Director of Public Prosecutions v Kelly
[2024] VCC 1130
•26 July 2024
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT GEELONG
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR 23-01046
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| KAIN KELLY |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE LYON |
| WHERE HELD: | Geelong |
| DATE OF HEARING: | 22 July 2024 |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 26 July 2024 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Kelly |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 1130 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: Criminal Law
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:R v Martin [2007] VSCA 291; DPP v PS [2023] VSC 85; The Queen v Thomas John Sebalj [2006] VSCA 106; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Sentence:Three years and 11 months imprisonment with a non parole period of two years and six months
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr S. Devlin | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms S. Wendlandt | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
1Kain Kelly, you have pleaded guilty to the following charges which carry the following maximum penalties:
2Arson carries a maximum of 15 years' imprisonment; theft of a motorcar and theft of petrol both carry the same maximum penalty, 10 years; possess explosive substance without excuse is five years' imprisonment; drive whilst exceeding the prescribed concentration of drugs carries a maximum penalty of 12 penalty units and subsequent offence, 60 for a second and 120 for a third; and then drive in a manner dangerous two years' imprisonment or a fine with an association disqualification of licence.
3You have an extensive prior criminal history which is, in part, relevant to the offending. I shall say more about that later in these remarks.
Circumstances of Offending
4The Crown tendered the summary of prosecution opening as Exhibit A. A summary of your offending is this:
5On 23 January 2023, you were at your father's home in Corio. At about 8 o'clock in the morning you climbed on the roof of the carport of the adjoining property and then onto the roof of your neighbour, Kathleen Thomson's, house.
6You had gathered together professional grade firework material, kerosene and a red barbecue lighter. You lifted a tile from the roof of Ms Thomson's property. You dropped the firework rods into the insulation of the roof cavity. You doused the area with kerosene and you used a firelighter to start a fire.
7Ms Thomson was next door. She heard a bang on the carport roof, someone walking on a roof. She walked outside and saw you on the roof. She asked you what you were doing and you told her to 'fuck off'.
Ms Thomson saw smoke coming from her roof and so she used a garden hose to attempt to douse the flames and she called Triple 0. Her 11-year-old grandson and two dogs were inside the house. Neighbours fortunately also called Triple 0 or 112.8When you returned to the house, you took your father's car keys, his silver 2010 Commodore Ute. The car was stolen, you did not have his permission to take the car. At the time of driving you had more than the prescribed concentration of drugs in your blood as you had been on a methamphetamine binge for a day or two and had not slept and you admitted to the psychologist that you had injected one or two points of the drug relatively immediate to the offending or just before.
9When the fire units attended at Ms Thomson's property there was extensive damage caused to the rear of the house and then further damage caused through the house because of the water used to extinguish the fire. There was over $200,000 damage caused to the house. Police found a drum of kerosene, pressure sprays, a plastic funnel and, as I say, professional series fireworks which accounts for your being charged and pleading guilty to possession of explosive material.
10As you drove off in your father's car you stopped the car at the BP Service Station at Lovely Banks and filled up with 66 and a half litres of petrol worth $130 for which you did not pay. That is the charge of theft. You drove out on the Geelong Ballan Road. You were observed by drivers to be travelling at a speed estimated at 140 kilometres an hour. You attempted to overtake two drivers on a blind left-hand bend at a fast speed. You slid sideways and lost control of the car toward oncoming traffic, before crossing back onto the correct lane, and then you collided with a tree and that is the charge of dangerous driving.
You got out of the stolen car, walked away. A bystander who witnessed the collision went to assist you. She put you in the backseat of her car. The police arrested you and your blood was tested and found to be positive to the presence of methylamphetamine. You were taken to hospital in Geelong, released the following day, and you refused to be interviewed. You were remanded in custody where you have remained ever since.
Objective Gravity and Moral Culpability
11I now turn to the objective gravity and moral culpability for your offending.
12The seriousness of your offending is marked by the following factors:
Arson
(a) First of all, it is marked by the fact it carries a maximum penalty of 15 years, which shows you the seriousness with which Parliament takes the offence;
(b)
Next, there is the immediate fear and confusion your actions caused. Mrs Thomson heard an explosion, smelt smoke and had to take action to remove the human and pet occupants from the house. One of those was, as I say, her 11-year-old grandson. It is no exaggeration to say that your actions caused fear and terror, along with confusion.
