Director of Public Prosecutions v Kharal
[2021] VCC 1755
•8 November 2021
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR-20-01516
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| SAMME KHARAL |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE GWYNN |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | 25 October 2021 |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 8 November 2021 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Kharal |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 1755 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:Criminal law
Catchwords: Attempt to pervert the course of justice; use carriage service to harass; contravene personal safety intervention order
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic); Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Cases Cited:R v Buscema [2011] VSC 206; R v Healy (Unreported, Victorian Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal, 4 August 1997); Rossi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 296; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169
Sentence:CCO of 15 months with 100 hours unpaid community work; CCO of 28 months with 175 hours unpaid community work; fine of $3,000.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms K. Farrell | Office of Public Prosecutions |
For the Offender | Ms D. Lamovie | Victoria Legal Aid |
HER HONOUR:
1Samme Kharal, you have pleaded guilty on indictment to attempting to pervert the course of justice and three charges of using a carriage service to harass.
2You have also entered a guilty plea to a related summary offence of contravening a personal safety intervention order. That is a rolled up charge.
3In sentencing you for your crime, I am obliged to have regard to the maximum penalty for the offences which you have committed. The maximum penalty for attempting to pervert the course of justice is one of 25 years' imprisonment, the maximum penalty for using a carriage service to harass is three years' imprisonment, and the maximum penalty for the related summary offence of contravening a personal safety intervention order is one of two years' imprisonment. Those maximum penalties reflect the seriousness with which Parliament regards your offending.
The offending
4The circumstances of your offending were set out in a document entitled “Summary of prosecution opening” dated 4 October 2021. This is an agreed document and represents your acceptance of the elements of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty, as well as the factual basis on which I am to sentence. I have had recourse to the full document.
5I am told that you and Mr Rezaee met each other during high school. At the time of the offending Simmone Palmer was a 53-year-old female who was struggling with alcohol addiction. She met you, Mr Kharal, on an online dating site and you later introduced her to your co-accused Mr Rezaee. You told Ms Palmer that your name was “Jake” and introduced Mr Rezaee to her as “Osmani.”
6Initially each of you and the victim would occasionally speak to each other on the phone.
7In about November 2017 you each began threatening Simmone Palmer, telling her that you would slit her son’s throat, rape her, would kill police and kill her son. You told her you would chop her up and bury her in the forest. You threatened to kill a policeman.
8You also began calling her ex-husband, Robert Palmer, and her son Nathan Palmer.
9One night in November of 2017 Robert Palmer started receiving calls from a private number. When he answered the first call no one was there. The next day he received another call from a private number and when he answered the phone a male voice said 'Hi Rob. How are you going? Hope you’re having a nice day'. He hung up on the caller. From that point he received persistent calls from private numbers, sometimes a dozen times in a row, but he would not answer. Sometimes messages would be left on his phone. The messages were usually of his ex-wife and a male arguing or the male provoking Simmone Palmer. One message included 'Hi Rob, Simmone is really sorry for all she has ever done, she still loves you and wants you back.' To Robert Palmer, Simmone Palmer sounded very upset. He found the calls disruptive and harassing.
10Also in November of 2017 Nathan Palmer answered a call from a private number on his phone. He could hear his mother yelling 'Nathan don’t answer private numbers, just hang up, hang up'. After that he began receiving three calls a day from private numbers. This would occur both day and night. Every second call had a message left with it. Most of the messages had his mother speaking to someone else. To Nathan Palmer they sounded like recordings and his mother sounded unhappy and what he described as being 'riled up'.
11In early 2018 you visited Simmone Palmer’s house with Mr Rezaee. This was the first time you had met her in person. On that occasion you offered to buy her wine, cigarettes and McDonald’s. She did ask why you were making threats and you told her that it was because it was funny.
12You and Mr Rezaee would each order pizzas and taxis and have them sent to Simmone Palmer’s house without her knowledge. This occurred on so many occasions that the local taxi company refused to let her book a taxi.
13In February of 2018 Simmone Palmer went to Telstra and changed her phone number so that you would no longer be able to call her. Somehow you managed to get her new number and the calls continued.
14Since March of 2018 you would persistently call her. If she did not answer you would leave messages such as 'Pick up, you dirty dog'.
15Between 30 March 2018 and 16 April 2018 you, Mr Kharal, called Simmone Palmer some 795 times. This is the subject of Charge 3 – using a carriage service to harass Simmone Palmer.
