Director of Public Prosecutions v Murrell

[2014] VCC 335

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR-13-01157
CR-13-01143
CR-13-01142

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

ANOIR MURRELL
KERRY MURRELL
LLOYD MURRELL

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MAIDMENT
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	28 February 2014
DATE OF SENTENCE:	13 March 2014
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Murrell & Ors
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VCC 335

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

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

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms M. Dunbar
For Accused A. Murrell	Ms N. Van der Heyden
For Accused K. Murrell	Mr T. Bevan
For Accused L. Murrell	Mr K. Reynolds

HIS HONOUR:

1Lloyd Murrell and Kerry Murrell, you have each pleaded guilty to an indictment charging you both with an offence of armed robbery on 4th December of 2010 during which you stole a number of items of jewellery, cash, cameras, ornamental dolls and a computer, and you had with you offensive weapons, namely a pistol, a sawn off air rifle and a pipe.

2And you, Lloyd Murrell, have also pleaded guilty to an offence of dishonestly handling stolen goods, being an apple mp3 player, knowing or believing such goods to be stolen.   That offence occurred on 2 November 2011.  In Charge 3, you Lloyd Murrell, have also pleaded guilty to a similar offence of dishonest handling of stolen goods, involving three compact discs, one tomtom receiver and one pro comp, knowing or believing such goods to be stolen.

3You, Anoir Murrell, were found guilty by a jury on charges of aggravated burglary and armed robbery, all of which took place on the same day, as part of the same incident the subject of Charge 1 to which your co-offenders Lloyd Murrell and Kerry Murrell, have pleaded guilty.  You were also convicted of armed robbery involving four separate victims at those premises.  In Charge 2 James Frangos, in Charge 3 Dianne Frangos, in Charge 4 Melia Frangos and in Charge 5 Timothy Scanlon.

4Each of you have admitted prior court appearances and prior convictions.  The prosecution tendered and relied upon a summary of prosecution opening, which is Exhibit A on the plea hearing.   That was read to the court on the previous occasion you appeared before me.  I'm not going to read it again. Suffice to say it describes an incident on 4 December involving an invasion by the three of you together with a fourth person, of the home of the Frangos family.   You were armed with the weapons set out in the Charge.

5During the course of the armed robbery you demanded money; demanded $150,000 in cash.  You had been led to believe that it was likely that there would have been large sums of money on the premises.   You threatened the members of the family.  You struck James Frangos on the shoulder with a steel pipe, you held a shotgun to James's head, you threatened them with their lives, and led them to believe that they may be killed.  You also threatened that if they didn't comply you'd have to start shooting and would chop off their fingers.

6Needless to say, the victim impact statements that are relied upon by the prosecution and tendered before me, show that the impact of your offending conduct on this occasion will have a lasting impact upon your victims.  There is no doubt that you have significantly destroyed their quality of life, all three of them, and you have left them with scars that will not heal.  They will bear those scars, I have no doubt, for the rest of their lives, and will feel uncomfortable living in their home for the rest of their lives.

7You have shattered that sense of safety that a citizen is entitled to feel in his or her home.   It is clear from an accompanying psychologist report in relation to Melia Frangos, that she is receiving ongoing psychological treatment, and is likely to suffer from these effects for a very significant part, or the rest of her life.  All of those matters I am bound to take into account.

8In respect of the two offences to which you pleaded guilty alone Lloyd Murrell, of handling stolen property, they involve items that were apparently stolen on two separate occasions; one on 22 August 2011 and one on 14 September 2011, and they are set out in those separate charges for that reason.

9The maximum term of imprisonment for armed robbery is 25 years and the maximum term for aggravated burglary is 25 years.  These were very serious examples of those offences.  They were appalling crimes committed without any concern for your victims, mercilessly and motivated by greed and nothing else.

10

Turning to matters personal to each of you, starting with you Lloyd Murrell.  Your counsel provided me with an outline of submissions with is Exhibit LM4, together with a report from Dr Cunningham, clinical psychologist, dated

23 September 2013, a letter from a Dr James Chung, dated 12 September 2013 and various certificates and assay reports, which show firstly, that you have been participating in a number of programs within the metropolitan remand centre, whilst you've been on remand.  In particular, the MRC's schools program of 2013, which seems to me to be a worthwhile program, and it's to your credit that you have participated in that.  It also shows that you have sought to improve your range of skills whilst you have been inside, and have used your time as much as you can, wisely.  I understand that you have been in protection for part of that time, and have therefore, not been able to participate as fully as you might otherwise have wished.  It is also clear that during that time you have remained drug free, and that too, is to your credit.

