Director of Public Prosecutions v Hooper

[2017] VCC 1141

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

AT BENDIGO
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 17-00379

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

PETER LACHLAN HOOPER

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE COHEN
WHERE HELD:	Bendigo
DATE OF HEARING:	3 August, 4 August and 14 August 2017
DATE OF SENTENCE:	15 August 2017
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Hooper
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2017] VCC 1141

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:  Sentencing

Catchwords:             Armed robbery; false imprisonment; intentional cause injury; mainly passive role; beholden to main offender; no prior criminal history; strong prospects of rehabilitation

Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991 s6AAA
Sentence:                  $3000 fines and CCO for 2 years

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr D. Cordy	OPP
For the Accused	Mr Z. Menon	MJA Legal Services Pty Ltd

HER HONOUR:

1Peter Lachlan Hooper; you have pleaded guilty to one charge of false imprisonment, one charge of intentionally causing injury and one charge of armed robbery.

2The maximum penalty for false imprisonment, and for intentionally causing injury, is ten years' imprisonment.  For armed robbery its 25 years' imprisonment.  I have taken these into account as reflecting the objective seriousness of offences of such nature.

3These charges arise out of your involvement with some events in Kyabram on 18 September 2015.  You were in company with a man named Jason Garvey, and a younger woman named Mikaela Golding-Smith.  You were accompanying Mr Garvey as he tried to recover what he claimed to be a debt owed to him by a man named Ashley Thomas.  You had not seen Mr Thomas for many years, but had known him at school.

4In a car driven by Garvey, at about 5 am, the three of you watched
Mr Thomas go to an ATM, withdraw money and then walk towards a newsagency.  You followed him into that newsagency.  Ms Golding-Smith also entered the store, and Mr Garvey stayed in the vicinity of his car, outside.  You approached Thomas, grabbed him by the arm, and led him from the store to Garvey's car, where he was required to get into the rear seat.  Garvey then drove the car away, with Golding-Smith in the front passenger seat, and you in the rear, beside Thomas. These events were the start of the false imprisonment of Mr Thomas.

5You seemed to have taken no active part after that, but by your passive presence you contributed to the ongoing intimation and false imprisonment of Thomas, and you became an accessory by aiding and abetting the further actions of Garvey.

6While driving Garvey, was arguing with Thomas, demanding the money he claimed he was owed.  He reached for a sawn-off rifle, pink in colour, which he placed on his lap as he drove, and then at one point he fired two shots out of the window of the vehicle as it was moving.  This seems to have shocked both you and Thomas.  Garvey drove to a remote location near the Kyabram tip, stopped the car, got out, and told Mr Thomas to get out. 

7You and Golding-Smith stayed in the car, Thomas appeared, in fear, refused to get out, but Garvey opened the rear door, grabbed him, and dragged him from the car onto the road.  Garvey then slammed Thomas' head into the side of the car, repeatedly punched him to the head, and when Thomas fell to the ground Garvey stomped on his head and body, all while demanding the money.  He then took Thomas' wallet, which contained $480.  In your record of interview you thought an extra $50 was demanded by Garvey because of what he claimed to be late payment, but you were not sure of the total amount. It seems you got out of the car after the money had been taken from the wallet, and you may have brought, or contributed to bringing about the end of the assault.

8Mr Thomas received facial injuries requiring medical treatment from the assault on him.  Doctors’ notes record him receiving soft tissue swelling and a fracture to the tip of the nasal bone.  He has not made a Victim Impact Statement, so I do not know whether he has suffered any lasting physical impairment, or indeed, emotional impact, but he was clearly subjected to a very frightening experience, and the risk of more serious injury is indicated by the description of multiple blows to his head. The assault on him constitutes Charge 2, of intentionally causing injury.  The stealing of $480 from him with the threat of the sawn-off rifle constitutes Charge 3, of armed robbery.

9Mr Thomas was returned to town and later that morning he reported the matter to police and was treated at the hospital.  You, by then, had accompanied Garvey and Golding-Smith to where Garvey drove you all, where Mr Thomas apparently visited later that day and spoke with you.

10You and Garvey were located by police and arrested next day.  You were co-operative with police, admitted your involvement in a recorded interview, and agreed that you would be willing to give evidence against Garvey.

