Director of Public Prosecutions v Haddara

[2022] VCC 2304

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT Melbourne

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-21-02670

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

SADDE HADDARA

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE WRAIGHT
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	21 November 2022
DATE OF SENTENCE:	14 December 2022
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Haddara
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2022] VCC 2304

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing.

Catchwords:              Plea of guilty – Trafficking in drug of dependence in a commercial quantity – Possession of a drug of dependence – Commit an indictable offence whilst on bail – Possess prohibited weapon without exemption – Limited application of Bugmy principles – Guarded prospects of rehabilitation – COVID-19 pandemic.

Legislation Cited:      Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 ss 71AA(1), 73(1); Bail Act 1977 s 30B; Control of Weapons Act 1990 s 5AA; Confiscation Act 1997 ss 58, 67(1)(aa); Sentencing Act 1991 ss 6AAA, 18.

Cases Cited:Kada v The Queen [2017] VSCA 339; Giang v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 25; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; Director of Public Prosecutions v Herrmann [2021] VSCA 160.

Sentence:                  Imprisonment for a period of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms S. Tatas	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms K. Ballard	Stary Norton Halphen

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1Sadde Haddara, you have pleaded guilty to:

· one charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence – commercial quantity, contrary to s 71AA(1) of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (‘Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act’), which carries a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment (Charge 1); and

· three charges of possession of a drug of dependence contrary to s 73(1) of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act, which in relation to Charges 2 and 4 each carry a maximum penalty of 1 year imprisonment if the possession is not for the purpose of trafficking or 5 years imprisonment if the possession is for the purpose of trafficking. In relation to Charge 3, as the cannabis is a small amount, the maximum penalty is 5 penalty units.

2You have also pleaded guilty to the related summary offences of:

· Commit an indicatable offence whilst on bail contrary to s 30B of the Bail Act 1977, which carries a maximum penalty of 3 months imprisonment (Summary Charge 3); and

· Possess a prohibited weapon without exemption contrary to s 5AA of the Control of Weapons Act 1990, which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment on each summary offence (Summary Charges 16 and 17).

3You have also admitted your criminal record. 

Circumstances of the offending

4A prosecution opening was tendered on the plea and may be summarised as follows:

5You were born in October 1982, and you were 38 years old at the time of the offending.

6You were employed as a cleaner with Calcorp Services, a nightshift cleaning service that operates in Melbourne’s Central Business District.

7During this employment you met Covert Operative 323 (‘CO323’), and you built a rapport. You provided your phone number to CO323 and advised CO323 that you could supply ounces of methylamphetamine.

8On 24 January 2021, you told CO323 that he could get ‘bags’ (referring to an ounce of methylamphetamine) for $5,000. CO323 expressed interest but no agreement was reached.

9You and CO323 met up again a couple of hours later. You told CO323 that you would be able to bring the product to work, just to let you know by sending a text message saying, “let’s catch up”.

10On 26 January 2021, you and CO323 communicated via text message. Ultimately the deal did not go through on that day.

11On 27 January 2021, you and CO323 again communicated via text message. Ultimately the deal did not go through on that day as you were preoccupied with your cousin, Mohammed Haddara, being arrested earlier that day and a search warrant being executed at his address.

Charge 1

12Between 1 February 2021 and 21 April 2021, you sold 193.7g of methylamphetamine to a Victoria Police covert operative over six occasions for a total amount of $35,100.

Purchase One

13On 31 January 2021, CO323 sent a text message to you discussing catching up that evening. You responded, “Done brother see u then.”

14There were further text messages between the two of you and you ultimately met at the Golden Nugget Hotel in Lonsdale St, Melbourne on 1 February 2021 at 1:30am. You advised that you were having trouble with your supplier and showed CO323 text message communication with a Chantelle Salazar.

15Whilst at the Golden Nugget, CO323 observed Guispee Manoria and Candice Kindred enter. As CO323 left the Golden Nugget Hotel he observed Ms Salazar inside the venue. She appeared to be searching for someone.