Mrs Thomson had the presence of mind to try and fight the fire with a garden hose and then call Triple 0. In that respect, she was aided by her neighbours who also called emergency services. Nevertheless, the fire took hold and destroyed significant parts of her home;
(c) Your use of a mixture of kerosene and professional grade fireworks to start the fire – that is, the explosive capacity made the accelerant even more dangerous than in the usual case of arson. I emphasise what the Crown opening and the photographs make clear – that the fireworks you used were big, combustible rods of explosive material. This is underlined by the fact that you have pleaded guilty to the possession of explosive materials – the canisters you used and those found in the garage. I will not use this to doubly punish you, but to make the point that your decision to use these fireworks as an accelerant mixed with kerosene shows your determination to cause damage. This was exacerbated by the fact that you placed the explosive and combustible material inside the roof cavity of the carport, where it was able to quickly spread into the roof cavity of the house;
(d) Next, in still considering the objective seriousness of your offending, I look at the immediate threat to human life and pets – that is, to the occupants of the house;
(e) Then to the less immediate threat to neighbours because the fire was set in a residential area;
(f) Next, I look at the effect of your actions on the family of Katheryne Thomson, and to this I refer to the victim impact statement made by Mrs Thomson. There was, might I say with respect, an older couple living at the house.
(i)It is apparent from her victim impact statement that her husband has had mental health problems caused by your actions;
(ii)Moreover, Mrs Thomson was caring for her severely autistic daughter who lived at the house;
(iii)She had the care of her 11-year-old grandchild at the house;
(iv)This has all caused a seismic disruption to their lives. It has caused them to have to be relocated for 15 months, with countless dealings with insurers and tradespeople;
(v)There has been a loss of social amenity to Mrs Thomson with her neighbours, some of whom have died in the period of her relocation;
(vi)There has been life changing adverse effects on her relationship with her grandson who was inside the home at the time; and
(vii)There has been adverse effects on the caring arrangements for her grandson, causing disruption, difficulty and financial impact on Mrs Thomson's daughter.
13The damage to the house eventually cost over $200,000 to repair, as I say, and to make good. It appears that cost was met wholly or largely by the insurer. But, whilst the financial cost of damage caused is considered a factor to be taken into account in assessing the objective gravity of your offending, in this case it is a subsidiary factor to the ongoing fear your victims still feel; the apprehension they feel that you may return as a neighbour to your father’s place next door, and to the chaos and turmoil you caused by disrupting their home life and causing them to relocate from their home. The ongoing fear has caused your victims to entirely replace the roof of their house with colour bond to ensure such an act cannot occur again.
14Ordinarily, such conduct must be met by principles of general and specific deterrence, denunciation and a measure of protection of the community.
15I will leave my ultimate assessment of your moral culpability for your offending until after I consider your personal circumstances and the extensive psychiatric and psychological material provided to me.
16I can however make some observations at this stage. There is no evidence of particular planning. Based on Ms Scott’s opinion, I am satisfied that you are unlikely to have planned this offending. Further, I was told that the fireworks were stored in the garage on behalf of a friend. In other words, at least part of the accelerant used in your offending was present opportunistically and was not sought out and purchased by you.
17Nevertheless, if your thought process was relatively spontaneous, your conduct took some considerable effort. Your motivations are not entirely clear. It appears you perceived some grudge or wrongdoing on the part of your neighbours, which to my observation was utterly fictional. From your actions, it is apparent that you gathered the material together, jumped on to the roof of the carport and lifted the roof tiles to set fire to the insulation in the cavity of the roof. When confronted by your neighbour, you fled. After you were apprehended by police, you were taken to hospital where methylamphetamine was detected in your bloodstream. You were held at hospital and released into police custody the following day and it was the following day that you made the decision to refuse to be interviewed by police.
18Further, although you do not have a prior conviction for arson, you do have a number of prior convictions for damaging property. They are relevant to the escalation of your criminal conduct on this occasion.
19It seems from the reports I have received that your offending must take into account your cognitive and mental health issues, but it was to some extent fuelled by your drug use. These are the factors I will need to consider in determining your moral culpability.
