Director of Public Prosecutions v Pun

[2016] VCC 1458

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 16-00472

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

AUNG PUN

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE LAWSON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	21 September 2016
DATE OF SENTENCE:	28 September 2016
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Pun
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2016] VCC 1458

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:Criminal law

Catchwords: Sentencing – seven charges obtaining a financial advantage by deception, eight charges of dealing with the proceeds of crime, attempting to obtain property by deception, attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception, possessing a drug of dependence (testosterone), trafficking a drug of dependence (methylamphetamine) – immediate term of imprisonment imposed

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Office of Public Prosecutions	Mr J. Wheelahan	John Cain, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr R. Lawrence	Starry Norton Halphen

HER HONOUR:

1Aung Pun, you have pleaded guilty on indictment to seven charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception (Charges 1-3 and 5-8); eight charges of dealing with the proceeds of crime (Charges 9-15 and 17); one charge of possessing drug of dependence (testosterone) (Charge 18); one charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence (methylamphetamine) (Charge 16);  one charge of attempting to obtain property by deception (Charge 19); and one charge of attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception (Charge 4).

2That reminds me, we need to amend the particulars on the indictment because it all refers to the Crimes Act 1958 whereas the charges dealing with the drugs should be the Drugs Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, which is Charge 16 and Charge 18.  Mr Wheelahan, on the original, Charges 16 and 18 relate to sections of the Crimes Act 1958 which are patently wrong.

3MR WHEELAHAN:  Yes.

4HER HONOUR:  So do you want to make the amendments?

5MR WHEELAHAN:  I do, Your Honour, yes.

6That is an oversight on my part.

7HER HONOUR:  That is all right. I will give leave to the Crown to amend the original.  My associate will hand that over.  There is no need for Mr Pun to be re-arraigned given it is just a particular. Do you agree with that,
Mr Lawrence?

8MR LAWRENCE:  Yes, I do, Your Honour.

9HER HONOUR:  All right.  I will proceed.  Mr Pun, you were 33 at the time of the offending.  You are now aged 34.  You come before the court with no prior criminal history.

10The charges are serious and that is evidenced in the maximum penalties that are prescribed for the various charges which are as follows:

·ten years’ imprisonment for the charges of financial advantage by deception and obtaining property by deception;

·five years' imprisonment for the charges of attempting to obtain property by deception, attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception, and negligently dealing in the proceeds of crime; 

·15 years' imprisonment in respect to trafficking a drug of dependence simpliciter; and

·with respect to possession of a drug of dependence, the maximum penalty is one year imprisonment where the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the offence was not committed for any purpose relating to trafficking and five years' imprisonment in any other case.  In this case I have applied the lower penalty, given that it is accepted that the testosterone was in your possession for personal use.

11You were self-employed at the time of the offending, operating an information technology business from your home at 4 Ellsworth Drive, Keysborough.  You resided there with your wife, Sandar Lay.

12The principal victim is the Westpac Bank.  Between 3 February 2015 and 8 July 2016 you accessed Westpac's online banking services from IP addresses linked to your residential address and applied for a series of loans and credit facilities using false names.

13Subsequent analysis of Westpac Banking records by Mr A. Chesler, Senior Fraud Investigator, showed you opened seven Westpac bank accounts in the following false names:

(i)Kway Han

(ii)Samantha Jade

(iii)Gregory Clark

(iv)Sam Harris

(v)Chun Zhou

(vi)Phuong Trinh

(vii)Mikito Nishino

You also attempted to open an account in the name of Ryan Reef.

14Your modus operandi was simple.  You would open loan accounts or apply for credit facilities online from your home address and then you would attend suburban Westpac branches and supply false identification documents in support of the online loan and Mastercard applications in satisfaction of the bank's 100 point identity check requirements. Westpac would then authorise the loan or credit facility with the exception of the matter the subject of Charge 4.

15You were captured on CCTV footage on eight occasions withdrawing funds from accounts that were set up in the false names at various Westpac Bank telling machines.  The total value of the financial advantage obtained and depleted was $240,800.  The total value of the attempt to obtain a financial advantage was $57,400 making a grand total of $298,200.

16The total value of the proceeds of the crime dealt with negligently in terms of withdrawals from the Westpac Bank was $108,500.  A further $2,600 cash was located at your home address, making a grand total of $111,100.

17I shall sentence you on the basis of the Crown opening that was read to the court at the time of the plea hearing, there being no objection taken by your counsel Mr Lawrence. There are three rolled up charges, namely Charges 4, 5 and 6. 

