Director of Public Prosecutions v McCann (a pseudonym)

[2020] VCC 572

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

HOWARD MCCANN (A PSEUDONYM)

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE GUCCIARDO
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	4 May 2020 and 5 May 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v McCann (a pseudonym)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VCC 572

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

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

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms R. Fleming
For the Accused	Mr A. Pyne

HIS HONOUR:

1Howard McCann[1], you pleaded guilty to a Commonwealth indictment which charged two counts of using a carriage service to harass under s.474.17(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, two counts of using a carriage service to groom a person under 16 years of age for sexual activity contrary to s.474.27(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, and one count of using a carriage service to solicit child pornography material contrary to s.474.19(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

[1] A pseudonym

2In addition, you pleaded guilty to a related state summary charge of possession of prohibited weapon without exemption, namely a concealed knife in the shape of a credit card.

3The total period of your offending spans from 18 August 2018 to 27 December 2018, and each of the four Commonwealth charges occurred in discrete periods within that span of time.

4The circumstances of the offending were summarised in a document prepared by the prosecution, which was tendered in an exhibit.  I will refer to the salient aspects of it, for purposes of this sentence.

5At the time of the offending, you were 38 years of age.  In the relevant period, you used Facebook Messenger, an online communication application which enables people to engage in chat with other persons in real time over the internet.  Between August and December 2018, you called and sent messages to three young persons and one undercover police officer who was using an assumed online identity.  You did so in ways that reasonable persons could regard as harassing (Charges 1 and 2), with intention of making it easier to procedure a child under 16 to engage with you in sexual activity, that is, grooming (Charges 3 and 4) and to solicit child pornography material
(Charge 5).

6The Facebook account, as well as the Messenger account which you used, was registered in your own proper name and listed as well as your date birth as six years younger than your real age.

7The first victim was a 17 year old, to whom I shall refer to as 'A'.  Between August and December 2018, you sent her 200 individual messages.  You called her by audio or video calls 77 times, often late at night.  On 23 occasions, you sent her audio and voice recordings.  She ignored all but one call.  In text messages, she made it clear to you that your contact was unwelcome.

8The prosecution opening contains at paragraph 10, various examples of your contact with her.  On one occasion in November, you called her five times between 2.43 am and 5.12 am.  You sent kissing face emojis.  At 4.45 am, you sent a 26 second recording of the shower running and a person breathing.  Again, she told you to desist.  The following day, you again left a number of short text messages to which A did not respond.

9Annexure A to the opening p.13, contains extracts from the message logs from August 2018.  The matters concerning A were reported to police in late November.

10Between 4 and 16 September 2018, you sent Messenger messages to harass a second victim, 'B', who was 15 at the time.  You sent her 65 text messages.  You audio or video called her four times and sent her nine voice recordings and five video recordings.  You made photo requests which she refused and was clear that she did not want you to contact her.  You called her on 9 September at 10 pm and she answered briefly, after which she hung up.  Again, text exchanges of a sexualised nature were sent, as well as audio and video recordings.

11Later that evening, you sent more videos and audio recordings, again sexualised in context.  In late November, B provided a statement to the police.  On 28 September, Victoria Police Child Exploitation Team began to investigate you.  An undercover police officer, using an assumed online identity and sent you an online friend request on Facebook.  You accepted and initiated contact via Messenger.  The officer was posing as a 14 year old girl.  Between that date and December 28, you sent the officer a large number of emojis and texts.  You tried to call 77 times, you sent 16 audio recordings.

12Your conduct was intended to procure the victim to engage in phone sex with you, that is, a sexual activity of an audio or a video type.  A summary of the exchanges can be found at p.6 paragraph 20 to 22 of the opening.

13On 5 November 2018, you contacted the third real person, 'C', on Messenger.  She was 15 years old.  Between 5 November and 15 December, you sent her 750 emojis or text messages, tried to call, video chat 144 times, and sent her 78 audio or video recordings, several of which were sexually explicit.  This conduct was intended to groom C to engage in phone sex and to solicit child pornography from her.  Despite knowing her age, which was visible on her profile page on Facebook and being told by C that she was only 15, your contact focus on grooming and focussed on encouraging sexually explicit text chat, soliciting photos, persuading her to answer the calls.

