Director of Public Prosecutions v Politis

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-23-01438

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

POLITIS, Cohen

JUDGE:	His Honour Judge Palmer
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	30 July & 2 December 2024
DATE OF SENTENCE:	11 February 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Politis
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 89

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:Criminal Law - Sentence
Catchwords: Dangerous driving causing serious injury – possess a drug of dependence – related summary charges – objectively serious offending – driving unlicensed – commit offence while on bail – driving under the influence of methamphetamine and cannabis – Koori Court – early guilty plea – extensive criminal history - extra-curial punishment – paraplegia - hardship in prison – whether community corrections order alone can meet sentencing purposes – CCO imposed
Sentence: Convicted and sentenced to a Community Corrections Order of 5 years
6AAA:3 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Ms Cara Foot	Office of Public Prosecutions Victoria
For the Accused	Ms Amanda Burnnard	Kurnai Legal

HIS HONOUR:

Circumstances of offending[1]

[1] The offending is set out in more detail in the Amended Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea (30 July 2024). I have also read and taken into consideration Prosecution Submissions for Plea Hearing (12 December 2024); Outline of Circumstances for Mr Politis to Assist in Koori Court Sentencing Conversation (26 July 2024); Outline of Plea Submissions on Behalf of Mr Politis (22 November 2024); and the material tendered in support, including character references, medical and related reports, psychological reports and material relating to the availability of healthcare services in prison.

Cohen Politis, on the morning of 20 August 2022, you were driving a BMW sedan in Hazelwood North. You were unlicensed, and the car was unregistered, with fraudulent plates. Allan Williams, aged 20, was in the passenger seat.
You had a high level of methamphetamine in your blood, which would have prevented you from having proper control of the car. You also had a high cannabis blood level, which may have compounded the effects of the methamphetamine. And you were on bail.
As you drove north along Hazelwood Road, Shannon Steadman, who was also aged 20, was driving south, towards Churchill. He was driving just under the speed limit of 100 km/h.
As you approached Mr Steadman’s car you lost control of yours, and veered into the wrong side of the road. You were travelling somewhere between 85 to 120 km/h. The rear passenger side of your car struck the front of Mr Steadman’s car.
Your car became airborne and ended up in a swamp. You were ejected, and Mr Williams was left hanging by his seatbelt. Mr Steadman was trapped inside his car. All three of you suffered serious injuries, and had to be airlifted to hospitals in Melbourne:
a.Mr Steadman suffered a broken jaw, chipped teeth, a fracture at the back of his skull, and fractured legs from his femurs to his feet. These injuries required multiple surgeries, and months of rehabilitation work before Mr Steadman could walk again. He has still not returned to work, is unable to run or squat as he once could, and continues to suffer post-traumatic stress.[2]
b.Mr Williams suffered a fractured spine and an acquired brain injury, and had two fingers amputated from his left hand. The injuries have had, and will continue to have, an enormous ongoing impact both on himself, and on his mother.[3]
c.You suffered a broken spine, and will almost certainly be paraplegic for the rest of your life.
[2] Shannon Steadman, Victim Impact Statement (3 May 2024).
[3] Ivy Mobourne, Victim Impact Statement (undated).
Your wallet was found at the scene. In it were two small zip lock bags, one containing cannabis, the other a Xanax tablet.
You have pleaded guilty to the following charges:
a.Two counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury, contrary to s 319(1A) of the Crimes Act 1958, the maximum penalty for which is five years imprisonment;[4] and
b.A rolled-up charge of possessing a drug of dependence, namely cannabis L and alprazolam, contrary to s 73 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, the maximum penalty for which is one year imprisonment.
[4] These are serious motor vehicle offences within s 87P(d) of the Sentencing Act 1991. This which means that I must, under s 89(1)(a), cancel your licence and disqualify you from obtaining a further one for a period of not less than 18 months.
You have also pleaded guilty to three related summary offences:
a.Driving while unauthorised, contrary to s 18(1)(a) of the Road Safety Act 1986, the maximum penalty for which is six months imprisonment (related summary offence 7);
b.Driving an unregistered motor vehicle, contrary to s 7(1)(a) of the Road Safety Act 1986, the maximum penalty for which is a fine of 25 penalty units (related summary offence 10); and
c.Fraudulently using registration plates, contrary to s 72 of the Road Safety Act 1986, the maximum penalty for which is two months imprisonment (related summary offence 11).