16As a result of these phone calls and threats she became very frightened for own safety and was understandably concerned for her ex-husband and her son.
17On 9 April 2018 Simmone Palmer attended at Wonthaggi police station to report your offending. Police subsequently took a statement from her.
18Between 26 November 2017 and 28 January 2018 your phone records obtained by police, Mr Kharal, show that you made 18 phone calls to Nathan Palmer and 40 phone calls to Robert Palmer. This is the subject of Charge 1 – using a carriage service to harass Robert Palmer and Charge 2 – using a carriage service to harass Nathan Palmer.
19When interviewed by police on 27 June 2018, you essentially denied any offending and said that you felt sorry for Ms Palmer and wanted to help her out. You told police that you would call her when you were bored, to fill in time and that it was just a bit of a laugh.
20On 3 May 2018 interim personal safety intervention orders were made against you, protecting Simmone Palmer. A final personal safety intervention order was made on 8 June 2018. This order was personally served on you on 17 June 2018 and included a prohibition on communicating or contacting Simmone Palmer, approaching or remaining within five metres of her and going to or remaining within 200 metres of her address.
21Regardless, between 15 November 2018 and 27 November 2018 you, Mr Kharal, called Simmone Palmer on 64 occasions in breach of the personal safety order protecting her from you.
22On 19 November 2018 you, Mr Kharal, attended at the Werribee Magistrates' Court in relation to a charge of using a carriage service to harass Simmone, Robert and Nathan Palmer, and a charge of stalking Simmone Palmer. You were bailed on that date to appear at court on 21 November 2018.
23That same day, that being 19 November 2018, you contacted Simmone Palmer. You wanted her to write a letter to police saying that she would drop the charges. You wanted the charges dropped against both you and Mr Rezaee. Mr Rezaee was of course part of these communications. You told Ms Palmer that if she did that you would bring her McDonald’s, cigarettes, and wine.
24This contact was obviously in breach of the personal safety intervention orders in place and, for you Mr Kharal, also represented a breach of bail.
25In furtherance of your intention at that time you then attended at Ms Palmer’s home later that evening. With the knowledge of what Mr Kharal was going to ask Ms Palmer to do, Mr Rezaee went out onto the balcony and smoked a cigarette. Whilst he was there you, Mr Kharal, asked Ms Palmer to write a letter saying that she wanted to drop the charges, as otherwise Mr Rezaee was going to get into more trouble with the police. She agreed to do it because she felt sorry for you. You told her what to write. Once she finished the letter you asked her to drop the personal safety intervention order as well. You and Mr Rezaee then drove Ms Palmer to the police station in Wonthaggi to drop off the letter which stated:
'Attention: Constable Cadman.
I would like to withdraw my statement of harassment and stalking charges against:
Samme Kharal
Assaf Rezaee.
Please forward a copy of this to court. Regards, Simmone Palmer.'
26You both stayed in the car whilst Ms Palmer attended the Wonthaggi police station and handed the letter to police at about 11.30 pm on 19 November 2018. You then attended at a petrol station and bought Ms Palmer a packet of cigarettes before driving her home.
27After Ms Palmer wrote the letter you both continued to call her. She wanted you to stop. She had written the letter in the belief that she would then be left alone.
28Charge 4 - attempting to pervert the course of justice between 15 November 2018 and 19 November 2018 is particularised to include the following:
a) contacting Ms Palmer by phone requesting that she withdraw her original statement to police;
b) attending at her address and convincing her to write a letter to police stating that she no longer wanted the charges of stalking and harassment to proceed against either or you; and
c) that you drove Simmone Palmer to the Wonthaggi police station on 19 November 2018 to deliver the letter to police.
29On 21 November 2018 you, Mr Kharal, appeared at the Werribee Magistrates' Court in relation to charges I previously referred to of using a carriage service to harass Simmone, Robert and Nathan Palmer and of stalking Simmone Palmer. On that occasion your solicitor provided the police prosecutor with a photocopy of the letter Simmone Palmer had written and your case was adjourned. This continued use of the letter and the role you played in persuading Ms Palmer’s compliance elevates your offending for this charge above that of Mr Rezaee.
30On 13 February 2019 you were arrested and interviewed in relation to this matter. You were on bail from 19 November 2018, and therefore during the time of committing the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. This is an aggravating feature to that offending. However, as a direct consequence you were remanded into custody and spent some 71 days in custody before being granted bail. To some extent this is capable of acting as a sanction for your offending and hopefully a deterrent into the future.