Other offending
20Your theft of car was the act of stealing your father’s car. You drove at a time when you were (it appears) significantly affected by methylamphetamine. Your driving, both by the manner in which you drove and the speed at which you drove, put the lives of to her road users at risk as well as your own. As a result of your reckless, dangerous driving you smashed your father’s car causing injury to you.
21Police were required to attend to apprehend you, and then other services had to attend to clear up the damage you caused.
22Again, this is a serious example of driving under the influence of drugs, and of dangerous driving. Your conduct attracts principles of general and specific deterrence, denunciation and protection of the community.
Personal Circumstances
23You are a 38-year-old Wiradjuri man of aboriginal heritage on your mother’s side. I specifically asked Ms Wendlandt whether I should seek an Indigenous cultural heritage report or make other enquiries relating to your Indigenous heritage. I was told that you do not identify with, or through your heritage and no such enquiries were warranted.
24Your mother had problems with alcohol throughout the course of her life.
25You were born in January 1987 in Sydney and moved to Melbourne when you were aged three. Your twin passed away at birth and your parents separated when you were six.
26Throughout your childhood you lived mostly with your mother between Melbourne and Brisbane. Due to frequently moving you attended several primary schools and completed Year 10 in Corio.
27At aged nine you acquired a mild to moderate brain injury, which I will refer to as an ABI, an acquired brain injury, as a result of being struck by a car while riding your bike. You were assisted through your schooling with the help of teachers’ aides. You report struggling with literacy, needing to repeat years and that you were bullied due to your Aboriginality.
28Post your formal education you attempted (with an aide’s assistance) a mechanical apprenticeship (which you abandoned) and received your Certificate 2 in motor mechanics and Certificate 1 in panel beating. You have worked some other labouring jobs, but you have mostly remained unemployed in your adult life.
29You have never lived independently of either your mother or your father. You have only rudimentary life skills and can take care of yourself to a basic level, but mostly when prompted you require assistance and you require assistance with even more slightly complex tasks, or (prior to your remand) those tasks were taken over and performed by your father.
30You have a longstanding multi-substance addiction problem. Your drug use commenced at 13 using cannabis and consuming alcohol. At age 18 you started using methylamphetamines frequently. You were admitted to hospital in February 2020 and July 2020 (and then after this offending) with drug-induced psychoses.
31Your father reported to psychologist Laura Scott that your use of methylamphetamine had increased in the eight or nine months you had been living with him; and, as I have already observed, you admit to injecting methamphetamines on the day of and just prior to your offending.
32You have an extensive prior criminal history in both Victoria and New South Wales. You have numerous convictions for damaging property. Those convictions are relevant to this offending; although this represents a considerable escalation. You have three convictions for dangerous driving. You have previously been sentenced to a period of six months' imprisonment in 2021 for offences of theft, recklessly causing injury and driving. Your father reports that he was the victim of part of this offending in 2021. He told psychologist Laura Scott that there have been other instances of violence, aggression and damage in the time you have lived with him, including the damage to his car caused in your latest offending.
33You have undertaken a number of CCOs in Victoria and in New South Wales. You were subject to a CCO for damaging property and driving offences at the time of this current offending.
34Prior to your remand you were unemployed and were receiving a disability pension due to your ABI. You had been living with your father in Corio for, as I say, nine months.
35You have limited personal relationships, you have no children, and you have not had a romantic partner for over a decade.
36As I say, your mother passed away in 2022 after being diagnosed with liver cancer.
37Since your imprisonment you have had no contact with your father. Your father has indicated that he has severed his relationship with you and he will not allow you to return to his home. While this news will be a relief to your neighbours, given your history of living dependently with your parents it will cause you considerable hardship, both in respect to the question of release on parole and in the long term beyond that.
Psychological material
38I received the Mental Health Advice and Responsive Services Report of
Mr Onder Mete, Registered Nurse, dated 25 January 2023, which was prepared after your hospital admission on your arrest. Mr Mete confirmed that at the time of your admission you were suffering drug-induced psychosis, noting you have previously suffered persistent psychosis after drug taking episodes.39You were assessed by neuropsychologist Laura Scott on 26 July 2023.
Ms Scott conducted an extensive examination of your medical and other health issues.40Ms Scott examined the records in relation to, and confirmed the ABI you received when you were nine years old.
