Director of Public Prosecutions v McFarlane
[2025] VCC 1351
•28 July 2025
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for PublicationCase No. CR-24-00810
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS v MASON MCFARLANE ---
JUDGE:
Karapanagiotidis
WHERE HELD:
Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
6 September 2024; 7 July 2025; 23 July 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:
28 July 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:
DPP v McFarlane
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:
[2025] VCC 1351
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---Subject:CRIMINAL LAW - Sentencing
Catchwords: obtain a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity – attempt to obtain a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity – deferred plea – recognisance release order - Bugmy
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Cases Cited:Hooimeyer v The King [2025] VSCA 37; Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.
Sentence: Total effective sentence of 20 months’ imprisonment, served by way of Recognisance Release Order.
---
APPEARANCES:
Counsel Solicitors For the CDPP Mr J. O’Toole Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions For the Accused Mr P. Dunn KC Garde Wilson Lawyers HER HONOUR:
1Mr McFarlane, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of obtain a financial advantage by deception and one charge of attempt of obtain a financial advantage by deception.
Circumstances of the offending
2
The full circumstances of your offending are outlined in the prosecution opening, marked as Exhibit A. This constitutes the factual basis upon which I sentence you.
3
In summary, you obtained a financial advantage by deception by lodging a total of ten (10) original and amended Business Activity Statements (BAS) for the periods of March 2021 to July 2021, when you did not actually operate a business enterprise. As a result of the offending you obtained GST refunds from the ATO totalling $141,995 which were paid into your nominated bank account (charge 1).
4
Further, you attempted to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception by lodging twenty-three (23) original and amended BAS for various periods, when you did not actually operate a business enterprise. These amounts were not paid (charge 2). As a result of the offending you attempted to obtain a further $605, 355 in GST refunds from the ATO.
5
The total quantum of the offending is alleged to be $747,350.
6For the period of the offending you were either unemployed and/or in receipt of social security benefits, namely Youth Allowance.
7
On 6 March 2021 you used the Australian Business Register to register an ABN, with an effective date of 1 March 2021. You registered under your name as a sole trader, with the major industry described as ‘Construction.’ You also registered for GST and elected to lodge your BAS on a monthly basis using the cash method. The effective start date was 1 March 2021. You nominated your Commonwealth Bank account to receive the GST refunds. By selecting a monthly BAS lodgement cycle, on a cash basis, you were required to report sales and purchases in the BAS period in which consideration was received from customers or when consideration was made for the purchases.
8
The Goods and Services Tax and Business Activity Statement regime is canvassed in detail in the prosecution opening from paragraphs [14] to [44].
9On 28 October 2021 you contacted the ATO to link the ATO to your myGov platform. This allowed you to access the ATO online platform to lodge BAS with the ATO. Each of the BAS lodged by you was lodged through your myGov platform.
10In respect of charge one, the date of lodgement, BAS period, date of refund and amount is outlined in the prosecution table at paragraph [47] and reproduced below:
# Lodgement date BAS period Date refund
received
Benefit obtained Amount paid 1 9 March
2021
January 2021
(original)
12 March 2021 $19,483 $19,483 2 9 March
2021
February 2021
(original)
12 March 2021 $13,346 $13,346 3 17 May 2021 May 2021
(amended)
20 May 2021 $17,769 $17,769 4 16 June
2021
June 2021
(amended)
20 June 2021 $14,592 $14,592 5 5 July 2021 March 2021
(original)
8 July 2021 $2,360 $2,360 6 5 July 2021 April 2021
(amended)
8 July 2021 $1,608 $1,608 7 19 July 2021 July 2021
(original)
25 July 2021 $17,770 $17,385[1] 8 1 August
2021
July 2021
(amended)