11I must assess both the objective and subjective seriousness of this offending.  Armed robbery carries a maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment, which signals its objective seriousness, and when it involves a firearm, let alone a loaded one which is discharged as part of the threat, it must be regarded as at a very serious level for such an offence.  The fact that Garvey was claiming that money was owed to him does not entitle him, or anyone else, to rob the alleged debtor of the money, let alone by using such frightening methods.  The fact that there was a relatively small amount of money stolen does not reduce the seriousness of the other features of the offence.

12The false imprisonment initially did not involve violence, but it escalated very significantly.  The physical assault on Mr Thomas was also a serious instance of the offence of intentionally causing injury, as it involved repeated force to his head, and once he was on the ground, the stomping on him, was both cowardly and brutal.

13Objectively, these were serious instances of each of these offences.  I accept that there are aspects of your subjective role which do indicate that your personal blameworthiness was lower than the objective circumstances otherwise reflect.  You took no active role in the physical assault, and indeed, seem to have contributed to bringing it to an end.  In fact, Mr Thomas told police that he thought that you might have said words to stop Garvey from continuing the assault, and even physically pulled him away to prevent him from continuing.

14You took no active part in the armed robbery, and in your interview with police you claimed to have been as surprised as the victim when the gun was fired.  You also insisted to police that you did not know Garvey had brought it with him, although you had seen him with this, or another firearm, in his home, and you were aware that in his company there could be firearms.

15You had no personal interest in the recovery of the money, and did not stand to gain from it, or any other part of these offences, except to maintain your relationship with Garvey.  That, I am told, was that you were dependent on him for the accommodation at his house that he had offered you, and also, for supply of the drug “ice”, on which you were heavily dependent at the time.

16You did play an active role in initiating the false imprisonment, as you were the person who approached Mr Thomas and required him to accompany you to, and into, Garvey's car.  Your continued presence, as I have said, was also part of what kept Mr Thomas falsely imprisoned and intimidated.

17You were not the instigator of any of this offending, but did play a significant role in the false imprisonment.  You were not an active protagonist in the other two offences, but lent your support - even if passively - although you also, as I have said, contributed to bringing the physical assault of Mr Thomas to an end.

18This was a very serious incident, even though I accept that your role was less blameworthy than the objective circumstances reflect, my sentencing of you must reflect all of those aspects.

19After being interviewed and giving your statement to police you were released on bail.  You failed to attend court on the first committal mention in December 2015, and a warrant was issued for your arrest.  It emerged that you had left Victoria and gone to Queensland, and you subsequently agreed to return, and appeared at court.  You were then bailed with conditions enabling you to return to Queensland.

20In the meantime Ms Golding-Smith pleaded guilty, gave a similar undertaking as you have done, to give evidence against Mr Garvey - and she also against you, if your case came to trial.  She was sentenced by His Honour
Judge Montgomery in June last year to a community correction order with only rehabilitative and therapeutic conditions.

21Mr Garvey has been committed to stand trial for his involvement, and that trial is currently listed for later this circuit, if it is reached.

22You had indicated from an early stage that you would plead guilty.  As I have said, you made early admissions to police.  That entitles you to considerable leniency in your sentence, and notwithstanding that you disappeared from the jurisdiction in the meantime and delayed coming to this point of being sentenced.  I take into account that there is utilitarian value of saving the community the time and cost of further police investigation, and of disputed hearings, and sparing Mr Thomas, and others, having to give evidence.  You have accepted responsibility for your offending.

23Also, I am prepared to accept that your plea of guilty reflects genuine remorse, and, when assessed by psychologist, Mr Simmons, you were noted to show some understanding of the impact of such offences on the victim,
Mr Thomas.

24As I have already said, you indicated a willingness to give evidence against your co-offender, Garvey.  In front of me you confirmed that the statement you made on 19 September 2015 to police was true, and you undertook to give evidence to that effect, if called upon to do so, at Garvey's trial. The prosecutor informed me that this was regarded by the informant as of high grade value towards the prosecution of Mr Garvey.  This undertaking to give evidence against him is not only consistent with your own co-operation with the justice system, and remorse, but is not without some potential risk to you, personally.  It entitles you to further leniency in your sentence - that is, in addition to that for your plea of guilty.  You confirmed that you understand that if you fail to comply with your undertaking to give such evidence, if required, you may be re-sentenced for these offences.