14She responded at times and sent about 25 photos of herself at your request.  When you sought more explicit images, she refused saying you made her feel uncomfortable and unsafe and called you a creep.  She asked you to stop harassing her, leave her alone.  The overtly sexually explicit texts, the request for photos, and the sexually explicit voice recordings, are summarised in the opening at paragraphs 18 to 31.

15At paragraph 32, there is summarised in the opening, repeated attempts to connect via audio and video calls; on one day, 3 December for example, on 26 times during that day.

16Annexure B to the opening contains extracts from the message logs, characteristically your attempts to engage with C in sexually explicit chat.  On 22 November 2018, you succeeded in soliciting two photos from C that met the definition of child pornography material.  Annexure C and D to the opening include the images of C and a message log.  C made a statement to police in early January 2019.  You were arrested when you presented yourself to a police station.  When searching your car, police found your mobile phone which contained your above mode of communications, as well as a concealed knife.

17You have been in custody since that time.  Your offending is serious and as much was conceded in the course of your plea.  Using a carriage service to harass carries a maximum penalty of three years' imprisonment.  Using a carriage service to groom a person under 16 years of age for sexual activity has a maximum of 12 years.  Using a carriage service to solicit child pornography material carries a maximum penalty of 15 years.

18Possession of a prohibited weapon without exemption or approval has a maximum penalty of 240 penalty units, or two years' imprisonment.  It was also conceded that a term of imprisonment in this case is appropriate.

19The harassment-related Charges 1 and 2, are serious examples of the offence.  The period for Charge 1 was three months and 15 days.  Charge 2, it was
13 days.  The volume of communications are significant, persistent, clearly unwelcome, and the content is sexualised, and made the victim uncomfortable.

20Charges 3 and 4 are serious examples of grooming.  In each case, the duration is significant, three months and 41 days respectively.  The volume of the communication is large.  The contact is persistent, sexualised, and manipulative.  The age disparity between you and your victims was significant.  Because these offences together with the soliciting offence involved communications of a sexual nature with young children, its potential to cause significant damage to the victims cannot be underestimated.

21One victim impact statement was received by the court in relation to Victim C.  In a brief but very relevant statement, she highlights her ongoing anxiety and depression, detrimental effect on her schooling, her disconnection to her family and friends, and the need for ongoing counselling.  She has difficulties with trust issues, particularly with males and at school.  These are typical of the effects which such offending visits upon victims.  Although I did not receive other victim impact statements, I think I can reasonably infer that the impact upon the other two would have been similar.

22You should understand that the offence is no less reprehensible when you communicated with a fictitious person, who you believed to be a real person.  The law provides the offence involving grooming to be committed in this way, to enhance the prospects of detection and consequently to deter offenders and to minimise the use of the internet and social media contact, for the corruption of children for sexual gratification.  Grantley v R 2010 NSW Court of Criminal Appeal 293, and the case is mentioned there.

23Although the charges which involve grooming were said to not be put on the basis that there was a plan on your part to meet with any of the victims.  Nevertheless, there was sexual activity as the object of your communication, at least including what might generally be described as phone sex.  This was deliberate, calculated, contumacious conduct on your part, involving contacts with distinctive features of harassment, grooming, and soliciting images to four different entities.  It was a calculated course of insistent manipulation for your sexual gratification.

24These discrete offences will require in my view, a certain degree of cumulation in individual sentences in recognition of the distinct criminality involved, and the distinct receiving entities involved.  This also recognises that the soliciting charge, Charge 5, involved only two images of a low category within the applicable classification of such material, and which largely overlaps the behaviour encompassed in Charges 4 and 5.  While 25 images were sent under Charge 4, none of them well within this classification.  However, this progression exemplifies the illicit course of conduct in which you engaged.  See R v Rajasekar 2017 NSWCCA 113.

25The grooming offences were designed to win over the victim, establish a tone of friendliness, interest, shared subterfuge and trust, leading to sexualised content.  This kind of predatory conduct is precisely what the offences are aimed at, and call primarily into relevance, general and specific deterrence.  These offences reflect high moral culpability, the harmful effect of exposing a child to very explicit sexualised language is self-evidence.  Adamson v R 2015 301 FLR 385, and R v Gajjar 2008 192 A Crim R 76.

