Director of Public Prosecutions v Karaliamis
[2011] VCC 1161
•12 August 2011
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Suitable for publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-11-01202
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ILIAS KARALIAMIS |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE CANNON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 3 August 2011 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 12 August 2011 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Karaliamis | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2011] VCC 1161 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence – Pleas of guilty – Obtain financial advantage by deception – Obtain property by deception – Theft – Deliberative conduct – Delay – Willingness to pay restitution
Legal cases:R v Swift [20017] VSCA 72
Sentence: Convicted and sentenced to 4 years 6 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years 3 months’ imprisonment – s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991 declaration – Ancillary order compensation
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms R. Radley | Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr Z. Zayler | Melasecca, Kelly & Zayler |
HER HONOUR:
1 Ilias Karaliamis, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception, two charges of obtaining property by deception, and two charges of theft. Each of these offences carries a maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment.
2 I am sorry, you can be seated for the moment sir.
3 Your offending was opened as follows:
4 You were employed from early 2004 to July 2006, by Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd.
5 Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd is a supplier of hair care, hairdressing and beauty therapy products with over 100 franchise stores in Australia. The business was founded in 1991 by Joseph and Tony Lattouf and the franchise stores are owned by individual operators.
6 You were employed as the chief accountant, financial controller and bookkeeper in the business’s head office in Doncaster.
7 In July 2006, you left this position and were then employed by two of the Hairhouse Warehouse franchise holders from February 2007 until March 2008. They were the Waverley Gardens franchise, owned and operated by Nicole Fiorelli and Alison Woods, and the Chirnside Park franchise, owned and operated by Ziad Aridi.
8 You were employed in these franchises to manage finances, and had been recommended by staff at the business’ head office who were unaware of your later discovered offending. The three positions you held were each positions of significant trust and financial control.
9 During your employment with the three businesses, you conducted a large number of fraudulent transactions and manipulated account keeping records while illegally appropriating money from the businesses.
Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd Head Office - January 2004 to July 2006
10 You commenced your employment with Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd in the Head Office in January 2004.
11 As part of your role, you were in charge of the financial aspects of all of the company’s day-to-day business activities. You were not, however, authorised to write or sign cheques on behalf of the business and were required to report to the company’s external accountants, Lowe Lippman.
12 You had access to the company’s account keeping computer based records as well as the owner’s cheque books. Your duties required you to record the regular and numerous daily payments made to suppliers and service providers.
13 You used a number of different methods to deceive your employers while appropriating money from the business.
Charges 1 and 3
14 In relation to the factual basis for Charges 1 and 3. You were ordinarily paid on a weekly basis by cheque for the services you provided. These cheques would be made out and signed by one of the owners of the business and given to you. On occasion you would take the cheque and add one or more extra digits to the front of the legitimate amount and also add extra words to the written amount, thus creating a cheque in your name of far greater value than that to which you were entitled. You would then deposit the cheque into a bank account over which you had control.
15 In order to hide the payment of these extra amounts, you would create false payment invoices and ledger entries using the company’s computer based accounting system. The amounts created would be the extra amount you had added to your originally legitimate cheque and would show on the records as a payment to one of a number of external entities that the company would make payments to on a regular basis.
16 On other occasions, you would use this same method of altering cheques but would make an invoice payment and account ledger entry payable to yourself for an amount much greater than that to which you were entitled. On occasions, these were $10,000 to $20,000 greater than the value of services you had actually provided.
17 The transactions which are the subject of Charge 1, which is a rolled up charge for the financial year ending June 2005, and Charge 3, a rolled up charge for the financial year ending June 2006.
18
Schedule A to the indictment shows the transactions contained in Charge 1. This is a rolled up charge of 20 offences between 19 May 2004 and
8 December 2004and the financial advantage obtained by deception amounts to $171,000.
19 Schedule C to the indictment shows the transactions contained in Charge 3. This is a rolled up charge of six offences between 7 June 2005 and 26 May 2006 and the financial advantage obtained by deception amounts to $70,000.
Charges 2 and 4
20 In relation to the factual basis for Charges 2 and 4 the Crown alleged that on other occasions, you would access the cheque book of one of the business owners, Joseph Lattouf, and, without his knowledge, would make out cheques payable to yourself. You would then forge the signature of Mr Lattouf on the cheque and deposit it into an account under your control, again creating false accounting entries and payment invoices to external entities in order to hide your deception.
