Director of Public Prosecutions v McConkey

[2014] VCC 1574

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 13-00343
CR 14-01592

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

ROBERT MCCONKEY

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE CANNON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	9 September 2014
DATE OF SENTENCE:	18 September 2014
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v McConkey
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VCC 1574

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:  CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:  Sentence – Plea of guilty – Recklessly cause injury – Up lifted unrelated summary offences including drive whilst disqualified – Breach suspended sentence – Relevant criminal record – Delay  - Homelessness – Exceptional circumstances note made out – Mild to moderate depression

Sentence:Total effective sentence 15 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 7 months’ imprisonment – 9 days pre-sentence detention declared as already having been served – s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991 declaration – No ancillary orders

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director	Ms S. Coombes (Plea) Mr A. Rooney (Sentence)	Ms C. Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr A. Bates	McNamaras

HER HONOUR:

1Robert McConkey you have pleaded guilty to one charge of Recklessly Causing Injury, which is the only charge on a filed over plea indictment-it carries a maximum penalty of 5 years' imprisonment.

2You have also pleaded guilty to the following summary charges:

(a)      4 charges of Drive Whilst Disqualified- this offence has a maximum penalty of 240 penalty units or two years' imprisonment for a subsequent offence;

(b) Two charges of using an unregistered vehicle which has a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units for a subsequent offence;

(c) One charge of using incorrect number plates which has a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units;

(d) One charge of fraudulently using number plates which has a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units or two months' imprisonment;

(e) One  charge of exceeding the prescribed speed limit which has a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units;

(f) Breach of a suspended sentence, whereby the four drive whilst disqualified offences breach a suspended sentence imposed upon you at the Sunshine Magistrates' Court on 21 March 2013 for an operational period of 12 months.

3You are also liable to licence disqualification in relation to driving offences in the exercise of my discretion. However, the Crown has not sought an order in this regard.

4Your offending was opened as follows:

5The learned prosecutor told me that the victim in this matter, Clarissa Stewart, is an ex-partner of yours.  You have two children together.  At the time of the incident giving rise to the offence of recklessly causing injury, your son was 11 years old and your daughter was nine.  Your relationship with the victim ended about four years before this incident.

6On Christmas Day 2010, Ms Stewart attended premises where you and your then de-facto partner, Ms Brockdorff were living.  Shortly before this, the victim had had a heated telephone conversation with Ms Brockdorff, who was alone at the house.

7The victim arrived at the house at about 7pm and engaged in an argument with Ms Brockdorff through the front door.  Ms Stewart began walking back to her car and as she did so, Ms Brockdorff yelled at her to go away, and said "keep walking you fucking slut."  Ms Stewart then returned to the house and the parties argued through the fly screen window in the lounge room.  Ms Stewart pushed her hand onto the flyscreen and Ms Brockdorff pushed it back.  The fly screen buckled and the victim then grabbed the fly screen and threw it away.  The parties then engaged in a physical fight.

8At this time, you arrived at the house and your children were with you.

9The ensuing events give rise to the charge of recklessly causing injury, to which you have pleaded guilty.

10You got out of your car and approached Ms Stewart.  You pulled her away from the window by grabbing her hair.  You then grabbed the victim around the shoulders and pulled her to the ground.  You kicked and punched her whilst she was on the ground and you verbally abused her.  Your children ran to the aid of their mother, and were eventually able to stop you from further assaulting her.  At one stage, one of your children jumped on your back in an attempt to stop the assault on his mother.

11The victim and children then drove from your premises.

12As a result of the attack on her, Ms Stewart suffered injuries.  These included the loss of a front tooth, a swollen, bruised and closed right eye, bruising to her face, and bruising to her ankle.  In addition, the medical practitioner examining the victim measured an area of hair loss on the victim’s crown to be 7cm x 3.5 cm in area

13You were interviewed in relation the incident and said:

·A78: “They (the victim and Ms Brockdorff) were just throwing punches at each other;

·A88: “…I tried to pull them apart…and they were still stuck together…then I sort of tripped a little bit and I got back up and Clarissa got back up and walked to her car.”;

·A89/90:“…she kicked Mary (Ms Brockdorff);

·A97: She (the victim) was punching her when I pulled up.”;