26There is a paramount public interest in protecting children from this type of abuse, at an age when they are ill-equipped to protect themselves or respond either appropriately or in their own interest.  See R v Nahlous 2013 273 FLR 232, Tector v R 2008 186 A Crim R 133, Western Australia v Collier 2007 178 A Crim R 310.

27The need to protect children must be enforced by courts with sentences of appropriate severity.  The objective seriousness of your offending is assessed through your mode of sexual gratification, the abuse of the power of the age difference bestowed on you, your degree of persistence and your intention to engage in sexual activity by the escalation of sexual talk, the opportunity to plan, consider your actions, and fine-tune your tactics of compliance.

28There are also aspects of lack of aggravation which I note.  You did not falsify or conceal your identity, although you misled your true age.  You did not coerce, threaten, or offer inducements.  You did not use violent language.  There was no suggestion of actual physical meetings.  You terminated the communications of your own volition.  You pleaded guilty at an early opportunity.

29Similarly, the objective gravity of soliciting pornographic material online is exploitative and grave.  Seeking and procuring such material from a child herself, is a variant of child pornography offences.  Here as I said, it lies at the lowest end of the spectrum of offending, because of the content and number.  But it is nevertheless serious, ameliorated only by those factors and the absence of any evidence that such images were sought for distribution, sale, or profit.

30The offence, as I have said, is directed to a different vice, and is not identical to the grooming offence.  But a measure of cumulation is warranted to reflect the differing criminality contained in Charges 4 and 5.

31After your arrest, a number of routine proceedings took place, such as committal mentions in April and May 2019.  You entered pleas of guilty at the end of May at a mention hearing.  I regard this as a plea at the first reasonable opportunity.  The plea has utilitarian value, being avoiding a criminal trial, and the evidence of the victims.  It signifies an acceptance of responsibility and facilitation of the course of justice.  The plea will attract a reduction in your sentence as a result.

32Remorse is a difficult feeling to assess; the plea appears from the material to be accompanied by regret at your predicament.  However, as the material discloses, your insight into your offending is limited and your appreciation of your own blameworthiness is minimised by you and noted by the professionals who assessed you.  I shall come to that aspect in a moment.

33I do not find it positively, that you are expressing remorse.  This, together with your previous aspects of your history, background, and mental assessment, led to a conclusion that your prospects of future rehabilitation should be regarded as guarded and that your risk of reoffending is of reasonable concern.

34You are now 40 years of age.  You lived in St Albans, the eldest of four.  Your father worked as a truck driver in the security industry.  Your mother was at home and later worked in disability care.  Within the confines of relative stability at home, there were underlying problematic issues of substance abuse.  Your father was imprisoned for a period of time.  Both of your parents drank alcohol and used drugs heavily.  There was verbal stoushing, but no physical violence.  They divorced about seven years ago.

35You have little by way of academic achievement, leaving school at Year 8 and attempting Year 9 at a trade's school.  You have difficulty with basic literacy.  From very earlier on, you began using drugs and alcohol.  This abuse is a core theme in your development and remains the main unresolved issue in your life and future prospects.  These substances have caused most of your prior offending.  They have caused you to have no relationship with your siblings, and to have an intervention order restraining you from contact with your mother whom you have not seen since 2016.

36Prior to your remand, you have not worked on a regular basis for about four years.  You have in the past had sustained employment in the security industry and driving forklifts, although that license has lapsed.  The heavy use of alcohol in particular began at age 15 including when you had work.  You used cannabis and amphetamines from age 13 with heavy use as you grew older, and methamphetamine from age 15.  The latter use, however, ceased at age 22 because of its impact on your body.  But there were ongoing uses of MDMA, cocaine, heroin, and psychedelics.

37In Year 9, you went to trade school.  You drove a tractor and a forklift for some 13 years.  You also developed a serious problem with gambling.  However, your work history also included stints loading containers as a labourer and machine operator.  I take this reasonably good work record into account.

38From age 24, you were in a long-term relationship which lasted some 12 years.  A daughter was born from that relationship, and she is now something near in the order of 14 years old.  But you have not seen her for three years.  You have been in contact with her until you formed a new relationship with another woman, with whom you had another daughter, who is now nearly four years old.  That latter relationship ended about two years ago.  Gambling and heavy losses was the major catalyst for that breakup.