21 The transactions which are the subject of Charge 2. Sorry, the transactions the subject of Charge 2, a rolled up charge for the financial year ending June 2005, and Charge 4, a rolled up charge for the financial year ending June 2006.
22
Schedule B to the indictment shows the transactions contained in Charge 2. This is a rolled up charge of 15 offences between 22 December 2004 and
19 July 2005and the value of the cheques appropriated and negotiated was $236,142.
23 Schedule D to the indictment shows the transactions contained in Charge 4. This is a rolled up charge of 15 offences between 3 August 2005 and 18 May 2006 and the value of the cheques appropriated and negotiated was $249,400.
24 You resigned from your position at Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd Head Office in July 2006 stating that the workload was too heavy. In early 2007, you discussed with Joseph Lattouf making yourself available as an accountant for the various franchises and Mr Lattouf, who was unaware of your appropriations, recommended you at a conference.
J & J Hair and Beauty Pty Ltd trading as Hairhouse Warehouse Chirnside Park – March 2007 to March 2008
Charge 5
25 I now go to the factual basis for Charge 5, which is in respect of the victim company J & J Hair and Beauty Pty Ltd trading as Hairhouse Warehouse Chirnside Park between March 2007 to March 2008. You were later employed by the franchise owner of the Chirnside Park Hairhouse Warehouse from February 2007 until March 2008.
26 The franchise owner and director, Ziad ‘John’ Aridi, employed you on the recommendation of the Head Office staff and you were employed to take charge of the business’s finances including taxation, superannuation and payments to suppliers. You were given the electronic passwords to all of the company’s online business accounts as well as the computer based account keeping records. You were given authority to transfer funds from the operating account of the business to make payments to various suppliers.
27 On a number of occasions, you transferred funds from the business’s account into accounts of your own and then made efforts to cover these up as payments to legitimate suppliers.
28 You would make fraudulent entries into the company’s account keeping records indicating that a payment had been made to a supplier for an outstanding debt and that funds had been electronically transferred to the supplier’s bank account, giving an appearance that the transfer was a legitimate business transaction.
29 This offending is the subject of Charge 5 on the indictment. There is a rolled up charge of 61 offences committed between 14 March 2007 and 4 March 2008. The dates and individual amounts of those offences are set out in Schedule E to the indictment. The total amount stolen by you in these offences was $142,272.25
RNL Leckwood Pty Ltd trading as Hairhouse Warehouse Waverley Gardens – April 2007 to February 2008
Charge 6
30 I now go to the factual basis for Charge 6 in respect of RNL Leckwood Pty Ltd trading as Hairhouse Warehouse Waverley Gardens. You were also employed by the franchise owners of the Waverley Gardens Hairhouse Warehouse in April 2007. You had again been recommended to them by the Head Office staff who at that stage had not discovered your illegal activities.
31 The owners and directors of the franchise were Nicole Fiorelli and Alison Woods, and they hired you to be in charge of all of the business’s finances including taxation, superannuation and payment of suppliers. You were provided with electronic passwords to all of the online business accounts as well as the computer based account keeping records. You were given authority to transfer funds from the operating account of the business to make payments to various suppliers.
32 On a number of occasions, you electronically transferred funds from the business operating account into accounts under your own control.
33 You would fraudulently make an entry in the company’s accounting records purporting that payment had been made to a supplier for an outstanding debt and that funds had been transferred to the supplier’s bank account, thus giving an appearance that the transfer was a legitimate business transaction.
34 This offending is the subject of Charge 6 on the indictment. It is a rolled up charge of 37 offences committed between 2 April 2007 and 4 February 2008. The dates and individual amounts of those offences are set out in Schedule E to the indictment. The total amount stolen by you in these offences was $88,199.83.
35 Your offending was discovered in March 2008.
36 On 12 March 2009, you met with the general manager of Hairhouse Warehouse and the company’s suspicions were put to you. You admitted your offending.
37 You attended on 14 March 2008 and 20 May 2008 at the Knox Police Station for interview by police.
38 During those interviews, you made full admissions to the offending, stating that you had spent all of the money on a lavish lifestyle and in order to fund your wife’s linen business. You said that your wife was not aware of the deceptions as you had led her to believe you were receiving pay increases greater than you actually were. You said during the interview you felt under pressure to support your wife’s business and to succeed.
39 Your offending is indeed serious, spanning two and a half years and involving a total of 154 bank transactions which you chose to engage in and which resulted in you obtaining funds totalling $957,014.08. Your offending involved a good deal of sophistication, deliberation and subterfuge. You exploited your position as an accountant for each of the victims and, moreover, significantly exploited the trust which was placed upon you, first by those involved at the head office of Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd and then by the franchisees, who accepted recommendations by those who trusted you.