31You did not admit the offending behaviour in your interview with police.
Gravity of offending and victim impact
32I turn now to offence gravity and victim impact.
33The purpose of a victim impact statement is to give those affected by your crime the opportunity to participate in the criminal justice process by informing the court about the effects of the crime upon them.
34In her victim impact statement dated 6 December 2018 Ms Palmer speaks of living in fear and experiencing anxiety each time a ‘no caller ID’ comes up on her phone. Her sleep was affected and she chose to remain housebound.
35In a more recent victim impact statement dated 9 October 2021 Ms Palmer speaks of her continuing fear and of her experience of panic attacks and anxiety related to your offending against her. She has had to repair relationships with family members also impacted by your offending. The effects of your offending on Ms Palmer have been enduring, now some three years post your conduct ceasing.
36I have had regard to the relevant portions of each of Ms Palmer’s victim impact statements.
37This offending is difficult to understand. On the one hand it is extremely juvenile and immature. On the other it is extremely serious and has had a profound and significant impact on your victim. I find your behaviour to her to be both cruel and demeaning.
38You were well aware of Ms Palmer’s vulnerability and you sought to exploit that for your own amusement. You had no regard for her distress, distress, which would have been obvious to you.
39The calls to Ms Palmer particularly, and to her other family members, were persistent and, as you have been charged, in contravention of a court order. You had multiple opportunities to rethink your actions yet you did not.
40You pursued Ms Palmer particularly, despite her efforts to cease all contact. Your history of offending against Ms Palmer and her family set the foundation for the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. By the time of this offence she was even more vulnerable to you given her efforts to get you out of her life and your persistent efforts to remain in it. This is of course the most serious charge.
41The offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice may embrace a wide spectrum of criminal conduct. It is an offence which strikes at the heart of the administration of justice and would normally require a term of imprisonment to be imposed.
42Justice of Appeal Charles, in the Victorian Court of Appeal quoted, with approval, a sentencing judge in the case of Healy (unreported, Victorian Court of Appeal, 4 August 1997), who observed:
“The administration of justice depends upon the system operating so that people who commit crimes are pursued, are brought to court and are punished, and those who take part in trying to interfere with that system commit a grave injustice insofar as the community is concerned."
43In the decision of Buscema [2011] VSC 206, Nettle J referred to a number of circumstances which assist to inform the gravity of the offending. These include:
1)the consequence which the offending was calculated to avoid;
2)the time for which the deception was maintained and whether it was actively repeated or persisted in or merely allowed to continue;
3)whether the deception involved some other person, either as an accomplice or as a victim;
4)whether there was any threat of violence involved;
5)whether the offence was spontaneous or premeditated; and
6)whether the deception resulted in the deception of the court or the creation of false public records and, if so, the extent and consequence of that.
44In this case your actions were born out of your own self-interest and desire for self-protection. It was designed to avoid court proceedings, although there is no evidence that it did so. Whilst relatively short-lived, and apparently prompted by Mr Kharal’s appearance in the Magistrates' Court that same day, your offending does remain a serious matter.
45Your role in that charge, Mr Kharal, was in my view more active than that of Mr Rezaee but I accept that Mr Rezaee was a willing participant. I do accept the Crown's submissions that for an offence of its type, the attempting to pervert the course of justice was towards the mid-range, albeit unsophisticated.
Plea of guilty
46In terms of your plea of guilty, you entered your plea of guilty after sentence indication, a process which permits a judicial officer to give a defendant a general indication of the sentence that would be likely to be imposed if that person pleaded guilty at that stage of the proceedings. A sentence indication process can resolve some concerns about the likely sentence that may be causing a defendant to defer entering a plea of guilty or electing to proceed to trial.
47The sentence indication given by me on 22 September 2021 was that I would not impose a sentence of imprisonment that commences immediately from the time of any sentence occurring. This was taking into account a range of matters that had been raised in both oral and carefully written submissions, including the nature of other plea material that would be available.
48The Sentencing Act obliges me to take into account the stage at which you entered your plea.
49The chronology of this matter would indicate that your plea was not at an early stage. Ms Palmer, her ex-husband and son were all required to give evidence at contested committal proceedings.
50Nevertheless I do form the view that your plea has utilitarian value. It has saved this court the time and expense of contested proceedings and the need for the witnesses to again relive events, events which are now somewhat aged.