39You had received some counselling for that particular addiction before your remand.  You have described your level of alcohol abuse as having a drink all day every day, for some 15 years.  Your drinking, however, has diminished and you so say prior to your arrest.  In the past, you have drunk a slab of bourbon a day from first thing in the morning on your account.  When first on remand, you told a psychiatrist that you set up a still to brew alcohol, but you were now not drinking.

40You are currently prescribed methadone.  Your drug use has diminished over the past three and a half years, because you are pursuing the custody of your first child.  You have a prior criminal history, which is notable for commencing in 2009, so relatively late in your life.  These 2009 offences concern drug offences and stalking offences, and breach of an intervention order, together with the possession of a prohibited weapon.  These priors are particularly relevant.  There is then a seven year break, probably reflecting a relative period of stability in which you have the semblance of a family and regular employment.

41When that situation ceased to be, you appeared in court again with weapons offences in August of 2016 and November 2016, as well as drink and alcohol related offences.  You were placed on a community corrections order, however, that order was breached by you, and that order was cancelled in October 2018 for drug offences and weapons offences.  This was during the period of your offences I am dealing with here.  About a week later, again, in October 2018, the record reflects the imposition of another community corrections order, for 12 months, commencing on 9 October for a range of driving and bail offences.

42At the time of your arrest, therefore, you were subject to that community corrections order.  You did not have a permanent address and had completed 40 hours of community work out of 150, which had been imposed.  Contravention proceedings are on foot in relation to that order.

43In October of 2018, as part of the assessment for that order, you were assessed then as a high risk of reoffending.  Under the treatment condition, you had been referred to the Community Offender Advice and Treatment Service on
4 December and you did attend.  This is at a time concurrent with this offending.  You had been referred to counselling and treatment at the Victorian Aboriginal Health Service, but you were placed into custody before receiving any treatment as directed.

44You had self-referred to VAAHS on 31 October with your father's support and had been provided with two appointments to see a drug and alcohol counsellor prior to the COATS assessment, but you had failed to attend either of these times.  Your arrest similarly halted participation in offending behaviour programs of Corrections Victoria.  Unfortunately, it appears that neither the punitive sanction aspect of the order, nor the rehabilitation aspect has had an impact upon you at all, as you committed these serious offences in that crucial period.

45Reliance was placed on your behalf upon two reports in your plea.  The first was that of Dr Nina Zimmerman, dated 10 September 2019, which was accompanied by an addendum report dated 13 March 2020.  The second was a neuropsychological report from Associate Professor Warwick Brewer, dated 13 December 2019.  Both are comprehensive and fulsome in their detail.  I will only summarise their extensive contents, but I have considered them at length and taken their salient opinions into account.

46It is not submitted that any of the Verdins principles apply to you and I accept this submission.  Your substance abuse problems are significant, and together with other incidents, have probably resulted in an acquired brain injury albeit minor.  Professor Brewer in this context at paragraph 41, sounds a note of warning, which is directed at you, but which is relevant to the court's task.  Professor Brewer in that paragraph says that such an injury, that is by reference to the acquired brain injury,

'Usually represents some loss of agency in the mind of the individual diagnosed with the same'.

47Particularly upon one with already,

'Vulnerable behavioural scripts and cognitive resources that exist, not so much due to neural compromise, but to the accumulated impact of environmental insults over time such as that characteristic of Mr McCann’s history'.

48As a consequence, he opines it is less appropriate to rely on a likely mild acquired brain injury as a significant mitigatory factor with respect to your offending history.  Professor Brewer in effect, says your background and history of substance abuse reflects the stronger mitigatory factors in his opinion.

49Such mitigation, however, in my view is minimal, particularly and
Professor Brewer points this out at paragraph 43, as you are well acquainted with the impact of illicit substances and alcohol on your behaviour and thinking.  Professor Brewer finds at paragraphs 44 and 45 that you remain subject to features of, 'Untreated post-traumatic distress and associated psychotic decompensation', over a foundation of unstable and immature personality traits, and that while your substance abuse is in remission, while in the contained and structured settings of a gaol, from a clinical perspective, his prognosis is that you remain a high risk of relapse with respect to your criminal history and relationships.

50He confirms at paragraphs 45B, that your intimate knowledge of the likely criminal sanctions that your behaviour attracts as arguably not being sufficient to trigger independent and appropriate regulation of your behaviour and have more likely failed to learn from the impact of these past sanctions.  This in my view makes specific deterrence and just punishment highly relevant in this sentence, together with primary aims of general deterrence and denunciation of your conduct.

