Director of Public Prosecutions v Henderson

[2015] VCC 1333

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 14-01804

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

GERARD HENDERSON

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MULLALY
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	18 September 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Henderson
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VCC 1333

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr J. Lewis	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms C. Foot	Stary Norton Halphen

HIS HONOUR: 

1Gerard Henderson, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of stalking, two charges of theft, and one of burglary, two charges of carrying or using a loaded firearm, two charges of breaching an intervention order intending to cause harm or fear, and one charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

2You have also pleaded guilty to ten breaches of the intervention orders and I will deal with you for those related summary offences.

3The full and agreed summary of facts and circumstances of your crimes was read by the prosecutor at the plea hearing.

4In December 2012, you were released from prison.  I will later deal briefly with the circumstances of the offending that saw a magistrate impose a sentence of 14 months with a minimum non-parole period of eight months for the crimes of stalking, threats to kill and breaches of intervention orders.

5The offences and the circumstances of those offences are relevant because of the similarities with the offences before me and the patterns that are evident in your terrifying response to a relationship ending.

6During the course of this previous offending, you met and formed a relationship with a woman, the primary victim in the offences before me.  I will refer to her as Ms A.  Ultimately, you were married to Ms A in January 2012.

7As to the allegations that you were then facing at the time, you persuaded Ms A it was your victims, that is, your former wife and another girlfriend, who were vindictive and at fault, not you.  Ms A stood by you, notwithstanding the seriousness of the crimes that you had committed directed at two women who had been in a relationship with you and those who supported them.

8On your release from prison, you recommenced living with Ms A.  She was a hairdresser operating a business from home as she raised her two children from a previous relationship.  The relationship between you both deteriorated.  Ms A sought to separate from you.  Your response was a protracted campaign of terrifying stalking, harassment, surveillance and intimidation, breaking into her business and causing damage, modifying and using a firearm, and setting on her friends and family who tried to support and protect her from your frightening behaviour.

9Your arrest and remand on 1 September 2013, rather than bring your offending to an end, saw it escalate in its seriousness.

10As noted, your relationship with Ms A came to an end, and it was around June of 2013.  Ms A felt it necessary to seek an intervention order in July of 2013.  It was granted, giving her and her two children protection from you.

11Although you well knew the seriousness of intervention orders, and more importantly the consequences of breaching such orders, it made no difference to you.  With utter contempt for the laws that seek to protect women such as Ms A, you quickly commenced to breach the intervention orders.

12You did so by putting things on Ms A's Facebook page, driving past and loitering around where she was on many occasions.  You took to telephoning Ms A or sending text messages time and again until she felt she could not use her phone.  You left things on her doorstep which had the effect that she felt you may be somewhere nearby and that she was under surveillance.  On one occasion, Ms A herself left her handbag by her front door momentarily.  You were nearby, although you should not have been, and you stole her bag.  Later, her debit card was used by you to purchase over $500 of items on eBay.  This eBay account of hers was password protected but you somehow got access to it.  Your phone had photographs on it of these items when you were arrested.

13Your obsessive surveillance and frightening intimidation escalated, and on 24 August 2013 you broke into where Ms A operated her hairdressing business which was on her domestic property but separate from her house.  You stole important property and caused very significant damage.  According to Ms A's victim impact statement, she was unable to continue operating her hairdressing business thereafter, causing her significant financial difficulties.

14Again you escalated your conduct, obtaining a rifle and shortening the barrel.  Obviously this was a very concerning development in your criminality.  You expanded your intimidation of Ms A by threatening her friends and family who were trying to protect her from you.  You took to driving past her friends and her sister's property in suburban Geelong.  In a frightening display of violence, you fired your rifle at the house of her sister and brother-in-law causing some damage but more relevantly, you caused real fear, precisely your intent.  People are entitled to feel safe in their homes including feeling safe if they kindly help and stand by a woman leaving a violent, controlling, disturbed man such as you.  Firing a lethal weapon at an occupied suburban home is very serious offending.