25I turn now to your personal circumstances.  You are now aged 42.  You grew up in regional Victoria in a stable family.  Your father was a dairy farmer.  You left school in Year 11 and commenced a plumbing apprenticeship, but were unable to complete that when your employer went bankrupt and you could not find a suitable substitute employer.  You then worked in milk factories for some years, and later, with a rural supplier's company. 

26You married - having met and formed a relationship with your wife from a relatively young age.  You and your wife had two children; now, as I calculate, nearing their early teens.  You were living a stable, hardworking and responsible family life. Your marriage came under some pressure when you lost your employment, and subsequently your wife wanted to end the marriage.  Having agreed to leave your wife and children in your former home, that left you both alone and without the focus of them and a stable family, and also without a home.

27I am told that you obtained new employment in Shepparton, but you found yourself amongst co-workers who were using the drug known as ice, or crystal methylamphetamine.  I am told that you initially turned to using it yourself in an attempt to counter how low or depressed with life you were feeling.  I am told that you began using the drug on weekends and then increased its use until it became every second day, and you found yourself more dependent on it.

28In 2015 you lost your accommodation, and it seems that you were offered accommodation by Jason Garvey.  You moved into his home, where there was apparently a steady supply of the drug ice, and that made you somewhat beholden to Mr Garvey for both accommodation and the supply of the drug, which you continued to take, and you became even more dependent on it.

29I am told that Garvey was an intimidating individual, although considerably younger than you, and that you would do what he asked, as you were, as I say, beholden to him for both your home and the drugs. 

30In relation to you becoming involved in this offending, as I have said, I am told this all occurred at a low point in your life, and that Mr Garvey was exerting some control over you.  Although Mr Garvey's version of these events is presently unknown, the statements of Ms Golding-Smith, Mr Thomas, and you, all indicate that Garvey was in a most intimidating and violent state throughout these actual events.

31I accept that you, personally, have no history of violence.  Indeed, there is no prior criminal record alleged against you.  For a man of 40 when these events occurred, that is not only to your credit, but is consistent with what I have been told of you having led a responsible lifestyle until the period of this offending.  Of course, by exposing that you had been using illicit drugs for some time prior to these events, it cannot be said you were living a totally law-abiding life, but they form no part of a criminal record against you.

32It seems that the reality of these events, and their seriousness, caused you to make a very significant break from the associations which you had at that time, and indeed, to make considerable changes in your life.  I am told by your counsel that you never returned to live in Garvey's house; visiting only once to collect some clothing.  You were, at that time, in a relationship with a woman who was also using this drug, and you apparently ended that relationship when she refused to cease its use, as you wanted no further association with people using that drug. You said - on oath, before me - that you have not used methylamphetamine since late September 2015.  There is no independent proof of that, as you have not undergone screening tests to check whether any illicit drugs are in your system, but you went on oath before me and swore that you had not, and I do take that into account.

33I am told that by December 2015, you had moved to live in Queensland with your parents and near your sister with whom you are close.  This was not only to gain their support, but to make a clean break from the associations with drug users amongst whom you had been living and socialising at the time of these events.  I am told that you have been attending a doctor near where you live, who has prescribed anti-depressant medication, and whom you consult in relation to staying clear of illicit drugs. 

34You have also obtained employment as a forklift driver, which although seasonal, does provide full-time work at alternative sites. I read a letter from your employer confirming that you are working 40 hours a week.  I am also told that you have recently formed a new relationship in Queensland, which is also a stabilising factor for you, and together with the support of your parents and sister, makes you more hopeful for your future.  I am told that the fact that you have work is also helping you with your depression. 

35It is submitted on your behalf that you have taken significant steps towards your rehabilitation by moving to Queensland and what you have done since arriving there.  You have the protective factors of family and now a new relationship to assist you to stay away from drugs and the work, which is helpful in many ways, including helping you overcome the depression that you had suffered after the break-up of your marriage.

36I am told that while your former wife still lives in Victoria with your two children, you see the children by agreement on school holidays, and that this is a better ongoing relationship with the children than during the period of your drug use, and you hope to continue and improve that.

37There can be no doubt that the seriousness of the offending in which you were involved calls for strong denunciation.  Courts on behalf of the community cannot condone the use of force and violence let alone loaded guns to be used to extract money from other people whether or not that is money legitimately owed. 