51I note also the other sources of information and documents to which both
Dr Zimmerman and Professor Brewer have referred.  I note the medical history outline in Dr Zimmerman's report, paragraph 36, particularly your use of Ventolin for asthma, which I take into account, particularly during this period.

52Both experts' opinions contain an account of your offending which is vague about your involvement, with a significant attempt to minimise your culpability.  When asked about the victims, you acknowledged that they would have been, 'Worried and scared'.  There is no doubt that a sex offender program is needed to address this lacunae in your appreciation. 

53Dr Zimmerman specifically finds you to present as a moderate risk of future sex offending in the face of, 'Most concerning extreme minimisation of your role in the offending'.  Professor Brewer also noted the same feature in his report, paragraphs 8 and 46.  I noted the tests he conducted during his assessment and note the disordered and partly arrested personality development and associated social and emotional immaturity.

54As to your incarceration, Professor Brewer found the risk of reclusion to your mental health to not be significantly different from that from many of your peers that find imprisonment depressing.  He found you currently suffer no physical ailments, have been treated with medication of Anza and Seroquel and have had no difficulty with mood or attention.  Nevertheless, both experts note that those like you of Indigenous background may be more at risk while in prison.  However, this particular aspect provides one positive note in your current circumstances, as long as you remain engaged in culturally relevant programs and activities.

55Your father and paternal grandmother both experienced removal from traditional lands and family in New South Wales and raised as state wards in institutions.  You are said to be exploring your Aboriginality in the past, and are currently doing so in custody, following your father's footsteps of better understanding that cultural link.  In this context, the evidence I heard during your bail application of earlier, to enable you to attend your father's serious medical condition, touched upon this connection and its positive benefits in the future.

56While in prison, you have completed programs within the Aboriginal program unit at Ravenhall Correctional Centre, which are outlined in the letter by
Kyla Burns, the Aboriginal Program Officer at Ravenhall which I have taken into account.  These have included a Men's Behaviour Program and a health and fitness program and an Elder's program, which is ongoing.  You have also undertaken the vocational educational programs available, including those to do with the effects of drug and alcohol, for which certificates were tendered to the court from the Kangan Institute and the GEO Group, and the City Mission.

57You have also been employed full-time in the screen-printing section and as attested in a letter from your instructor.  I take these positive steps that you have taken into account.

58In relation to your sentence, I received and read helpful prosecution submissions, which included a number of comparative cases, which I have read into.  Charges 3, 4, and 5 are class two offences under the Sex Offender Registration Act and are registrable offences under schedule 2, so that upon my sentence, you will become a registrable offender.  This is not part of my sentence but arises as a result of my sentence.  You will be required to comply with a number of significant obligations for the rest of your life.  But although this is a consequence of the sentence, this is not part of the sentence, as I have said.  However, a breach of these requirements may cause you to be prosecuted and punished for these breaches of these obligations.

59It was accepted that the weapon, the subject of the related summary charge, was not used as a knife by you and that matter is of low gravity, only of significance given your priors for similar offences as to weapons.

60On Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

61On Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

62On Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to one and a half years' imprisonment.

63On Charge 4, the base sentence, you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

64On Charge 5, you are convicted and sentenced to nine months' imprisonment.

65On the summary charge, you are convicted to one month which is to be concurrent.

66I order that one month on Charges 1, 2, and 5, and six months on Charge 3 to be cumulative on Charge 4, making two years and nine months.

67I order a non-parole period of 22 months.  I declare that you have served
470 days excluding today by way of pre-sentence detention, and I will note that number in the records of the court.

68Ms Fleming, were there other ancillary orders which were required to be made?

69MS FLEMING:  Yes, Your Honour.  I understand that there is a forfeiture order sought which I understand was not opposed.

70HIS HONOUR:  Right.  Sorry, that they are opposed, did you say?

71MS FLEMING:  Mr Pyne may be able to assist me.  I understand that ultimately, they were not opposed.

72HIS HONOUR:  Were not opposed, yes.  I did not think that that was the case.  Mr Pyne, I am sorry, I still do not have your image.  But are you still listening?

73MR PYNE:  Sorry, I am still listening.  I just wanted to make optional all the bandwidth which was devoted to the audio.