15As noted, you were using a phone to harass Ms A and also her friends and family.  You rang or sent messages to Ms A 126 times over the period 18 August to 30 August 2013.  In addition, you rang or sent messages to friends of Ms A 455 times from 1 August to 1 September.  Once you learnt that Ms A had a new male friend, you called or texted him 256 times in the two weeks from 15 August to 1 September 2013.

16Many of these calls were in the early hours of the morning, containing information which made it clear to the receiver that you had him or her under observation.  Such behaviour was frightening and intended to be so.  An example is where you called Ms A at 1.12 am on 17 August 2013 telling her which one of her children got into her car first when she picked them up from their school.  This was a chilling call and you meant it to be exactly that.  The next day, you rang Ms A 30 times between 1.08 am and 2.36 am.  You tracked Ms A's movements by going onto her Facebook page and used the information to further intimidate her by revealing you knew where she was or had been.

17You used a firearm again at a house of a friend of Ms A's.  Ms A was there and when she heard what she thought were firecracker-type noises.  Later inspection discovered holes and a bullet in Ms A's friend's car.  You later told friends of Ms A over the phone in an intimating way and in Ms A's hearing, that the firecracker sounds were a .22 gun and that you would go around and finish them all off.  You were angry and aggressive during this call which was the pattern.

18One day Ms A returned home to find the turtle tank in her home was filled with detergent.  Later, friends of Ms A told her that a new Facebook profile in her name had come up.  The picture on the Facebook page was a naked photo of her which had been on a computer that you took possession of at the time of the separation.

19Just pausing here.  Putting naked photographs of someone on the internet against their will is a particularly cruel type of behaviour.  It is humiliating.  It breaches the trust that existed during the relationship.  The publication was designed to cause psychological stress in terms of revenge and control by a male who feels slighted that a woman decides to leave them.  This sort of conduct is very serious and must be denounced by the imposition of a gaol term.  It seems in modern times this sort of behaviour is easy enough to do.  A message of deterrence must be sent to anyone contemplating such dreadful conduct.  The clear message must be that if you do it, gaol awaits.

20Following the discovery by Ms A of your behaviour on 31 August 2013 with the firearm, she was leaving her house with a friend in fear.  She came across you in a car and you manoeuvred your car, parking it so she would drive past.  As she did, you pointed your gun at her.  She drove to the police station to report this event.  You were arrested that night on 1 September 2013.  The police found a spent .22 bullet casing in your car.

21After your arrest, you were remanded in custody.  Ms A, and indeed her friends and family, were all then and at last entitled to feel safe from your obsessional and frightening behaviour.  However, and most seriously, you continued to stalk Ms A, having others keep her under surveillance and monitor her Facebook account while you were in prison.

22You had formed another relationship with a Tania Bolt from 16 August 2013.  You had Ms Bolt and your mother Val Henderson undertake the surveillance and stalking of Ms A on your behalf while you were in prison.  Beyond that, you prevailed on Ms Bolt to be part of creating a false alibi.  As I understand, the false alibi notice was created and filed.  You had both Ms Bolt and your mother rewrite letters that you had written in prison with instructions to these women to send the letters to Ms A, her family and friends to put pressure on Ms A to withdraw her allegations against you.  Ms Bolt was asked to follow Ms A's new male friend and you advised her of his workplace and details of cars of his that she was to follow.  Much of this was done in prison phone calls, visits and letters.  A search of your cell in the prison revealed many items that themselves revealed your ongoing pattern of finding or obtaining information about your victim and her supporters, all for the purpose of continuing your intimidation and harassment.

23While in prison and on remand, you befriended another prisoner who I will call Mr X.  You made arrangements to act on your behalf to commit serious crimes for the overall purpose of derailing the allegations against you.

24Specific acts you wanted Mr X to do included burning down a house in Lara which you said belonged to Ms A, and burning a car you said belonged to a new male friend.  Mr X was told to get a gun from your mother and shoot up the house in Lara where Ms A and her new male friend were living.  This was not mere idle prison talk.  Mr X was released and you arranged for him to meet Ms Bolt who took him to an address in Lara.  Ms Bolt and Mr X were told that you wanted a petrol bomb thrown through a window at night.  Later in December 2013, Ms Bolt met Mr X again at your request.  She requested that Mr X put a quantity of the drug ice in a car connected with a friend of Ms A.  Clearly this was to create a serious difficulty for that friend of Ms A's, who was a witness in the prosecution of you for the crimes you have committed.