4 June 2021 $19,030 $19,030 9 13 August
2021
April 2021
(amended)
19 August 2021 $19,499 $12,116[2] 10 15 August
2021
March 2021
(amended)
19 August 2021 $16,538 $16,538 Total for Charge 1
$141,995
$134,227
11Between 12 August 2021 and 17 December 2022, you attempted to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception by lodging twenty-three (23). Your attempts are outlined in the table at paragraph [51] and reproduced below:
# Lodgement date BAS period Amount Attempted 1. 12 August 2021 June 2021 (amended) $4,607 2. 27 August 2021 January 2021 (amended) $13,000 3. 27 August 2021 February 2021 (amended) $10,000 4. 27 August 2021 February 2021 (amended) $5,000 5. 27 August 2021 February 2021 (amended) $10,000 6. 27 August 2021 March 2021 (amended) $10,000 7. 27 August 2021 April 2021 (amended) $13,113 8. 27 August 2021 May 2021 (amended) $1,200 9. 28 August 2021 August 2021 (original) $45,570 10. 12 September
2021
August 2021 (amended) $35,660 11. 21 October 2021 September 2021 (original) $17,770 12. 28 October 2021 October 2021 (original) $12,242 13. 29 October 2021 October 2021 (amended) $13,155
14. 17 November 2021 November 2021 (original) $17,770 15. 18 November 2021 October 2021 (amended) $198,913 16. 18 November 2021 November 2021 (amended) $45,088 17. 21 January 2022 December 2021 (original) $5,335 18. 21 January 2022 December 2021 (amended) $56,122 19. 21 January 2022 January 2022 (original) $3,855 20. 21 January 2022 January 2022 (amended) $59,737 21. 21 January 2022 November 2021 (amended) $7,147 22. 27 April 2022 March 2022 (original) $17,980 23. 17 December 2022 November 2022 (original) $3,291 Total for Charge 2 $605,355 12
Each of the BAS lodged by you contained false details relating to the amount reported at label 1B being ‘GST on purchases’.
13A summary of this inferred expenditure based on amounts entered by you at label 1B are outlined in the table at paragraph [53] and reproduced below:
Date Lodged BAS Period Amount claimed Inferred amount by the Offender of purchases at label 1B 9/03/2021 January 2021
(original)
$19,483 $214,313 9/03/2021 February 2021
(original)
$14,737 $162,107 17/05/2021 May 2021 (original) $18,450 $202,950 16/06/2021 June 2021
(original)
$15,011 $165,121
Date Lodged BAS Period Amount claimed Inferred amount by the Offender of purchases at label 1B 5/07/2021 March 2021
(original)
$3,089 $33,979 5/07/2021 April 2021
(original)
$3,005 $33,055 19/07/2021 July 2021 (original) $18,450 $202,950 1/08/2021 July
(amended)
2021 $45,300 $498,300 13/08/2021 April
(amended)
2021 $35,677 $392,447 15/08/2021 March
(amended)
2021 $19,678 $216,458 12/08/2021 June
(amended)
2021 $19,879 $218,669 27/08/2021 January
(amended)
2021 $32,483 $357,313 27/08/2021 February
(amended)
2021 $24,737 $272,107 27/08/2021 February
(amended)
2021 $29,737 $327,107 27/08/2021 February
(amended)
2021 $39,737 $437,107 27/08/2021 March
(amended)
2021 $29,678 $326,458 27/08/2021 April
(amended)
2021 $35,677 $392,447 27/08/2021 May
(amended)
2021 $19,650 $216,150 28/08/2021 August
(original)
2021 $54,470 $599,170 Date Lodged BAS Period Amount claimed by the Offender at label 1B Inferred amount of purchases 12/09/2021 August
(amended)
2021 $44,560 $490,160 21/10/2021 September
(original)
2021 $18,450 $202,950 28/10/2021 October
(original)
2021 $12,365 $136,015 29/10/2021 October
(amended)
2021 $13,289 $146,179 17/11/2021 November
(original)
2021 $18,450 $202,950 18/11/2021 October
(amended)
2021 $199,047 $2,189,517 18/11/2021 November
(amended)
2021 $45,768 $503,448 21/01/2022 December
(original)
2021 $5,567 $61,237 21/01/2022 December
(amended)
2021 $56,360 $619,960 21/01/2022 January
(original)
2022 $3,987 $43,857 21/01/2022 January
(amended)
2022 $59,869 $658,559 21/01/2022 November
(amended)
2021 $7,678 $84,458 27/04/2022 March
(original)
2022 $19,370 $213,070 17/12/2022 November
(amended)
2022 $3,291 $36,201 14There were no transactions consistent with the running of a construction business within your bank statements. There were no identified purchases for business expenses such as construction supplies, business insurance, business advertising, vehicle expenditure, or book-keeping/accountant fees.
15Most of the largest purchases from your bank accounts following the disbursement of the GST refunds, are for cash withdrawals, lifestyle retail purchases, transfers to numerous individuals (particularly in relation to your partner).