Charge 1 – Kway Han 

18On 3 February 2015, you completed an online loan application for a Westpac Flexi Loan in the sum of $28,900 in the name of Kway Han.  You then attended the Westpac branch at the Chadstone Shopping Centre and produced a forged marine licence bearing your photograph, together with a birth certificate in the name of Kway Han to Westpac employees, who then opened an account in that name.

Charge 2 – Samantha Jade

19On 8 April 2015, you applied for a Westpac Mastercard in the name of Samantha Jade in the amount of $30,000.  An unknown co-accused attended the Westpac Bank Collins Street branch and produced a forged marine licence and utility notice in the name of Samantha 3 – Gregory Clark

20On 9 April 2015, you completed an online application with Westpac Bank to generate a Mastercard account in the name of Gregory Clark to the value of $15,000.  You attended the Westpac Glenhuntly branch and produced a forged marine licence in the name of Gregory Clark bearing your photograph. The Westpac branch retained a copy of that licence.

Charge 4 – Ryan Reef

21This is the attempt charge.  On 21 April 2015, you applied for a Westpac Mastercard credit card for the amount of $40,000 and a Westpac Flexi Loan online for $17,400 in the name of Ryan Reef. Both of these loans were declined.

22On 27 April 2015, you attended the Westpac Bank Braeside branch where you were captured on CCTV footage.  On that day you produced a forged heavy vehicle driver's licence in the name of Ryan Reef that had your photograph depicted on it, together with a false utility notice in the name of Ryan Reef in support of the application that was photocopied by bank staff.

Charge 5 – Sam Harris

23You attended the Westpac Wales Corner branch on the corner of Swanston and Collins Street, Melbourne, on 27 April 2015 and produced a forged heavy vehicle licence in the name of Sam Harris which depicted a photograph of you and a utility notice in the name of Sam Harris to activate a Westpac Mastercard and Flexi Loan application.

24On 28 April 2015, you completed an online loan application via Westpac Bank to generate a Westpac Mastercard credit card for the sum of $30,000.

25On 30 April 2015, you completed an online loan application via Westpac Bank to generate a Westpac Flexi Loan in the sum of $27,900.

Charge 6 – Phuong Trinh

26On 1 June 2015, you completed an online loan application via Westpac Bank to generate a Westpac Mastercard credit card for $30,000.  You provided a mobile phone number as your contact phone number.

27You attended the Ferntree Gully Westpac branch on 4 June 2015 and provided a forged licence and Medicare Card in Phuong Trinh's name to activate the card. On 19 June 2015, you applied for a Westpac Flexi Loan online in the name of Phuong Trinh to the value of $24,000.

Charge 7 – Chun Zhou

28On 17 May 2015, you applied for a Westpac Mastercard credit card in the name of Chun Zhou to the value of $25,000.

29On 4 June 2015, you attended at Knox Shopping Centre Westpac branch and provided a false Australian Driver's Licence and an Energy Australia bill in the name of Chun Zhou in support of the application.

Charge 8 – Mikito Nishino

30On 17 May 2015, you applied for a Westpac Mastercard credit card for the amount of $30,000 in the name of Mikito Nishino. On
4 June 2015, you attended Westpac Bank QV Village and provided a forged driver's licence and utility notice in support of the application.

Charges 9 and 10

31These charges relate to Charge 6 and concern withdrawals from Phuong Trinh's account. 

32On 29 June 2015, you attended at the Westpac branch in Bayswater and withdrew $8,000 from an account in the false name of Phuong Trinh. You were depicted on CCTV footage.

33On the same date, you withdrew $15,000 in the false name of Phuong Trinh at the Westpac Bank Glen Waverley branch and again you were captured on CCTV footage.

Charge 11 – withdrawal from Myo Aung’s account

34On 1 July 2015, you attended at Westpac Bank Melbourne QV Village branch and withdrew $30,000 cash from the Myo Aung account. On that occasion you were depicted on CCTV footage.

Charges 12 and 13 – withdrawals from Vincent Chou's account

35On 2 July 2015, you attended Westpac Bank Clayton branch and withdrew $500 cash from the Vincent Chou account. Once again you were seen on CCTV footage. 

36On 4 July 2015, you attended Westpac Melbourne Wales Corner branch and withdrew $25,000 cash from this account. Again, you were depicted on CCTV footage.

