Director of Public Prosecutions v Ragkeb

[2018] VCC 2119

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR-18-01761

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

DEBBY RAGKEB

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MASON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	7 December 2018
DATE OF SENTENCE:	13 December 2018
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Ragkeb
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VCC 2119

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:Plea - sentencing

Catchwords:             Obtain property by deception

Legislation Cited:     Sentencing Act 1991

Cases Cited:            

Sentence: 6 years’ imprisonment, 4 years’ non-parole period

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions at hearing For the Director of Public Prosecutions at sentence	Ms R. Khan Ms M. Vingerhoets	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr K. McDonald	S Kourkoulis & Associates

HIS HONOUR: 

1Debby Ragkeb, you have pleaded guilty to ten charges of obtaining property by deception, namely, cash totalling $1,264,453.30. 

-    The maximum penalty for this offence is ten years' imprisonment. 

2You were born on 5 April 1963, so you are now aged 55.  You were aged 44 to 53 when this offending occurred. 

3You have no prior criminal history. 

4You are a bookkeeper by profession.

5The circumstances of the offending are as follows. 

6Between 5 April 2006 and September 2016, you were employed as a bookkeeper for Printco, a signage company for the real estate industry situated in Oakleigh South in Victoria.  You were responsible for entering customer and supplier invoices, payroll and general administration. 

7In July 2016 Printco employed a Mr Darren Scotti as a financial controller.  Mr Scotti's role was to review company processes, current staff and make recommendations for improvement.

8On 29 August 2016, Mr Scotti was notified by Printco's accountant that payments noted on Printco's accounts as being made to the Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”) were not on the ATO online portal. 

9On 14 September 2016, Mr Scotti completed the reconciliation of Printco's and the ATO's respective tax ledgers.  It revealed that eight transactions between 20 July 2015 and 7 June 2016 to the total value of $125,000 were recorded as being paid to the ATO in Printco's software, but had not actually been paid to the ATO.   

10On 15 September 2016, Mr Scotti discovered that there were a number of payments recorded as being paid to Rojo, which was a company client of Printco, which had not been received by Rojo.  Printco's bank account details for Rojo were in fact the bank accounts for Matthew Ragkeb, your son.  The invoices had been uploaded for payment under the supplier’s name.  You manually amended the supplier’s bank account details, changing them to Matthew's bank account details.  The invoice would then be checked by the general manager and payment was made on the NAB connect system by you.

11In an attempt to evade detection of fraudulent transactions within Printco's accounting system, Matthew Ragkeb deposited $10,000 into Rojo's account in cash on 2 August 2016.  Rojo had been advised by you that you would make a payment of $10,000 at around this time.  It was not the usual method of payment between Printco and Rojo. 

12On 18 September 2016, Mr Scotti reported the matter to police. 

13On 28 September 2016, your employment with Printco was officially terminated. 

14On 4 October 2016 the Managing Director of Printco, Mr Neil Pearson, received an email from you in which you apologised for your actions and stated that:

a.  you were deeply regretful;

b.  you will co-operate to the best of your ability;

c.  you would like to repay the money but you have no job or income. 

15Between 27 September 2007 and 14 September 2016, you made a total of 399 unauthorised transactions by electronically transferring various sums of money from Printco's two bank accounts to various other bank accounts, without the authorisation of company directors.  You would amend the bank details of various suppliers to the bank accounts of either you or one of your three sons, Matthew, Christopher and Nicholas Ragkeb, after which the recipient would distribute the payment between you and your sons. 

16The unauthorised transactions made by you from Printco's bank account by year are as follows: 

(a)2 transactions to the value of $4,920 between 20 September 2007 and 12 October 2007 (Charge 1);

(b)3 transactions to the value of $5,116.34 between 29 May 2008 and 16 September 2008 (Charge 2);

(c)12 transactions to the value of $25,637.57 between 25 May 2009 and 9 December 2009 (Charge 3);

(d)39 transactions to the value of $74,589.15 between 20 January 2010 and 22 December 2010 (Charge 4);

(e)54 transactions to the value of $139,275.06 between 10 January 2011 and 28 December 2011 (Charge 5);

(f)40 transactions to the value of $140,161.23 between 12 January 2012 and 19 December 2012 (Charge 6);

(g)76 transactions to the value of $205,746.07 between 10 January 2013 and 23 December 2013 (Charge 7);

(h)66 transactions to the value of $251,082.99 between 10 January 2014 and 30 December 2014 (Charge 8);

(i)64 transactions to the value of $254,948.64 between 6 January 2015 and 23 December 2015 (Charge 9);

(j)43 transactions to the value of $162,976.25 between 12 January 2016 and 14 September 2016 (Charge 10).

