Director of Public Prosecutions v Redenbach
[2014] VCC 1116
•10 June 2014
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-13-00571
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| CARL REDENBACH |
---
JUDGE: | CANNON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 5 June 2014 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 10 June 2014 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Redenbach | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2014] VCC 1116 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence – Plea of guilty - Criminal history – Delay in resolution – Prisoner history drug abuse
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms D. Manova | Mr C. Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr A. Purcell | Valos Black |
HER HONOUR:
1 Just remain seated until I ask you to stand up towards the end of the sentence, Mr Redenbach. Carl Gordon Redenbach, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking a drug of dependence, one charge of possessing a drug of dependence, two charges of possessing a machine to falsify documents and two charges of handling stolen goods. You have also pleaded guilty to some summary charges uplifted from the Magistrates' Court, being three charges of forging a licence and one charge of fraudulently altering a licence.
2 Trafficking a drug of dependence has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment; possessing a drug of dependence has a maximum penalty of five penalty units; possessing a machine to falsify documents has a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment; handling stolen goods has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment; forging a licence and fraudulently altering a licence each have a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units or two months' imprisonment.
3 The summary of the prosecution opening was accepted by you through your counsel. I was told by the learned prosecutor that in May 2012 police became aware of you in the course of an operation targeting a number of individuals in respect of drug trafficking. On 24 May 2012 police executed a warrant at your home. You were not there at the time. However, another male was. In the garage, police found numerous items, including gas bottles, glassware and chemicals. However, after examination of these items, the only illegal substance found was GHB.
4 In relation to Charge 1, a number of items seized were found to contain GHB. GHB, the total quantity being 4.6 litres. The basis for the one day of trafficking is that you were in possession of this for sale, for which there is some support in telephone intercept material. In terms of weight, I was told that this was well and truly over the two‑kilogram threshold for commercial quantity; in fact, it was double this. However, it was not alleged that you intended to traffic a commercial quantity of GHB or had knowledge of the concentrations of drug in the mixture found, which explains the trafficking simpliciter charge. I do not sentence you on any other basis. I was told that items seized and subjected to testing were found to be incapable of manufacturing GHB or its derivatives. From this I understand that the GHB seized was taken from other items and was already fully formed.
5 In respect of Charge 2, police found 11.2 grams of cannabis in a tissue box in a bedside table in the master bedroom.
6 In relation to Charge 3, on the top shelf of the master bedroom was a card printing machine with a false driver's licence partially printed. The details on the front were there, but it was blank on the back. Fingerprints matching yours were found on that machine.
7 In relation to Charge 4 and Summary Charge 6, I was told that police found in the garage another card printer with numerous plastic cards in a cardboard box containing numerous fraudulent licences, including driver's licences, handgun licences, heavy vehicle driving licences and boat operator licences. The basis for Charge 5 is that four false driver's licences in the name of the same individual whose actual licence had been stolen in December 2011 were found in the master bedroom.
8 In relation to Charge 6, a passport and birth certificate in the name of a person who had had these items stolen in January 2011 were found in the garage. The basis for Summary Charges 7 through to 9 is that forged drivers' licences were found in the master bedroom, wardrobe or tallboy which were derived from details of three individuals, in one case from a licence which was said to have been stolen whilst that person was in Italy. All of these licences were alleged to have been forged by you and you have pleaded guilty to these charges.
9 The sole distributor of the printing machine which was found in the master bedroom wardrobe and which is the subject of Charge 3 found the machine to be in working order and in 2007 it retailed for $3495. I understand that this witness, who had been cross‑examined at the committal hearing, had wanted to amend his police statement subsequently; however, I was not enlightened and am unable to speculate as to the nature of the amendments which were sought to be made. In any event, you have instructed your counsel and told police in the record of interview that as far as you were concerned this machine did not work. Perhaps the partially printed false driver's licence was testament to this, but it also appears that the reason you knew it did not work is that you had tried to operate it, the partially printed false licence being the product of what was last attempted, it would seem.
10 You were arrested at your parents' address, I was told, in Traralgon on 12 July 2012 and took part in a record of interview. You acknowledged that the address where all of the seized items were found was your home. You said that you and a male friend, who was the male present at the time of the police attendance, were living there as at 24 May 2012. You said that the various items in the garage belonged to three or four people who were in gaol and that they were being stored there. You also said that the last time you had been to the garage was a couple of days before to get a pushbike.