74HIS HONOUR:  That is fine, you are back up and I can see you and I can hear you.  Do you agree that the ancillary orders were not opposed?

75MR PYNE:  I agree.  Yes, not opposed.

76HIS HONOUR:  All right, I am sorry, there is a bit of a delay in the audio.  But in any event, I will sign those forfeiture orders that were mentioned accordingly.  I actually do not have a copy at the moment, but I will make sure that orders are received and signed by me accordingly.  Is the effect of the sentence clear to each of you?

77MR PYNE:  Yes, Your Honour, it is.

78MS FLEMING:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

79HIS HONOUR:  All right.  Well, thank you both.  Thank you, Mr McCann.  Did you hear all of that?

80ACCUSED:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

81HIS HONOUR:  All right, thank you.  Mr Pyne, given the opportunity to do so, I can absent myself and now leave the Bench, if you want to speak to Mr McCann.  It might be an opportunity for you to do so if you wish to do so.

82MR PYNE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  That will be very helpful.

83HIS HONOUR:  All right, well I will leave the video conferencing and perhaps also, Ms Fleming, I do not require you any further.  So, thank you again.

84MR PYNE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

85MS FLEMING:  Thank you, Your Honour.

86HIS HONOUR:  All right, well my staff will facilitate that, Mr Pyne, and I will leave the Bench.  Thank you.

(At a later stage.)

87HIS HONOUR: My apologies for having to bring people back. Having concentrated on the provisions for the disposition yesterday, I omitted completely the proper form with which to impose this sentence, which being below three years, should be by way of a recognisance release order. I note that under s.19AH of the Crimes Act I am empowered to correct an error of a technical nature or form, but while preserving the validity of the order, despite the error.

88The effect of the recognisance release is parallel to that of a non-parole period.  So, I intend to impose the same term, that is two years and nine months with Mr McCann being released upon a recognisance release order, upon him providing - I think the formula is a recognisance in the sum of $2000 after having served a period of 22 months for all of the Federal offences upon this indictment.

89

I note that an order in recognisance draft has been provided to my associate and I have signed it as of today, with those details and it will be sent to Mr McCann, where he is currently being imprisoned and he can sign that particular

order.

90MR PYNE:  Yes, Your Honour.  Can I enquire as to the duration and conditions of the order?  As I understand, the duration would be the duration of what would have been the parole period of the sentence.

91HIS HONOUR:  Yes, correct.

92MR PYNE:  And in relation to conditions - - -

93HIS HONOUR:  Well, the conditions apart from the monetary recognisance, which is the nominal sum attached to the order, it is simply to be of good behaviour during that period.  There are no other particular conditions that I am going to apply in relation to that order.  Such conditions can be applied, but I think that the only condition that I am content to have applicable to the order is the condition to be of good behaviour.

94MR PYNE:  As Your Honour pleases.

95HIS HONOUR:  In the period after his release.  I should say that and explain to Mr McCann, I am sure that you will as well, Mr Pyne, but the effect of this order is the same, if you like, as the sentence.  There will be a period which Mr McCann, you will have to serve, which is the period that I have outlined and thereafter, you will be released on this recognisance in effect to be of good behaviour for the remaining 11 months of that order, so as to comply with the sentence of the court.

96It is the type of order which you can by non-compliance, by being not of good behaviour, breach and you can be charged and brought back before the court for that, during that period of time.  Do you understand?

97ACCUSED:  Yes, Your Honour.

98HIS HONOUR:  All right.  Well, I do not think there are any other provisions that I am required to do anything more, than what I have done.  I have explained the consequence of the recognisance release order to Mr McCann, and it can be explained by his counsel to him, once I leave the Bench.  So, that this order has gone from one being which I announced yesterday as being one pertaining to a non-parole period, rather to a recognisance release order properly, because of the period of imprisonment imposed.

99MS FLEMING:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

100MR PYNE:  As the court pleases.

101HIS HONOUR:  Is there anything else?  I note that there are a number of people that are plugged into our court this morning.  Has that satisfied the requirements of the order?  As I understand it, it does, and I am content for this document to be sent back up for signature for Mr McCann.  Thank you.

102MS FLEMING:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

103MR PYNE:  Yes, Your Honour.

104HIS HONOUR:  Thank you, Ms Fleming.  Thank you, Mr Pyne.  I will step down.

---