16You nominated each refund to be paid into an account in your name, for which you were the sole signatory.
17You received your first refund from the ATO into this account for the original January 2021 BAS on 12 March 2021 (being a refund of $32,829). The refund was deposited with reference indicator ‘ATO’.
18Prior to this deposit, this account had a balance of $171.82 as of 11 March 2021.
19From the date the first ATO refund of $32,829 was received, you fully dissipated the funds within two weeks and disposed of the money.
20Each subsequent refund was received into this bank account.
21On 3 September 2021, an ATO Client Engagement Officer, undertook an audit to verify the GST credits claimed by you. The officer took a number of steps, as outlined in paragraph [62] of the opening.
22On 20 September 2021, a final request letter was sent to you, informing you that you had not provided a response and that they would withhold the refund in connection to the recent BAS you had recently lodged for the tax period September 2021.
23On the same day, the ATO retained GST refunds totalling $110,152 being the BAS refund for the BAS lodged for the period of September 2021.
24On 6 October 2021, a finalisation audit letter was sent to you advising that the ATO had completed its GST audit of the BASs lodged for the tax periods between 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2021 and 1 July 2021 to 30 September 2021, with outcome that the GST credits of $250, 044 for the above periods were reduced to nil due to your failure to substantiate the purchases you claimed the GST credits for. Further, no penalties were applied.
25On 7 October 2021, the notice of amended assessment was issued to you for the amount of $240,134 as a result of you not substantiating the purchases for which he had claimed GST.
26In 2023, the matter was referred to the Australian Federal Police for investigation. On 9 February 2023, members of the Australian Federal Police executed a search warrant at your residence. They seized correspondence from the ATO and your mobile phone.
27Analysis of your phone revealed communications between you and others relating to the GST refund scheme.
28On 11 July 2023, the informant wrote to you inviting you to participate in a record of interview. No response was received, and a record of interview did not take place.
29You were charged on summons on 2 January 2024.
Sentencing factors
30In sentencing you the Court is required to take into account a range of sentencing factors, as outlined in the non-exhaustive list contained in s16A(2) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). I have also considered other sentencing principles that are relevant to the Court’s task to fix a sentence ‘of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence’ as required by s16A(1)[3].
[3] (see also Annexure A of prosecution submissions, 5 September 2024).
Gravity of offending
31Your offending is inherently serious as indicated by the 10 year maximum sentence that applies to each indictable offence.
32General deterrence looms large in offending of this nature. As the higher courts have stated, ‘the tax regime is dependent on the honesty of those participating in it. Therefore, in cases such as this, considerations of general deterrence are given particular emphasis, and indeed prominence, in the sentencing process[4].
[4]Hooimeyer v The King [2025] VSCA 37.
33Also, such offending can be difficult to detect, ‘investigations are often expensive and there is the potential for significant loss to be sustained by the revenue’. As has also been stated many times before, serious tax fraud adversely affects the whole community.
34The prosecution have helpfully canvassed the relevant sentencing principles in tax fraud cases from paragraph [5] to [7] and [12] to [20] of their submissions.
35You engaged in a course of thoroughly dishonest and sustained criminal conduct from approximately March 2021 to December 2022. Within this period you fraudulently claimed GST refunds by lodging a total of 33 false BAS claims. It is clear from the summary that your fraud involved the completion of numerous individual steps to generate each false GST refund claim.
36Over this period of time, you dishonestly obtained, and attempted to obtain, a significant quantum of money. You were not carrying on a business at all. I accept the prosecution submission that you lodged these BAS forms ‘with the sole intent of offending’ and you were motivated by greed and financial gain[5])).
[5] See paragraph [9](e)(f).
37Each charge is a rolled up one and I have considered all the relevant circumstances,. They are both serious charges. On charge 1, you actually obtained a substantial amount of money. On charge 2, while you were not successful in your attempts, I do assess it as the more serious charge of the two. The amount you attempted to obtain was significant and it was between a lengthy period. As already referred to it, it also involved you lodging 23 BAS statements. Further, for at least part of this period, you offended after the ATO had commenced an investigation into your previous claims and had sent you correspondence about this.