41On testing conducted by Ms Scott, you presented with a full scale IQ of 67, and presented with a mild intellectual disability with particular weaknesses in information processing speed, higher attentional abilities, aspects of memory function and some aspects of executive function. You were stronger but still in the borderline to low average ranges for basic attention span, verbal intellectual abilities and some other aspects of executive function. Your test results were consistent with mild depressive symptoms and moderate anxiety. You have globally impaired cognition. Over the years since aged 14, testing shows that you have shown significant declines in verbal intellectual abilities, processing speed memory and aspects of executive function, especially planning and organisation.
42Ms Scott observes that your continued decline in cognitive function will likely be associated with an increase in the effect of mental illness on your condition.
43Ms Scott considers your cognitive impairment and mental state were likely significant factors contributing to your offending behaviour but ultimately considered that the opinion of a forensic psychiatrist was required.
44Ms Scott considers that you are at risk of failing to follow commands in custody due to your distractibility, poor memory and disorganisation. Moreover, Ms Scott is concerned for your future as you have none of the supports you need in place for your eventual release, you have no ready accommodation option and no family support. Given the permanent nature of your impairments, you will require lifelong support through disability services in the future.
45Ms Scott considers that you have demonstrated an awareness that what you did was wrong.
46You were then assessed by forensic psychiatrist Associate Professor Rajan Darjee on 28 January 2024.
47Dr Darjee agrees with Ms Scott’s assessment and confirms that you meet the criteria for a mild intellectual disability and impaired and declining cognition. However, Dr Darjee carefully considered the role your extensive drug taking has played in the psychoses you have suffered in the past and at the time of your offending.
48It is vitally important to read the whole of Dr Darjee’s report; with a particular focus on the sections headed 'diagnostic issues and current mental health' and 'relationship between mental health conditions/psychological functioning and current offences'.
49Although in rely on the whole of the report, I particularly refer to the following paragraphs where he says at 67:
'In my view, there is evidence that his psychotic symptoms have continued beyond the period of intoxication but not evidence that he has been psychotic unrelated to methamphetamine use. However, in prison he has been treated with antipsychotic medication since being remanded and remained on such medication so this may have led to a quicker resolution of his symptoms, given of course so far the most appropriate diagnosis is methamphetamine induced psychosis as there is evidence of psychotic symptoms beyond the period of direct intoxicating effects, along with acute exacerbations due to being intoxicated and his psychosis has been fuelled by chronic methamphetamine and previous cannabis use. Many individuals diagnosed with drug-induced psychosis go on to have episodes of psychosis unrelated to drug taking, probably about a third to half of cases, emphasising there is usually an underlying vulnerability to psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, and although people are often more acutely disturbed when highly intoxicated methamphetamine induced psychosis is not merely the effects of methamphetamine intoxication'.
50Then at 71 through to 73 Dr Darjee says:
'He was acutely psychotic, hearing voices and believing the neighbours were persecuting him and stealing from him. His thinking and ability to reason and exercise judgment were clearly very impaired at the time as he responded to what he believed to be real. He was acutely psychotic due to intoxication with methamphetamine in the context of his vulnerability to drug-induced psychosis. Some aspects of his mental state at the time were due to the intoxicating effects of the methamphetamine, such as being disinhibited, being driven and being heightened, but these were also contributed to by the drug-induced psychosis and it is of course difficult to entangle what was due to intoxication and would have affected anyone and what was due to induced psychosis and affected him due to his underlying vulnerability. If he was not acutely psychotic, albeit in the context of methamphetamine intoxication, these events are unlikely to have unfolded. His underlying cognitive deficits due to his mild intellectual disability and ABI made him more vulnerable to become disinhibited, reckless, unable to think things through and disorganised in the context of methamphetamine intoxication and acute psychosis.'
51Then at 73:
'All the conditions mentioned above, methamphetamine induced psychosis, methamphetamine dependence and intoxication, mild individual and the impact of the previous ABI therefore contributed to him committing the offences in 2023 by impairing his judgment, impairment his ability to make calm, rational choices and to think clearly, by impairing his appreciation of the wrongfulness of his conduct and by making him disinhibited. However, teasing a path of relative contribution of these conditions to these factors is difficult.'
52Dr Darjee considers that you present as a moderate risk of committing the offence of arson again in the future. Dr Darjee considers your immediate lack of support creates instability and uncertainty, which increase the risk factors and decline in your mental health and criminal behaviour.