11The material provided to me shows that you had a very difficult childhood, a deprived background and an extremely difficult start to your life.  In those circumstances, it is not surprising that they have left scars upon you.   It seems that you do not have a high level of intelligence, but that the effect of the various events of your childhood, which I need not catalogue, have resulted in you suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, of a serious kind.

12Dr Cunningham also notes that because of your criminal record and the fact that you have had long terms of imprisonment, you have become institutionalised.  That will not have assisted you in dealing with your mental disorders.  It is urged upon me that I should take your post-traumatic stress disorder into account.  Undoubtedly it will make serving your term of imprisonment more difficult than for a person who did not have such a disorder.  And for that reason it requires me to adjust the sentence that I should otherwise impose upon you.

13Dr Cunningham does express the opinion that you represent an ongoing risk of re-offending until you engage in ongoing psychological and psychiatric drug and alcohol and community support. There is no doubt that, looking at your criminal record, that opinion is well founded.  You have a very bad record.  The most significant prior conviction occurred on 5 April 2002, when you were sentenced for a series of offences, including armed robbery, to a total effective sentence of 13 years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of seven-and-a-half years.  You were, it seems, released on parole, but then committed a further offence and lost your parole.  I understand that you had been released on parole from that sentence in, or about, November 2010, about a month prior to the invasion of the Frangos's home.  It was whilst you were on parole that that offence was committed.

14A period of liberty then was broken by you being reclaimed, as I understand it, and you were ultimately paroled during the middle of 2011.   You committed further offences not long after you were granted parole, for which you were sentenced by His Honour Judge Howard on 18 December last year.  Those offences - there were 12 indictable offences I think - to which you pleaded guilty, plus two summary offences.  Those offences involved, amongst other things, conspiracy to commit armed robbery in Ballarat and an aggravated burglary.

15

Your were sentenced by His Honour Judge Howard on that date,

18 December 2013, to a total effective sentence of 14 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of ten-and-a-half years.  His Honour declared

777 days of pre-sentence detention to be reckoned as already served on that sentence, and therefore deducted administratively from the sentence.

16You pleaded guilty to those offences.   Otherwise, according to His Honour, you would have been sentenced to a total of seventeen-and-a-half years, with a minimum term of 14 years.  Those offences, of course, were committed after these offences, and are therefore not prior convictions.  It is necessary for me to consider the sentences imposed by His Honour Judge Howard in determining an appropriate overall sentence, having regard to what is known as the totality principle, that is, looking at all of your criminality together, and determining what is an appropriate and just overall sentence.  There are, obviously, some complications in that, but ultimately I am also required to impose a new non-parole period which takes into account, amongst other things, the totality principle also.  I will come to that in more detail in the moment.

17It is impossible for me to think that your prospects of rehabilitation at this stage can be anything but very poor.  There are signs from the participation in these various programs in the remand centre, that you are endeavouring to improve your prospects of rehabilitation.  Unfortunately, it will be some fairly considerable time before you will be at liberty again.  It is to be hoped that you will continue with your efforts inside to rehabilitate yourself.

18This court has no capacity other than to impose a sentence upon you which will add to the period that you are already serving.  But the general thrust of your counsel's submissions on your behalf is that I should not impose a crushing sentence, not impose a sentence which deprives you of all hope of rehabilitation in the future, and which leaves you some encouragement to continue with your rehabilitation.  Obviously I am required to punish you appropriately for this serious offending conduct and as I say, for that reason, that will add, necessarily, somewhat to the period of your incarceration.

19I note, also, that your counsel particularly, drew my attention to the fact that you are, and have been, in a relatively stable relationship - with your present partner, Karianne.   She has had troubles of her own, and for that reason has returned to New South Wales to seek treatment and also support from family members.  You have, I think, two children with her, one of them as young as one year of age.  And you have a number of other children also.   I accept, that you will do it hard this time, with a very young child, and not being in a position to play any significant role as a parent to that young child for a considerable period of time.  Whilst, on one view, you have only got yourself to blame for that, on another view it undoubtedly will make serving your time harder.