16At 2:34am, you called CO323 and advised that your female supplier had arrived and to return to the Golden Nugget. CO323 attended outside the Golden Nugget Hotel where you advised that the female had only brought half a bag and the price was $2,500.

17CO323 handed you $2,500 and you entered a vehicle linked to Ms Kindred. You returned with 28g of methylamphetamine and advised CO323 the full amount was available for purchase for $5,000.

18CO323 gave you a total of $5,000 cash and you gave CO323 an energiser tin containing two Coles branded resealable bags, each containing 14g of a white crystal substance.

19You went to vehicle N1SGRL before returning to CO323 and advising that he was $100 short. CO323 provided a further $100 to you.

20During the transaction you stated that you could do multiple bags (ounces) for a cheaper price and that your usual supplier was currently away camping.

21The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 85% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 28g.

Purchase Two

22On 9 and 10 February 2021, you and CO323 communicated via text message. You arranged to supply CO323 with two ounces on 10 February 2021, however, the deal ultimately did not take place on that day.

23On 17 and 18 February 2021, you and CO323 communicated via text message. You arranged to supply CO323 with two ounces on 18 February 2021 at ‘Mills St Altona North’.

24On 18 February 2021 at 12:31am, the same vehicle linked to Ms Kindred arrived at your home address and an unidentified occupant entered the house.

25At 12:33am, you exited your address.

26At 12:36am, you arrived at CO323’s location in your partner’s 2002 Mercedes Black CLK320 Coupe.

27You exited your vehicle and got into the front passenger seat of CO323’s vehicle. You produced a Yocan Box containing two plastic sealed bags with a blue stripe above the seal on one side.

28You showed CO323 the drugs. CO323 attempted to negotiate the price but you maintained the price per bag was $5,000. You then handed the Yocan Box containing the two plastic sealed bags to CO323. CO323 handed you $10,000 cash.

29You advised CO323 that you only needed a couple of hours’ notice before conducting a transaction and that this product was of better quality. You then exited CO323’s vehicle and drove home.

30On 20 February 2021, you sent a text message to CO323, “My mate can do one more roadworthy, for 45 if you want it”. CO323 declined.

31The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 83% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 54.9g.

Purchase Three

32On 9 and 10 March 2021, you and CO323 exchanged text messages to arrange a deal on 10 March 2021.

33On 10 March 2021 at 10:39pm, CO323 arrived in Altona in the vicinity of Mills Street and Gilligan Road. Shortly after, you arrived in the Mercedes and pulled up beside CO323. You advised CO323 that you were buying from a new male supplier and to follow you.

34You drove in convoy to one location in Williamstown North, and then in CO323’s car to a second location.

35CO323 provided you with $5,000 cash which you took and purchased the drugs off a person believed to be Troy Walker.

36You returned to CO323’s vehicle and placed a snap lock bag containing a white crystal substance in the front cup holder.

37CO323 then drove you back to your vehicle at the first location.

38The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 84% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 27.7g.

Purchase Four

39On 13 and 14 March 2021, you and CO323 communicated via text message and calls. You arranged to meet at Altona Meadows Hungry Jacks on 14 March 2021.

40On 14 March 2021 at 10:23pm, CO323 met you in the Hungry Jacks car park. You drove the black Mercedes. You both went inside Hungry Jacks. You said your supplier was there, took the $5,000 cash from CO323 and went outside, returning a short time later. You told CO323 that it was the same supplier as last time, but most likely a different product.

41You and CO323 then ordered and ate a meal together. You received a text message and stated ‘they’ were here and exited the store, returning a short time later and handing CO323 a plastic snap lock bag containing a white crystal substance.

42You both then exited Hungry Jacks and returned to your respective vehicles.

43The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 79% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 28.2g.

Purchase Five

44On 20 and 21 March 2021, you and CO323 exchanged text messages arranging to meet up on 21 March 2021. Ultimately the deal did not occur that day.

45On 22 March 2021 at 11:00am, you sent CO323 a text message “Ready when ever you are cuz”.