·A107: “I just basically pulled her around the wrists to split them up;

14Clarissa Stewart was charged in relation to the incident with Ms Brockdorff.  The injuries sustained by Ms Brockdorff, as set out in Exhibit 7, were scratches to her face, head, neck, shoulder, and multiple scratches to the left hand.  She had an upper lip contusion bleeding into soft tissues and was in pain in the nasal area as well as the head, left shoulder, and body.  She was prescribed Panadeine Forte, having been treated at a local medical centre on 26^th December.  I have viewed her photos, and it is apparent that she also suffered bruising to her left shoulder and was bleeding from the left side of her head.  On 16 May 2012 at the Magistrates' Court at Broadmeadows, Ms Stewart entered a plea of guilty to a charge of recklessly causing injury to Ms Brockdorff.  She received a 12 month adjourned undertaking.

15Returning to your offending. objectively, the circumstances giving rise to it, are serious.  Having said this, I have factored in that it was the victim who attended your premises and commenced hostilities on that day, albeit that they were directed at your then girlfriend.  She has been dealt with for this.  I accept that your actions were not premeditated, and that there was an element of provocation in the complainant’s conduct.  But your reaction was completely disproportionate.  You exploited your superior strength and savagely assaulted the victim, being reckless as to whether you caused her injury or not.  It appears that you lost control in a most dangerous fashion in respect of a person whom you knew you could physically dominate, having assaulted her on two previous occasions.  The injuries which you inflicted, albeit recklessly, were most concerning.  It is an aggravating feature of your offending that you assaulted the victim in the presence of your children, and hers.

16The impact on the victim has been dreadful.  She had already been the victim of assaults by you a number of years before, and apart from the physical injuries she sustained from the matter now before me, she has suffered an exacerbation of post-traumatic stress disorder and of depression.  She experiences anxiety which manifests itself in agoraphobia, fear, low self-esteem and social withdrawal.  These matters are established in the report of Ms. Maria Cassar, psychologist which is one of the annexures to the victim impact statement.  Ms Stewart says that she fears going anywhere near where you might be.  In taking into account the impact upon the victim I have allowed for the fact that there may have been other occurrences in her life not associated with you which have contributed to her difficulties, however, I have no doubt that your treatment of her on the day for which I now sentence you has made things a good deal worse.  This is especially so in view of the fact that she has suffered two previous assaults at your hands.  She has also suffered some financial hardship as a result of the assault and has had her living arrangements upheaved, as she has had to move away from a location near you.  In referring to financial hardship I do not factor in the matters expressed by the complainant in respect of maintenance and family law matters, and I have only taken into account the matters to which your offending can be directly attributed.  She has needed ongoing counselling and medication to deal with her psychological problems.  A report from Dr Phan, who is a dentist, indicates that as a result of the injury to her teeth that you caused, the complainant has suffered "a lot of trauma" to her teeth and surrounding gum, including a collapsed gum and nerve damage on the front upper teeth.  She required extensive dental treatment in respect of her four front teeth including root canal, bridge and crown work.  The report, from the dentist, indicates that her speech has been affected and she will need ongoing dental monitoring.

17Your conduct in relation to this matter warrants a sentence which is just in all of the circumstances and your conduct must be denounced.  Further, significant weight ought attach to general deterrence in a bid to deter others who are minded to behave as you have.

18Insofar as the summary matters are concerned, I was provided with summaries for three of the four occasions giving rise to these, and it was agreed that the wording of the charge in respect of the matters which was without a summary would suffice in respect of that occasion.

19The first episode of driving offences occurred on 25 May 2013.  On that day, at about 8.25 pm, you were intercepted by police as you drove along the Western Highway at Warrenheip.  You admitted to being suspended from driving, having been suspended on 11 April 2013.  You also admitted that the car you were driving was unregistered and that you had fitted the registration plates which were incorrect, the correct registration having been cancelled. This incident, where the police informant is Jones, gives rise to the offences of drive whilst disqualified, use unregistered vehicle and use incorrect number plates.

20On 24 November 2013, where the informant is Wattie, you were again intercepted by the police-this time, in Mollison St, Malmsbury, and found to be driving whilst disqualified.