25You had also requested your mother dispose the firearm.  A later search revealed the barrel you had sawn off at a friend's workshop was left over a fence near that workshop.  It remains of real concern that the firearm remains undiscovered.

26As it turned out, Mr X did not do as you asked.  He spoke to the police, implicating you.  Earlier, Ms Bolt had decided she was not willing to continue to lie for you and to continue to intimidate or keep Ms A under surveillance in order to put pressure on her or other witnesses.  Ms Bolt made a statement to the police.  Your mother has not cooperated with the police and continues to support you.

27The recitation of the circumstances of your offending that I have embarked upon here is a bare summary of what you did and planned in order to cause misery to Ms A and others connected to her.

28Before stating my assessment of the gravity of your crimes, I need to touch on the great adverse impact caused on Ms A and others.  The impact on the victims has been very significant, especially Ms A.  I do not intend to list in any detail what was set out in the victim impact statement of Ms A, her sister, her brother-in-law and her friend.  The friend and the family who supported Ms A have been through a frightening experience.  One has moved house.  All have suffered psychologically.  They are now hypervigilant.  Sleep and feelings of wellbeing have been much affected.

29Ms A's psychological trauma has been very considerable indeed.  Unable to work because of the burglary and damage to her business, and then she could not continue to pay for her house and it was repossessed.  She had to move many times through crisis housing and other premises as she tried to cope.  This had significant effect on her children's education and wellbeing.  She was often physically ill with fear and remains hypervigilant.  She has had to abandon her nursing studies and thus the potential to establish a new and rewarding career.  She has had lengthy counselling and has been told of the likely long impact of post-traumatic stress disorder.

30There is a good deal more that Ms A has written, and I have read and re-read it all.  It is an insightful account of the terrifying ordeal at the hands of a cruel and vindictive man.

31What I say to you is:  despite your intent, you did not break her.  She obviously has a strong character, especially in contrast to your weak and cowardly character.  The community is heartily sick of violent men setting upon women who simply seek to end a relationship.  As superior courts have made clear, such crimes will not be merely brushed over as perhaps once was the case.  In Pasinis v R, our Court of Appeal said:

"Historically, perpetrators of family violence were rarely prosecuted.  Even when offenders were convicted of such offences, they often received lenient offences.  Fortunately, the criminal law now gives greater recognition to the devastating effects of family violence."

32There is, in my view, a growing concern in the community at the disdain men like you show to intervention orders obtained in order that a woman has some protection so as to live free of violence and fear.

33Breaches of intervention orders made by the courts to protect people from violent cowards like you should be and will be in this case met with stern and unambiguous punishment involving lengthy terms of imprisonment.  The courts will not underplay the sorts of crimes that you committed because your victim was your ex-partner, nor will the courts give undue mitigatory weight when the so-called excuse or rationale in the mind of the offender is that he feels slighted or desperate because a relationship has ended.  Relationships do end, and often enough, with a man unhappy about being left.  In those circumstances, men of character do not resort to violence against the women that they were once with.  When men act violently and engender fear, then the courts will reassert proper and decent values, that is, protecting the vulnerable from the violent.  The courts will do this with stern punishment.

34In your case, your crimes of stalking were very serious examples of that serious offence.  What makes your conduct stand out as a serious example was the relentless nature of your harassment, surveillance, and intimidation, the chilling ways you made known to the victims that you were stalking them.  Also, your resort to firearms, your attack on those trying to help and protect your primary victim, the escalation of your intimidation, its grave impact upon the primary victim and others, and your determination to continue even when in prison, involving others including another criminal to continue your terrifying campaign establishes how serious this was.  All these factors lead inevitably to the conclusion that these examples of stalking both offences were very high up on the scale.  Of course, making it worse is that you are a repeat offender.  I will say more about your prior offending later.

35As to your offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice, it should be noted that you were planning to intimidate victims and witnesses with very serious levels of violence including shooting at houses and burning houses occupied by victims and their supporters in order that you would not have to face up to court proceedings that were underway.  You were trying to fit a witness up with drugs.  You were endeavouring to create false alibis.