11 You said that the items which were subsequently found to contain GHB were furniture cleaner or polish and came with an old Chinese table. You said that the printer, which is the subject of Charge 3, was not working and that you had already been charged with it, that you used the cards to gamble online. You said that the machine was taken and the courts disposed of it and it did not work. You said the licences were the ones that had been copied, but the machine could not make them so you would say that they had been left behind from the last thing and that the stolen identity documents were all left over when you were charged for all of those. You said that you were surprised that they were there as you thought police had taken them all. You said that the second printer, which is the subject of Charge 4, was bodgie, that you had never used it and it did not work. You said that the only one that worked was the one that police got when you were charged. These are the extracts from the record of interview which are relevant to the charges before me.
12 Mr Redenbach, your offending is serious and deserving of punishment which is just in all of the circumstances and your conduct must be denounced. In particular, the trafficking charge, albeit for one day, concerns a drug which you used but to which you were not addicted. However, you were prepared to sell to others. Also you were in possession of the personal details of a number of people in the community which you were prepared to use to forge identity documents. No doubt it would be a great cause for anxiety for these individuals to know that someone like you had access to their details. From what I can gather, I understand that at least some of these identities were used by you to gamble online using a free trial period which is offered on a number of gambling sites.
13 You have a criminal history which involves prior convictions for drug offences, dishonesty and dishonesty offences. In 1990 you were convicted of murder and sentenced to 19 years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 15 years. This sentence was affirmed on appeal. I have read the Court of Appeal decision in this regard and it is apparent that you had imbibed drugs prior to committing the murder, albeit that you were then 22 years old at that time.
14 In July 2011, you were convicted of one charge of trafficking methylamphetamine; 39 charges of possessing identifying information to commit an indictable offence; 16 charges of making identifying information to commit an indictable offence; one charge of possessing equipment to make identifying documents; one charge of possessing proceeds of crime and one charge of possession of ecstasy. You were sentenced to an aggregate term of 12 months' imprisonment, which was wholly suspended for 18 months. It is an aggravating feature of the offending before me that it was committed whilst you were subjected to that suspended sentence. I will return to these particular matters a little later on.
15 In your favour, I take into account your plea of guilty and the stage at which you entered this. Although this was not entered until after the committal hearing, it was entered in the context of resolving the matter on a lesser charge and having been apprised of telephone intercept material of which you had been unaware until after the committal hearing.
16 In the circumstances, you are entitled to a discount which is quite significant in all the circumstances. You have saved the witnesses the time and trouble of giving evidence at trial and you have saved the community the time and expense of running a trial. As a principal issue at trial concerned your intention in respect of the quantity of GHB which has since resolved in your favour, I have allowed for this in the discount to which I have just referred.
17 In your case, the principle of totality has a good deal of relevance. You have been in gaol for some 698 days now, which is about one month short of two years. As part of that period was spent undergoing sentence for other matters, 145 days pre‑sentence detention is to be declared in respect of the matters before me. However, in sentencing you I have taken into account that you have been in gaol for nearly two years and I have also taken into account the somewhat unfortunate chronology in respect of these matters which saw you being arrested and interviewed two months after the police search had occurred at your home. Having said this, I note that you were not at your home at that time and that when police caught up with you, you were in Traralgon, at your parents' place.
18 Having been remanded in custody on 12 July 2012, your application for bail was refused in the Magistrates' Court on two occasions. As I understand the position, you were refused bail the first time when you were charged with trafficking simpliciter, but when you made the second application you were facing a charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity. On this latter occasion the learned magistrate found new facts and circumstances on the basis of the hand‑up brief having been served but you were unable to show exceptional circumstances which were required because of this upgraded charge.
19 In December 2012 in the Supreme Court you were also refused bail as you were unable to show exceptional circumstances once more. I have factored in that you may have missed the opportunity to have been granted bail on 28 November 2012 because you were subjected to a higher test than that which would have been required if facing the trafficking charge which is now before me.
20 On 28 March 2013 you were committed for trial. Unfortunately, the chemist who your defence representatives were wanting to cross‑examine on your behalf was not available on that day. It was on that day that you first became aware of telephone intercepts and negotiations then ensued. As was pointed out in the course of your plea hearing on 26 June 2013 at the Sunshine Magistrates' Court you were convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of six months' imprisonment for theft of motor car and dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime. These offences breached the wholly suspended sentence which had been imposed on 27 July 2011.