53Dr Darjee stresses the need for someone on your behalf to liaise with formal support services to prepare you for your eventual release into the community. Your counsel told me that you wish to apply for the NDIS on your release. It would be best if a social worker or community liaison officer could commence that process on your behalf now.
Sentencing Submissions
54Ms Wendlandt who appeared on your behalf submitted that the following factors should operate to mitigate your sentence:
(a) Your early plea of guilty;
(b) Utilitarian benefit of the plea, particularly as victims did not have to give evidence;
(c) You have displayed some remorse through your plea of guilty and an awareness according to Ms Scott that you understand your actions were wrong;
(d) That the principles in Verdins,[1] namely limbs 1–4, limb 5, and limb 6 (arising from your ABI and impaired mental cognition); should operate and
(e) There has been a delay in the matter proceeding to plea due to obtaining the psychological material.
[1] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.
55Ms Wendlandt submitted that the principles enunciated in Bugmy[2] do not apply in this case.
[2] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.
56I was provided with several comparable cases of this court by your counsel following the plea hearing. All involved instances of similar offending, namely residential arsons with known victims. Drug use and mental health issues were also present, but in contrast to this case, most of the offenders had prior convictions for arson. In my view, this somewhat limits their comparability. The Crown made no objections to the production of these sentencing remarks, save that the individual sentences should be, the Crown submits, limited to the individual facts of each case. In the end I must not be overly influenced by the sentences imposed in other cases.
57In support of her submissions, Ms Wendlandt provided two further cases of R v Martin[3] and DPP v PS[4]. The cases speak to an additional consideration as to whether the accused had any foreknowledge that he would become psychotic and thus commit the offending. Ms Wendlandt submitted that you have had earlier admissions in 2020 for drug-related psychoses (not connected to offending), and there is evidence that your cognitive state is in decline and as such 'learning' from a psychosis event is not evident. Further, she submits that the expert material does not suggest that you had any foreknowledge of the effect of the ice and the psychosis. And this this is further complicated by the interplay between your ABI, your intellectual disability and as such moral culpability should be reduced.
[3] [2007] VSCA 291 at [21].
[4] [2023] VSC 85 at [60-64].
58The Crown in response maintains its submissions on this point, and rely upon the opinions expressed by Dr Darjee at paragraphs 62 and 67 – I read 67 - of his report, and the case of Sebalj[5] (which I referred counsel to in the course of the hearing), such that Mr Devlin submits that it is clear that a self-induced psychosis would have little to any effect on reducing moral culpability.
[5] The Queen v Thomas John Sebalj [2006] VSCA 106.
59Ms Wendlandt appropriately submitted that whilst the factors I have referred to should operate to mitigate the sentence imposed on you, the appropriate sentence in this case remained a head sentence with a non-parole period.
60Mr Devlin submitted the only appropriate sentence was a head sentence with a non-parole.
61Mr Devlin readily conceded that Verdins 5 should operate to mitigate your sentence.
62However, when he addressed the other limbs of Verdins, namely 1-4 and 6, it was submitted they have no application in your case.
Analysis
63I consider that your early plea of guilty has utilitarian benefit; furthermore, I conclude that you have some understanding of the wrongfulness of your actions. These factors serve to mitigate your sentence.
64I take into account the effect that your ABI, sustained at such an early age, has had on your learning and development and your path into drugs. Your father speaks of the noticeable change the accident had on you as a boy. It is easy to conclude that the path you have taken through life was not the one that you would have otherwise chosen for yourself.
65
I turn now to the question of whether your moral culpability for this offending is reduced by your intellectual disability and your cognitive impairment.
Ms Scott considers that these factors would have likely impacted your offending, but ultimately left question to be further considered by a forensic psychiatrist.
66Dr Darjee considers that 'the most appropriate diagnosis is methamphetamine induced psychosis'; and that it is difficult to untangle intoxication and induced psychosis.
67In the end, I am satisfied that your offending was brought on by the paranoid thoughts you held in the course of your psychotic episode. In turn, relying on Dr Darjee’s report, I am satisfied that your psychosis resulted from your sustained methamphetamine binge in the day or two before the offending, which concluded with you injecting methamphetamine just before committing these offences.