38General deterrence, which means sending a message to others that if they engage in similar conduct they can expect it to attract stern punishment, must also be an important sentencing purpose in this case.  I accept that you have taken some real and constructive steps towards your rehabilitation but in my view, specific deterrence - that is to deter you from further offending - including lapsing into drug abuse, is still of significance. 

39Your counsel urged me to give weight to the sentencing principle of parity in light of Ms Golding-Smith's sentence, and similarities in your levels of involvement in the actual offending, your both being addicted to “ice” at the time, and to an extent, both being under Garvey's heavy influence. Although it was acknowledged that she was much younger than you, and attracted sentencing principles applicable to a young offender. It was submitted that the differences in your role and hers are not so great as to suggest that your moral culpability for these offences was much higher than hers.  Further, as was put, there was a similarity in that neither she nor you had any prior criminal history and she, like you, admitted to use of an illicit drug although neither of you had been brought before a court for that. 

40The prosecution submits that parity does not apply in this case as between you and Ms Golding-Smith, because she, at age 19, fell to be sentenced as a young offender whose rehabilitation should be given primary importance, in particular when she had no prior offending.  In contrast, you were aged 40 and with some knowledge that Mr Garvey kept at least one firearm and ammunition for it, and it was submitted you carried a more adult responsibility to dissociate yourself from any actions in which he might use a gun or indeed, from any actions by him that ought to have alerted you to the fact that he could be about to commit an offence.

41I do regard your age as a distinguishing factor from that of Ms Golding-Smith.  However, in the circumstances, I do not regard it as so great that there should be no regard to the similarities in the circumstances that seem to have led each of you to accompany and support Mr Garvey when he set out to recover a debt that morning.  Further, insofar as you have no relevant prior criminal history, that in a sense is a stronger factor in your favour than for Ms Golding-Smith, because you can call in aid almost two more decades than she of avoiding trouble that could lead you before a court. 

42Although rehabilitation does not become a primary sentencing purpose for a person of your age, it is not totally irrelevant because ultimately the community's interest is in your returning to be a responsible member of society and contributing to it. 

43I also note that it is now almost two year since these offences occurred.  While much of the delay in your coming before a court seems to be because you left Victoria without permission and could not be found, I do take into account that you have shown during that time resolve to cease your illicit drug use and establish yourself far away from those with whom you engaged in drug use and indeed, got into this criminal trouble.  You have surrounded yourself with the support and protective aspects that I have already mentioned, and have sought medical treatment from a GP in respect of your history of depression. 

44I have read a psychological report on you by Mr Warren Simmons, in which you disclosed some family history of depression and two periods of it yourself - the first when you lost your employment at age 32, and the second after you separated from your wife when you experienced suicidal thoughts and were referred by your GP to the local hospital and from there to a psychiatrist.  You were apparently prescribed medication which you took for 12 to 18 months and which you found helpful but you ceased it of your own initiative.

45When you saw Mr Simmons in May of this year, as you described your mood as good and knowing you had work waiting for you back in Queensland, and seeing your future as positive although feeling anxious about this pending court case, he did not consider that you were suffering any significant degree of depressive symptoms at that time.  You acknowledged to him that becoming involved in this offending was a "stupid decision", and although explaining that Garvey was controlling of you, you did not seek to minimise what occurred and accepted responsibility for it.  You also described your perception of how your actions may have had significant impact on the victim. 

46Mr Simmons found no indication of any significant anti-social personality traits in you, although I view with some caution his statement that no doubt, your thought processes were not as clear as they could have been given your use of methylamphetamine, I accept that the seriousness of this offending shocked you out of your complacency with regard to using ice.  He considered you would benefit from some drug counselling with a focus on relapse prevention.  He considered there was little to suggest that you were at high risk of reoffending. 

47It is not suggested that anything in Mr Simmons' opinion invokes particular leniency or reduction in the need for other sentencing purposes through what lawyers know as Verdins principles.  However, I take his views into account as consistent with the other aspects of your personal history and involvement in this offending. 

48Your case poses a very real practical dilemma as to what the appropriate sentence should be given the limited options for sentencing available. 

49The prosecution submits that nothing short of a term of imprisonment would be sufficient to adequately convey denunciation, just punishment and general deterrence, having regard to the seriousness of these offences.  Your counsel urged a non-custodial sentence, and moreover one which would enable you to return to Queensland to continue with your work, family support, new relationship and rehabilitative steps. 