38Your Counsel submits, in broad terms, that your plan to defraud the ATO was not of your own making. You yourself are of limited intellectual functioning. It was your father who originated and executed the plan. He instructed you to apply for an Australian business number and played a major role in the offending. He submitted several claims using your details and you were largely unaware of what was initially taking place. After his involvement ceased, your own attempts to obtain further funds were futile and, as your Counsel puts it, ‘nonsensical in light of the ATO requiring information which [you] did not provide.’
39On your behalf it was submitted that the origins of the offending lie in the combination of the Covid pandemic and the impact of the lockdowns, the relationship with your father, and your own immaturity, combined also with your intellectual disabilities.
40The combination of circumstances, as canvassed by your Counsel, does not excuse your offending. Even if influenced initially by your father, you involved yourself in planned and protracted offending for which you received a financial benefit. However, I do accept that the constellation of factors, that is your immaturity, intellectual deficits, along with the influence of your father – particularly in light of your history, are relevant to an assessment of your moral culpability.
Plea of guilty
41I take into account your plea of guilty.
42Your plea of guilty entitles you to an important sentencing discount. You entered your plea at the first reasonable opportunity. I accept your plea indicates your willingness to facilitate the course of justice and accept responsibility for your offending. Your plea has important utilitarian value. I also accept, as submitted on your behalf, that your plea is indicative of remorse.
Personal circumstances
43Your personal circumstances were outlined by your Counsel and are canvassed in the report of clinical neuropsychologist, Dr Mathew Staios.
44You were born in December 2002 and are now aged 22 years.
45You had a difficult upbringing with your parents both, at times, struggling with drug addictions. You also have a full brother and three half siblings. Growing up you were also exposed to significant domestic violence. Your parents separated when you were 12 or 13 years of age with your father later imprisoned for domestic violence and other offending. There is an extensive history of DHS involvement with the family and protective concerns, with over 20 past notifications to Child Protection.
46Your schooling was challenging and it appears, from contemporaneous reports tendered on your behalf, that your progress educationally was severely hampered by a combination of learning difficulties and increasing disengagement. This was compounded by the trauma you encountered and experienced as a child and young person. You did not go to secondary school and you are largely uneducated. You have reported that you ‘never attended secondary school, as no school would accept you’ given your challenges and behavioural issues.
47In 2016 a neuropsychological report assessed your full-scale IQ as falling within the extremely low range (67). You performed at low levels across all areas of functioning and your memory skills were particularly weak. Further, the report placed your perceptional reasoning in the borderline range. The writer, who assessed you when you were 13 years of age, opined as follows:
‘… findings from the current assessment indicate that Mason’s current level of cognitive function is at a level of mild intellectual disability. Mason’s basic word, reading and spelling skills at the level of an 8 year old.’
48From the age of 13 you spent a number of years living between your mother’s home and being on the streets. You also started gravitating towards negative peer influences and came into contact with the criminal justice system. You started using substances, including methamphetamine, from the young age of 13 up until 2018. During this time you had a number of appearances in the Children’s court for a range of dishonesty offences.
49In 2019, following the death of two close friends in a stolen car crash you became determined to change your ways, with the assistance of your longtime partner (Paris Phodi) and your mother.
50At the end of 2019 you obtained a job as a labourer. In early 2020 you moved into transition housing with your partner. In March 2020 Covid-19 lockdowns commenced.
51You had then moved to a rental accommodation in Dandenong. You didn’t have a licence and you were unable to work.
52In 2021 your father suggested that you could get some ‘easy money’ and created the necessary paperwork for you to get refunds from the ATO. In August of that year the ATO wanted verification which neither you or your father could provide. Thereafter your father stopped making further applications. From time to time you attempted to gain more money unsuccessfully from the ATO. The money obtained was spent during and post Covid.
53In 2022 you returned to work and maintained your relationship with your partner and had steady work since that time.
54In 2022 the matter was referred to the Australian Federal Police and in February police executed a search warrant. In January 2024 you were charged by summons. In May 2024 you pleaded guilty at a committal mention and the matter was set down for plea.
55You have a relevant prior criminal history, including for dishonesty matters, mostly in the Children’s Court. I note that on the 27 January 2023 you appeared in the Magistrates Court and were sentenced to a community corrections order (CCO).
