Director of Public Prosecutions v Reardon

[2018] VCC 20

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

Revised

(Not) Restricted

Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 17-00332

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

KRYSTAL REARDON

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE GAYNOR
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	23 January 2018
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Reardon
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VCC 20

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:

Catchwords:

Legislation Cited:

Cases Cited:

Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms C. Duckett
For the Accused	Ms D. Dempsey

HER HONOUR:

1Krystal Reardon, you have pleaded guilty before me to one charge of negligently causing serious injury, one charge of possessing a drug of amphetamine, mainly methamphetamine, one charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence, that is, methamphetamine.  In addition, you have also pleaded guilty to two summary charges, which have been uplifted for hearing pursuant to s.145 of the Criminal Procedure Act.  They were driving whilst authorise suspended and driving an unregistered vehicle.

2The maximum penalty for negligently causing serious injury is ten years' imprisonment.  The maximum penalty for possessing a drug of dependence in this case is five years' imprisonment.  The maximum penalty for trafficking in a drug of dependence is 15 years' imprisonment.  The maximum penalty for driving whilst authorisation is suspended is a penalty not exceeding 30 penalty units or imprisonment for four months, and the maximum penalty for driving an unregistered vehicle is 60 penalty units or imprisonment for 12 months or both.

3The fact underlying your offending are as follows:  By way of background on 15 May 2016, you were issued a traffic infringement notice for exceeding the speed limit by 35 kilometres or more, but less than 40 kilometres.  Which offending occurred on 16 April 2016 in which time your car permit or licence was suspended for six months from 15 May 2016.  It is worth mentioning that at the time, you were on a learners permit only.  On 16 April, you were speeding and at the time driving without a licensed driver.

4The offending which is the subject of the charges before this court occurred on 10 June 2016.  Two days before on 8 June 2016 at 3 am in the morning, you were intercepted driving a stolen car, with stolen number plates and an ice pipe was found in the interior of the car.  The next day, you were with the victim in this matter, Matthew Mather, who was at the time aged 18.  The two of you attended on one Stephen Bartolo, purchasing from him a red 1997 Holden Vectra, which you were informed was an unregistered vehicle and which had a head gasket issue.  Mr Bartolo removed the plates before selling you the car for $500 cash.

5On 10 June 2016, at about 1.19 in the morning, police attended at the Woodgrove shopping centre in Melton and spoke to the two of you who were standing near a red car, police leaving the carpark three minutes later to attend another call.  At 3 am, Mr Bartolo's car received a text message from the two of you about problems with the way the car was running.  There was a response, but the Bartolos did not hear from you again.

6At 9.30 on the morning of 10 June 2016, two police in an unmarked car on Millers road on their way to perform a planned arrest, saw the car without a number plate in the right-hand lane beside then, which they decided to follow and intercept, believing it may have been stolen.  In following you, they saw the car turn left from a right-hand lane into Millers Road and activated police lights on their car, indicated that you pull over, and this was done.  It was then seen that the car was been driven by you, with Mather in the passenger seat.

7There were questions by police to you about the driver's licence, which you said you did not have on you and, after instructions were given to you to report to police and produce the drivers licence, police then left, discovering at the end of their shift that in fact you did not have a driver's licence, but only a learner's permit.  Following this interception by police, you continue driving your car west along the Old Geelong Road in Brooklyn.  This is a road with three lanes, with an 80 kilometre per hour speed limit.  It had a slip road on either side.

8At a point west of McDonald's Road, the car began to yaw and you were unable to correct it.  The vehicle left the road and impacted a tree on the southern median strip which caused it to then travel further in the opposite direction, coming to rest on the nature strip outside a house in Old Geelong Road, Brooklyn.  One Brian Chute heard the car crash outside your house, ran outside, saw you in the driver's seat, with Mather in the passenger seat, who at that stage, appeared unconscious and he called an ambulance.  Other people working on a nearby building site attended, and 000 was also called, paramedics attending the scene at about 10 am.