46At 1:04pm, CO323 contacted your mobile and it was agreed to meet in Altona North in an hours’ time.

47Just after 2pm, you drove a Black BMW and pulled up next to CO323’s vehicle so the drivers windows were adjacent.

48Through the window you handed CO323 an envelope containing a snap lock plastic bag containing a white crystal substance in exchange for $5,000 cash.

49You then returned home.

50The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 76% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 27.5g.

Purchase Six

51On 20 and 21 April 2021, you and CO323 exchanged text messages arranging to meet on 21 April 2021.

52On 21 April 2021 at 8:22pm, you contacted Natalie Vazquez (your brother Rabieh Haddara’s ex-wife). You requested Ms Vazquez ‘organise one now, go drop it off and come for my next two’. Ms Vazquez advised all three were ready to go. A discussion ensued regarding the best and safest location to meet.

53You and CO323 arranged to meet at Miller Inn Pokies in Altona North.  At 8:40pm, you arrived at the Millers Inn in the black Mercedes and met up with CO323. You travelled in convoy to The Brook Hotel, Point Cook. You met Ms Vazquez and collected the drugs.

54You then approached CO323 and handed CO323 a clear plastic ziplock bag containing a white crystal substance.

55CO323 then left the area and you went into The Brook Hotel.

56The methylamphetamine was analysed and found to contain 82% methylamphetamine with a total weight of 27.4g.

57On 16 June 2021, police executed multiple search warrants pursuant to s 81 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act and s 465 of the Crimes Act 1958 (‘Crimes Act’) in relation to parties identified through the trafficking the subject of Charge 1.

58A number of associates were arrested for trafficking a drug of dependence, including Ms Vazquez, Ms Salazar, Ms Kindred and Mr Walker.

59On 16 June 2021 at 6:25am, police attended your home address at 36 Mills St, Altona North for the intended execution of two search warrants issued pursuant to s 81 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act and s 465 of the Crimes Act.

60Police parked their vehicles and approached the address on foot.

61You resided in a bedroom in the bungalow at the rear of the premises. Inside your bedroom was an advanced CCTV system that had four camera angles that covered both directions in Mills St and Short St.

62As police approached the address, you saw them on the CCTV and left the address, slipping through a gap in the fence into the neighbouring property.

63Police observed you walk from the fence line of 36 Mills St and behind a vehicle in the driveway of 34 Mills St. Police requested that you stop and place your hands behind your back, which you complied with. You were asked your name, you replied ‘Rabieh’. Police did not believe you and you were brought inside 36 Mills St. You were arrested for trafficking a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence.

64Located on you was a Silver and Black Nokia Mobile Phone. The phone contained a Belong SIM card matching a number captured on TI.

65A search of the premises was then conducted, and the following items were located in your bedroom:

a.a blue balloon containing 1.2g (28 films) Buprenorphine tabs in silver foil (Buprenorphine) (Charge 2);

b.a plastic container containing 2g of mixture of cannabis and tobacco (Charge 3);

c.a zip lock bag containing 0.8g of methylamphetamine (83% purity) (Charge 4);

d.black Knuckle Dusters (Summary charge 16);

e.a black extendable baton (Summary charge 17); and

f.a blue Oppo Mobile Phone containing Vodafone SIM used in the offending.

66An order to provide information or assistance issued pursuant to s 465AA of the Crimes Act was served on you and you subsequently provided police with the pin codes to the phones seized.

67On 14 April 2020, you were granted bail by the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court in relation to a matter where Brookes was the informant. You were on bail for that matter at the time of this offending. On 28 December 2020, you were granted bail by the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court in relation to a matter where Morton was the informant. You were also on bail for that matter at the time of this offending (Summary Charge 3).