36On any analysis, these were no minor attempts to pervert the course of justice.  Rather it was sophisticated, planned and determined, and was to involve serious violence and endangerment.  You utilised others outside the prison and then involved yourself with another criminal who was to be released from prison so as he could perpetrate many acts of violence and intimidation on your behalf.

37The charge has a number of particulars.  Each was in itself a serious example of the offence.  You will only be dealt with for the one offence you faced and pleaded guilty to, but in examining other cases, yours is a rare one in that there are so many serious things set in train, or that you wanted done while you were in prison awaiting the court hearing to derail the prosecution or to intimidate prosecution witnesses.

38Your conduct was a concerted attack going to the very heart of our legal system.  In our community, criminal allegations are determined by courts with witnesses able to safely make allegations and give evidence, and have a sense the system is protective of them as well as fair to the accused.  You determined to undermine those important principles.  Our courts have repeatedly said that this sort of attack on justice is truly serious offending.  Our justice system and the witnesses who come forward must be protected by proper and appropriate punishment of offenders like you.

39The gravity of your stalking and intervention order breaches is much more pronounced because you had in recent times been gaoled for very similar behaviour.  This fact is also relevant in other ways relating to the heightened need for deterrence to you, the need to protect the community especially the women from you, and it also means your prospects of reform are very dim.

40As I have mentioned, you were imprisoned for like offending, serving your sentence up to December 2012.  The serious crimes you committed were four charges of stalking, making threats to kill and breaching intervention orders.

41The offending spanned 15 October 2009 to 2 February 2010 in relation to the breakdown in your then marriage to a Brooke Henderson.  The main target of your offending was a man who Ms Henderson commenced to see subsequent to your marriage breakup.  Other family members of this man were also intimidated and threatened.  Letters and text messages were used to threaten.  It was, like this offending, relentless, planned and frightening.

42You had, while committing those offences, in the meantime formed a new relationship commencing December 2009.  The woman you took up with ended that relationship in May 2010.  You then embarked on another campaign against her and her friends and family including men helping her with dealing with your behaviour.  Of note was your use of Facebook and text messages to stalk.  Also, you contacted the woman's family and employer suggesting the woman was using drugs.  With her employer, you pretended to be a police officer investigating the woman's involvement with drugs.  The intention of your conduct was plain and had a devastating effect.

43You also had been before the Magistrates' Court at an earlier separate time for threats to kill and breaching an intervention order for which you were fined $400 without conviction.

44Your prior history is very concerning.  It reveals, as I have said, a pattern of violent behaviour and stalking which has not abated even when you were in prison.  Your relentlessness and the lengths you will go to intimidate and damage your victims psychologically have expanded.  You are not to be re-punished for past offences but they and the propensities they reveal simply cannot be ignored.

45My requirement pursuant to the Sentencing Act to assess your moral culpability leads me to an obvious conclusion.  Your moral culpability is very high.  You knew what you were doing was wrong but that had no restraining impact on you.  Your self-centred thinking was revealed in many ways by your conduct and also your words in telling your mother and Ms Bolt and Mr X that in effect your victim and her friends had "fucked with the wrong guy" and that you would teach them.

46There is little in your personal circumstances that mitigates.  You are now 37, the youngest of three, raised essentially by your mother who was, as I have mentioned, someone who assisted you in your criminal conduct and, I was told, still supports you.  Your father and mother separated when you were young, and your stepfather's involvement from the time you were about eight was as a strict man.  You left school at 15.  It seems you were not very interested in school and had some problems with discipline.  You completed an apprenticeship as a painter and quickly established a successful business.  This is to your credit.  Your major relationships with women were marked by your criminal conduct when those relationships ended.  You have two children and mean a lot to you.  You experienced a traumatic event when an intoxicated friend of yours who you were out with on a social occasion was unfortunately assaulted and very tragically and sadly died.  This has taken an emotional toll on you.