Other mitigating factors
Youth
56I take into account as a relevant and important factor your youth. As already noted you are now 22 years of age and you were between the ages of 18 and 20 at the time of your offending. There are well-settled principles concerning young or youthful offenders, as outlined by your counsel[3]. While this factor needs to be assessed against the gravity of the offending, I accept that your youth is a primary consideration and that your rehabilitation should be given prominence over general deterrence.
Delay
57I also take into account the delay in your case being finalised. The offending took place in 2020 to 2021. As already noted, the matter was reported to the AFP in 2022 and their investigation commenced at the beginning of 2023. You were not charged until 2024. The delay is important from a consideration of fairness and rehabilitation. I take into account the anxiety of having the charges hanging over your head, along with your efforts at rehabilitation during this period, which I will return to in a moment.
Cognitive limitations
58It is submitted on your part, and I accept, that your diagnosed deficits along with your immaturity, results in a reduction of your moral culpability[6].
[6] Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39.
59More recently in September 2024 Dr Staios undertook further testing which was consistent with the earlier findings in 2022 and confirmed that your level of intellect falls within the Extremely Low range. While Dr Staios notes that a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment was beyond the scope of his assessment, your general cognitive profile was consistent with your history of early learning difficulties and disrupted and limited access to educational institutes throughout early development (at [7.1]). While falling short of a formal diagnosis of intellectual disability, Dr Staios opines that your ‘prior and current cognitive profiles indicate that [you are] performing at a very low level; essentially similar to an individual with a mild intellectual disability’ (at [7.3]).
60Your Counsel also submits, and I accept, that an immediate prison sentence would weigh more heavily on your then a person who does not suffer from your disabilities and that you would be more vulnerable in an adult prison. Relevantly Dr Staios states: (at 7.5): ‘given his history of early childhood maladjustment, limited level of education/limited level of intelligence, I am concerned that a term of imprisonment may result in a decline in his mental state and forging bonds with maladaptive peer influences. The impact of custody may very well result in an adjustment disorder and impact on his capacity for rehabilitation.’
Bugmy principles
61I also accept your Counsel's submission that the Bugmy principle in the general sense applies in your case and is relevant to an assessment of your moral culpability and sentencing[7]. Your background has been marred by significant instability and disadvantage and you have been exposed to drug use and negative influences as a young person. Dr Staios states at 7.2:
‘His prior cognitive profile indicates a limited capacity for problem-solving and consequential thinking, factors that would have left him vulnerable to the influence of negative peers. The added impact of ongoing exposure to domestic violence and psychological destabilisation appears to have been added factors that resulted in difficulty with regulating emotions and substance use as a means of coping.’
[7] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
62On 6 September 2024 I heard submissions in your case and deferred your sentence for several months to better assess your prospects of rehabilitation. Within this period you were remanded in custody. You were remanded in custody on new alleged offending in early November 2024. These matters are listed for committal hearing later in the year (October 2025).
63In the circumstances, the prosecution submit that your prospects of rehabilitation should be assessed as guarded. Also, they submit that while you have a relatively limited prior criminal history in the adult jurisdiction you have a significant juvenile history commencing from 2015.
64Your Counsel submits that it is most regrettable that you are now in custody given you had seemed to turn a corner in your life. While the charges are disputed and of a different nature to the current ones, he accepts that these recent circumstances bear upon an assessment of your rehabilitative prospects.
65Your Counsel submits that since 2019 (aged 17) you had made efforts to turn your life around. In 2019 you had your last children’s court appearance and had not, up until recently, returned to custody. You stopped using drugs and made significant changes to your life. In January 2023 you pleaded guilty in the Frankston Magistrates Court to offences which had occurred some time earlier and were released on a 12 month CCO. You complied with the order, without breach and had a solid period of rehabilitation. Given your background and circumstances Mr Dunn submits that you had made remarkable progress – including gaining full time work, maintaining a strong and positive relationship with your partner, remaining abstinent, and developing insight into your behaviours[8] .
[8] Letter of Paul Johnson.
66While this progress has now been disrupted, and this causes me to adopt a cautious approach to an assessment of your rehabilitative prospects, I do take into account the efforts you had made. Given your history and deficits it was particularly promising and indicates that you are capable of making positive and meaningful change to your life.
67Dr Staios considers that you would benefit from engaging with a psychologist to assist with the management of ongoing risk factors and previous experiences of childhood trauma, consequential thinking and your offending. Given your limited ability for abstract reasoning and language skills, he recommends that psychological intervention is best delivered using a behavioural/concrete based approach (at 7.6]).
