Director of Public Prosecutions v Shahadat

[2025] VCC 1438

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

CR 25-00419

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

ALADEAN SHAHADAT

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MULLALY
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	10 September 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	30 September 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Shahadat
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 1438

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:

Catchwords:

Legislation Cited:

Cases Cited:

Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr J. Morrison	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms H. Anderson	Greg Thomas Barristers & Solicitors

HIS HONOUR:

1Aladean Shahadat, on 14 March 2024, you were a P-Plate driver, required to have no alcohol in your system if you chose to drive.  You blatantly, deliberately, ignored that legal requirement and drank to excess before getting in your car and driving in an appalling fashion in the suburban streets of Truganina on that day.  You drove at excessive speeds along Sinclairs and then Hopkins Road, Truganina, passing other vehicles in a dangerous manner.  Your behaviour caused real concern for other drivers.  As you moved onto Hopkins Road, you accelerated, putting what was found to be full pressure on the accelerator. 

2In other words, you were pushing the accelerator literally to the floor.  You were trying to get the car to go as fast as it could.  That was your aim.  Your car got up to 150 kilometres per hour, a speed ordinary citizens would find incredulous.  The speed limit for your direction on Hopkins Road was 70 kilometres an hour.  As you got up to 150 kilometres per hour, you came over a rise.  At a point ahead of you, the victim, Mr Quaye, was in the process of doing a U-turn to get from the northbound lanes on Hopkins Road to the southbound lanes.  He was delayed in doing so by other traffic.  He got himself part way through a three-point turn and was stationary across the traffic lanes.

3A truckdriver endeavoured to warn you of the hazard caused by Mr Quaye's car but you did not slow down at all.  Rather, you ploughed into Mr Quaye's car at a speed estimated to be 154 kilometres per hour.  There was no evidence of any braking by you before the collision.  Your grossly negligent driving, including this outrageous speed and your intoxication which I will speak of shortly, were such that you were not capable of seeing or doing anything to avoid Mr Quaye’s car.  The force of the impact split Mr Quaye's car in half.  He was ejected.  He suffered catastrophic injuries and died soon after impact.

4Amazingly, you were uninjured, got out of your car and ran away, only returning to get your phone before heading off into the nearby paddocks again.  Ultimately, you were found by a police dog and arrested by the handler.  In recent days, in a letter to the victim's family, you have spoken of your shame at running from the scene and not remaining to help.  A sample of your blood was taken, and an expert's opinion put your blood alcohol at the time of the collision as being between 0.191 and 0.215. This excessive blood alcohol reading is around four times the legal limit for those with a full licence. 

5As noted, you were not permitted to have any alcohol in your system at all.  This blood alcohol level is very high, up with some of the highest seen in culpable driving offences.  Your behaviour is what all other responsible road users fear.  Outrageous speeds, moving in and out of your lane, unnecessarily passing other vehicles who are driving at the speed limit and having near misses and then colliding at high speed with another vehicle where the driver was unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time.  This was extreme hoon-type driving with no explicable reason other than somehow it was for your own selfish pleasure.

6You showed utter disdain for your fellow citizens who were lawfully driving on their suburban roads.  In assessing the gravity of what you did, I have considered all the factors that I have mentioned in outlining these circumstances.  You were grossly intoxicated, driving in an erratic manner, putting a significant number of road users at high risk before the almost inevitable catastrophe occurred.  It was a catastrophe entirely of your making.  It was entirely avoidable.  Given the levels of alcohol, the incredible speed, yours is an example of culpable driving at the higher end of the spectrum.

7I have come to that conclusion after also adding in that the deceased, Mr Quaye was making a U-turn in circumstances where it was not legal to do that.  He was stationary and across the road.  This was a factor out of your control.  According to Court of Appeal authorities, this is a factor that moderates the gravity or your moral culpability to some extent.  However, had you been sober and driving at the speed limit, you would have seen Mr Quaye doing his U-turn, you would have slowed down and allowed him to do complete it, perhaps tooted your horn at worst and then moved on. Because of your conduct and your level of intoxication, that is not what happened.  Far from it.

8The impact of the death of Mr Quaye on his family has been profound.  His wife and daughter wrote moving victim impact statements.  His wife said that she wished to share the profound impact that Robert Quaye's tragic death has had on her life.  She spoke of never getting the chance to be with him again:

…I will never get to see him smile or hear his voice again.  I will never get that chance due to the incident that killed him.  I will never get over this.  I cannot bring Robert back and because of this I wish I could spend one more minute with him to tell him how much I love him.  I have nightmares of Robert dying.

9She says she misses everything about Robert:

We used to have good times both of us together.  We did everything together.  I miss him so much and I dream about him.  I miss his jokes, his smile and his character that was serious with a funny side.  We had a good marriage, it was a marriage that we both said was for life’ and I have been left with feelings of being alone, sad and of a broken heart…

10She used to socialise but now she just wants to stay at home.  She was social with her friends and she attended church a good deal but finds that very difficult, a matter of great importance to her, I discern.  She says that, and with a sadness that is hard to comprehend:

In 2010, I lost my first husband, he also died in a car accident. This accident has brought back all the emotions from the previous accident that killed my other husband due to the stupidity on the roads today.

11She spoke of the feeling when she was first told of Robert's death by the police who came to her door.  She couldn't believe it.  He was her soulmate and she thinks of him every day.  She sees a psychologist due to depression and anxiety.  She is affected so badly that some days she can't leave the house, can't get out the door.  She has difficulty sleeping.  He was, as she rightly puts, the innocent victim of a completely preventable accident and she now lives with the permanent knowledge that one person's selfish disregard for safety of others caused the death which has had profound far-reaching impacts on many lives and has changed her forever.