9At the time one paramedic spoke with you, trying to establish whether you had lost consciousness, you saying that you could not recall being in an accident, could not recall driving a car, and had used at least 2 grams of methamphetamine the previous night, but could not recall when in fact you had taken it.  Mr Mather was extracted from the front passenger seat by the Metropolitan Fire Brigade, and taken to The Alfred Hospital with life threatening injuries.

10Your actions in driving in the state that you were in, that is, having taken methamphetamine, (the prosecution case being that in fact, you had fallen asleep as the result, possibly of the rebound fatigue), underlie Charge 1 on the indictment, negligently causing serious injury and also underlie the summary charges of driving whilst your authorisation was suspended, and driving an unregistered vehicle.

11It was also established following analysis of the collision scene that you were driving 16 kilometres over the speed limit whilst under the influence of methamphetamine and whilst you were fatigued.  Investigations of your mobile phone revealed that you had had very little sleep in the preceding 50 hours.  You were taken to Alfred Hospital where you were treated for a broken pelvic bones and ribs.  A blood sample taken at 11am revealed you had 0.38 milligrams of methamphetamine and 0.08 milligrams of amphetamine in your blood.

12You were discharged from hospital four days later and failed to attend for follow up treatment.  The car was searched where police discovered a pipe used to smoke methamphetamine in the driver's door compartment and in the outside pocket of a handbag, also located $200 cash and a zip up case containing scales and a snap lock bag containing a white crystallised substance, later analysed as methamphetamine.

13Eventually, you attended police by appointment on 28 July 2016 when a record of interview was conducted.  You told police in that record of interview that all you could remember was being pulled over and let go by police, that you had stopped at lights after that but could not remember any more.  You agreed that you knew the car was unregistered.  You said that you remembered being pulled over for speeding.  You remember being told that you would be suspended, that is in relation to April of that year, and that suspension was for six months.

14You said that you did not recall the collision or speaking with police.  You said you had probably been up all night, probably only had a couple of hours sleep, and that your normal sleep depended on whether you had taken drugs or not.  You said you had taken drugs a couple of hours before that collision.  You also said that you knew you should not have been taking methamphetamine or driving.  You said the drugs that were found were Mather's and that you had bought them after police intercepted them, as you were in a car park waiting for the dealer to turn up.

15Your possession of those drugs underlies Charge 2 on the indictment, possession of a drug of dependence.  You also told police that you had sold some drugs to a friend that you met in Altona, that you used the pipe found in the car to smoke ice, that originally there were 32 points or grams in the bag, and that you had sold 1.7 of those grams for $350.  Those admissions underlie Charge 3 on the indictment, trafficking in a drug of dependence.  You agreed that no one else used your phone other than you.

16Eventually police carried out a mechanical examination of the car which determined there was no mechanical fault that would have contributed to the collision.  A report from Dr Angela Sungaila provided an opinion that at the time of the impact the methamphetamine and sleep deprivation would have caused you to be unable to maintain proper control of the vehicle.  She also made further reference to the rebound fatigue issue, which I will refer to later in these sentencing remarks.

17Ultimately, Detective Leading Senior Constable Michael Hardiman, of the Motor Vehicle Collision Squad made a report where his opinion was that you had, for no apparent reason, made a left steering manoeuvre causing the vehicle to yaw, rotating in an anti-clockwise direction towards the southern side of the Old Geelong Road, then transitioning the car into a spinning skid just prior to leaving the road, colliding with a tree, and determined that the vehicle was travelling at about 96 kilometres per hour before it began to yaw.

18This matter was resolved on 23 February 2017 following the negotiations at a committal mention hearing, and a plea was entered.

19I now turn to the injuries sustained by the victim in this matter.  A medical report compiled by Dr Caroline McFarlane at Alfred Health noted that Mr Mather, as a result of the collision, suffered an extremely traumatic brain injury requiring surgical intervention.  He was in a state of post traumatic amnesia for 63 days, during which time he underwent multiple surgeries.  The report noted that Mr Mather was, after the accident, seen to have slower thinking speed, difficulty with multitasking and difficulty with problem solving and had a poorer memory.