21On 7 December 2013, where the police informant is Bailey, you were intercepted by police when driving along Midland Highway, Guilford.  The car you were driving had a different set of number plates to those found on your car when driving in May but were not the correct ones.  Again, the car was unregistered and you were driving whilst your licence was suspended.  On that occasion you said to the police that you knew about the licence and ‘rego’ but were trying to move from Wallace to Castlemaine.  This is the basis for the charges of use unregistered motor vehicle, drive whilst disqualified, and fraudulently use number plates.

22On 14 January 2014, you were seen driving along the Midland Highway, Mt Franklin, at a fast rate of speed.  A radar device checked your speed at 113 km/h in an 80 km/h zone.  Again, you were driving whilst disqualified, your licence having been cancelled on 3 June 2013.  This incident gives rise to drive whilst disqualified and exceed speed limit.  The informant in that matter is Allan.

23The most serious of the driving offences are the driving whilst disqualified charges, which amount to the flouting of a legally imposed sanction.  You did so on four occasions, having previously committed this type offence on three previous occasions, although I factor in that these previous occasions had occurred about ten years before.  The driving offences were also committed whilst on bail for the recklessly cause injury charge before me, which is an aggravating feature attaching to the summary matters.

24Further, on 21 March 2013 a suspended sentence of three months was imposed in respect of a threat to kill charge, which was  committed by you on 13 October 2012.  As I previously indicated, the drive whilst disqualified charges breach that suspended sentence.  I will return to that matter a little later on.

25I take into account your criminal history, which commenced in March 1993 with assault police, resist police, wilfully damaging property and being drunk in a public place.  You were convicted and fined for these offences.  You then committed various offences including driving offences, theft, which included theft of a motor vehicle, and fraudulently using a registration label.  You have a prior conviction for intentionally causing injury in June 2003, which along with theft of a motor vehicle and criminal damage, was dealt with in this court.  On that occasion, you were sentenced to a total effective sentence of two years six months with a non-parole period of 15 months.  You appealed to the Supreme Court but were unsuccessful.  

26On 1 September 2010 at the Broadmeadows Magistrates' Court you were sentenced to 12 months' gaol to be served by way of an intensive corrections order in respect of two charges of recklessly causing injury.  The victim of each of these was the same victim you assaulted on the occasion before me.  I was told that the first of these assaults was committed in November 2005, in the context of you separating from the complainant and the second assault was committed in October 2006 after you had separated.  The learned prosecutor told me that on each of these occasions you pulled at the complainant’s hair in the course of the assaults upon her.  I note that you committed the third recklessly cause injury upon the complainant - that is, the one for which I now sentence you, less than four months after receiving the intensive corrections order for the two previous assaults upon her, to which I have just referred.

27I allow for an appropriate discount in the sentence you would otherwise receive in circumstances where you pleaded guilty to recklessly causing injury on the second day of trial before me, having run a contested committal hearing and a first trial which was aborted in the course of the complainant being cross examined, and in which one of your children was cross examined in a Basha hearing.  I understand that from a time after the contested committal hearing the Crown had indicated that they would accept a plea to the charge for which I now sentence you.  You are not to be punished for taking this course-it is your entitlement to do so, but the discount to which you are entitled is not as significant as it would have been had you indicated your willingness to plead guilty at an earlier stage.  However, in pleading guilty when you did, you saved the complainant and other witnesses the time and trauma associated with giving evidence at the trial listed before me and you have saved the community the time and expense of running a trial.

28It was not advanced on your behalf, that the course you have taken manifests remorse, and I sentence you on this basis.  In this regard, I note that your account to the police was inconsistent with the factual basis upon which it is agreed you ought be sentenced.  Lack of remorse is relevant to assessing your prospects of rehabilitation, and the weight needed to be placed on specific deterrence and protection of the community.

29In sentencing you I have taken into account that at the time of the recklessly causing injury offence, you had just seen Ms Stewart at the police station in order to hand over the children on access, and it was at her insistence that, rather than take them to your home which you shared with Ms Brockdorff, you were on your way to your mother’s, when Ms Brockdorff made a distress call to you.  She was much younger than Ms Stewart, and Ms Stewart was assaulting her in a fairly serious fashion when you came on the scene.  I have also factored in that the assault you perpetrated was of a fairly short duration, and that the previous assaults perpetrated upon the complainant were about four and five years, respectively, before this incident, and apparently lacked the context in which the present offence was committed.