Sentencing principles
68As already canvassed, your youth is an important factor and I consider that your rehabilitation should be given prominence over general deterrence. Nevertheless, denunciation and general deterrence still have an important role to play in the sentencing exercise. Specific deterrence and community protection is also relevant given your history and I must ensure that are you adequately punished for your offending.
69I take into account the principles of parsimony, proportionality and, totality. The fraud offences are similar in nature and, in all the circumstances, I consider it appropriate to order substantial concurrency. I accept the prosecution submission that a degree of cumulation is required to reflect the distinct criminality of each charge and the breadth and seriousness of the offending.
70The prosecution submit that, given the gravity of the offending and the importance of general deterrence and denunciation an immediate term of imprisonment involving a non-parole period is required. Your Counsel originally submitted that it was open to the Court to consider alternatives to immediate imprisonment. Given your change of circumstances and current remand in custody, he submits that the Court could impose either a straight custodial sentence or a sentence by way of a recognisance release order.
71I have had regard to the comparable cases provided by Counsel. In particular, I have considered the appellate cases contained in the prosecution table[9] . These cases offer broad guidance and assistance but there are discernible differences. For example, none of the cases, with perhaps the exception of the case of Dylan Ockwell, who was still older than you, appear to have involved youthful offenders[10]. Of course, each case must be decided on its own facts and circumstances.
[9] R v Ibbetson [2020] QCA 214; Henne v the Queen (Unreported decision of VSCA dated 20 December 2016); Acosta v The Queen [2015] VSCA 94; R v Massey [2015] QCA 254; Cao v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 109; DPP v Ockwell [2024] VCC 270; DPP v Blanke [2023] VCC 1291; DPP v Hughes [2020] NSWDC 98; DPP v Dattilo [2026] VCC 1617; DPP v Castaldi [2015] VCC 596; DPP v Wilkins [2014] VCC 1344.
[10] DPP v Ockwell [2024] VCC 270.
72I am satisfied that no sentence other than one involving a component of imprisonment immediately served is appropriate in the circumstances. The sentence needs to mark the seriousness of the offending and give appropriate weight to general and specific deterrence and just punishment. In setting and structuring the sentence I have also taken into account the powerful and compelling mitigating factors advanced on your behalf, in particular your plea of guilt, delay, your youth and immaturity, your vulnerabilities and cognitive deficits and your background of hardship and disadvantage.
Sentence
73On Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to 11 months' imprisonment.
74On Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to 17 months’ imprisonment.
75Charge 2 commences today, 5 August 2025. It is a Commonwealth regime so I am required to specify the commencement dates. Charge 2 commences today. My intention is to cumulate three months of Charge 1 on to Charge 2, so I will order that Charge 1 commences eight months before the expiry of Charge 2. That ought to result in a total period of 20 months.
76I direct that you be released after you have served 4 months’ imprisonment, upon giving security by recognizance of $1,000, on condition that you be of good behaviour for a period of 18 months.
77Pursuant to s.18 (or equivalent) I declare that you have served 13 days in pre-sentence detention, which dates back to your remand on 23 July 2025.
78Pursuant to s.6AAA but for your plea I would have sentenced you to some 2 years and 10 months' imprisonment and had you serve 8 months’ imprisonment.
79Pursuant to s.21B of the Crimes Act I make the reparation order in the sum of $141,995.00 in the terms sought and unopposed.
80Mr McFarlane, what I have done is, in total I have sentenced you to 20 months' imprisonment. It is to be served by way of a Recognisance Release Order so I have got to explain that to you.
81What I am requiring of you is that you serve four months of that sentence. Take away the time that you have done already. So there is four months to serve. The rest is effectively hanging over your head. You sign an order that you are going to be of good behaviour for that period of time, the 18 months. Does that make sense?
82OFFENDER: Thanks, Your Honour. Yes, Your Honour.
83HER HONOUR: Yes. With that $1,000, the security of $1,000, you do not have to pay it now, okay.
84OFFENDER: Yeah.
85HER HONOUR: It is really a security that you are offering. You might in the future, should you breach it, then there are ways in which - it might be that you have to pay it later if you breach it. Maybe, maybe not, but there is power to do that, okay.
86OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
87HER HONOUR: If you breach the order then you come back before the Court and it is open to the Court to have you serve the time that is hanging over your heard, okay.
88OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour. Yeah.
89HER HONOUR: So you have really got to think of it. I am sure that Ms Garde-Wilson will explain it to you further, but you have got to think of it in terms of a suspended sentence.
90OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
91HER HONOUR: Think of it like, after you have done your four months. I know that you are on remand for other matters. This does not affect that. You are serving a sentence for a period and then that matter will go through its own process, okay.
92OFFENDER: Yeah. Yes, Your Honour.
93HER HONOUR: Ms Garde-Wilson, no doubt you will explain it further but what I will do is, in my experience of these matters, I mean number one, I have to explain it to a person, but number two, it needs to be signed. So I might actually leave the link open. I am really mindful of Mr McFarlane's difficulty in perhaps understanding some of these concepts, so it might be that you can talk to him again because he will receive a piece of paper, asking him to sign it.
94Perhaps, actually Counsel, it might be that I should go through it right now.
95The piece of paper that you are going to get, it is going to be sent to you, it is going to indicate the sentence I have just imposed, which is effectively the term I have imposed and the four months that you have to serve. You are going to confirm by signing, so you are going to agree by signing, that you have had explained the purpose and effect of the order, okay. And I have done that. The consequences that might follow if you break it, okay. And that this order may be discharged or varied. That is another thing open to the Court. The Court has the power to vary the order as well. You will be signing that you agree to be bound by it. In other words, you agree to it. Do you agree to it, Mr McFarlane?
96OFFENDER: Yeah. Yes, Your Honour.
97HER HONOUR: All right. And that you agree that you have been given a copy of it. So that is what this document is going to say.
98Counsel, actually, have we sent that through to them? Thank you. Counsel, it is going to be sent through to both of you. I might actually have you check it first before we do end the link, just to ensure that you both agree. It has been sent now, maybe just give it a moment.
99Now while that is coming through, Ms Prasad, anything further? Do you both agree with my - the maths is not that complicated but do you both agree that I made my intention very clear.
100MS PRASAD: Yes.
101HER HONOUR: It is to cumulate three months.
102MS PRASAD: Yes.
103HER HONOUR: It's a total of 20 months. He's to serve four, okay.
104MS PRASAD: Yes, that's right, yes.
105MS GARDE-WILSON: Yes, Your Honour.
106HER HONOUR: Thank you. And have you both received the Recognisance Order?
107MS PRASAD: I haven't as yet, Your Honour.
108HER HONOUR: All right, it might just take a moment.
109MS GARDE-WILSON: I have, Your Honour.
110HER HONOUR: Okay, excellent.
111MS GARDE-WILSON: I am happy with that.
112HER HONOUR: Thank you. Ms Prasad, still waiting?
113MS PRASAD: I am, Your Honour, sorry. There's a bit of an internet lag in my office so sometimes things can take a bit longer to be received.
114HER HONOUR: Oh, you were having some difficulty with your link as well.
115MS PRASAD: Yes. Yes, I was.
116HER HONOUR: Why don't we just give it a moment though, because I do want to ensure that you have it.
117MS PRASAD: Yes.
118MS GARDE-WILSON: Your Honour, I do apologise. I am required in another Court at 10 o'clock. I'm wondering whether or not I could be excused.
119HER HONOUR: Yes. Look, can I just indicate to Mr McFarlane that you will have a word with him later, no doubt?
120MS GARDE-WILSON: I will arrange a link with him at lunchtime today and go through it further with him.
121HER HONOUR: Yes, okay. Ms Prasad, you've got the document?
122MS PRASAD: I haven't yet, Your Honour. Although based on what was read out, it does sound appropriate. I just haven't received it yet, I'm sorry.
123HER HONOUR: That's all right. Why don't we do this? Ms Garde-Wilson, I am going to let you go. Just give me one moment. Why don't we do this? Can you just confirm by email that you have received it, let me know if there's anything you want to raise or if you are content with it, and then it will be sent through to Mr McFarlane in the prison, he knows what it is, he'll sign it, we'll return it, copies will be sent to Counsel. Can we leave it like that?
124MS PRASAD: Yes, Your Honour.
125Ms GARDE-WILSON: Thank you.
126HER HONOUR: All right, Counsel, thank you. We'll adjourn the matter.
0
10
0