Objective seriousness and current sentencing practice

The principles that apply to sentencing for the offence of dangerous driving are well-established:[5]
a.General deterrence will often be the primary sentencing consideration for driving offences involving the death or serious injury of another person;
b.Just punishment and denunciation are also important considerations; and
c.A custodial sentence (and often a substantial one) will typically be appropriate for offences of this kind, except where an offender’s moral culpability is at the lower end of the range of seriousness.
[5] See, for example, DPP v Neethling (2009) 22 VR 466; Lee v The Queen [2021] VSCA 156; and Pan v The Queen [2020] VSCA 42.
In this case, I find that your offending was objectively serious:
a.You were unlicensed;
b.You were on bail for other offences;
c.The car you were driving was unregistered, and fitted with fraudulent plates;
d.You severely injured both your passenger and the driver of another vehicle; and
e.Most significantly, you had been using methamphetamine and cannabis, and had high levels of both of these drugs in your blood, and this would have rendered you incapable of exercising proper control of the car.
Ordinarily, the objective seriousness of your offending would require me to impose a substantial head sentence, with a non-parole period. However, as the prosecution has acknowledged, the severe and profound impact the offending has had on you mean that this is not an ordinary case. Current sentencing practice for dangerous driving offences which do not include this feature is of limited assistance.[6]
[6] Cf Lytras v The Queen [2020] VSCA 150 at [53]-[56] (Priest and Weinberg JJA).
The prosecution’s position is that a term of imprisonment imposed in combination with a community correction order (CCO) would sufficiently meet the relevant sentencing purposes. The defence, by contrast, submits that a punitive CCO on its own would suffice.
Although both dangerous driving charges arise out of the same driving, the laying of separate charges reflects the fact that you caused serious injury to two people. Your sentence must reflect that too. I have taken the conduct encompassed by the related summary offences into account in determining the objective seriousness of the dangerous driving charges; this means that, in my view, these charges do not require your total effective sentence to be significantly increased.