68I do not entirely reject the submission that your mild intellectual disability and cognitive impairment played some role in your impaired judgment on the day. Therefore I consider that your moral culpability should be reduced; however in the circumstances the reduction can only be slight.
69Otherwise, I am not satisfied that Verdins limbs 2, 3 or 4 have particular application in this case. Given the concession made by Mr Devlin in the course of submissions before me, and upon my own examination, I conclude that limb 5 of Verdins should be applied and I intend to mitigate your sentence accordingly.
70The application of limb 6 is more difficult. It appears that there may be some conflict between Ms Scott and Dr Darjee on this point. Ms Scott points to some decline in your cognitive abilities in prison and to the difficulties you likely face in following directions. Dr Darjee on the other hand reports that you appear to be coping adequately in the prison environment.
71In the end, I am not satisfied that limb 6 of Verdins specifically applies in this case. However, I have and I will take into account the overall difficult circumstances of your life caused by your intellectual disability and cognitive impairment; and the fact that you face instability and uncertainty into the future in arriving at the appropriate sentence in this case.
72It is apparent that your prospects for rehabilitation in relation to your offending generally are entirely predicated upon the level of formal support you receive and whether you are able to curb your drug use and alcohol consumption in the future, and your response to the services you will hopefully receive. Given that no services or support are yet in place, your prospects for rehabilitation are generally poor.
73In fixing the appropriate total effective sentence in this case, the law requires that I ignore the prospect of your release on parole. In other words, I must sentence you on the assumption that you will serve every day of your sentence. I simply make the observation that if you serve the whole of this sentence, upon your release into community without family support that you have had the whole of your life, in order to have any real prospect at rehabilitation you will need to engage in formal support mechanisms such as obtaining access to the NDIS. I cannot stress strongly enough the need to start implementing formal structures soon as possible and for this reason I will order that a copy of my sentencing remarks be made available to the prison authorities in the hope that someone will read them and take this into account.
Orders
74Accordingly, the order I make are as follows:
75On the charge of arson you are convicted and sentenced to a term of three years and nine months' imprisonment. That is the base sentence.
76On the charge of theft of a motor car you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment and I order that one month of the sentence be served cumulatively on the base sentence and all other sentences.
77On the charge of theft of the petrol, that is Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to one month's imprisonment. That sentence will be served concurrently with the sentence you are presently undergoing.
78On the charge of possess explosives you are convicted and sentenced to eight months' imprisonment.
79On the charge of driving with drugs in your system you are convicted and fined $1,000.
80On the charge of driving in a manner dangerous you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment. I make one month of that sentence cumulative.
81The total effective sentence is a sentence of three years and 11 months' imprisonment. I order that you serve a non-parole period of two years and six months before you are eligible for parole. I declare the period of 549 days pre-sentence detention reckoned as already served. I make the observation that the possession of explosive material is to be served concurrently. I considered a period of cumulation but I decided that it has been taken into account in all of the factors in the sentence I have imposed for the arson.
82The 6AAA declaration globally or universally is that but for the plea of guilty I would have imposed a sentence of five years with three to serve.
83There are ancillary orders to be made for disposal and forfeiture I understand. Are they opposed, Ms Wendlandt?
84MS WENDLANDT: No, Your Honour.
85HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Mr Kelly, any licence held by you is cancelled and you are disqualified from driving for a period of two years.
86Are there any other matters from your perspective, Mr Devlin?
87MR DEVLIN: Your Honour, the matter that I'm trying to clarify is in relation to the disqualification period. Does that disqualification period start
from - - -?88HIS HONOUR: Today.
89MR DEVLIN: Today. That's what I wanted to clarify. Thank you, Your Honour.
90HIS HONOUR: Is there anything else you need to raise, Ms Wendlandt?
91MS WENDLANDT: No, Your Honour.
92HIS HONOUR: Thank you.
93MR DEVLIN: No, Your Honour.
94HIS HONOUR: Thank you. To Mrs Thomson and family, thank you again for your participation in the proceedings, both on the previous occasion and today. Good luck going forward into the future.
95Ms Wendlandt, do you want the opportunity to be left to speak to Mr Kelly over the link? I can vacate the court and give you that opportunity if you wish.
96MS WENDLANDT: I'll arrange a separate conference, Your Honour, but thank you.
97HIS HONOUR: Thank you very much. Thank you for your appearance in the matter, we will stand down.
---
0
5
0