40 Mr Latouff recommended you, unaware that you had dishonestly appropriated from his own company the total sum of $726,542. Rather than having the decency to refuse further positions, knowing that you had already dishonestly taken significant sums, you traded on such recommendation to defraud further victims. I was told by the learned prosecutor that, upon discovering your offending against Mr Aridi, Ms Fiorelli and Ms Woods, Mr Latouff went to significant lengths to have you repay these franchisees, apparently unaware that you had taken such significant sums from him or his own company.
41 I was not told of Mr Latouff’s financial position or that of his company; nor was I told of the impact that your offending has had in this regard. However, it is evident that the sums which you took from the franchisees were sums which they could ill afford. As their accountant, this is something that you must have known. This goes to your moral culpability and the seriousness of your offending.
Impact on Victims
42 It would be no surprise that the impact upon Mr Aridi and upon Ms Fiorelli and Ms Woods has been devastating, effectively poisoning a good deal of their lives.
43 Apart from the financial impact suffered by Mr Aridi which has resulted in him experiencing significant financial difficulty, he said that the lives of those in his family have transformed from being a happy family
44 "“into a nightmare of agony, depression, emotional stress, sleepless nights, bad reputation towards banks, finances, friends, (and) suppliers due to bad credit record”. Both he and his wife are now on prescriptive medication for stress and depression. In the period since your offending, whilst you were seeking to rehabilitate, Mr Aridi indicates that his children have suffered distress over the financial deterioration the family has suffered because of your actions and have become lonely and disengaged at school."
45 Nicole Fiorelli says that she and her business partner, Alison Woods, had been lifelong friends and did everything together. They had their families at about the same time and then decided to start a business together so that they could take turns at working whilst one or other of them looked after the six children that they had between them. Alison Woods mortgaged her home and Nicole Fiorelli spent the proceeds of sale from her home in order to open their shop in November 2006. In order to alleviate the burden of minding the children and running the business, Nicole Fiorelli accepted a recommendation from her husband that involved you keeping their books.
46
Ms Fiorelli describes you as “warm” and “caring” and she says that it was like you were “part of the family”. It is readily apparent from her victim impact statement that she and Ms Woods cared about you and the various ups and downs that you were experiencing during the time you worked for them.
Ms Fiorelli said:
47 "“All the time he was stealing money from us and (was) totally not the person we thought”.
48 When she discovered what you had been doing, she felt physically ill and,
49 "“could not believe a person (she) trusted had done this to us”.
50 She says that she fell apart and blamed her husband for referring you to them. She also blamed Alison Woods for not checking on the accounts more closely. This placed a massive strain on her friendship with Alison Woods. By June 2008 (three months after discovering your offending) she had separated from her husband. She has suffered sleeplessness and her children were devastated that their father had left the family home. She describes her life as being “a wreck”, losing everyone who was close to her and fearing the loss of the business and her financial security.
51 She has struggled significantly with your duplicitousness, describing your conduct as callous, stealing from her and Ms Woods on the one hand whilst allowing them to think that they needed to better run their business. She also described having to lay off staff, and her children and those of Ms Woods have had to be placed in childcare so that they can work in the business. Sorry, so that she and Ms Woods can work in the business.
52
She makes reference to a discussion which she had with you which involved the promise of restitution. Your counsel has explained that the company that you had worked for, before I remanded you, had been prepared to pay your debts on your behalf on the basis that you repaid them. It appeared that they and others were under the false impression that charges against you could be dropped if restitution was paid and, therefore, you would remain out of gaol and be in a position to repay your subsequent employer, Aquanas Foods. In any event, the prospect of being repaid by you renewed hope in Ms Fiorelli, who had thought that she had been able to put your wrongdoing behind her after a long time and some counselling. However, her hopes and those of
Ms Woods were dashed when it was made clear to them that charges would not be dropped and that there was no guarantee that you would not go to gaol.
53 In her victim impact statement, Alison Woods says that your offending has impacted upon her business but it has also “destroyed (her) personal life”. She describes the dream that she and Nicole Fiorelli have always had to open and run a business together. She describes the tremendous closeness of her friendship with Ms Fiorelli which commenced when they were at high school. Their respective families had spent a great deal of time together, including taking family holidays together.