Charges 14 and 15 – withdrawals from the Myo Aung’s account

37On 6 July 2015, you attended at Westpac Bank Springvale branch and withdrew $10,000 cash from the account of Myo Aung and you were captured on CCTV footage.

38On 6 July 2015, you attended a different Westpac Bank branch in Springvale and transferred $20,000 from the account of Myo Aung into the account of Mikito Nishino and again you were depicted on CCTV footage on that occasion.

Detection and arrest

39On Tuesday 7 July 2015 at about 4.00 pm, you parked your wife's BMW sedan outside the Westpac Dandenong branch and walked into the bank, producing a card in the name of Phuong Trinh to the bank teller, Rakesh Chander.  You told her that the Westpac Knox branch had blocked your card. On checking, she noted that there were some funds available in that account and yet the system indicated there was no money available for your withdrawal.

40She asked that you return the following day, which you did, and again you provided the ATM card and driver's licence in the name of Phuong Trinh to Ms Chander. She contacted the Westpac Fraud Investigation Unit who, in turn, alerted Victoria Police who arrived shortly thereafter and placed you under arrest. At the time you had a heavy vehicle driver's licence, Medicare card and two Westpac Bank cards in the name of Phuong Trinh in your possession. 

41Police then conducted a Vic Roads check on that licence and confirmed that the licence did not exist on the system.  You were arrested and taken to Springvale Police Station to confirm your identity.  Police then obtained search warrants for the BMW and your home in Ellsworth Drive, Keysborough.

Charge 16 and 18 – possession and trafficking

42A quantity of methylamphetamine and a vial of testosterone were located in the BMW.  Also located were a set of silver scales in a black case, snaplock bags containing methylamphetamine, 30 SIM cards and a mobile phone containing text messages.  An exemplar text reads: "Hey I got 400 can I please get half just got his brother and sister who hanging out for it."

43On searching your home, police discovered a multitude of false documents, including licences, payslips and false utility accounts used to apply for credit facilities and loans in the false identities outlined previously on a computer hard drive located at your premises.

Charge 17 – deal with proceeds of crime

44The amount of $2,600 in cash was located during the search of your home. 

Charge 19 – attempt to obtain property by deception

45On 5 August 2015, after you had been arrested and released on bail, you then attended Vic Roads Heatherton Depot and applied for a duplicate marine licence in the name of Kway Han.  That request was rejected as the marine licence was cancelled.

46On 11 October 2015, a “can say statement” was prepared and witnessed by Mr Patrick Morris, your lawyer, in which you said: "I agreed to make the Kway Han loan application" and that you paid $5,000 for a forged birth certificate used in support of that loan and that you withdrew money from unspecified false accounts. You stated that, save for the Han application, you had never made any online credit applications and never picked up the credit cards from the bank except when a card was blocked.  You admitted withdrawing funds from the bank to support an ice addiction and nominated a number of individuals as being involved in a joint criminal enterprise to defraud the bank being led by a person you knew as “Andrew Harris” also known as “Andrew Haddara”.

47In the statement, you said Mr Harris would give you ice and then made the false loan applications to enable you to pay back your debts owed to him. You stated that other people would pick up the cards from the bank, give them to Mr Harris, who would then in turn give them to Mr Han, and you would then withdraw funds to pay back Andrew Harris.  You put forward a number of names as being persons of interest involved in this joint criminal enterprise. Investigations of the nominated persons by the informant, Amy Perrin, proved fruitless.

48Whilst the Crown acknowledges Mr Haddara is a real person who actually exists, no link could be established between him and you by the investigators. The other persons nominated by you could not be identified.  Therefore, I have concluded that the “can say statement” that you provided was of no real utility to the investigations.

49I note that you entered a plea of guilty in this matter following negotiations after a contested committal hearing.

50In sentencing you, I must have regard to the fact that when you committed the final offence on the indictment, namely Charge 19, that you were on bail, and the fact that you committed this offence whilst on bail is a breach of your bail conditions and is an aggravating feature of that offending.

51Following your arrest on that offence, you were remanded and you have remained on remand for some considerable time.  There has been extensive negotiations following the contested committal hearing, and once an appropriately drawn indictment was prepared, you indicated your willingness to plead to the charges on the indictment.

52You were arraigned and entered a plea of guilty on 26 July 2016 and it is accepted by the Crown that you entered a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity.

