ ‑