54 In 2005, they each convinced their husbands to pool their savings and obtained loans to buy the franchise. She said that things were going better than she could have dreamed and that they loved working together. However, although the business seemed to be going well, she noticed a financial strain on it which they were to discover was because of your thievery.
55 She indicates that the business is continuing currently but continues to struggle. Your offending left them with little money, numerous suppliers who were owed money and tax debt. Neither she nor Ms Fiorelli were able to take any wages for a long period after your offending and were forced to work long hours as the business could not afford to pay staff. As they were forced to spend more time in the business due to lack of staff, her family suffered with her young children being placed in childcare and she had to ask other family members to also help in this regard. The toll on her personal relationships and on her family was and is “significant”. Her marriage has since broken down, which she attributes at least in part to the financial strain and stress that your offending caused. Her friendship with Nicole Fiorelli has suffered, and she has blamed her for trusting you. She says that her
56 "“once very close relationship is sadly very strained”.
57 These are the very real and devastating impacts that your offending has had upon these people who placed their trust in you.
58 Your offending commenced shortly after your marriage to your second wife, Anna Giannakopoulos, and it would appear from what you told Dr Walton, and from that which has been presented on your behalf, that you appropriated these large sums of money in order to lavish yourself and your wife with designer clothing, overseas trips, and the purchase of an investment property. It may well be that you were wanting to please, and perhaps keep, your second wife, but you have made no secret of the fact that you offended in this way in order to enjoy a particular lifestyle yourself.
59 Although Dr Walton speaks of a fantasy commonly held by people who have offended such as you, that they will be able to repay what they have stolen as the offending goes along, there is no evidence to which I have been taken which establishes that this was your thinking, besides what appears to have been conveyed to Dr Walton by you one occasion. Whilst you have expressed an intention to make restitution, and have done so in part following the discovery of your offending, there was no attempt on your part nor any evidence of a mindset that you intended to place funds back into any of the businesses whilst offending was going on.
60 I was told by your counsel that you used the funds largely to buy a business in China for your second wife and to invest in property. I was also told that you went overseas on only two occasions and it was your second wife who travelled to a far greater extent. It may well be that you were a quiet partner to your second wife who was said to be highly ambitious in terms of her business ventures, however, it was you who chose to offend in order to assist her and unbeknownst to her.
61 You and she bought a series of properties, one of which you renovated, and a second which you built and then resold – the natural objective being to make profit. You succeeded to some extent in this. Your second wife’s business was losing money at the rate of $10,000 to $15,000 per week and you were earning an income of $90,000 a year. It was put on your behalf that your second wife knew that you were receiving this modest income, however never asked any questions as to how you could afford such a lavish lifestyle. However, it would appear that you were explaining this to her by saying that you were receiving pay increases at work. In any event, even if your second wife was ambitious, greedy or both, this does not detract from your moral culpability, which I regard as high.
62 Further, your offending is deserving of just punishment and must be denounced. In offending of this kind, the weight which I must accord to general deterrence is significant – a strong message must be sent to others in the community who may be tempted to behave as you have, that such conduct will be met with solid sanction.
63
You indicated a willingness to plead guilty at an early stage and were fully cooperative with the police. Although, I do take into account that when the police interviewed you in respect of the offending concerning the franchisees, you did not volunteer any admissions concerning your offending against the company owned by Tony and Joseph Lattouf. It took the police a second visit in respect of what had been discovered as to your offending there before you made such admissions. Further, you have attempted to make payment of such restitution in the sum of $65,000, a large part of which has been paid to Mr Aridi in the sum of $57,500, with $7,500 being paid to Ms Fiorelli and
Ms Woods. Obviously, this is a splash in the ocean – especially for Ms Fiorelli and Ms Woods. I was told that the payment of these sums came from the sale of a property, but, as the learned prosecutor has indicated, you have made no further endeavour to repay any victim beyond this, although I do take into account that the payment of restitution was part of a proposal made by your employer, Aquanas Food, to which I have previously referred.
64 In all the circumstances, I find that you have shown a good deal of remorse in relation to your actions which is signified by your preparedness to plead guilty from an early stage and your cooperation with the police as well as your efforts to make restitution to some extent. Whilst your expression of remorse is not as profound and extensive as it could be, I do regard it as significant, especially in view of the fact that you were willing to sit down with Mr Lattouf and tell him your offending techniques so that he and other franchisees could protect themselves in the future from such conduct. This is an unusual feature in the aftermath offending of this kind, which amongst other things bodes well for your prospects of rehabilitation.