21 On 26 June last year the wholly suspended term of 12 months was restored and the six months' imprisonment for the breaching offences were directed to be served cumulatively. The total effective sentence was therefore 18 months' imprisonment and a non-parole period of 12 months was fixed. 349 days was reckoned as a period already served, so you had about 16 further days before becoming eligible for parole at the time of that sentence.
22 The matters before me resolved as a plea on 13 February 2014. Your counsel submitted that delay ought be taken into account in your favour in these circumstances as you have had the anxiety of these proceedings hanging over your head for a lengthy period. I have given some weight to this, although it was not submitted that you were always prepared to plead guilty to the present charges. As you were a voice on the intercepts, you would have known the nature of discussions which you had had involving the sale of GHB. In those circumstances, it was always open to you to accept responsibility at an earlier time even if you were unaware of the further evidence against you. You are not to be punished for not having done so and you are entitled to know the entirety of the evidence alleged against you before deciding your course. However, in these circumstances you may have been in a position to bring your anxiety to an earlier end than you chose to do so. Having said this, I have factored in that there was some fluctuation of significance in the charge that you were facing insofar as the trafficking allegation was concerned.
23 It was submitted by your counsel that the impact of delay in resolving this matter has also had the effect of depriving you of a chance to have all outstanding matters dealt with at about the time of the Magistrates' Court proceedings in June last year, so depriving you of a chance for a level of concurrency as between the Magistrate Court matters and those before me. I have had regard to this to a point, although I note that in relation to the matters before me resolution discussions between you and the prosecution commenced in March last year, which was at a time before the Magistrates' Court matters.
24 I was not informed as to the stage that these discussions had reached insofar as the trafficking charge was concerned; in particular, by the time June came around. In any event, as I have previously said, I have borne in mind the principle of totality when sentencing you now. I have also taken into account that in respect of the charge of trafficking GHB, it was for one day and that there is no evidence of betterment from having done so. You were using GHB at the time which, according to you, gave you a zest for life. However, you were not addicted to the drug, which makes you more morally culpable than someone who was addicted and selling the substance to sustain their habit.
25 I was told that you were released from gaol in 2005 after serving the non-parole period for the murder conviction. During your time in gaol, you had gained a reputation in view of your dreadful crime and you also had gained a number of criminal associates. When you were released, you were totally unprepared for making a life outside gaol. Initially, you lived near Fulham Prison, but then you moved to the house which was provided for you by a well‑known crime figure. The problem with this was that it was also a place where a number of criminals dropped by, often leaving stolen property there, which was in your possession when the police executed the search warrant.
26 You gave frank answers in your record of interview and aspects of your letter to me were also very frank. In your letter, you expressed remorse and a desire to reunite with your family as soon as possible. You detailed the various drugs you have used from time to time and the effects that these have had upon you. You said that upon your release, you would probably use cannabis but would abstain from other drugs. In the circumstances, I am sure that you know that it would be best if you abstained from drugs altogether.
27 This has not been the case whilst you have been in gaol. You have used drugs whilst inside to help alleviate the boredom of being in gaol and the pain of separation from your family. I take into account your background. You are now 48 years old. You and your wife, Lauren, married in 2011. You met her after having been asked to look out for her by a friend, who was returning to gaol and who was concerned that she be protected from an abusive relationship she had been in. You have a three‑year‑old child together and your wife also has an 11‑year‑old child who you treat as your own.
28 You have a child from another relationship which was established whilst you were in gaol. Your relationship was with a drug counsellor, who you say reignited your drug‑taking. You wished to pursue contact with the child of that relationship which broke down following your release from prison. That child is now eight years old and her mother has blocked any contact with you.
29 Notwithstanding your perception of the child's mother, it is unlikely to be in the child's best interests that you do reconnect until you get your act together and lead a life free of drugs and free of crime. Of course, every child needs a father, but as you would know so well, they need a father who can be a positive role model rather than someone whose life only serves to bring them down.
30 You had a very sad and dysfunctional childhood. Your father was a heroin addict and your household was constantly subjected to police raids. You were given the task of hiding incriminating items when the police came and on occasion you also had to take the blame for things your father did. You were often subjected to witnessing your father's overdoses and tasked with removing the belt from his arm after he had injected heroin. If you did not perform these tasks, your father would punish you for failing to protect him from the law.
31 When you were 12 years old your father, whilst in gaol, had indicated that he was prepared to attend Odyssey House with you for a parenting program. However, he changed his mind, deciding to serve a gaol term instead, leaving you at Odyssey House for eight months in the care of a staff member.