20Formal testing showed evidence of impaired speed of processing, executive function and memory abilities with were consistent with a very severe traumatic injury.  He lost power in the muscles down the right side of his body and the left side of his face due to his brain injury, which was continuing to improve, but he continued at the time of the making of this report in 2017, to display impaired control of movement in his right arm.  It was noted that he continued to experience ongoing fatigue from the injury, which was a common - noted was a common issue with patients with a traumatic brain injury face.

21He was required at the time of this report still to take rest breaks in the middle of the day and it was noted:

"It is likely that Matthew will continue to experience some degree of fatigue long-term, although it may improve slightly in the next 12 months."

22It was noted also that on a functional level, Mr Mather was independent with many aspects of his domestic life but required prompting to initiate tasks.  He needed assistance with tasks such as shopping, could not manage his own finances independently and had not been able to return to work or driving.

23It was stated that it was likely that cognitive changes would impact on the trajectory of his life in coming years, and that it was unclear how much improvement may occur.  The report concluded:

"It is my opinion that Matthew's injury has had a significant impact on his life and has caused lasting impairments in cognition in particular".

24Dr McFarlane went on to say that in her opinion, the injury could impact on his capacity to maintain full time employment in the future and would likely negatively impact his future earning potential and further, would negatively impact his interpersonal skills and his ability to independently manage finances long-term.  It was felt that he would require ongoing support from a multidisciplinary team to assist him to achieve goals in the future and finally:

"There are further effects for traumatic brain injury to which Matthew remains vulnerable over the course of his life, such as:  post traumatic headaches, mental health issues, seizures, increased risk of drug and alcohol abuse and that he would need medical review lifelong to screen for secondary complications of his injury."

25In the victim impact statement, Mr Mather said that he had difficulty leaving the house because of depression and anxiety, was self-conscious about his looks, could barely write or sign his name, had trouble cutting his food and feeding himself, could no longer ride his skateboard or play sports, undertake athletics and had a brain injury for life.  He has noted that he was still having rehabilitation at home, and that:

"In other words, it has affected my life in multiple ways."

26His father's victim impact stated that the family had understandably undergone huge stress due to the unknown impact of the injury on his son, who had had several operations on his brain.  It has caused interruption to the whole family:

"It is also stressful seeing Matt now unhappy with his body and not knowing what the future holds for him."

27I now turn to your personal circumstances.  You are 29 years of age, the youngest of three children born to your parents, who separated when you were a baby.  Both parents have re-partnered and other half-siblings have been born since.  You left school partway through Year 10, which you had repeated at Barton Heights High School.  After your parents separated, you remained living with your mother but in your later teens had some difficulties with her and went to live with your father but found his discipline to be excessive, ran away and lived for two years with an aunt in Geelong and then with an aunt in Broadmeadows.

28On leaving school, you undertook a hairdressing apprenticeship which you continued with for three and a half years but with only six months to go, left the aunt whom you were living with to return to your mother who then lived too far from the place of your work, and have never finished that apprenticeship.  You became involved with your partner, Paul, when you were aged 18.  That relationship continued until 2015 and five children were born of that relationship, now aged between three and nine years.

29During that relationship the two of you purchased a home but particular difficulties arose when your partner began using methamphetamine and became both emotionally and physically violent towards you.  You began using marijuana at the age of 16 and then began using methamphetamines with your former partner five to six years ago.

30In 2014, because of drug use and domestic violence difficulties, the Department of Health and Human Services became involved.  You were informed that if you separated from your partner, you could retain custody of your children but your own rather fractured experiences within your family led you to believe that you should seek to maintain the relationship with your partner and ultimately, the children were removed from you.  They have now been placed on a permanent care order with your partner's parents.  You and your partner then separated in 2015.

31At the time of this offending, you were having fortnightly access with your children.  The aftermath of the loss of your children and the separation between you and your long-term partner resulted in a time of chaos for you.  It is noteworthy that up until this time, you had never been in trouble with police.  Whilst you have no prior convictions in relation to the matters with which this court is concerned, you became, around that time, involved in a series of offences, some of which are being dealt with by this court, the rest being dealt with by the Magistrates' Court, sentencing in which has been deferred until the resolution of these matters.