53Mr Lawrence, on your behalf, considered that this was dishonesty offending involving substantial amounts of money.  He submitted that the offending was at the mid-range of seriousness for this type of offending.  He accepted that the entire operation, namely the creation and use of false identification documents for the purpose of the provision to the bank, was sophisticated, but otherwise this was a straightforward operation. At no time did you seek to hide your identity and police were able to identify you easily from your IP server details. The period of offending was for some five months.  He noted the offending involved the use of fraudulent identities in order to obtain money from the Westpac Bank rather than from individuals.  He nonetheless accepted that your offending had an indirect effect on banking services and any losses would flow to customers.

54Mr Lawrence noted that your trafficking of methylamphetamine was for the single day only and that you were in possession of a relatively small amount of methylamphetamine.  You were a heavy user at the time of the offending and it was submitted that you were trafficking in support of your own drug habit.  You were also in possession of a small amount of testosterone that was located in a parcel. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the testosterone was for personal use only.

55By way of explanation, Mr Lawrence submitted that your role with respect to the dishonesty charges was a central one in terms of the deception of obtaining monies.  He emphasised, however, that it was not akin to a typical white collar crime offence. There was no breach of trust, which is often a feature of such offending.  The motivation for your offending was to meet debts that you had incurred to your drug dealer because of your heavy drug use.

56You were a daily user at the time of the offending and ice use was inextricably bound up with gambling issues that you had.  You used ice to forget about your gambling debts and it became a daily habit with the consequence that you accrued a large debt to your drug dealer.

57He accepted that you were a knowing participant in the frauds committed upon the Westpac Bank.  It was submitted that you did not come up independently with the idea of the offending and that you were involved in a scheme that had already been underway.  I do not accept Mr Lawrence's submission that another person identified as the third person, Mr Haddara, was responsible for the creation of these false documents, and that is not consistent with what the police found when they executed the search warrant at your premises in terms of what was found on your computer hard drive.

58Mr Lawrence accepted that you did receive some financial benefit, in that you withdrew funds totalling $88,500 and that you transferred $20,000 between the accounts belonging to Mr Aung to Ms Nishino.  He submitted that you also were readily identified from the CCTV footage.

59Your role in this criminal operation was important. It included the making of false applications, attending the banks with false identification documents, actively completing the procedures for the bank to enable the opening of accounts and credit facilities. You also withdrew the monies and you received some financial benefit as has been outlined.

60Overall I consider that this is serious offending and you will be sentenced accordingly.  Whilst I accept that the explanation given for your offending, namely that you accrued large debts to your drug dealer, does explain your offending, it in no way excuses your offending.  The offending is objectively very serious involving, as it does, the creation of false identity documents that you then personally used in order to complete the opening of accounts to facilitate the withdrawal of monies to which you were not otherwise entitled.

61I have taken into account the mitigating factors urged on your behalf.  I have noted that you are a man who, at the time of the offending, was 34 and had no prior criminal history and I accept that, apart from this offending, you are a person who is otherwise of good character.  You have excellent supports in the community from your wife, older sister, brother-in-law, mother and friends.

62I have already noted that the plea of guilty, whilst not entered at the earliest stage, is accepted as an early plea and by your plea you have facilitated justice. You have saved the court considerable time and expense and there is real utility in your plea. The sentence will be discounted accordingly.  The plea is also evidence that you now accept responsibility for the offending and demonstrates a level of remorse.

63In terms of the ultimate disposition, Mr Lawrence conceded that a sentence of imprisonment does serve the requirements of denunciation. He submitted that both general and specific deterrence were of importance and, having regard to your antecedents, he submitted that special deterrence is of lesser importance in this case and I accept that.

64He submitted you have excellent prospects of rehabilitation and I also accept that.

65I noted your background.  You are a person who was born in Burma and came to Australia as a student.  Following your arrival in Australia, you met your wife, Sandar Lay, who is also a person of Burmese background and she is an Australian citizen.  You were married and eventually through her you were able to achieve Australian citizenship in 2009.

66I noted that you did undertake some formal education in Australia.  You did an Advanced Diploma in Computer Systems and Engineering at NMIT. Unfortunately, you did not complete that Diploma because you fell below the 80 per cent requirement in respect to your visa. The visa was cancelled and you were deported. It was from Burma that you made application for an espousal visa.

67Since living in Australia, you have worked hard.  You have a number of qualifications in information technology and you were able to work continuously as a computer systems engineer between 2006 and 2014.  Your last place of employment sacked you because of poor attendance and issues associated with the quality of your work due to your ice addiction.

68It was only when you were arrested in respect to the last charge on the indictment, when you were remanded, that you were then honest and open and told your wife about the true nature and extent of your addiction to the drug ice.