Personal circumstances and other subjective matters

You were born in Queensland in 1996. You were 25 years old at the time of the offending, and are now 28 years old. Your mother Carolyn is a Bidjara and Mandandanji woman.
Your parents separated when you were four years old. You lived with your mother until you were six, when your father effectively kidnapped you and took you to Victoria. Over the next few years you moved between your parents, and in and out of home. You were exposed to drugs and violence, and many traumatic experiences. The very serious difficulties of your childhood and adolescence continue to affect you, and I give this weight in the sentencing process.[7]
[7] Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571.
You began using cannabis at the age of 13 and methamphetamine at the age of 14. At the same age, you were dealt with by the Children’s Court for the first time. You spent much of the next decade in custody and now have a lengthy criminal record which includes offences involving drugs, violence, family violence, weapons, driving, theft, burglary and criminal damage. However, in the two years since your offending, with one minor exception, you have not used drugs or committed any further offences. In the circumstances of your case – including both your change in attitude and your reduced ability to offend[8] – there is little need for specific deterrence.
[8] Cf R v McLachlan [2004] VSCA 87 at [17] (Chernov JA). The Department of Justice and Community Safety, Extended Pre-Sentence Assessment – Outcome Report (4 February 2025), page 5, assessed you as being at medium risk of general re-offending. However, counsel for the prosecution submitted that this assessment failed to adequately reflect your changed circumstances.
You live at home with your mother and sister, both of whom are nurses, and who help care for you. As supportive as they are, they are also, in a sense, victims of your offending.
It is to your credit that you chose to have your plea heard in the County Koori Court. [9] You were open to receiving powerful messages from the two elders who participated in the sentencing conversation, as well as from your mother, and you showed genuine and deeply felt remorse and insight. You did not seek to blame anyone but yourself for your offending, and you apologised to your victims. You seemed to have turned this tragic event into an opportunity for personal change and rehabilitation.[10] The insight and remorse you have shown, both in court and to those who have assessed you, is a powerful mitigating factor in your favour.
[9] Honeysett v The Queen [2018] VSCA 214 at [54] (Priest, Beach and Hargrave JJA).
[10] This is confirmed in the character references from your mother Carolyn Fraser (21 November 2024) and sister Laiken Politis (undated).
You indicated your intention to plead guilty after a contested committal. However, the prosecution accepted that your plea should be regarded as an early one. Your plea saved the courts, witnesses, prosecuting agencies and the community as a whole time, money, inconvenience and uncertainty. I will therefore reduce your sentence because of your plea of guilty.
The most significant and complex matter I need to take into account arises from the serious damage you caused to yourself by your dangerous driving. The defence submissions set out in detail the medical treatment you required in the aftermath of the crash, as well as the ongoing impact on you of your injuries. [11] To mention just some of that impact: you have no voluntary limb movement, sensation or use of your lower body; you have lost bowel and bladder function; you have ongoing pain and erratic sleep; you are at risk of secondary complications; you require significant ongoing medical management; and you are vulnerable, isolated, depressed and anxious.
[11] Outline of Plea Submissions on Behalf of Mr Politis (22 November 2024), [13]-[33]; see also the extensive body of material tendered in support.
You have suffered extraordinary extra-curial punishment.[12] Moreover, you will continue to suffer this punishment for the rest of your life. On a physical level it is unlikely to improve with time, and may get worse. In combination with your deep remorse, I give this very significant weight in the sentencing process.[13]
[12] Neither counsel nor I had been able to identify any case where the extra-curial punishment was as heavy as yours. See, for example, the following dangerous or culpable driving cases R v McLachlan [2004] VSCA 87; DPP v King (2008) 187 A Crim R 219 at 228 [30] (Redlich JA); Altun v The Queen [2014] VSCA 46 at [10(62)] (Weinberg and Coghlan JJA); and DPP v Pershouse [2024] VCC 397 at [53]-[54] (Judge Todd).
[13] See, for example, Singh v The Queen [2021] VSCA 161 at [48] (Kyrou and McLeish JJA); Fuller v The Queen [2013] VSCA 186 at [40] (Ashley JA); and DPP v King (2008) 187 A Crim R 219.
Corrections Victoria and Justice Health indicate that they will be able to cater for your individual health needs in a custodial environment.[14] Your counsel did not dispute this. However, she did submit that the changes and uncertainties in your care would cause you to experience enormous vulnerability, which would make prison significantly more onerous on you. I accept that. Your mental health issues also mean that prison will weigh more heavily on you; and there is a serious risk that prison could worsen these issues.[15]
[14] See letters from Geraldine Veneziano, Acting General Manager, Sentence Management Operations, Sentence Management Division, Corrections Victoria (13 November 2024); and Jackie Ashmore, Clinical Director, Adult Health Services, Justice Health (26 November 2024). This means there is no basis for me to make a finding that there is a serious risk that imprisonment would have a grave effect on your health: cf Boucher v The Queen [2022] VSCA 3 at [122]-[123] (Priest and Beach JJA and Macauley AJA), discussing R v Eliasen (1991) 53 A Crim R 391 and R v Smith (1987) 44 SASR 587.
[15] Report of Carla Lechner, Clinical Psychologist (12 November 2024), page 9 [6]; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269, limbs 5 and 6.
The injuries you have suffered are thus relevant – both as extra-curial punishment and in terms of the hardship of prison – to whether I impose a term of imprisonment at all; and if I do, to the length of that term. [16] Giving these matters proper weight can result in a sentence that would otherwise be regarded as extremely lenient. [17] That is the case here. But for your permanent disabilities, you would undoubtedly be facing a substantial term of imprisonment.
[16] See DPP v El-Hassan [2023] VSCA 307 at [31] (Priest and Beach JJA).
[17] See DPP v King (2008) 187 A Crim R 219 at 222 [4] (Warren CJ) and 230 [35]-[36] (Redlich JA).
Instead, I have considered whether all relevant sentencing purposes can be met by the imposition of an appropriately conditioned CCO, either on its own, or in combination with a shorter period of imprisonment. To that end, I had you assessed for a CCO. The authors of the pre-sentence assessment report said that you have developed insight into the way in which your drug use and mental health concerns had influenced your offending; that you are eager to engage in treatment; and that they were confident in your ability to complete a CCO despite your pre-injury history of non-compliance.[18]
[18] Department of Justice and Community Safety, Extended Pre-Sentence Assessment – Outcome Report (4 February 2025).
Your counsel effectively submitted that the amount of suffering that imprisonment would cause you would be inhumane. Of course, in many ways the point of punishment is to inflict suffering. Nevertheless, in your case, it seems to me that the need for general deterrence and just punishment is already significantly met by your extra-curial punishment: even if you do not go to prison, it is difficult to see how anyone could reasonably claim that you had “got off lightly”.
For that reason, I have chosen to impose a CCO on its own. That CCO will be as punitive as your circumstances allow. By doing that, in my view, a CCO can balance the need for punishment and deterrence with an appropriate exercise of compassion. I will impose that CCO in respect of all of the driving charges because they are founded on the same facts. [19]
[19] Sentencing Act 1991, s 40(1).
Before I can impose a CCO, you need to consent to it. If I cannot impose a CCO because you do not consent, then the only adequate sentencing option available to me would involve a term of imprisonment. In offering you a CCO, I encourage you to use it as an opportunity to make the changes in your life that, in Koori Court and to Corrections staff, you said you wanted to make. You have a long criminal history, marred by drug use, and you have caused terrible suffering to the two people you injured through your offending. This CCO is designed to both punish you and to help you not to return to your previous way of living.
The CCO I intend to impose will be of five years duration. I will explain the conditions that would be included in a CCO, so you can decide whether or not you consent. [Read out conditions from CCO].
If you breach the CCO by committing further offences, you can be charged and a sentence of imprisonment is one of the options that can be imposed for that breach. You can also be re-sentenced for the offending which is currently before me. That might include imposing a term of imprisonment. I will make an order that any breach by you of this CCO be brought back before me.
Do you consent to the imposition of a community correction order? [Yes].

Orders

Had you not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of three years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of two years. Because you pleaded guilty, I am instead imposing the following sentence:
a.On charge 1, dangerous driving causing serious injury to Shannon Steadman; charge 2, dangerous driving causing serious injury to Allan Williams; related summary offence 7, driving while unauthorised; related summary offence 10, driving an unregistered vehicle; and related summary offence 11, using fraudulent plates: I convict you and sentence you to a CCO of five years duration.
b.On charge 3, possessing a drug of dependence, I convict you and impose no further penalty. I also make the disposal order sought by the prosecution.
In relation to charges 1 and 2, I cancel your driving licence and disqualify you from obtaining a further one for a period of three years.

[2025] VCC 89

11 February 2025