20Also you have, as your counsel pointed out, no control over, or influence upon, the difficulties that are inherent in the family without the mother, Karianne, functioning to her full capacity.  That, too, will weigh more heavily upon you. 

21You pleaded guilty, and that I is to your credit.  You are entitled to a discount for your plea.  The court recognises that pleas of guilty are to be encouraged because they save the community a good deal of money and they save witnesses for having to relive the trauma of events such as this.  Unfortunately, of course, they did have to give evidence in the trial of Anoir Murrell, but that was not your doing, that was him exercising his right, as he did, to plead not guilty.  He doesn't get punished for not pleading guilty, but you get credit for pleading guilty, and you will get a significant discount for that plea of guilty.

22I really can't do much about the fact that you are institutionalised already and that the time you will have to serve in prison, even on the order of His Honour Judge Howard from last year, will add to your problems of being institutionalised, and I am bound, I think, to add further to that.  But I have to facilitate your rehabilitation, eventually as far as that reasonably can be achieved, having regard to the various other sentencing considerations.

23There's no doubt that your difficult childhood and early life will have made living an honest life more difficult.   There are plenty of people with deprived backgrounds who don’t get into the kind of trouble you do, but that will no doubt have contributed to the problems and the criminal history that you have become involved in.

24These events occurred three years and three months ago.   A good deal of time has passed.  It must have been in your mind that you may get caught for this and it has been hanging over your head for some considerable period of time.   I take into account the delay.  It is not anybody's fault, but there has been a delay of three years and three months since the offending conduct. 

25I note also that it is probable you will have issues with your term of imprisonment.  You have been in the management unit and that undoubtedly will have made doing your time harder.  You have been in your cell 23 out of 24 hours at least for significant periods of that time.  I imagine you would not want to remain in a management unit for your sentence, but it is quite probable that for periods of your imprisonment you will be the subject of that kind of incarceration.  I take that into account.  Also, of course, that does make your efforts to rehabilitate yourself more difficult.

26I regard this as a particularly serious offence.  You clearly must take full blame for what occurred.  I can't say whose idea it was.  But I can say that you were in there right at the word go, part of the planning process, and that you played a full part in the offence.  It is, I think, unfortunate that your nephew Anoir was drawn into this, I don't give you any a heavier sentence for that, but I think it's unfortunate. 

27This was a vicious crime.   It will have such an impact on your victims, that you should be ashamed of what you did.  And I hope you are now.  I have to take all those matters into account.   But giving you the full credit for your plea of guilty, avoiding giving you a crushing sentence, and taking into account and giving proper effect to the totality principle, I hope that the sentence that I will ultimately impose in a few minutes will not be regarded by you, or others, as a crushing sentence, but a just sentence in all the circumstances.

28Moving on to you, Kerry Murrell, I was provided by your counsel with an outline of submissions - which is Exhibit KM1 on the plea hearing.  Obviously, you came from the same family background and your life was difficult as a child.   You, as I understand it, left home and stayed with your grandmother from the age of 14, and left school at a relatively young age in order to set about a life of hard work.  You have been a hard worker throughout your life and you've turned your hand to almost anything that has been available to you when the need arises.  It seems you trained as a nurse but didn't particularly like that work, but did it for a while.  You've turned your hand to being a brickie's labourer, mechanic, roof tiler and, as your counsel put it you worked "Like a man, truck driving.".

29Your have, I think, been a lifelong lesbian and you've had various relationships with women.   The most recent significant relationship was with Renee Aro, which began, as I understand in 1998.  It continued until about mid-2010.  It is clear, I think from the material I've seen, that there was a very difficult break-up of that relationship and that it was for you, a particularly traumatic experience, and one that you had a good deal of difficulty dealing with.  That coincided with the release of your brother, Lloyd on parole.   You made efforts to help him settle in Victoria, which is where he wanted to go apparently.  It was in those circumstances that you found yourselves, that is Lloyd and indeed Anoir, all living close together in Ballarat.

30You went off the rails during that year.   I suspect that it did have a fair bit to do with the relationship break-up.   Whilst you have a criminal record, which includes an offence of aggravated burglary, I think in 2007, that offence was of a very different kind from this aggravated burglary.   It arose in circumstances of provocation and was very differently motivated from this offence.