30In relation to the driving offences, there were four separate occasions when the nine offences occurred.  I was told that at the time that you committed the last three drive whilst disqualified offences, you had been living in Wallace on very low income, and had been given 30 days in which to vacate your rented premises.  You had two harness racing horses which you were training in Castlemaine, and you needed to move the contents of your house there, where you were trying to find accommodation.  In the meantime, you were couch surfing with friends in the Castlemaine area and tending to the horses.  I was told that by January 2014, you were effectively homeless and reliant on friends to accommodate you in Castlemaine, where you were trying to obtain accommodation.  This was proffered as the explanation for you driving whilst  disqualified, as I understand it, in November, December and January.  Certainly in the police summary for the December matter, you told police that you were trying to move from Wallace to Castlemaine and documentation from a Castlemaine Accommodation group dated 27 March 2014, states that you had spent the past two months in a homeless state, and that you sometimes slept in your car.  The lengthier letter from this organisation, written by a ‘Purdy Buckle’, who was a social worker spoke of your dire financial circumstances.

31As I understand the situation, you were receiving Centrelink payments at this time, although you may have also been doing some concreting work.

32In a well prepared plea on your behalf, Mr Bates submitted that exceptional circumstances had arisen since the imposition of the suspended sentence in your case, in that you had suffered homelessness or the prospect of this at the time that you committed the offence of driving whilst disqualified-  At least, this was the position when you committed the last three offences.  He said that you needed to drive in order to transport your belongings to Castlemaine in a bid to start a new life as a horse trainer.  He referred to the psychological report prepared by a Professor Egan on 28 April 2014 and tendered on your behalf, and submitted that, as you tended to isolate yourself, your decision to drive during this period was perhaps because you were reluctant to reach out to others to transport you.  However, this appears to be rather speculative, and I note that you were able to reach out to others in order to find accommodation in Castlemaine.  Further, such an explanation does not apply to the first of the four drive whilst disqualified before me which was committed in May 2013. I shall refer to this matter (breach of suspended sentence)  in due course.

33You have just turned 43.

34By way of background, I was told that you were born and raised in Broadmeadows and are one of two children.  You completed Year 12 at Broadmeadows Technical School.

35You have endured some traumatic events in your life.  When 13, you were trapped between two cars after one car reversed.  Both femurs, the two largest bones in your legs and a kneecap were broken.  You were required to stay in the Royal Children’s hospital for nine or ten months.  During this period, your parents separated.  You had been very close to your father but you only saw him once more, which was at your brother’s funeral when you were 26 years old.  When you came out of hospital, you lived with your mother.

36Tragically, in 1997, your brother, Troy, who was three years younger than you, committed suicide.  You found your brother hanging in the garage at your home, and cut him down, which must have been an horrific experience for you.  You were very close to your brother and, naturally, you were devastated, shocked and bewildered by his death.  I accept that the onset of a major depressive episode was triggered by your father’s abandonment of you when you were only 14, especially in the context of the accident and your hospitalisation at that time.  I also accept that there was a further onset of a major depressive episode triggered by your brother’s death and its surrounding circumstances.

37After leaving school, you worked full time in a furniture factory for one and a half years.  You then entered the concreting industry and have worked in that industry for many years as a sub-contractor, commencing when you were aged 18 or 19.  You have encountered hardship along the way, often living from hand to mouth and enduring rough patches when work was sparse.  You have had your own business but have found running this a strain.

38After your brother’s death, you met Ms Stewart, and you commenced a relationship which was a rather turbulent one.  As has already been said, you have two children from that relationship.  They are now 15 and 13. Unfortunately, you no longer see your children.  There were a number of pressures on your relationship with Ms Stewart.  You were finding it difficult to obtain work with consequent strains on your business and then in April 2002 you assaulted a taxi driver, resulting in you being incarcerated for 15 months.  This is the only time you had received an immediate gaol term.  When you were released in 2005 your relationship was doomed and you and Ms Stewart separated at the end of 2005.  You then embarked on a relationship with Ms Brockdorff but that has since ended.  She moved interstate and now has a baby.