51In the recent decision of Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169 at paragraph [39], the Court of Appeal said:
'A plea of guilty entered during the currency of the COVID-19 pandemic is worthy of greater weight in mitigation than a similar plea entered at a time when the community and the courts are not afflicted by the pandemic’s effects. A plea of guilty during the pandemic ordinarily should attract a more pronounced amelioration of sentence than at another time…'
52This was recently reinforced in the decision of Rossi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 296.
53Whilst your level of remorse may be a little bit harder to identify, I do take into account that some remorse exists and the benefits of your plea of guilty, as I have just outlined.
54You seek to rely on delay between being charged with your offending and being sentenced for it some two and a half to three years later.
55You were interviewed by police in June of 2018 for making harassing phone calls and charged on 17 August 2018.
56The offending constituting the attempt to pervert the course of justice charge and the summary offence of contravening a personal safety intervention order occurred in November of that year.
57You were arrested and interviewed by police early in 2019, with a filing hearing held on 15 February 2019.
58An application for summary jurisdiction made by you was refused in late 2019.
59A committal hearing listed in April of 2020 was vacated due to the COVID-19 pandemic but did finally take place in November of 2020, at which time you were committed for trial.
60Case management commenced in the County Court in April of 2021 with a sentence indication in September of 2021 and your plea hearing taking place on 25 October 2021.
61I do accept that during this time there have been stressors for you associated with court hearings and possible outcome. The period since being charged and your sentencing also represents a period in which to assess your prospects for rehabilitation.
62Part of that assessment does require recourse to your prior criminal history.
Prior criminal history
63Your prior criminal history, Mr Kharal, is relatively limited. On 24 May 2011 you appeared at the Sunshine Magistrates' Court in relation to five charges of burglary, five charges of theft and obtaining property by deception. You were convicted and sentenced to five months' imprisonment to be served by way of an intensive corrections order.
64On 11 November 2011 you appeared at the Sunshine Magistrates' Court for failing to comply with that intensive correction order. The original order was then varied.
65On 17 October 2012 you again appeared at the Sunshine Magistrates' Court for failing to comply with the intensive correction order. The order was confirmed.
66On 9 July 2013 you appeared at the Dandenong Magistrates' Court for a range of driving offences and were fined an aggregate of $1,000. A conviction was recorded.
67There have been no further matters until the matters before me and I am told that there has been no further offending since November of 2018.
Personal history
68In terms of personal background, your parents met and married in Pakistan. You were born in Preston and have four siblings.
69Your father died from food poisoning whilst holidaying in Pakistan in his mid-30s when you were aged only five years. Your father had worked as a banker in Australia and in Kuwait. Your mother has not remarried.
70In terms of your education, you completed your VCE and then did two years of a science course at Victoria University in Footscray. You then commenced an IT diploma at the Werribee campus of Victoria University which you successfully completed.
71You spent the following two years working for Carpet Call in customer service before working as a manager at Harvey Norman flooring franchise in Dandenong, followed by another year at Harvey Norman in Broadmeadows. You then set up a flooring business with your older brother in Niddrie, where you were working at the time of your offending. It would appear from this history that your work history is one which can be properly described as consistent.
72You have never had a problem with drugs or alcohol.
73I accept that your family is a solid support base for you. You and your brother currently work for your sister who runs a floor covering business in Keilor. You remain with your mother and siblings in the family home.
74Your sister Saher has provided a reference in which she speaks of the closeness of your family and the role you play in it, helping to look after your mother, who is in poor health. She believes that you have learnt your lesson from the time you did spend on remand and the impact of court processes upon you.
75Tendered on your behalf was a letter dated 8 October 2019 authored by Sally Nicholls, program manager from the Victorian Behaviour Change Centre. The letter confirmed that at that stage you had commenced a men’s behavioural change program and that you were engaging well. A certificate of completion of that program was also provided.
76Also tendered on your behalf were two reports authored by Jeffrey Cummins, clinical and forensic psychologist.
77In his first report in time, dated 10 April 2019, you were on remand. Prior to being remanded you had not made your family aware of the offending. You blamed your co-accused for your resort to the offending behaviour. At that time Mr Cummins did not assess you as having any personality disorder, impulse control disorder, sexual disorder or general anger management problem. He indicated a preparedness to treat you into the future. You received bail on 3 April 2019 – which, those dates do not quite match up but I understand that he assessed you whilst on remand.