31How you allowed yourself to become involved in this, with your relatively good  record, defies belief.  But it is also apparent from the circumstances, that you were in on it from the planning stage.   You make no bones about the fact that you played your part in the offence.  I suspect that you are ashamed of what you have done.   You have pleaded guilty knowing that you would get a substantial term of imprisonment and you, like your brother Lloyd, are entitled to the credit for that plea of guilty.

32It was submitted on your behalf that your prospects of rehabilitation are to be regarded as good.   I am inclined to accept that.  You have a good work record, notwithstanding that you have osteoarthritis, which has no doubt been contributed to by some of the physical hard work that you have done over the years.  You don't have any drug or alcohol issues.   You had no desperate need for money.   You through your counsel, suggested that you have been shocked by what you have encountered in prison whilst you have been on remand, have no wish to remain in the prison system any longer than necessary, and no wish to return to it.

33You have lost your house and your possessions.   You have very little support.   You're well respected within the gay community and you find, apart from what you have observed in prison, your time in prison irksome because of the boredom that it entails, you being a person used to hard work.  All of those things, I think, do support the contention that you are a good candidate for rehabilitation.  I would be surprised if you got yourself into trouble of this nature again.  I think that this was, and should be, regarded as something of an aberration in your life, and I am confident that you have the wherewithal to put all this behind you when you have completed your sentence.

34All of that I take into account.  It was urged on me that I should enable you to have a significant period on parole.   It seems to me that that is a well-founded submission.  I have to punish you adequately for your offending conduct, and denounce this appalling crime by an appropriate sentence.   I have to impose a sentence which not just deters you but deters others, particularly deters others from committing offences of this kind.  But I have selected a sentence which I think adequately facilitates your rehabilitation, to the extent that I reasonably can, having regard to the other sentencing considerations.  I will impose sentence on you in a moment, after I spoken about your nephew, Anoir Murrell.

35Anoir Murrell you are now 25 years of age and were 21 years of age, at the time of the offending conduct.  It was, of course in your case, also appalling conduct.  I have no doubt that you played your role in the offences.   The question arises as to whether you would have got into this offence if it had not been for the co-offenders.  As I have tried to indicate, I do not blame anyone in particular, but I suspect that you would not.  Your criminal record does not suggest that you were on a course that would have led you to offending conduct of this kind, of your own accord.

36I was provided with a comprehensive outline of plea - Exhibit AM1.  I was also provided with a report of Mr Jeffrey Cummins dated 25 February of this year.  Also some correspondence from Headspace which shows that you have attended there regularly, particularly during 2011 and early 2012, but going back as far as 2007.  I have also been provided with a letter from your mother.   I have seen a number of letters from mothers.   Mothers generally do have a rather glossy view of their sons, but I do not get the impression that your mother has tried to gloss over anything in this letter.  It is, I think, extremely well written and catalogues your childhood, and yours and her history of encountering violence and ill treatment and disruption in your lives, of a kind not dissimilar from that suffered by your co-offenders.  Possibly worse.  I note that there are references in Mr Cummins report which I will not detail, which suggest that you were subjected to particular behaviours which would no doubt have contributed to your post-traumatic stress disorder.  There is also a suggestion that you might also have bipolar disorder.   That does not seem to me to be very well documented.  But there is no doubt that there are symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder which need to be taken into account.

37The diagnosis that Mr Cummins, I think finally was prepared to express an opinion about, was that you suffered from a chronic adjustment disorder, and mixed anxiety and depressed mood, and features of traumatisation, the adjustment disorder initially being triggered by childhood and adolescent experiences.  He went on to say that you most probably suffer from multiple and overlapping post-traumatic stress disorders.   He describes that as a condition described as 'complex post-traumatic stress disorder'.

38

To the extent that there were some signs of psychosis, in his opinion they were most probably drug-related.  Mr Cummins also read your mother's letter and noted the background history that describes, and confirmed in

Mr Cummins mind that she also suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. All of that forms part of the background and context in which you came to be committing this offence.

39Perhaps the most significant factor though, is that from the age of 18 you became a heroin addict.  Your habit was running at about $1,000 per day.  It is difficult to avoid, if you have a habit like that, being tempted by the prospect of easy money and putting a little aside for the next several days at least, where you have to find heroin in quantity of that order.