69Following your remand, you were taken into custody and you spent time at the Metropolitan Remand Centre. I accept that following the riots in July 2015, you have been held in harsh custodial conditions and it has been very difficult for you whilst in custody.  I have taken that into account.

70Notwithstanding that, you have been very productive whilst in custody and exemplary in your behaviour.  You are a person who is considered trustworthy.  You are currently held in apartment style cells which is limited to only trusted prisoners of good behaviour.  You are employed in the canteen working seven hours five days per week.  You have completed a drug program whilst in prison and other programs associated with coping in custody, together with occupational training certificates.

71On three occasions you have been tested for drugs, and each screen has been negative.

72I have noted the contents of Dr Aaron Cunningham's report.  He interviewed you for the purposes of a psychological assessment.  In his report of 16 August 2016, he states that he did not consider that there was any evidence of intellectual impairment, nor did he consider that you suffered any mental illness. Psychometric testing indicated cognitive function in the above average range.

73He submitted that you would benefit from maintaining stability in the community through employment and accommodation and from maintaining support from your family and wife.  He has recommended psychological treatment to manage stress and anxiety with regard to financial vulnerability. This would assist in reducing your risk of re-offending and enhance your rehabilitation prospects.

74Given the combination of powerful mitigating factors, Mr Lawrence submitted that, notwithstanding his concession, a sentence of imprisonment must be imposed.  He submitted that it would be open to the court to impose a sentence combining a term of imprisonment to be followed by a Community Correction Order. 

75Mr Wheelahan, on behalf of the Crown, submitted that a custodial sentence to be served is the only appropriate disposition and that a combination sentence is not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of just punishment in this case. He emphasised the serious nature of the offending, with a high level of preparation and planning including the making of the false documents, such that general deterrence has an important part to play in this case together with specific deterrence.

76The fact that an institutional victim was involved means there is an absence of an aggravating factor rather than a mitigating feature.

77Mr Wheelahan accepted you could rely on good character but submitted the court ought to be guarded in terms of your rehabilitation, particularly having regard to the fact that you offended whilst on bail, Charge 19, and that is an aggravating feature.

78He considered it was legitimate for the defence to pursue this matter at committal and that you were entitled to receive the full utilitarian benefit of your plea.  Any trial for offences of this nature would have been difficult, lengthy and expensive.  He accepted that the plea of guilty was entered at the earliest practicable opportunity.

79He nonetheless submitted that it was not open to the court to infer genuine remorse on the basis of the facts, nor that you were willing to facilitate justice such that your guilty plea did warrant a significant discount.  He submitted that the “can say statement” contained false denials and demonstrated an aptitude to blame other members of the syndicate for your offending. Therefore he submitted the court could not make a finding that you were remorseful.

80Mr Wheelahan submitted that, regardless of your role, you gained an advantage for yourself and others, and that is the gravamen of the offending.  The court ought to reject the submission that Mr Haddara played a role in this matter in the absence of any other supportive evidence. Mr Wheelahan submitted the court ought to have regard to the principal of totality.

81He also noted, with respect to Charge 19, s.16(3C) of the Sentencing Act 1991 applies such that any sentence imposed in respect to this charge must be served cumulatively unless otherwise ordered.

82In response Mr Lawrence submitted that notwithstanding you did commit the offence whilst on bail, that was in the context of you having been released on bail after a filing hearing only, where you were held overnight in custody and were not provided with any support for your drug addiction.

83You have now served more than a year in custody and you are now a person who has a drug-free status and therefore your prospects of rehabilitation are enhanced.

84I have noted the letter that you wrote to the court where you acknowledged that you have failed your family and your wife as a consequence of your actions.  You acknowledge that you did have it all. You had a career, money, success, status, pride, love and a family. Through your use of drugs you became involved in the commission of this offending.  You now demonstrate insight into your offending behaviour and you understand what you need to do to rehabilitate yourself.  You acknowledge that you compartmentalised your life and severely misled your wife by lying to her and that you owe it to her and to society to prove that you are not really a bad person, only that you are a good person who made bad choices.

85You express a desire to return to your professional career in the IT industry and to remain law abiding.  It is fortunate that your wife had stood by you notwithstanding the duplicitous life that you were leading and the many lies that you told her about your actions.

86Overall, I have formed the view that you are remorseful for your actions and I have taken that into account. I have already expressed my opinion about the sentencing discount and the fact that you have facilitated justice. I have taken that all into account.