50I had you assessed for a Community Corrections Order and asked for information about the transferability of such an order to Queensland.  The answers were, first, that you were found suitable for a CCO. However, in respect of potential transfer to Queensland, I was told that unpaid community work was not transferable and moreover, an order would not be accepted by Queensland on transfer if any unpaid community work remained outstanding.  Community work is of course a visible penalty component of a community corrections order, when ordered. 

51The officer who assessed you also noted that to do such work in this region risked bringing you back into contact with the drug environment and contacts that you were trying to avoid. 

52Further, because you live in Bowen in Queensland, that area has little to offer currently in either drug rehabilitation programs or other programs to reduce risk of reoffending, because of the impact of the recent cyclone and its damage.  I am told that it would be about a two-hour drive to the nearest source of such programs. 

53This leaves the dilemma that there would effectively be no framework of supervision or programs if a CCO is transferred to Queensland, and I take that framework as well as, where applied, unpaid community work, to be the basis of reference by the Court of Appeal to a CCO being in itself a penalty.  I adjourned your case for a second time to consider these matters further. 

54I note that yesterday what was offered was that you would get in touch with an agency that might be able to provide outreach drug program services to the Bowen area, although there is no information on the eligibility for such services - whether because you have apparently ceased using drugs for a considerable period now, you would not be made eligible for that program, nor indeed how often or for how long it would apply.

55Ultimately, I have had to look at whether any penalty short of imprisonment could suitably convey adequate sentencing purposes.  I have decided that the lack of fulsome application of CCO conditions should not lead me to impose a more severe penalty than I would otherwise have done. 

56For a person with no relevant prior criminal history, who lapsed into a drug addiction and such environment at close to age 40, whose role in what was serious offending was limited, and who has taken very substantial steps to rehabilitate, and further with the leniency attracted of both an early plea of guilty and an undertaking to give evidence against a co-offender, I am not satisfied that no sentence other than immediate imprisonment is required to convey adequately sentencing purposes. 

57However, I am going to impose both a CCO and a substantial fine.  Whilst a fine alone, I agree with the prosecution submission, would not adequately convey the sentencing purposes, it is a tangible - and in this case substantial - penalty, which together with the CCO in my view can meet sentencing requirements, the CCO being applied to at least provide ongoing deterrence.

58Would you stand up now please.

59Peter Lachlan Hooper, on each of these three charges you are convicted and sentenced as follows:

60On Charge 1 of false imprisonment, a fine of $2500 with conviction.

61On Charge 2 of intentionally causing injury, a fine of $500 with conviction.

62On Charge 3 of armed robbery, I impose a CCO - a Community Corrections Order that is to last for two years, with conditions of supervision, drug programs including testing, and programs to reduce risk of reoffending.  I recognise that there may be limited amounts of supervision, drug programs or other programs actually applied if this CCO is transferred to Queensland, but nevertheless I impose those conditions. 

63In addition to those conditions, all usual terms of a CCO apply.  Those are - the first and foremost and most important of them, is that you must not commit any other offence during that two-year period which could be punished by imprisonment.  Now, not only does that include such crimes of violence as these convictions stand for, and in particular, the charge of armed robbery for which this is being imposed, but it also includes a whole range of other offences - whether of violence or dishonesty, and a number of offences to do with possession and use of drugs. 

64The other usual terms I will go through as I am obliged to, but they will no doubt vary if you apply to have this CCO transferred to Queensland.  You must report within two working days of today at the nearest CCO office.  I think in the circumstances that should be Bendigo and if you - you can attend before you leave Bendigo.  It is appropriate that you do that to engage in what arrangements have to be made for the transfer of the CCO. 

65It is also a condition of a CCO that you advise your supervising community corrections office of any change in address of where you are living or where you are working, and that you do that within two clear working days.  It is a term of all CCOs that you must submit to visits as directed, and you must obey all lawful instructions and directions of community corrections officers.  It is also a usual term, and applies, that you must not leave the State of Victoria without the prior permission of your supervising community corrections office.  So that means that to be able to go back to Queensland, you are going to have to engage with the Bendigo office and have all that finalised to the point of there being consent for you to leave Victoria. 