40Your mother does not try to gloss over anything, as I have said, in her letter.  It seems that she, and perhaps more recently you, have found solace in your contact with the Jehovah Witnesses.   I was provided with firstly a letter from David Becei and also a letter from a Mr Spano, who is apparently an elder in the Deer Park congregation of Jehovah Witnesses.  It seems that you have a wish to ultimately pursue that religious direction and that you see that as an aid to your ultimate rehabilitation.

41I think it is plain to you, it is plain to your mother, and it is plain to everybody, that unless you get the heroin addiction under control and control it permanently, then you are at significant risk of re-offending.  If, on the other hand you are able to overcome that particular demon, then your record does not suggest that your prospects of rehabilitation are all that bad.  Unfortunately, heroin addiction and the rehabilitation from that has a very high failure rate, and you will have to devote considerable effort to overcoming that particular demon.

42I think I mentioned during the course of the plea that there are programs within the prison system in Victoria, particularly Marngoneet Prison, which I would urge you at some stage to apply for, if you get the opportunity.  That will not only help you, but it will put you in a better position to get parole when eventually you are entitled to apply for parole.  Also it will help you, I think, with the sort of contacts you are going to need, and the supports you are going to need when you get out, in order to stay off heroin and to find a more productive pathway in your future life.  It seems that there are people who are prepared to support you.   That will help you.   In a guarded sort of way, I think you have got reasonable prospects of rehabilitation.

43You were still very young when you committed this offence, and I suspect, immature.  You are only 25 years of age now.   The courts well recognise that the public is very often best protected, particularly in dealing with young persons, by facilitating their rehabilitation as much as reasonably possible.  You did not plead guilty.   You don't get punished for pleading not guilty, you are entitled to plead not guilty.   But on the other hand you get no credit for pleading guilty.  You have to appreciate that you won't get the discount that would have been available had you done so.

44That is highlighted by the fact that there is no discount for saving the Frangos's for having to come and give evidence about these traumatic events.   But as I say, you don't get punished for that and I don't propose to give you any extra for having exercised your undoubted right to put the prosecution to their proof.

45This is your first time in custody.  It seems, you too, have made good use of your time and have engaged in the programs that have been offered to you.  That too, I think, suggests that you, in a guarded way as I have already indicated, have good prospects, or reasonable prospects of rehabilitation.

46You have been trusted as a billet within the prison system and you have done your best to facilitate your rehabilitation in the quite lengthy period, I think it must be now around about 680 days - somebody will tell me what the pre-sentence detention is - that you have been in custody, to think about what you have done.  I have no doubt that you have done that.

47It is necessary for me to consider questions of parity as between sentencing of all three of you.   That's not a terribly easy exercise in circumstances where two have pleaded guilty, one has a very extensive criminal record involving offences of a similar character and the other, your Aunt Kerry, has nowhere near as substantial a record and has, I think more obviously, good prospects of rehabilitation, she having no drug or alcohol issues.  So it is not an easy exercise to determine what sentence should be imposed on each of you to reflect all of the relevant circumstances and to make the sentences just as between you, so that you are being treated equally, having regard to all of those various factors that I have to take into account.

48I do, of course in your case Anoir, take into account your youth, and that does bring into sharp focus the question of rehabilitation.  It has been urged upon me that, for that reason, I should look to a longer than usual period on parole, where you can have the sort of support that is necessary for a person addicted to heroin and recovering from heroin addiction.

49As the prosecution pointed out, in assessing an appropriate sentence, and then in determining an appropriate punishment for each of you, I need to take into account that this was a well-planned and well executed series of offences upon the Frangos family.  It wasn't spontaneous; you went to some length to disguise yourselves.  You went equipped for various eventualities, in particular to menace the Frangos family.   You were all willing participants and you believed that large sums of money would be available to you at the Frangos home.

50You were motivated by greed.   You were prepared to deal with resistance if you encountered it.   There was some gratuitous violence perpetrated upon James Frangos, and a good deal more in the way of threatened violence than was necessary in all the circumstances.  As I have pointed out, this has had such a profound effect upon our victims.  That forms a significant consideration in determining an appropriate sentence.

51I was invited to look at the sentencing snapshots in order to determine an appropriate range of sentences for offences of this kind.  I've also looked with some care at recent cases coming before the Court of Appeal in this state to determine an appropriate sentence.   I have also paid particular regard to the sentencing remarks of His Honour Judge Howard when he passed sentence upon you, Lloyd Murrell, on 18 December of last year.