32On 24 July 2016, that is, following the offending before this court, you were arrested as a passenger in a car which had stolen number plates and in your bag, police discovered cannabis and knuckle dusters.  At that time you were on bail in relation to these matters.  You were charged with charges of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, possessing a prohibited weapon and possessing a drug of dependence.

33In relation to the earlier offending where you were picked up in a stolen vehicle, you were charged with handling stolen goods, possessing the proceeds of crime which related to a drill set which had been found in the car, driving whilst suspended and having a false number plate.  On 19 August 2016, you were arrested as a passenger in a car intercepted by police, where you were found to possess 7 grams of ice.  You were also charged with committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.  And following your arrest, there were problems at the police station resulting in a charge of acting in a manner prejudicial to maintaining the good order of a police station.

34You were also charged with failing to appear on 10 August 2016 in relation to the handling stolen goods and other charges.  Then again on 21 September 2016, you were found in a car containing stolen number plates and also in possession of prescription pills, thought possibly to be Xanax.  You were also charged with possessing proceeds of crime and on that occasion you were not granted bail and remained in custody for 44 days.

35I have gone into some detail about that surrounding offending because it has relevance to the issue of prospects of rehabilitation and to your progress since the time that you were involved in the offending that had brought you before this court.  Eventually after 44 days as I have said, you were released on bail and you went to reside with your mother.  It appears that whilst you continued to use methamphetamine during that period of time, that use was much reduced.  But ultimately you ended back up in gaol again in August because of failing to appear on dates for court in relation to these charges, and you have remained in custody ever since.

36It would seem that, as is unfortunately so often the case with persons whose lives are out of control because of their drug use, that gaol has in fact been of assistance to you.  You are working in the service industries in the gaol.  You had been subject twice to random drug testing and both times the tests had been clear of any drug use.

37Matters have very much settled for you.  Your relationship with your family, in particular with your father, which I understand was strained at the time, has resolved itself and the situation is now one where it is your aim to ultimately finish your hairdressing apprenticeship and reside with your father and stepmother with whom you have a good relationship.  It would appear you are the only member of your family to appear before a court, although I do note that an older brother, Brett, at some stage had involvement with drug use.

38The situation insofar as your children is concerned is one in which this court has some interest because ultimately, in terms of your prospects of rehabilitation, that is going to be an ongoing issue for you.  A psychological report from Carla Lechner essentially points to the loss of your children and the breakdown of your relationship as leading to a period of uncontrolled use of methamphetamine, during which you continued to drive even after your arrest and charges being laid in relation to the very serious collision in which you were involved, but of which you have no memory.

39As I have already stated, I am satisfied at the time of this offending, you were using methamphetamine in an uncontrolled manner and offending in a way which was at odds with the way in which you had previously lived your life notwithstanding that you had been an ice user for some years before.  It was conceded from the outset by your counsel that the only way in which this court can deal with you and these charges is by way of a term of imprisonment to be immediately served.

40There were a number of submissions made as to where on the scale of seriousness I should place this offending.  Can I say, the fact that someone is using methamphetamine to the level that you were and continuing to drive and at the same time, driving not only under the influence of methamphetamine but in a situation where you are severely sleep deprived, hence leading to what is called rebound fatigue, (and it is the prosecution case that you were probably asleep at the wheel as a result of fatigue arising from your methamphetamine use) is so dangerous a scenario that what is called the principle of general deterrence, that is, sentencing which sends out a message to the community that if you are going to behave in this way, you can expect the court to respond in an extremely severe way, must apply in cases of this kind.

41Use of methamphetamine is increasing and really can be said to be rife throughout the community.  Of course, it has been long recognised that for example, driving whilst under the influence of alcohol is incredibly dangerous..  Cars can be said to be lethal weapons.  The effect of misuse of a motor vehicle can so often and almost inevitably end up in serious damage.  The particular evil of driving whilst you are a methamphetamine user, is that you add in this lethal factor of sleep deprivation, rebound fatigue, and hence falling asleep at the wheel.