66Now, I also must explain that if you breach - if you do not comply with this CCO, either by not complying with the general terms and conditions or by further offending, then you can expect to be brought back before me, or before this court, for a contravention hearing. The powers of the court, if you do contravene the CCO, are that either the CCO may just be confirmed or its terms can be varied or it can be cancelled and you can be re-sentenced on the charge on which it was imposed.  In this case, the charge of armed robbery.  Now, which of those is applied will depend on the circumstances of any breach and of your personal circumstances at the time, and how much of the order you have satisfactorily completed, but you need to understand that those are the potential consequences.  I have to ask you,
Mr Hooper, do you understand the terms and conditions, and consequences of breaching this CCO? 

67OFFENDER:  Yes, Your Honour.

68HER HONOUR:  Do you agree to comply with its terms?

69OFFENDER:  Yes, Your Honour.

70HER HONOUR:  All right.  In addition, I think I was asked on this matter to make a forensic sample order.  I think given the nature of this offending, it is appropriate to make such an order and I will.  I limit that to a scraping from the mouth which is effectively a saliva sample, Mr Hooper.  I have to explain to you that they take it by usually asking you to rub a swab on the inside of your mouth.  That is to enable your DNA to be tested for your DNA to be ascertained and its details placed on the State's database, but in fact it goes nationally now.  I must warn you that if you resist that being taken, police are authorised to use reasonable force to take it but because it is not very intrusive and should not hurt, unless you resist there will not need to be force used. 

71I state for the purposes of s.6AAA, and it is particularly artificial in this case because not only of the circumstances of you having re-established himself in Queensland, but also because of the undertaking to give evidence against a co-offender which is unlikely to have occurred if there had not been a plea of guilty. But I state that but for the plea of guilty but with other circumstances being the same, if you had been found guilty of these three charges after a trial, I would have imposed a total effect sentence of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 21 months.

72COUNSEL:  As Your Honour pleases.

73MR CORDY:  I will hand up a draft order for the 464.

74HER HONOUR:  Thank you.  You can take a seat, Mr Hooper, while the orders are prepared and signed.  There is a bit of an issue with this.  I had forgotten that the forensic sample when it is non-custodial requires the person to wait for four weeks before attending the police station.  Are they prepared to take it earlier than that usually?

75MR CORDY:  I think the practical reality is that they would be, Your Honour.  So ‑ ‑ ‑ 

76HER HONOUR:  Yes.  I know that is to allow the appeal period to pass ‑ ‑ ‑ 

77MR CORDY:  Yes, I know.

78HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ but it becomes - it is not only extremely awkward to explain to anybody ‑ ‑ ‑ 

79MR CORDY:  Yes.

80HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ in terms they might understand and remember but ‑ ‑ ‑ 

81MR CORDY:  I am pretty confident ‑ ‑ ‑ 

82HER HONOUR:  Mr Menon, you will have to talk about this with your client. 

83MR MENON:  Yes, Your Honour.

84HER HONOUR:  I would imagine that if he turns up with a copy of the order ‑ ‑ ‑ 

85MR MENON:  Yes, Your Honour.

86HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ at Bendigo police station, they will not refuse to take the sample even though the four weeks has not expired.  

87MR MENON:  Yes.

88HER HONOUR:  I would hope they would not.  Otherwise, he is going to have to make arrangements to come back to Victoria.  That is if - assuming he is allowed to leave Victoria by the CCO officers.

89MR MENON:  Yes.

90HER HONOUR:  He would have to come back in a - no less than four weeks and no more than eight weeks from now.

91MR MENON:  Yes.

92HER HONOUR:  I will hand down the Community Corrections Order to be checked by counsel that it reflects what I have said, and then my associate will take it to Mr Hooper to ask him to sign it.

93MR MENON:  Your Honour, may I approach my client?

94HER HONOUR:  Yes.  Mr Menon, do you seek a stay on payment of the funds?

95MR MENON:  Yes, Your Honour.  I was going to ask for a short stay.  Perhaps two months.

96HER HONOUR:  Yes.  All right.  I have now signed the CCO so there will be copies made of that.  Just one more order to go.  All right.  I have signed the orders now.  Mr Hooper can leave the dock.  And I have covered everything in this matter, I hope.

97MR MENON:  Yes, Your Honour.

98HER HONOUR:  We will just adjourn the court until 10 o'clock tomorrow and start afresh then.

‑ ‑ ‑