87I have had regard to the relevant provisions in relation to the Sentencing Act 1991 and also the guidelines of the judgment in Boulton & Ors v The Queen.[1]  That decision explains the wide potential application of Community Correction Orders, even in serious offending, and it certainly changed the sentencing regime in Victoria.

[1]Boulton & Ors v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342 (‘Boulton’).

88But in every case the court must consider whether the crime in question is so serious that nothing short of a sentence wholly comprised of an immediate term of imprisonment will suffice to satisfy the requirements of just punishment and whether a Community Correction Order, either alone or in conjunction with a sentence of imprisonment (which cannot exceed two years), would satisfy the requirements of just punishment.

89The Court emphasised in Boulton that a Community Correction Order can be punitive, although obviously not as punitive as imprisonment, and it observed that the new legislative regime would require courts to re-examine the types of offending that attract imprisonment.

90Overall, I have come to the conclusion, having regard to the gravity of the offending, that it is too serious to justify the imposition of a Community Correction Order even in combination with a gaol term to be served.

91This case can be distinguished from other white collar crimes, such as that exemplified in the case of Dyason v The Queen[2] that was discussed at the plea hearing where there was a significant feature of breach of trust.  However, this was serious offending involving a series of dishonest acts and obtaining monies as a consequence.  In sentencing you, I must give real effect to general deterrence and denunciation.

[2]Dyason v The Queen [2015] VSCA 120.

92Your offending did involve a bank, that is the Westpac Bank, and no individual suffered directly as such. But such offending has harmful effects.  The banking system relies on honesty and online systems are established for ease of access for clients or customers.  By your criminality, you abused that system.  In such circumstances, the cost of your criminality is borne by the bank which in turn would ultimately pass on the costs to all of its customers.

93Such criminal activity is difficult to detect and prosecution of your criminality has consumed resources; the resources of the bank in establishing the nature and extent of your criminal acts. Therefore, general deterrence must be emphasised in your sentence.

94I have noted your post-remand conduct.  I note that it has been exemplary and I consider that you now demonstrate insight into your offending behaviour and the effect of drugs on your behaviour and the need to totally abstain from drugs in the future to remain crime-free. You have also stated to the court that you have changed your attitude in terms of what you want to do for the future. You are now a more open and honest person in your dealings, in particular with your wife.

95In sentencing you, I have set a non-parole period shorter than otherwise because of your efforts towards rehabilitation whilst you have been on remand in very onerous circumstances. 

96I will now sentence you, if you could please stand, Mr Pun.  I will announce the sentences on each of the charges and then I will announce the cumulation.

97Charge 1, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

98Charge 2, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

99Charge 3, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

100Charge 4, convicted and sentenced to nine months' imprisonment.

101Charge 5, convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.

102Charge 6, convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.

103Charge 7, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

104Charge 8, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

105Charge 9, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

106Charge 10, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

107Charge 11, convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.  That is the base sentence.

108Charge 12, convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.

109Charge 13, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

110Charge 14, convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

111Charge 15, convicted and sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.

112Charge 16, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

113Charge 17, convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

114Charge 18, convicted and fined $500.

115Charge 19, convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

116I make the following order for cumulation.  Three months of the sentence imposed with respect to Charges 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 13, 15 and 16 and one month on Charges 4, 9, 10, 14 and six months on Charges 5 and 6 and two months on Charge 19 are cumulative upon each other and upon the sentence imposed on Charge 11, making a total effective sentence of five years' imprisonment.

117I fix a non-parole period of two years’ and six months’.

118I make a declaration of pre-sentence detention that you have already served 413 days and I direct that that be entered into the records of the court.

119I make the following declaration pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991.  But for your plea of guilty, I would have imposed a term of imprisonment of seven years’ to serve five years’. 

120I make the disposal order sought. I make the order for the retention of the forensic sample pursuant to s.464ZF of the Crimes Act 1958. I note that there was no opposition to those orders being made and they were consented to. I think that covers everything.

121MR LAWRENCE:  Yes, Your Honour.

122HER HONOUR:  So do you want to have an opportunity of speaking with your client before he goes down to the cells?

123MR LAWRENCE:  I will see him downstairs, Your Honour.

124HER HONOUR:  All right.  You can take Mr Pun.

125MR WHEELAHAN:  The only outstanding matter, Your Honour, is I have that draft disposal order.

126HER HONOUR:  All right, if you could hand that up.

127MR WHEELAHAN:  It's been settled.

128HER HONOUR:  And I will sign that.  Thank you.

‑ ‑ ‑