78In his second report, dated 23 August 2021, Mr Cummins confirms that you attended his rooms for treatment on at least nine occasions, by which time he was of the opinion that you did not require any further mental health treatment.
79Overall his assessment was that you presented with a low risk of future offending. This would appear to be an accurate assessment given there has been no further offending since November of 2018, a period of some three years.
80You wrote your own letter to the court. Whilst I tend to find such communications self-serving, you show some insight as to how your offending has affected others besides yourself.
81Overall it would appear you have worked hard at self-improvement and to reduce your future risk. Your prospects of rehabilitation appear to be good.
Parity
82I should point out that on 7 August 2019 Mr Rezaee pleaded guilty to three charges of using a carriage service to harass Robert, Nathan and Simmone Palmer and was placed on a community correction order. Mr Kharal is largely facing the same charges on indictment, reflected in Charges 1, 2 and 3.
83The parity principle demands that any sentence imposed reflects differences in culpability and personal circumstances of co-offenders, and avoids unjustifiable differences in co-offender sentences.
84You appear to have played similar roles in relation to the charges of using a carriage service to harass and in breaching the personal safety intervention orders designed to protect Ms Palmer against, in effect, each of you. I have already commented on the elevated role, in my view, that Mr Kharal played in the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice whilst subject to a bail order.
85The criminal histories do not play a role in differentiating between Mr Kharal and Mr Rezaee, although I comment, albeit in his absence given he did not attend for sentencing today, that I am slightly more concerned about Mr Rezaee’s future prospects than I am for Mr Kharal’s.
Submissions
86Given the sentence indication previously given by me, I was urged by your counsel that any penalty for your offending should not involve the imposition of an immediate term of imprisonment.
87It was submitted that you should be assessed as to your suitability for a community correction order. The Crown submitted that a proper reflection of all relevant sentencing principles would properly appear in the imposition of what is referred to as a combination sentence, that is, a term of imprisonment in combination with a community correction order.
88With both submissions in mind I have had you assessed as to your suitability for a correction order. An assessment outcome report dated 26 October 2021 has been provided in relation to you, Mr Kharal. The assessor points out that you have previously received two intensive correction orders, one of which was varied and then one of which was breached. You are described as engaging in the assessment, however, in a forthcoming manner and indicated your willingness to comply with a community correction order. You told the assessor that you are not proud of yourself and were quite ashamed.
89Nevertheless you were assessed as unsuitable for a community correction order. The assessor expressed concerns about your ability to comply given your history with Corrections and that the charges themselves would indicate 'a disregard for court mandated orders'.
90Section 37 of the Sentencing Act obliges me to seek an assessment when considering the imposition of such an order. The making of any order also requires the consent of the offender. You have indicated your consent.
91I do not see the recommendation made in the assessment undertaken as a basis to form the view that you should be not subjected to a community correction order.
92In your case, Mr Kharal, your previous involvement with Corrections was some 9-10 years ago. I accept what you told the assessor that you are now older and in a better place to comply with an order.
Setnencing
93In terms of sentencing, the basic purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are punishment, general and specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In sentencing you I must have regard to a range of matters such as the seriousness of the offending, your culpability for it, your personal circumstances and those of your victim.
94I must also balance the interest of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interest of the community in seeking to ensure, as far as possible, that offenders are rehabilitated and are reintegrated into society. Whilst I do express my denunciation of your behaviour it appears you are well reintegrated into society at this time.
95I have taken into account the relevant sentencing guidelines referred to in section 5 of the Sentencing Act 1991 where relevant to your case. In relation to Charges 1, 2 and 3 on the indictment, I take into account the provisions of section 16A of the Commonwealth Crimes Act 1914 .
96I have also taken into account the current sentencing practices for the offences to which you have entered your guilty pleas and the principles of totality, proportionality and parsimony.
97Courts now have more discretion in terms of choosing a sentencing disposition which does enable all the purposes of punishment to be served simultaneously, in what is described as a coherent and balanced way, in preference to the option of imprisonment which is naturally skewed towards retribution and deterrence.
98In my view a community correction order can be punitive, achieve deterrence and may be suitable even in cases of relatively serious offences such as these which might previously have attracted a medium term of imprisonment.
99Mr Kharal, in relation to Charges 1, 2 and 3 on the indictment, you are convicted and sentenced to a community correction order of 15 months duration. This is as an aggregate sentence.