68A record of interview was conducted with you at Melbourne West Police Station. You responded ‘no comment’ in relation to the trafficking to CO323. You also stated that:

a.you and your four brothers sleep in the bedroom you use depending on who is staying at the house at the time (Q60);

b.the cannabis located in your bedroom was yours (Q166);

c.the methylamphetamine located belonged to your brother Mohammed (Q169&191);

d.you do not know who the knuckle dusters belong to (Q174);

e.the extendable baton is not yours (Q175);

f.your phone number ending in 666 is registered to your ex-partner (Q239); and

g.your second phone number ending in 127 is an account that you had just opened (Q390).

Nature and gravity of the offending

69As conceded by your counsel, Charge 1, trafficking in a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, is a very serious offence which is reflected in the maximum penalty imposed by Parliament of 25 years imprisonment.

70Further, it is clear from the details provided in the prosecution opening, that in relation to the individual transactions with the undercover operative, you were able to easily source the drugs you provided. You were working within a well organised group of traffickers at a relatively high level. On a number of occasions it was you who encouraged the further sales, demonstrating your desire to continue trafficking. The purity of the drug you were sourcing was high and consistent through all transactions. The 193.7 grams of methylamphetamine you trafficked, translates to 158 grams pure, just over three times the commercial quantity.

71Your trafficking was to an undercover operative, which is a matter that is able to be taken into account as a relevant sentencing consideration.[1] However the weight to be given to police involvement will depend on the circumstances. Here, you were an active and willing participant and when you were offered the opportunity to continue to supply methylamphetamine, you were able to negotiate the deal, obtain the drug and make arrangements for the exchange. Although you were using drugs at the time of the offending, your conduct may be contrasted with that of a desperate drug user being coerced into supplying smaller amounts simply to support a habit.

[1] Kada v The Queen [2017] VSCA 339; (2017) 270 A Crim R 197, [72].

72The fact that the drugs were prevented from entering the community provides you with little, if any, weight in mitigation and your moral culpability is not reduced by this fact.[2] If the drugs did find their way into the community this may be an aggravating factor, however the absence of that aggravating factor does not translate into a mitigating factor.[3]

[2] Ibid, [72](f).

[3] Giang vThe Queen [2017] NSWCCA 25, [24].

73While the amount you trafficked is not close to a large commercial quantity (being 500 grams pure), for the reasons outlined above, your conduct which included six transactions over an 11 week period, in my view in the circumstances represents a relatively serious example of commercial quantity trafficking.

74The possession charges, Charges 2, 3 and 4 relate to small amounts of the respective drugs found. Charge 3, being a small amount of cannabis, is conceded by the prosecution to attract only the monetary penalty maximum. As to Charge 2, I am satisfied in all the circumstances that this drug was not possessed by you for the purposes of trafficking. As such the lower maximum penalty applies.

75As to Charge 4, in further submissions filed following the plea, the prosecution provided examples of telephone intercepts from the materials that demonstrates you were involved in a number of low level drug sales. In the circumstances, while I accept that during the time of the offending you were a chronic drug user, I am not satisfied that your possession of the methylamphetamine was purposes unrelated to trafficking. As such the higher penalty applies in relation to Charge 4.

Personal circumstances

76You are 40 years old, and as noted, you were 38 years old at the time of the offending. You are the second youngest of five siblings, and you report having a reasonably close relationship with all of your siblings, particularly with your sister. Your three brothers have all had involvement in the criminal justice system as a result of drug related offending.

77Your mother is aged 72 and you remain very close to her. For approximately the past 10 years before being remanded in relation to these matters, you had acted as a paid carer for her, as she suffers from a cardiac condition. This included driving her to and from doctors’ appointments and keeping her house clean. Your mother was frequently physically and emotionally abused by your father, who died in 2010.

78Your father worked as a taxi driver in Melbourne and had a significant gambling problem. You were never close with your father, and you report he physically and verbally abused you, sometimes after you had stepped in to protect your mother. You recall having your hands tied to the clothesline, and being struck with a plastic hose by your father.

79A psychological report dated 8 November 2022 was prepared by Mr Jeffrey Cummins. You reported to Mr Cummins that you experience nightmares and flashbacks regarding how you had been mistreated by your father. Mr Cummins opines it is probable that you are suffering from symptoms of Complex PTSD, and a recurrent Major Depressive Disorder of moderate severity, associated with features of traumatisation.