65 You are entitled to a substantial discount in the sentence that you would otherwise receive because of your early preparedness to plead guilty to these charges. By pleading guilty, you have saved the witnesses, particularly the victims, the trouble and trauma of giving evidence and being subjected to cross-examination and you have saved the community the time and significant expense of running contested proceedings.
66 The numerous character references which have been provided on your behalf and the presence of your character witnesses at court, testified to the fact that you are well loved and supported by family and friends, you were also supported by your employer, Mr - or your former employer Mr Peter Cavalieros of Aquanas Foods, which is demonstrated as - which is demonstrated by his preparedness to pay restitution on your behalf, and to keep you on as an employee.
67 It is apparent from a number of the character references that a good deal of blame is attributed to your former wife in respect of your offending. As I have attempted to make clear, the only person responsible for your offending is you, notwithstanding that you may have been vulnerable to perceived pressures to finance a lifestyle that would please your former wife. However, it is apparent from those character references - sorry, it is apparent from those character reference that apart from this dreadful episode of offending, you are of otherwise good character and it would appear that you have a good deal of ability as an accountant. You have solid support to look forward to when you are released on parole.
68 I take into account the report of Dr Lester A. Walton dated 28 June 2011 in some respects. He says that you are of normal intelligence and have experienced no difficulties with substance abuse. Your counsel, (most sensibly in my view) did not place any reliance on the principles of R v Verdins such as would impact on your moral culpability or specific or general deterrence. However, he does place reliance on that case in the sense that you suffer from anxiety and depression currently, which will make a period of imprisonment more onerous for you than for someone not suffering from these conditions, although only to a limited degree. I am prepared to take this latter aspect into account in your favour insofar as I can, in view of the fact that it would appear that your symptoms have abated somewhat and Dr Walton does not regard you as being in need of ongoing mental health assistance.
69 Dr Walton speaks of you suffering from a mood disorder as at the time of your offending which had arisen at the time of the failure of your first marriage. He says that the condition has been significantly aggravated by the failure of your second marriage, especially in the circumstances in which this occurred. In that respect, your second wife separated from you before these offences came to light but, notwithstanding this, you continued to pay for her rental accommodation and attempted to prop up her business.
70 However, I have great difficulty in accepting that you were suffering from psychological or any psychiatric problems which contributed to your offending, as reported by Dr Walton. I need not go into this any further as your counsel does not seek to rely on any such link. But I do observe that you had been in a relationship with your second wife for about five years before you married and that your offending commenced about a month after your marriage. It would be surprising if you were suffering from some sort of mood disorder involving depression and/or anxiety as at the time that you commenced offending, at the very least, as you had just embarked upon a marriage and were apparently happy to indulge not only your second wife but also yourself in the fruits of your offending.
71 I also note that, following the breakdown of your first marriage, you received counselling and, although not depositional material, it is interesting that one of the victims makes the observation in her victim impact statement that you were apparently happy upon commencing a relationship with Anna Giannakopoulos. You also received some counselling in 2008, and it would appear that you have developed significant insight into your offending and into yourself. As I have previously indicated, Dr Walton is of the view that you do not require any further psychiatric treatment.
72 I take into account your background. You are Australian born. Both of your parents migrated here from Kos. They both worked in factories and it would appear, provided you with a happy and supportive family environment. You told Dr Walton that you had ‘wonderful memories’ of childhood. You have a younger brother who has a print design business and who has shown his support of you by attending Court and providing a character reference at the plea hearing. You enjoy a good relationship with all family members.
73 You married your first wife in 1989 and separated in April 1997. You explained to Dr Walton that you and your first wife ‘grew apart’. From that union you have a 15 year old son, who, in more recent times you have been seeing regularly. He has visited you from Adelaide during school holidays.
74 You commenced a relationship with your second wife in 1999, marrying her in April 2004. You and she separated in 2007. You told Dr Walton that you could not cope with the burden of the lifestyle that you and she had, and your second wife’s unreasonable expectations. However, it would appear that your second wife left you, and that you continued to help support her and her business following separation. From what you told Dr Walton, it would appear that you were infatuated with your second wife and now realise that you exercised poor judgement. You had a strong wish that your second marriage not fail, as had your first marriage.
75 After you sold the property in Veronica Street, disbursing proceeds to 2 of your victims, you rented accommodation then moved back with your parents in March 2011, in order to save money. You embarked on a new relationship which commenced in July 2010. Your new partner has an 11 year old son. She is supportive of you and you are optimistic about this relationship continuing. You and your current girlfriend appear to have a more mature, substantial and realistic relationship than that which you enjoyed with your second wife.