100You are to complete 100 hours of community work. Given my assessment as to your future prospects and the need for totality, the work hours imposed are less than those which were imposed on Mr Rezaee by the Magistrates' Court for what, I am told, is similar or the same offending.
101You do not seem to need any additional treatment.
102In relation to Charge 4, attempting to pervert the course of justice, you are convicted and sentenced to community correction order of two years and four months duration. You are to complete an additional 175 hours of community work.
103I am satisfied that the duration of the order and the requirement to complete community work represents an extensive punishment. Given the efforts that you have undertaken on your own rehabilitation, as I have already commented, there does not seem to be a need to include any treatment conditions.
104For the summary rolled up charge of contravening a personal safety intervention order, you are convicted and fined the amount of $3,000.
105I note your sentencing takes into account the fact that you did spend some 71 days on remand.
106In addition to the conditions that I have imposed there are standard conditions. The first and foremost of those is that:
1) you must not commit any other offences during the period that the correction orders are in place which could be punished by imprisonment;
2) you must also report within two working days to your nearest community corrections office, which I understand to be Werribee;
3) you are also required to advise your supervising corrections office of any change of address of where you are living or working and you must do so within two clear working days;
4) it is a term of all community correction order that you must submit to visits as directed and must obey all of the instructions and directions of a community correction officer;
5) you cannot leave the State of Victoria without the prior permission of your supervising community corrections office.
107In essence, the order can be breached if you do not comply with it in terms of the conditions or if you re-offend with an offence punishable by imprisonment whilst it is in place. If you do, you will have to appear before me for contravening the order and I may be required to resentence on the original charges as well as to sentence for breaking the order.
108I cannot place you on this order unless consent is given. I will come back to that in a moment.
109Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act requires me to state the sentence that I would have imposed if you had not pleaded guilty to the charges. In relation to this requirement it appears to relate to Charge 4 only. If not for your pleas of guilty, Mr Kharal, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence On Charge 4 to 18 months' imprisonment with a minimum of 12 months before being eligible for parole.
110Now certainly, Mr Kharal, I will give you the chance to speak to Ms Lamovie as to whether or not you wish to consent to the correction orders that you will be required to indicate verbally your consent to and at a later date sign, so I will just stand down temporarily so you can finalise those instructions. Thank you.
(Short adjournment.)
111Just before I check on Mr Kharal's consent, I note that my associate helpfully tells me that Mr Kharal was bailed on 23 April. When I was referencing Mr Cummins' report I referred to 3 April so that explains that glitch hopefully.
112Ms Lamovie, have you had the chance to obtain instructions?
113MS LAMOVIE: Yes, I have, Your Honour, and Mr Kharal has instructed that he will consent to a community correction order on the terms Your Honour has outlined.
114HER HONOUR: Well, he has got two.
115MS LAMOVIE: On both orders, Your Honour.
116HER HONOUR: I will have to get that consent from Mr Kharal. So, Mr Kharal, if you could remove your mask.
117OFFENDER: Yes, I agree, Your Honour.
118HER HONOUR: Okay, to being placed on the two community correction orders that I have outlined?
119OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
120HER HONOUR: Thank you. All right. Well, it appears that certainly completes Mr Kharal's matter, is that right, unless there is anything that either you, Ms Lamovie, or you, Ms Farrell, wanted to bring to my attention?
121MS LAMOVIE: No, Your Honour, I don't have anything to raise.
122MS FARRELL: Nothing to raise, Your Honour.
123HER HONOUR: All right. Well in relation to Mr Rezaee, Mr Bloemen, unless you have got any updated information, I do not believe I have any alternative other than to issue a warrant.
124MR BLOEMEN: There's nothing I have to add.
125HER HONOUR: All right, well Ms Farrell made the application earlier, a warrant will issue for Mr Rezaee. In terms of the endorsement of that warrant, he is to be brought before the County Court, Ms Farrell, not anywhere. I have seen offenders bailed from the police station, I have seen them taken to the Magistrates' Court, he is to be brought before the County Court.
126MS FARRELL: Yes, Your Honour.
127HER HONOUR: I will not express a preference for me because for whatever reason if I am not here when he gets identified, then he does not get dealt with but of course if I am here it is preferable that he comes before me.
128MS FARRELL: As Your Honour pleases.
129HER HONOUR: All right. Anything further?
130MS FARRELL: No, Your Honour.
131HER HONOUR: All right, I again thank each of the parties for their assistance and I will close the court until 9 o'clock tomorrow, thank you.
- - -
3
0