17The total amount of the transactions is $1,264,453.30. 

18During the period of offending:

·you received a total of $363,268.84 either directly to your bank accounts through false invoices or transfers of money from your sons - your income from that period was $379,691.58; 

·a total of $1,123,661.04 was transferred into Matthew Ragkeb's bank accounts by Printco, as a result of false invoices; 

·a total of $243,482 was transferred to Christopher Ragkeb's bank accounts from the bank accounts of Printco, you and Matthew Ragkeb; 

·a total of $27,631 was transferred to Nicholas Ragkeb's bank accounts from the bank accounts of Printco, you and Matthew Ragkeb; 

·you and your sons’ greatest expenditure was on recreation, dining and entertainment venues such as the Crown Casino as well as store and online purchases; 

·the outflows for you, Matthew, Christopher and Nicholas Ragkeb exceeded your incomes. 

19On 24 November 2017 you attended the Moorabbin police station by appointment for arrest and interview.  You provided no comment during the interview. 

20You were charged on 6 January 2018 and placed on summons.  You pleaded guilty at the second committal mention on 29 August 2018.

21I now turn to your personal circumstances. 

22As I noted earlier, you are aged 55 now, you were 44 to 53 at the time of offending and you have no prior criminal history. 

23You grew up in Melbourne, the daughter of Dutch migrants.  You have an older adopted brother and sister.  The family was very private, even isolated, because of your parents’ experiences during World War II.  Your father died nine years ago, aged 81.  Your mother suffered a stroke soon after your father died and has been living in a nursing home for the last four years.  You have a grandson and your time is spent caring for him and visiting your mother and a few close friends.

24You completed Year 12 at Caulfield Institute and worked in school holidays for your father as a bookkeeper.  In 1980 you commenced your working life as an accounts clerk.  You continued working in accounts through your years in employment, including for a time when you and your then husband ran a pizza and pasta restaurant. 

25You met and married your husband in 1987 and you have three sons.  You experienced some domestic violence in the marriage and it did not last.  You separated and you were left to raise the three children without financial assistance from your husband.

26You began working for Printco in 2006 and continued with them until you were dismissed in 2016. 

27You are not currently employed and your income is restricted to Centrelink Newstart benefits of approximately $245 per week.  You are not required to comply with work-seeking requirements because of your medical status.  You currently live with your eldest son Christopher and his partner.  Your sole asset is a 2011 Holden Calais which you use to take your mother for outings once a week.  You otherwise have no assets or savings. 

28You have claimed that around half of the funds were lost to gambling and the remainder spent on entertainment, goods and services. 

29Your son Matthew's involvement comes about because of your manner of offending.  You had access to a Commonwealth Bank account opened for your son when he was at school and which was otherwise unused.  You would either move funds electronically or ask your son to withdraw funds and, if he queried you, you would inform him the money was from commissions or bonuses at work. 

30You were a passenger in your sister's car on 16 October 2016 when it was struck by another vehicle which failed to stop at a red light.  You now suffer from limited mobility because of a torn meniscus in your right knee and your left knee is beginning to give you trouble in compensating for your right knee.  You also suffer from tennis elbow and high blood pressure and you regard yourself as overweight.

31The discovery of your offending, and the resultant consequences to you, have clearly had a very distressing impact on your mental health.  In his report tendered at your plea, consultant psychiatrist Dr Lester Walton formed the opinion that you are presently suffering from a chronic mixed anxiety/depressive disorder, and that the origins of that disorder reach back to your childhood, aggravated by an unsatisfactory marriage and your current situation.  You do not, however, suffer from a major mental disorder and it would appear that the current circumstances of the discovery of the deception and the prospect of a significant period of imprisonment is a likely cause of you being so currently overwhelmed.

32Whilst you have provided a history of feelings of anxiety and depression reaching back to childhood when consulting with Dr Walton, in my view there is insufficient evidence to establish that your mental health was such as to reduce in any way your moral culpability for the offending.  I do note that there is a record of depression commencing after your vehicle collision in 2016 and a mental health plan commenced in October 2017.  This post-dates the offending. 