39You are now in another relationship with a young woman who was at the plea hearing to support you.  You have known her for a long time.  She lives in Daylesford.  You are thinking of buying a house together and resuming your concreting business as well as pursuing your dream as a horse trainer.  Your counsel said that you are at a pivotal point in your life where you can finally have all outstanding Court matters dealt with, and pursue your keen interest in harness horse training and racing.  He said that, apart from some outstanding unpaid fines in the Magistrates' Court, you are in a position to have all matters dealt with, and pursue your passion.  I do hope that this does mark the end of your dealings with the courts, and that you go on to lead a productive life in the community.  Your plans for the future and support from your girlfriend are positive matters concerning your prospects of rehabilitation.

40I was told that Centrelink had sponsored you to engage in a course which would enable you to become a harness racing trainer.  You and Ms Brockdorff are listed as the lessees of two horses, but I was told that this does not involve you paying any money.  Rather, you simply have a share in any winnings, in the event you obtain a training licence and are able to train a winner.  I must say that I have found this situation somewhat curious, against a background of apparent destitution in the latter part of 2013 and early 2014.  The learned Prosecutor referred to a letter undated and signed by a Jan Tippet which was tendered on your behalf.  Ms Tippet seems to say that you have spent a great deal of money in respect of the harness racing industry over a period of three years.  I also note that when pulled over by police in May 2013, you said that you were on the way to the bank to get money for horse feed.  However, I do note that that was earlier in the year of 2013, before the offending which gave rise to the subsequent charges before me.

41In any event, I take into account in your favour the character reference of Ms Tippet.  She speaks very highly of you as a hard-working and dedicated participant in the harness racing industry and also as a person.  She also speaks of the high regard that others in that industry have for you.

42I have taken into account the significant delay in this matter from the incident to date of charge-  When I say ‘the incident’, I am talking about the recklessly cause injury-  that is, from the date of that incident to date of charge, which was nearly two years and from that time till finalisation of the matter on the indictment.  In this regard, I note that you were interviewed by police on 25 February 2011 but you were not charged till 27 September 2012.  No matter the reason for this, which may well have been tied up with having the charge against the victim dealt with first, you have had the uncertainty of this matter hanging over you for some time, exacerbated by being interviewed 18 months before being charged.  I was told that at the first aborted trial of this matter, you were wanting to proceed with the trial in spite of the complainant’s inadmissible evidence, which had been heard by the jury.  However, the learned trial judge took the view that the jury ought be discharged.  You then had to wait for the second listing of the matter which was some time down the track.

43Your counsel submitted that you ought be entitled to a further allowance arising from delay, as he submitted you had used the time between the incident giving rise to the recklessly cause injury charge and now, to rehabilitate yourself.  While it is true that in the intervening period you have worked hard in the harness racing industry and, to your credit, you have completed a number of courses and are on the verge of obtaining your licence as a trainer, you have also committed offences during that period. However, I take into account, in your favour, that the first of these was committed on 29 April 2012 (theft of a motor vehicle), so you did not re-offend for 16 months.  You then committed the threat to kill offence on 13 October 2012, so, about six months after that.  You then did not offend until 25 May 2013, which was the first of the driving offences before me.  However, I factor in that you have not committed any offence of a violent nature since the threat to kill some two years ago.  In the end, I make some allowance in your favour for rehabilitation during the period of delay, but it is not as great as it could have been had you not committed offences in this period.

44You have spoken with harness racing stewards, who appear to be prepared to grant you  a trainers licence once you clear up all outstanding court matters.

45I take into account the opinion and diagnoses of Professor Egan and I accept that time in gaol has been, and will be harder for you than for someone without your psychological difficulties, and I also allow insofar as I can, that your mental health might well deteriorate whilst in gaol.  As to these aspects, I note what your counsel said today, in relation to being in protective custody for five days of the past nine days on remand, and I also note that you've been admitted to St Vincent's Hospital with a condition concerning breathing difficulties, which is yet to be diagnosed.

46Mr Bates said that you are at a pivotal point in your life, as I have said, where you wish to have all matters dealt with and to move on.  I do hope that this is the case and that you are able to make a positive contribution to the community in the future.

47Mr McConkey, taking into account the offending for which I now sentence you, your criminal history and subsequent offences, but also taking into account some steps you have taken toward turning your life around, as well as the character evidence and support you have in the community, I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as fair.  I place moderate weight on specific deterrence and the need to protect the community.