80In an addendum report prepared by Mr Cummins following the plea, dated 24 November 2022, he clarifies that while he cannot make a conclusive diagnosis of Complex PTSD, he has formed the opinion that you suffer from PTSD.

81Your primary schooling was largely uneventful, however you found high school challenging, reporting to Mr Cummins that you were bullied for your weight and your family name. You left school at the age of 17 and undertook a bricklaying course at Kangan Batman TAFE. However you stated to Mr Cummins that you ceased attending that course after 3 months, due to your father’s ongoing physical assaults on you.

82After dropping out of the bricklaying course you describe turning to alcohol, which you had started drinking in your teenage years, and remained dependent on until around the age of 30. You experimented with cannabis in your youth, but it was not until you were around 30 that you started using methylamphetamines. You stated to Mr Cummins that you typically smoked up to 3 or 4 grams of methylamphetamine on a daily basis, and then became involved in selling methylamphetamine in order to ensure you had a steady supply for your own use.

83In spite of this drug addition, you were able to maintain work for several years as a machine operator for Socobell. You have also worked as a meat packer, a concreter and more recently as a cleaner for Calcorp Services, which was were you were working at the time of this offending.

84You have an extensive criminal history which commenced in 2002, and you have relevant priors in relation to drug possession and weapons offences.

85You expressed to Mr Cummins that you feel reasonably optimistic that you will be able to remain off methylamphetamine now that you are settled in custody, and Mr Cummins opines that you displayed some insight into the consequences of your offending for yourself and the community in general. Mr Cummins further notes you gave the impression that being dependent on methylamphetamine assisted you coping with the traumatic memories related to your mistreatment by your father. Mr Cummins states that in his opinion you will require residential drug rehabilitation in order to remain drug-free on a long-term basis.

86You have had one significant intimate relationship, with a partner of 10 years. You agreed to separate before your arrest, due to your illicit drug use and offending behaviour. You have expressed regret for the end of this relationship, and understand the separation was a direct result of your offending. 

87You have expressed a feeling of guilt about not being able to act as a carer for your mother, particularly at a time when she has been diagnosed with a cardiac condition. The separation from your family has weighed heavily on you, and you have expressed a desire to return to caring for your mother and to be a part of your sister and her children’s lives.

88Your sister Roweh Haddara, provided a reference which was tendered on the plea. Despite your long term drug and criminal history, she offers her continued support of you. Ms Haddara provides further details as to your family history and the traumatic experiences you suffered at the hands of your father. She notes that since being in custody you have become more committed to your religious rituals and you have apologised to your family for the hurt you have caused them.

Sentencing considerations

89Ms Ballard, who appeared on your behalf, highlighted a number of matters in mitigation.

90First is your plea of guilty. You did not cross examine any witnesses at the committal hearing and the matter proceeded by way of straight hand up brief. While initially you sought to run a trial, the matter resolved and as such your pleas of guilty have significant utilitarian value. Your pleas have saved court time and expense and have spared witness from giving evidence.

91The plea carries additional weight which must be reflected in a further amelioration in sentence, as the plea was entered in circumstances where the pandemic has caused a substantial backlog of cases in the criminal justice system.[4]

[4] Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169 at [39].

92It was submitted on your behalf that the trauma you suffered at the hands of your father enlivens Bugmy[5] principles. Mr Cummins is of the view that your Depressive Disorder is associated with features of traumatisation and that you are probably suffering from symptoms of Complex PTSD. As noted in Director of Public Prosecutions v Herrmann[6] the ‘general’ approach enunciated in Bugmy is that the relevance of depravation to sentencing does not depend on a nexus or evidentiary foundation before a disadvantaged background can be taken into account – the ‘general’ approach relating to circumstances of the offender where he or she has been raised in an environment of violence and has been marred by that experience.

[5] Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571.

[6] [2021] VSCA 160, [36] and [45].