32 From 1980 to 1982 you were removed from your parents' care and spent some time in Turana and in foster placements. As a teenager, you were a paid participant in the production of child pornographic images. You went to various different secondary schools, both private and public; however, you truanted a good deal of the time.
33 Nowadays, you have a close relationship with your mother and you have occasional contact with your father, who I understand now lives in Queensland. I am not sure how this ties in with you being found at your parents in Traralgon, whether they have separated or whether they have moved since you were found, but there is nothing of substance attached to this.
34 You are now in a happy relationship with your current wife and the separation from her and the children over the past 23 months has been most difficult for you. In particular, you have missed a number of milestones of your three‑year‑old child. Your wife has now been served with a notice of eviction. Although your plan is to move away from the house when you are released to avoid any further undesirable visitors or storage items, it is far from desirable for your family to be threatened with homelessness. Your separation from your family in these stressful circumstances has made and will make time in gaol harder for you than for someone without these concerns.
35 In this regard, I have also factored in that your wife is not in the best of health and this has also added to your level of concern for her. I accept that you have a level of remorse which is much to do with the predicament you are in and being without your family. You also have a level of insight, this must be seen in the context of your prior convictions. Your wife has been in contact with Toll, a company which gives opportunities to people coming out of gaol, and they have indicated that they are prepared to have you apply to them upon your release. They are to be commended for this. No doubt you would have to be drug‑free in order to work for them. There is no guarantee of work, but an opportunity, which I understand you are willing to pursue if you can. You have resolved not to use any drug upon release, although you have frankly declared that you may well use cannabis.
36 You have developed rather exceptional computer skills and you have a sound level of intelligence which should stand you in good stead when trying to get work in the future. You have completed a number of courses in prison and apart from dirty drug screens, you have performed well there. It would appear, in the report of Dr Cruzen, that having spent a good deal of your life in gaol, you are somewhat institutionalised. However, you say that you now have much to look forward to with the prospect of your family to return to and a firm resolve not to jeopardise this stability in the future. You have also resolved to move away from the house, which has been a most undesirable environment for you and your family.
37 Mr Redenbach, I do hope that you keep to your resolve and I have taken into account your letter and your wife's letter in sentencing you. I have also taken into account the report of Dr Cruzen and the fact that you are not drug‑addicted, which puts you in a better position to avoid re‑offending than for someone who is. You also have good family support to look to upon your release. On the other hand, you do have a predilection for drugs and have relevant prior convictions. It may be that you do have a tendency to blame others for things you have done, but in view of all that is before me I am not convinced of this and I do not sentence you on this basis.
38 In all the circumstances, I must give not inconsiderable weight to specific deterrence and to the need to protect the community. As a man of 48 years you had good family support when you committed these offences and, therefore, I must be concerned for your prospects of rehabilitation, which I find are fair at best.
39 Your counsel submitted to me that I ought impose a sentence which would entitle you to be considered for release on parole now. The Crown submitted that even allowing for the principle of totality, the period served in respect of the matters before me was not adequate.
40 I am afraid that I have come to the view that an additional period of gaol is warranted because of the seriousness of the offending and in light of the weight I must attach to all relevant sentencing considerations. However, I have very much borne in mind all relevant sentencing principles and the fact that you have already been in gaol for nearly two years in arriving at an appropriate sentence in your case.
41 Would you please stand up, Mr Redenbach. In relation to all offences before me, you are convicted. I make a disposal order in accordance with the draft order which is not opposed by you. In relation to the charges on the Indictment, you are sentenced as follows: Charge 1, two years' imprisonment which will be the base sentence; Charge 2, you are fined $100; Charge 3, one year imprisonment; Charge 4, eight months' imprisonment; Charge 5, one year imprisonment; Charge 6, one year imprisonment. In respect of the summary charges, you are sentenced to an aggregate term of one month imprisonment.
42 I direct that in respect of the Indictment matters, three months of the sentence on Charge 3, two months of the sentence on Charge 4 and two months from the sentences on Charges 5 and 6 be served cumulatively with each other and with the base sentence, but that otherwise all sentences of imprisonment, whether on the Indictment or summary matters, are to be served concurrently producing a total effective sentence of two years, nine months and I direct that you serve 18 months before becoming eligible for parole.
43 I declare that you have already served 150 days by way of pre‑sentence detention. If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years. Would you take a seat for a moment, please, sir. Is there anything arising from that, counsel? Very well. If you would remove Mr Redenbach, please. We will now adjourn.
-‑‑
0
0
0