47You were seen by Ms Lechner, a psychologist, who is regularly referred clients facing criminal charges.  She wrote a report dated 1 April 2015.  As I commented during the plea and as your counsel conceded, the report was not one of the quality the courts would expect from an expert, nor would it meet the expectations of the community who via Victoria Legal Aid paid the expert to do the report.  I was left in the position of seeking a report from Forensicare.  It was more helpful.  You should be aware that you are not punished more by reason of the inadequacies of the Lechner psychological report.

48Ms Lechner said the following:  "Mr Henderson acknowledges his role in the above offences, making no attempt to shirk responsibility or to minimise the seriousness of his action."  Ms Lechner then went on to set out quotes from you that led her to the conclusion that I have just outlined.  She quoted you as saying generally as to your offending, "I'll own up to what I did and I'll cop it."  In respect to the firearms matter, she quoted you as saying, "My kids are my life.  I've had enough of him [meaning Tim] and snapped, and pulled out the gun.  I knew it was really bad."  In respect of the stalking matters, she quoted you as saying, "I shouldn't have been a pain in the arse and bugged her.  What's done is done, I shouldn't have pulled out a gun, I have to move on and restart everything again."

49Ms Lechner then went on to say that in her view, "He deeply regrets his action and understands the anxiety and distress he has caused the victim."  What you said to Ms Lechner would lead anyone to the opposite conclusion to the one drawn by Ms Lechner in terms of minimising the seriousness of your conduct, taking or shirking responsibility and expressing regret.  In the end, your counsel sensibly expressly contended that remorse was not put forward as a mitigatory matter in your case.

50Ms Lechner tested you for ongoing risk of reoffending.  She then wrote, "Mr Henderson is currently best described as a low" - which she emphasised - "low risk of violent behaviour.  His background does not indicate psychological maladjustment."

51The report I received from Dr Gisharzi of Forensicare dated 16 July 2015 was, as I have said, much more helpful.  Your accounts of your offending to Dr Gisharzi again in my view understates things, and in my view reveals that in truth, you find it very difficult to accept responsibility.

52Dr Gisharzi's opinion was that given the pattern of repeatedly keeping victims and associated parties under surveillance, and interfering with their property and causing fear and apprehension, she said the following:  "All of these elements bring to mind a rejected type of stalking that is one of the most persistent and intrusive type of stalking, and difficult to address appropriately."  She went on, "Although Mr Henderson presented with a good level of insight to his reaction and the consequence of the stalking behaviour on his victims in their daily life, however, his reactive strategy and behavioural patterns on three different occasions reveals the likelihood of relapse of his behaviour in the same context in the past and the future."  I am of the view that this opinion as to your risk of relapse is more informed and realistic, and I accept it over what Ms Lechner opined.

53Dr Gisharzi noted as to your progress in prison, "Mr Henderson reported he has been in custody since 31 July 2013.  He reported during these two years, he had spent six months overall in the slot because of numerous fightings.  He reported that he has his billet job in the kitchen.  He reported he has returned six positive urine drug screen tests and more than 20 negative tests.  He mentioned that he feels ashamed of that.  He reported he attended problem-solving anger management and choice courses in his previous incarceration."

54As to the requirement of psychological treatment on your release on parole, she wrote that you referred to attending the "Problem Behaviour Program Forensicare" with a forensic psychologist for assessment and management of your stalking behaviour as a condition of your previous parole.  She had noted you attended one session, then because your order had expired and the difficulties of travelling from Geelong to Melbourne, you did not attend further sessions.  She was of the view that a period of at least six months on parole for psychological assistance would be advisable.  You told her - helpfully, in my view - "I think I need help psychologically to get out of this situation."

55Dr Gisharzi wrote as to your future:  "It is noted that a longer period on parole would be advisable so as to ensure attendance for psychological treatment on appropriate programs."

56As has been made clear in other circumstances where the courts are called on to assess risk, expert opinions are centrally important but do not dictate a judicial conclusion.  I must take into account other aspects including the seriousness of your offending and your prior history, whether and at what level you accept responsibility, your remorse or lack of it, your conduct on remand, and your commitment to get help.

57In the end, I am of the view in your case that protection of the community is a very significant matter as your risk of reoffending is high if confronted with what is not an uncommon circumstance of a relationship in the future not working out.  Your risk of reoffending is a significant matter.  Sadly, your fall into poor prison behaviour such as drug use and aggression do not indicate your reform will simply be you resuming your once-lawful ways.  I agree with Dr Gisharzi that you will need more than a period of six months on parole once released.  However, whether you are released on parole is for others, not me.