76 Since committing these offences, you have made good use of the delay of about three years by demonstrating that you are able to obtain gainful employment and retain people’s trust without any subsequent re-offending. Moreover, you have no prior convictions. I also have regard to the fact that this will be your first period of incarceration and, in light of the character references, your employment with Aquanas Foods without incident, the promise of a job to go to at the company upon your release, and the support of your family and friends, I regard your prospects of rehabilitation as good. I do not regard them as excellent because your offending occurred over a protracted period and you are no longer working directly with money such that whilst I am fairly confident that you will not re-offend in the future, I cannot be supremely confident of this. I place little weight on specific deterrence due to the fact that you have no prior convictions but, again, the repetitive nature of your offending over more than two years does inform me that some weight must be given to this principle, notwithstanding that I give it fairly minimal weight.
77 I also take into account that the delay which has been endured by you has, no doubt, added to your anxiety in respect of matters hanging over your head for approximately three years. I take this into account, notwithstanding that the number of offences has been the partial cause of such delay, as a most expansive and detailed investigation has been necessary, precisely because of the extent of your offending.
78 A sentencing range was provided by the prosecution after I requested this. The prosecution submitted that a sentencing range of between four and five years head sentence with a non-parole period of two to three years was appropriate in your case. Mr Sayler, on your behalf, agreed with the range as being appropriate, although he indicated that your offending fitted at the lower end of this range. He referred me to a number of authorities and, in particular, the decision of R v Swift [2007] VSCA 72.
79 He said that when one looks at sentencing practice and, in particular, cases like R v Swift, your offending in all the circumstances warranted a sentence at the lower end of this range. He submitted that, even if the head sentence were higher than at the lower end of the range, in view of your prospects of rehabilitation, and he actually submitted that you were already rehabilitated, and in all the circumstances, there should be a lower than usual non-parole period in order to enable you to be released into the community and, in particular, to commence repaying the monies owed to your various victims.
80 Whilst your preparedness to make restitution, which has partly manifested itself, is something that I take into account in terms of your remorse and your prospects of rehabilitation, I do not accept that you ought be entitled to be released earlier than might otherwise be appropriate, in order to facilitate you repaying your victims as soon as possible. However, I do accept that in your case, in light of the mitigating features, and in order to continue on the path of rehabilitation that you have commenced, it is appropriate to allow for a larger gap between head sentence and non-parole period than usual.
81 In determining the appropriate individual sentences in your case and degrees of cumulation, I have factored in not only the amounts which you took but that in relation to the victims of Charges 5 and 6, the impact which you have had on these financially vulnerable victims and your preparedness to take significant sums from them, knowing that they were running small businesses. I have also had regard to current sentencing practice, the applicable maximum periods of imprisonment for the offences you have committed, as well as the weight which I attach to relevant sentencing considerations in your case. This includes the impact of delay, which is the impact that delay has had upon you, and it also includes the fact that during that period of delay you have demonstrated significant steps in the path to rehabilitation.
82 Would you please stand up Mr Karaliamis.
83 I make the following compensation orders.
· Firstly that you pay $726,542.00 compensation to Hairhouse Warehouse Pty Ltd, at the address set out in the order.
· That you pay $84,772.25 compensation to J&J Hair and Beauty Pty Ltd at the address set out in the order.
· That you pay $80,699.83 compensation to RNL Leckwood Pty Ltd at the address set out in the order.
84 I declare that you have already served 9 days imprisonment by way of pre-sentence detention.
85 In respect of Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.
86 In respect of Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.
87 In respect of Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment.
88 In respect to Charge 4, you are convicted and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.
89 In relation to Charge 5, you are convicted and sentenced to two and a half years’ imprisonment.
90 In relation to Charge 6, you are convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.
91 The base sentence will be the sentence on Charge 4. I order that six months of the sentences on Charges 2, 5 and 6 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the base sentence, but that otherwise the sentences imposed be served concurrently. This amounts to a total effective sentence of four and a half years imprisonment, and I order that you serve two years three months before becoming eligible for parole.
92 If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of six years with a non-parole period of four years.
93 Are there any other matters counsel?
94 MS ZAYLER: Nothing further Your Honour.
95 MR RADLEY: Nothing further Your Honour, if Your Honour pleases.
96 You may remove the prisoner. We'll adjourn.
- - -
0