42The courts have made it very clear that mitigating factors such as a clean record insofar as offending is concerned is going to have far less weight in scenarios such as these.  And the situation is that as a result of your driving on this occasion, a young man, who was only 18 at the time, has been left with debilitating lifelong injuries.  His life has been entirely changed in a negative way and severely, as a result of your actions on that day.

43As a result, the very sensible concession was made that no matter the factors underlying your ice use and your behaviour at that time, the court can only respond by way of a term of imprisonment to be immediately served.  I do accept that you have reasonable prospects for rehabilitation.  I do understand that you had a fairly chaotic upbringing yourself, that there were lots of changes of carers, that you moved from one house to another and that despite all this you were a young woman of some intelligence and capacity.  You were able to undertake most of an apprenticeship.  It would have been a much happier scenario had you been able to complete that apprenticeship, to go on and forge a career as a hairdresser.

44It would have been far better if at the age of 18, you had not partnered in the way you did and then gone on at a young age to have a large number of children, then to endure domestic violence and then to become involved in serious drug use which essentially went on to be a situation where you lost five children, which is an enormous trauma, and one can then understand why you would fall into a sort of spiral of despair and used drugs in the way you did.

45At the end of the day, all that has led to a horrific collision and the imposition of appalling injuries and lifelong injuries on as I have said, an 18-year-old boy.  I do accept that you are remorseful for your offending.  I take into account in sentencing you that an early plea of guilty was entered, that has saved the community the time and expense of a trial and has saved your victim and other persons the difficulty and trauma of giving evidence in a court proceeding. 

46I was referred by both counsel to a number of authorities, all of to which I have had regard.

47There are of course differences in the circumstances underlying each of those cases and it was my view that each of those cases contained factual aspects placing them in a more serious category than that in which I would place your offending.  However I do regard this offending as falling in the mid-range of seriousness of offending of this type, which is in and of itself, serious offending.

48In sentencing you I also take into account the fact that in 2008, the maximum penalty for the charge of negligently causing serious injury was doubled from five years to ten years' imprisonment.  I also note that the authority of Harrison v The Queen [2015] 49 VR 619 stands for the proposition that previously, sentencing by these courts for the charge of negligently causing serious injury has been too low.

49In all the circumstances having taken into account the mitigating circumstances I have outlined and the legal imperatives to be applied in cases of this kind, I sentence you as follows.  Could you stand up please?

50On Charge 1, you are sentenced to three years and six months' imprisonment.  On Charge 2, you are sentenced to a term of nine months' imprisonment.  On Charge 3, you are sentenced to a term of ten months' imprisonment.  On the charge of driving without authorisation you are sentenced to two months' imprisonment.  On the charge of driving an unregistered vehicle, you are sentenced to three months' imprisonment.  I order that two months of the sentences imposed on Charges 2 and 3 on the indictment and one month on each of the summary offences, one month is to be served cumulatively to the sentence imposed on Charge 1, giving a total effective sentence of four years.  I order that you serve two years of that sentence before becoming eligible of parole.

51In sentencing you I also note your counsel's very sensible submission that the mitigatory factors in this case should lead to a sentence where there is a longer than normal disparity between the head and minimum term.  It seems to me that that is an appropriate response to a case such as this involving very serious offending, but where there are good rehabilitative prospects so that the balancing exercise required to be carried out by a court is properly achieved.  It is my comment that in my view, when placed on parole, particular emphasis should be laid upon drug rehabilitation in this case.

52Now have a seat please.  Thank you, Ms Reardon.  Can I ask counsel for assistance with this?  I need to attend to the issue of licence and the way in which it needs to appear on the record as being in response to when driving under the influence of drugs charge.

53MS DUCKETT:  Yes, Your Honour.

54HER HONOUR:  And I also need to make a declaration in terms of time served.