58I wish to make clear, having re-examined the transcript of what happened at the end of your plea as you were being taken from the court, that I do not consider anything that happened warrants me taking anything into account adverse to you.  Courts are highly emotional and sometimes volatile environments, and things are said and done in the heat of the moment.  No more needs to be said.

59It is trite to say that every case turns on its unique circumstances that relate to what an offender did and why, and who the offender is and what the future may hold for them.  That said, I am obliged to consider current sentencing practices.  As your counsel said, the offence of pervert the course of justice can be committed in many and varied ways.  Accordingly, I should keep in mind what the Court of Appeal said in R v Aydin & Kirsch, cautioning against placing too much weight on the very long maximum term of 25 years' imprisonment for that offence.

60The table of sentences imposed for attempt to pervert the course of justice included in the decision of Tognolini v The Queen is very helpful.  In one of those cases, Galea, the accused having committed a serious armed robbery then while on remand, arranged with another prisoner that for $50,000, that prisoner would accept responsibility for the armed robbery.  Galea received four years in addition to a long sentence for the armed robbery after trial, that is, four years for the attempt to pervert the course of justice.

61In another case of Sue, the accused was facing a serious kidnapping charge.  He arranged from prison for an intimidating man to visit a key witness and tell him to leave Australia and other intimidating things so as that man would not attend at Sue's committal.  Sue also received four years as well as a long sentence for the kidnap after trial.

62In Tognolini, the accused there arranged for three young women to make a statement to a solicitor saying they had not witnessed the accused sexually assault other young girls, and that those girls were known liars.  The accused in that case believed what the young girls said to the solicitors was the truth.  His sentence was reduced from seven years to four years.  There were other penalties involved in Tognolini for other sexual offences after the trial.

63On any measure, yours is a far more serious example of this crime than those that have been mentioned.  Those matters are different in other respects.  But yours is a multi-faceted campaign to derail the proper prosecution of you for crimes and it involved planning dreadful violence and intimidation of witnesses.  Although I have paid due regard to what was said in Aydin & Kirsch, it is still of importance that this is a crime with a 25 year maximum term.  I do not sail for this maximum but I am guided by it.  There comes a time when the circumstances of a crime and the circumstances of the offender mean that a long term of imprisonment must be set even if it is longer than any before it.  It is the facts of the case and the laws and principles of sentencing that guide the exercise of my discretion, not a rigid reluctance to stay below what was the longest sentence previously passed for the offence just for that reason and no other.

64I have decided to pass individual sentences rather than an aggregate sentence so that as fully as I can, I expose my reasoning.  I have examined my sentences and revisited them and reconsidered each sentence, and the orders for cumulation so as to properly ensure that the principles of totality have been adhered to.  Totality is particularly important here because the breaches of intervention orders were part and parcel of stalking charges.  There is overlap in many of the offences.  I have not limited my considerations of the principles of totality just for the breaches of intervention orders but to all offences and all behaviour.  I have also considered other sentences for stalking, although I consider given your prior history that yours is, I have said, is very high on the scale.

65I have factored in your plea of guilty and make it clear that your sentence is less than it otherwise would have been had you pleaded not guilty and been found guilty of these offences.  Your plea was not an early one but it has important utilitarian benefits.  Witnesses were spared further trauma and that is no small matter in a case like this.

66This case took a long time to get on but it was your offending while on remand that caused further charges and for the matter to unequivocally have to be heard on indictment in this court.  However, I do not ignore the fact that you have been on remand for a long time and this has been a matter hanging over your head for that period of time.

67I will just pause for the moment.  Mr Prosecutor, I will need the pre-sentence detention shortly.

68MR LEWIS:  747 days not including today, Your Honour.

69HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.