52The question in your case, of determining what the relationship should be between the sentences I have to pass and those sentences imposed by His Honour Judge Howard, add to the complexity of the sentencing process.  But doing the best I can to marry up all those competing considerations, I am now ready to pass sentence upon you.

53Dealing first with you Lloyd Murrell, if you just stand please, whilst I deliver sentence.  On Charge 1 of armed robbery I sentence you to imprisonment for seven years; on Charge 2 of handling stolen goods I sentence you to imprisonment for 12 months; on Charge 3 of handling stolen goods I sentence you to imprisonment for 12 months.  I convict you in relation to each of those offences.  I order that the sentence on Charge 1, that is seven years, is to be regarded as the base sentence and I order that three months of the sentences on each of Charges 2 and 3 be served cumulatively upon one another and cumulatively upon the sentence on Charge 1; that makes a total effective sentence on the offences on the indictment of seven years and six months imprisonment.

54I now have to consider what relationship those sentences should play to the sentence of 14 years imprisonment imposed by His Honour Judge Howard.  I order that two years of the sentence that I have imposed of seven years and six months be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed by His Honour Judge Howard.  That makes a total effective sentence overall, of 16 years imprisonment.  I am required to fix a new non-parole period, and I do so having regard to the Court of Appeal decision in R v Bortoli, 2006, VSCA 62.   I am required to fix that new non-parole period in accordance with s.14 of the Victorian Sentencing Act, and I also take into account that you have served now almost three months of the non-parole period that was imposed by His Honour Judge Howard on 18 December of last year.  So you have already served that period.  You continue to get credit for the 777 days that His Honour declared as time served under the sentences that he imposed and propose in all of those circumstances to impose an overall new non-parole period which commences today, of 12 years imprisonment. 

55How many days is pre-sentence detention?

56MS VAN DER HEYDEN:  Eight hundred and sixty two days, including the 777.

57HIS HONOUR:  The total pre-sentence detention remains at 777 days.  Okay you can take a seat for a moment, and I should say, that but for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 20 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 16 years.

58Kerry Murrell would you just stand please.  On Charge 1 of armed robbery I sentence you to imprisonment for five years and six months and convict you.  That makes a total effective sentence in your case, of five years and six months, and I order that you serve a period of three years and three months before you become eligible for parole.  Now there is a pre-sentence detention which I need to declare in relation to Kerry Murrell, is there not?

59MS DUNBAR:  Yes Your Honour it is 713 days.

60HIS HONOUR:  Seven hundred and thirteen days.  I declare that 713 days of pre-sentence detention be reckoned as time served under the sentence that I have imposed and that those days be deducted administratively from the sentence that you will actually have to serve.  But for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years and eight months.  You can take a seat for the time being.

61Anoir Murrell would you stand please.  On Charge 1 of aggravated burglary I sentence you to imprisonment for six years and six months and I convict you.  On Charge 2 of armed robbery, I sentence you to six years and six months and convict you.  On Charge 3 of armed robbery I sentence you to six years and six months and convict you.  On Charge 4 of armed robbery I sentence you to imprisonment for six years and six months and convict you.  On Charge 5 of armed robbery I sentence you to six years and six months and convict you.

62All of those sentences, of course, arise out of one incident.   Therefore the total effective sentence is six years and six months and I order that you serve a period of four years and two months before becoming eligible for parole. 

63Now the pre-sentence for Anoir Murrell is?

64MS VAN DER HEYDEN:  Six hundred and seventy-nine days Your Honour.

65MS DUNBAR:  Correct Your Honour.

66MS VAN DER HEYDEN:  Oh, sorry Your Honour.

67HIS HONOUR:  That's all right.  And I declare that pre-sentence detention of 679 days be reckoned as time served under the sentence that I have imposed upon you and deducted administratively from the sentence you will actually have to serve.  Okay, you can take a seat too.

68I also make the orders for retention of forensic sample and forfeiture of property associated with the offending in accordance with the drafts with which I have been supplied.  I have signed those and I think Mr Travers has those and will hand them down to you.

69Are there any other orders that I need make, ladies and gentlemen?

70MS VAN DER HEYDEN:  No Your Honour.

71HIS HONOUR:  No?  All right.  Thank you.

- - -