55MS DUCKETT:  One hundred and eighty-one days in terms of ‑ ‑ ‑

56HER HONOUR:  In terms of the sentence I declare that 181 days has already been served by way of pre-sentence detention, which I think means that it would be about 14 months before your client can apply for - so you have got about 14 months to go before you can apply for parole.  All right?

57OFFENDER:  Yes.

58HER HONOUR:  Thank you.  Yes, thank you.  Yes, Ms Duckett?

59MS DUCKETT:  Your Honour, in relation to the order is sought with reference to s.89 ‑ ‑ ‑

60HER HONOUR:  Yes.

61MS DUCKETT:  It is s.89 to the Sentencing Act, and because it is a serious offence, it cannot be for less than 18 months, but under 89C, that is what allows the court - it states that they may make a finding - but I am just going to pull up the actual section ‑ ‑ ‑

62HER HONOUR:  That is all right.

63MS DUCKETT:  ‑ ‑ ‑ so that I am not making up pieces of legislation.  Section 89C allows subject to sub-s.2 which is just in relation to a culpable driving ‑ ‑ ‑

64HER HONOUR:  Yes.

65MS DUCKETT:  ‑ ‑ ‑ which makes it mandatory, whereas because we have a section that says that you may make an order under s.89 ‑ ‑ ‑

66HER HONOUR:  So it is my discretion as to whether I make that declaration?

67MS DUCKETT:  Yes, as to whether or not they are under the influence of alcohol or a drug or both of them which contributed to the offence.  And what it does is it actually allows or has provided for the prosecution, I suppose not to find themselves in a situation where you have that danger of duplicity because you have a negligently causing serious injury, or you have a culpable driving which the facts are based upon the drugs being present in - and so you avoid double punishment of course, by having this section in the legislation because it allows for the finding simply to have been made that either drugs or alcohol were a part of the offending and the declaration then is made.  The investigator brought it to my attention because of course, it will be relevant should and if at another date, there are any future offending involving similar circumstances.

68HER HONOUR:  Yes.

69MS DUCKETT:  And that is why it is sought to be made ‑ ‑ ‑

70HER HONOUR:  But I might talk to Ms Dempsey at this point. Do you have any ‑ ‑ ‑

71MS DEMPSEY:  Your Honour, we do not seek to make any submissions, Your Honour, given the way in which the case is made - is put and the admissions made in relation to the drug use and its impact.  Obviously, it is a matter for Your Honour but we do not seek to ‑ ‑ ‑

72HER HONOUR:  All right.  Well in relation to Charge 1, all licences are cancelled and essentially Ms Reardon is disqualified from obtaining any licence for a period of 18 months, and I make a declaration pursuant to s.89C(1) of the Sentencing Act that the offence was committed whilst she was under the influence of drugs which contributed to the offence.  Now can you stand up Ms Reardon?

73MS DEMPSEY:  Your Honour, there is another matter I need to raise, Your Honour ‑ ‑ ‑

74HER HONOUR:  Sorry, yes?  Sorry have a seat Ms Reardon, sorry to get ‑ ‑ ‑

75MS DEMPSEY:  Sorry, Your Honour.  I do know I did not pick this up in the Crown opening but drive unregistered vehicle - s.7(1)(A) doesn't actually involve any penalty of imprisonment.  The section is, it is my submission Your Honour, outlined as 25 penalty units.

76HER HONOUR:  Yes, yes, I must admit I was looking at that and I should have actually checked it because a little bell rang at the back of my head.

77MS DEMPSEY:  Yes, Your Honour.

78HER HONOUR:  So what I will do is I will - the unregistered ‑ ‑ ‑ 

79MS DEMPSEY:  So in relation to s.7(1)(A), a person must not use an unregistered motor vehicle and the penalty is for the first offence, which in this case it is, is 25 penalty units.  The second offence is 50 penalty units so I would submit, Your Honour, the maximum penalty for the transferred summary charge of use of an unregistered vehicle is only 25 penalty units.