93In your specific circumstances it was not disputed by the prosecution that Bugmy principles have some limited application in the circumstances. However, despite your difficult home environment you were able to complete year 11 and have maintained consistent employment – including being employed over the offending period. Further, in your sisters reference, while she acknowledges the trauma you have had to deal with as a result of the family conflict, she conveys that you are a hard worker and you continue to enjoy a close and supportive relationship with your siblings and your mother. In the circumstances I accept that some limited weight should be attributed to your early dysfunctional family environment and the impact that it has had on your life choices including your drug use. I also accept that you suffer from PTSD as a result of the trauma you suffered at the hands of your father.

94As to your prospects of rehabilitation, as noted by Mr Cummins, although you have displayed some insight into your offending behaviour, you require further assistance to increase your level of insight. That said, you have remained drug free in custody and you understand that there are consequences for your conduct such as the losing of your long term partner as a result of your offending. You have a supportive family although your three brothers have all been involved in the criminal justice system for drug related offending. Plainly, your prospects will improve if you can continue to remain drug free and accept supports that are offered to you once you are released back into the community. As things currently stand, I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as guarded.

95Deterrence both general and specific are prominent sentencing considerations. Trafficking drugs at a commercial level inevitably has the consequence that those drugs will be distributed more widely in the community. Methylamphetamines cause wide spread harm to individuals and families and those tempted to traffick methylamphetamines, must be deterred.

96I take into account the current custodial environment which is still labouring under the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. While the conditions have begun to improve, many services remain limited and prisoners are subject to periods of lockdown and quarantine. I also take into account pursuant to the principle of totality,  that while you have some 486 days that are able to be declared as pre-sentence detention, since you have been in custody, you were sentenced to two months imprisonment on other matters in the Magistrates Court.

97Pursuant to s 58 of the Confiscation Act 1997 (‘Confiscation Act’), the prosecution has sought a Pecuniary Penalty Order (‘PPO’) in the amount of $35,100. Pursuant to s 67(1)(aa) of the Confiscation Act the defence concedes that you derived a benefit as you physically received the amount sought by the PPO. However, it is submitted that you retained only a very small portion of the money from each transaction together with small amounts of methylamphetamine. The prosecution is unable to determine how much you personally received, however submit that the relevant assessment is not dependent on the ultimate benefit to you, relying on s 67(1)(aa) which refers to the actual money received, regardless of expenditures incurred.

98In further written submissions following the plea hearing, Ms Ballard submitted that the facts demonstrate that you were acting as an intermediary and gives the example of the third purchase, which suggests you only handled the money provided by the covert operative for a short time when purchasing from a new supplier. It was further submitted that in the circumstances you will have little or no capacity to pay the PPO and that leaving custody with such a significant debt, is counterproductive to your rehabilitation.

99While the objects of the Confiscation Act must be considered when determining the making of an order of this nature – which includes deterring others from engaging in criminal activity – in this case, there is no evidence that you were living a lavish lifestyle as a result of the sales you organised. On the other hand, it is accepted that you were battling with a long term drug addiction and were using heavily in the period of the offending. Further, as I have assessed your prospects of rehabilitation as guarded, you will need every incentive to continue your rehabilitation upon your release. A PPO would in my view create a hindrance to your continued rehabilitation and therefore in all the circumstances, I decline to make an order.

Sentence

100Mr Haddara, would you please stand.

101Sadde Haddara, on Charge 1, trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.

102On Charge 2, possession of a drug of dependence (buprenorphine), you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment. On Charge 3 possession of a drug of dependence (cannabis), you are convicted and fined $300. On Charge 4, possession of a drug of dependence (methylamphetamine), you are convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment.

103On summary Charge 3, commit an indictable offence whilst on bail, and Summary Charges 16 and 17, possess prohibited weapon without excuse, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment on each charge.

104I direct that you serve 2 years and 6 months before becoming eligible for parole.

105Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that 486 days be reckoned as the period of imprisonment already served under the sentence I have imposed. That does not include today.

106Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, if not for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a period of imprisonment of 6 years with a non-parole period of 4 years.

---