33Whilst I do accept that you currently suffer anxiety and depression, the context of your current situation is important.  Experience suggests that reactive emotions to the prospect of imprisonment tend to resolve once a sentence has commenced, and your current condition is not unusual for offenders in your position.  Nevertheless I do accept that clinically, Dr Walton considers that your condition does require a period of extended counselling as well as a trial of mood-stabilising medication, and I take that into account as part of your general personal circumstances.

34Your conduct amounts to a serious example of this type of offending.  It was protracted, extending over a period of nine years.  It was predatory in that you exploited a position of great trust.  It was considered, calculated and involved substantial sums of money.  The deception was executed for the purposes of maintaining a lifestyle of recreational spending.  There is no chance of restitution.  The primary victim is a small private company.  In his victim impact statement, the owner and Managing Director of Printco, Mr Pearson, gave eloquent testimony to the debilitating emotional effects that your acts have caused, quite apart from the financial impact of the loss of funds to the business.

35In mitigation I accept the submissions of your counsel and in particular:

·    your plea of guilty both for its expeditious response, utilitarian value and as an expression of remorse;

·    your lack of any previous or subsequent offending;

·    your letter of apology to the victim, which I accept as remorse;

·    the support you have from your friends and from your family;

·    your personal sense of disgrace and embarrassment, including its emotional effect on you;

·    that this will be your first time of imprisonment - I accept that this will weigh heavily upon you in the context of your relatively isolated background and health, both emotional and physical; and

·    your prospects of rehabilitation, which I assess as being good.

36The basic purposes for which a court can impose a sentence are punishment, deterrence (both specific to you and general in order to deter other like-minded individuals), rehabilitation, denunciation by the court and the protection of the community.  In sentencing I must have regard to a range of matters, such as the seriousness of the offending, your culpability for it, its context, your personal circumstances and those of the victim.  I am required to balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interests of the community in seeking to ensure that, as far as possible, offenders are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.

37In the course of submissions, a range of examples of sentences in other like matters were discussed.  I have considered these authorities as examples of principle, along with statistics as are available, as a yardstick as to current sentencing practices by the courts.  Whilst being a helpful guide, ultimately each case must, in fine analysis, depend on its own particular circumstances. 

38On balance, in the particular circumstances of this case I am satisfied that the purpose or purposes for which the sentence is imposed cannot be achieved by a sentence that does not involve your confinement in prison and for some significant period.  

39In my view, the objective gravity of your offending is high despite the mitigating circumstances, and requires that the retributive and deterrent purposes of punishment and denunciation of such conduct by the courts must take precedence.  

40Ms Ragkeb, would you please now stand.

41On Charge 1 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

42On charge 2 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

43On Charge 3 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.

44On Charge 4 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.

45On Charge 5 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

46On Charge 6 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

47On Charge 7 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment.

48On Charge 8 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment.

49On Charge 9 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment.

50On Charge 10 of obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

51Charge 9 is the base sentence.

52I direct that 12 months of the sentence imposed on Charge 8, and six months of each of the sentences imposed on Charges 3, 5, 6 and 10 be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on Charge 9 and on each other.  The sentences are otherwise concurrent.

53The total effective sentence is six years' imprisonment.

54I direct that you serve a minimum period of four years' imprisonment before being eligible for parole. 

55Pursuant to sub-s.18(4) of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that the period of six days, not including today, be reckoned as time already served under the sentence and I direct that the fact of this declaration and its details be noted in the records of the court.

56Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, but for your plea of guilty the total effective sentence that would have been imposed is eight years’ imprisonment, with a minimum period of six years to be served before eligibility for parole.

57At the plea hearing the prosecution sought an order to which you consented for the taking of a forensic sample and I have made that order today for the reasons noted on the order, namely, the seriousness of the circumstances of the offending warrant the order, the order is by consent and the granting of the order is in the public interest. 

58I must inform you that if, at the time of the request, you do not consent to the taking of a mouth scraping under the supervision of an authorised member of the police force, then the sample to be taken will be a blood sample and police may use reasonable force to enable that forensic procedure to be conducted.  Do you understand that, Ms Ragkeb?

59ACCUSED:  Yes, sir.

60HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.  That concludes my sentence.  Are there any other matters from counsel?

61MS VINGERHOETS:  No, Your Honour.

62MR McDONALD:  No thank you, Your Honour.

‑ ‑ ‑