70I have, as I must, taken into account all sentencing purposes as set out in our Sentencing Act.  Most prominently is the purpose of denunciation of your dreadful cowardly offending.  Also important is the purpose of deterrence to you so as to make it clear that if you do not break your ingrained patterns of violence and intimidation, you will confront ever increasing penalties.  Deterrence to others who might be minded to act in violent and aggressive ways when relationships end is also a particularly weighty consideration.  Also prominent is the need to protect the community from you, both via the significant incapacitation of a lengthy gaol term but also because your risk of reoffending is high.

71I have not ignored your rehabilitation, and the only conditions I have available to me to facilitate your rehabilitation is to fix a period of potential parole.  As I have said, whether you are granted parole or not is a matter for others, not me.  I fix the sentence on the basis that you may have to serve every day of the sentence.  I also fix a minimum non-parole period according to the law, that is, the minimum that I have said is what in my view justice requires you be incarcerated for the crimes that you have committed in all the circumstances pertaining to those offences and to you.

72I take into account that you completed parole but quickly thereafter committed this string of crimes.  You will likely need supervision on release and hopefully that is for longer than six months of parole that you had on the last occasion, but your recidivism and the escalating nature of your crimes do not warrant you having a long period of potential parole.

73I have kept well in mind that any gaol term is a grave punishment, and a lengthy gaol term, the more so.  I have ensured that you are punished no more and no less than what is appropriate and just.  Mr Henderson, you committed grave crimes and now you must meet the consequences your just deserts.

74Can you please stand.  Bear with me for one moment please.

75On Charge 1 of stalking, you are sentenced to three years' imprisonment.

76On Charge 2 theft, one month imprisonment.

77Charge 3 of burglary, 14 months' imprisonment.

78Charge 4 of theft, four months' imprisonment.

79Charge 5 carrying and using a loaded firearm, six months' imprisonment.

80Charge 6 carrying and using a loaded firearm, six months' imprisonment.

81Charge 7 breaching an intervention order intending to cause harm or fear for the safety of a person, 16 months' imprisonment.

82Charge 8 breach of an intervention order intending to cause harm or fear for the safety of a person, 18 months' imprisonment.

83Charge 9 stalking, two years and six months' imprisonment.

84Charge 10 attempting to pervert the course of justice, five years' imprisonment.

85For the ten summary offences of breaching an intervention order, I sentence you to an aggregate term of 12 months.

86I order that 12 months of Charge 1, three months of Charge 3, three months of Charge 5, three months of Charge 6, six months of Charge 7, seven months of Charge 8, and eight months of Charge 9 be cumulative upon each other and upon the sentence imposed on Charge 10.

87There will be no order as to cumulation in respect of the summary offences.

88The total sentence that follows is eight years and six months, and I order that you serve a minimum non-parole period of six years and nine months before being eligible for parole.

89Had you pleaded not guilty to these offences and been found guilty of them, I would have imposed a sentence of ten years with a minimum term of eight years.

90You have served a long period of time in custody, seven hundred and forty - Mr Prosecutor, you did tell me and I forgot.

91MR LEWIS:  Sorry, 747 not including today.

92HIS HONOUR:  You have served 747 days on remand and that figure having been reckoned, I declare that 747 days is part of the sentence that I have just imposed.  I will ensure that that declaration is entered into the records of the court so the prison authorities are left in no doubt that you have already served 747 days of the sentence I have just imposed.

93I intend to grant the other applications made by the prosecution in respect of property.  Is there anything further?

94MR LEWIS:  No, Your Honour.

95HIS HONOUR:  You can be seated, Mr Henderson.  Can both parties do some arithmetic for me to make sure that adds up.

96MR LEWIS:  Yes, Your Honour.  My maths agrees with Your Honour's.

97HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.  And my associate's.  Ms Foot?

98MS FOOT:  My maths takes a bit longer.

99HIS HONOUR:  Take your time.  Ms Foot?

100MS FOOT:  Yes.  I agree with that, Your Honour.

101HIS HONOUR:  Adds up?  Thank you.  There's nothing further?

102MR LEWIS:  No, Your Honour.

103HIS HONOUR:  I thank counsel for their considerable assistance.  Mr Henderson can be removed.

104And I thank counsel and those who have assisted them for the very considerable work that's been involved in this matter.

105MR LEWIS:  Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

106HIS HONOUR:  I'll stand down.

‑ ‑ ‑