48As I foreshadowed at the plea hearing, I do not find that exceptional circumstances have arisen since the imposition of the suspended sentence so as to make it unjust to restore the three months' gaol. You must have known full well each time you drove that it was in breach of the suspended sentence and whether you did so because you needed to feed the horses or live closer to them or whether you had to move furniture or find new accommodation, these matters do not amount to being exceptional circumstances, either separately or in combination.  You were able to ask for the help of others in finding accommodation.  It does not appear to me that you were so introverted or constrained by depression that you couldn’t obtain the help of others with transport.  In any event, you have committed this type of offence on a number of occasions before, albeit that the prior convictions in this regard are somewhat dated.  But I also note that you fist committed a drive whilst disqualified offence in the series of those offences for which I sentence you in May 2013, which was not at a time when you were moving house or rendered effectively homeless.

49I have had regard to the sentencing snapshots handed to me in respect of sentencing practice in this court and in the Magistrates' Court, and I have had regard to the statistics in these although, they are of limited utility in a case such as yours, especially where you have again assaulted the same victim, albeit in varying circumstances to the previous occasions.  There are other matters personal to you and relevant to your situation which also make statistics of limited utility in your case.

50In all of the circumstances and having regard to the weight that I need to give to all relevant sentencing considerations, I am of the view that a further period of gaol is necessary in your case, over and above the restored suspended sentence.  However, I have very much borne in mind the principle of totality and the matters in mitigation when imposing sentence.

51Would you please stand up, Mr McConkey:

52In relation to the offence of recklessly causing injury and all summary offences, you are convicted.

53I sentence you as follows:

54In relation to charge 1 on the indictment, recklessly cause injury, you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment which will be the base sentence.

55In relation to the breach of suspended sentence, I find the breach proven and I restore the three months' imprisonment, which was imposed by the learned magistrate on 21 March 2013, in respect of the charge of threat to kill.

56In relation to the two charges of using an unregistered motor vehicle, using incorrect number plates, fraudulently using number plates and exceeding the speed limit, I impose an aggregate fine of $500 and grant a stay of 12 months for payment of the fine.

57In relation to each of the charges of drive whilst disqualified you are sentenced to 3 months' imprisonment.

58I direct that one month imprisonment from the wholly restored term of three months, and that 15 days from each of the sentences for drive whilst disqualified, be served cumulatively with each other and with the base sentence, giving a total effective sentence of 15 months' imprisonment, and I direct that you serve seven months before becoming eligible for parole.

59If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of two years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 16 months.

60I declare that you have already served nine days pre-sentence detention which will be factored in as already served.

61I make no order against your licence as I want you to be in a position to get on with your life when you are released from gaol.  Take a seat please, Sir.

62Is there anything arising from those sentencing remarks?

63MR ROONEY:  Your Honour, I think there's also a penalty for breach in itself.

64HER HONOUR:  Well I found the breach proven; is there any need to do anything more than that?

65MR ROONEY:  Sorry, I had that.  Can you just give me a minute, I'll just double check that, Your Honour. 

66HER HONOUR:  It is 83AB?

67MR ROONEY:  It is, Your Honour.  Well it simply says that, "The offender is guilty of an offence and liable to a penalty not exceeding three months' imprisonment."

68HER HONOUR:  So do you say I have to impose a penalty?

69MR ROONEY:  I think you do for an offence, Your Honour.

70HER HONOUR:  All right.  Well in relation to breach of suspended sentence, I will impose a penalty of one month imprisonment, which will be served wholly concurrently with all other sentences.

71MR ROONEY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

72HER HONOUR:  Anything further?

73MR BATES:  If I could just clarify the cumulation, Your Honour, so it ought to be done correctly.

74HER HONOUR:  The base sentence is 12 months' imprisonment.  Then there is one month from the wholly suspended term, which is cumulative and also 15 days from each of the drive whilst disqualified offences, so that is a further two months, so that's three months plus the 12 months which is 15 months.  And non-parole period of seven months.

75MR BATES:  Yes, Your Honour.

76HER HONOUR:  Yes, thank you.  You may remove the prisoner.

- - -