80HER HONOUR:  All right.  Well look, what I will do then is because I am going have to change, that would not affect ‑ ‑ ‑

81MS DUCKETT:  Sub-section ‑ ‑ ‑

82HER HONOUR:  Yes.  I should have - thank you for that, Ms Dempsey, and I should have picked it up myself actually.

83MS DEMPSEY:  9.4, I think.  Sets out the summary offence and in mine it indicates the maximum penalty being 24 ‑ ‑ ‑

84HER HONOUR:  So I have given ‑ ‑ ‑

85MS DEMPSEY:   That was - you've given about three ‑ ‑ ‑

86HER HONOUR:  Three months in relation to that count.  All right so what I will do is for the unregistered - I think the maximum - so the maximum penalty works out at $500.  Is it $500?

87MS DEMPSEY:  Yes, it is about that when you get pulled over, I think.

88HER HONOUR:  All right, then I will make that $200 which is a pretty radical change I must say, to that.  But I have sort of factored that in, in the overall - so what I will do is I will make three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 2, and three months of the sentence on Charge - hang on ‑ ‑ ‑

89MS DUCKETT:  It is just the first summary charge, Your Honour.  The second one is simply a fine now of $200.

90HER HONOUR:  Yes, I see.  I will make three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 3 cumulative to the sentence imposed on Charge 1 and that will still give us the six months and lead the four years.  Does that make sense?

91MS DEMPSEY:  Yes, Your Honour.

92MS DUCKETT:  Yes, Your Honour.  I should have picked that up in mea culpa.  Thank you to Ms Dempsey, that will save us time down the track.

93HER HONOUR:  No, no.  We all - no, thank you very much indeed.  So now can you stand up please, Ms Reardon?  So you have got about 14 months to really, you know, bed down the gains that you have made, okay?  This is make or break time for you now.  One of the difficulties you are always going to have in the future if you lapse back into ice use, is that if you ever come before a court again - and I am not talking about going back in front of Magistrate Popovic - but in the future if you keep using and you come back, you have been to the County Court and that is serious, and you have got a sentence from the County Court.  And that is going to make your chances of ever avoiding gaol again, if you keep getting in trouble, that much harder.  Does that make sense to you?

94This is make or break for you.  This is the time when you just - as I have said - you bend down, build on the games that you have made, and get out there and build that life that you could have had all those years ago Ms Reardon, okay?  So I wish you well.  It never gives a court any pleasure to sentence someone who has been in the situation you have been in, but this needs to be, you know - you have hit the wall and it is only coming back from here, hopefully.  All right?  Thank you very much, have a seat.

95OFFENDER:  Thank you.

96HER HONOUR:  Is there anything else that I need to deal with?  I have got to sign all those orders.

97MS DUCKETT:  There is just some orders, Your Honour, and you will need a 6AAA declaration made, because ‑ ‑ ‑

98HER HONOUR:  Pursuant to s.6AAA, had you not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced you a term of imprisonment of five years with a minimum term of three years.  I also note that the charge of trafficking was able to be laid, primarily because of the admissions made in the record of interview and I referred to it that way, but did not take particular note of it in those remarks.  I am also ordering that you supply to police or that police obtain from you a forensic sample.  I need to advise you that if you resist in any way the taking of the sample, police may use reasonable force in order to obtain it, thank you.

99MS DUCKETT:  And Your Honour, there was a disposal order that I had Ms Martin just fill in your details when it is available now to Your Honour.

100HER HONOUR:  Thank you very much.  I thank counsel for their assistance.  Now is there any problem - may I ask the custody officer - if you are okay for family to say goodbye before you take Ms Reardon down?  Okay, we will do that now while I am on the Bench.  It is not to go on and on.  So if the family would just like to - sorry could we just - excuse me, I need to leave the Bench, so if you will just say the goodbyes and then I will stand down.  Anybody else?  Thank you very much.  I thank counsel very much for your assistance, particularly Ms Dempsey - I interrupted you all the way through, I do apologise.  Your written materials were so terrific that I was able to do that, so I thank you very much indeed for that.  Yes, we will stand down and we will adjourn to 9.30 tomorrow morning.  Thank you for your time.

‑ ‑ ‑