12Her daughter wrote how her mental state has been very significantly affected by the death of her father.  She barely ate, she lost weight, she felt suicidal.  She says that now she feels better but it is very hard to cope, and she needs help.  She spoke about her father being the one who kept the family together, especially her and her siblings.  But at the moment she writes that the family is ruined by what occurred.  She put it in simple terms 'my dad was a good man'.

13The government, the Parliament, our courts, the police, safety agencies, have for decades mounted campaigns saying again and again in clear words and using powerful images that drink driving is dreadful antisocial behaviour.  The campaigns have also emphasised the dangers of excessive speeding.  In the face of this, your conduct is simply intolerable.  It must be denounced and punished in a way that expresses the community's abhorrence and continues the message of deterrence to others.  In practical terms, that means years of imprisonment. 

14As is regularly said in these sad cases, the accused person is often a person of good character who has made one appalling mistake with fatal consequences in an otherwise law-abiding life.  I will outline your personal circumstances and in particular your supports within your family, but at this point it must be said that you have a criminal history.  You were before the Children's Court when 17 in late 2018.  You were released on a good behaviour bond without conviction for armed robbery and recklessly causing injury. 

15You were next before the Magistrates' Court, the adult court, in October 2019 for assaulting emergency workers, affray, assault, weapons and drugs charges.  Again, you were placed on an adjourned undertaking without conviction. 

16On 19 December 2022 you were dealt with for contravening a family violence order, damaging property, assault, drugs and drunkenness offences.  Again, you were placed on an adjourned undertaking for a year, this time with conviction.  Another breach of an intervention order in February 2023 saw you placed on an adjourned undertaking for 10 months. 

17In April 2023, you again were dealt with for contravening intervention orders, intentionally causing injury and property damage.  You were imprisoned for 37 days being the time you had been held on remand and in addition you were placed on a 12-month Community Correction Order (CCO).  Thus, you were on a CCO at the time of your culpable driving.  This is an aggravating factor.  I was told, and documents were provided, to show that you had done well enough on the CCO to date, attending the program relating to your problem with alcohol on two occasions.  This had not got to the point of empowering you to not drink and drive which you so obviously did causing this tragedy.

18So although you do not have prior offences for poor driving, you do have a history of not complying with court orders, by breaching intervention orders, bail orders and a CCO.  You have a history of violent offending.  The very merciful sentences contained conditions to assist you with your mental health, your drug use and your alcohol abuse, but the opportunities it would seem were not taken up fully.  You do not seem to have benefited from those opportunities to sort yourself out as evidenced by your excessive blood alcohol level and your mindless hoon-like driving on 14 March 2023.

19You are not to be repunished for past crimes, but they are not entirely irrelevant.  As for your broader personal circumstances, you are now 24.  You were born in the United Kingdom in 2001.  Your parents were both born in Zimbabwe.  At age 11, you moved to Australia with your parents and sister.  You are a permanent resident of Australia.  You reported that you had a normal and enjoyable upbringing until the age of 15 or 16.  Your life revolved it seemed around playing soccer either on the field or on your PlayStation.  It seems you were a talented soccer player.

20You attended school in Keilor Downs.  You were an average student and by your own admission you did not prioritise your education in favour of soccer.  During high school you were popular and outgoing.  You were focused on maintaining an image of being well liked.  School was a positive experience, but unfortunately in Year 10 you dropped out of school and, it seems to further rebel against your parents, you ceased playing soccer.  You regret this decision as soccer had been a significant part of your identity.  But more importantly, without school, you became idle, mixing with what you now recognise were negative peers.

21Your drug taking and alcohol abuse took hold, leading you to the criminality and court appearances over the next few years which I have outlined.  As to drug use, you were approximately 14 when you first began using cannabis, initially smoking once a week.  By the time you were 15, you were smoking daily.  As a teenager you developed a dependence on the prescription drug, Xanax.  In your late teens and early 20s, you drank heavily, sometimes to the point of blackouts.  You reported that you continued to smoke cannabis until your recent incarceration.

22You have had one significant relationship.  You lived with your partner, but had disagreements about having a child.  You felt you were not ready.  Despite this, you went on to have a son.  You describe a deep love and affection for your son.  Before your incarceration, your son stayed with you on weekends, and you paid a minimum of $400 per month in child support.  At the time of the offence, you had completed three of your four-year mechanic's apprenticeship.  You were working in your father's business as his only employee.  You hope to complete your apprenticeship when you are released from custody.

23Over the last two years you describe that your life changed for the better.  You distanced yourself from negative peers and criminal activity.  You had been using illicit prescription drugs as I said, and also cocaine and alcohol, but you turned your attention to your career and to being a father.  Following the death of Mr Quaye, you have attempted to live positively.  You report that you no longer drink heavily.  You recall that years ago you recognised that alcohol could cause you to seriously harm someone.  You are distressed that this fear has become a reality. 

24After the culpable driving, you sought out counselling via a mental health plan.  You have had a solid number of sessions with your psychologist, and you report you have gained benefit from your treatment and consider your psychologist understands you well.  I was not provided with any report or information directly from the treating psychologist.  You were seen by a medicolegal psychologist, Ms Mynard, for the purposes of the plea.  Her report was helpful, and I have relied upon it to fill out your personal circumstances. 

25Ultimately, in terms of her specific psychological expertise, she considered you were suffering from symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) brought about by the trauma of the fatal motor vehicle accident which you caused.  None of this is surprising.  For sentencing purposes, Ms Mynard considered that with your symptoms of PTSD, gaol will be more onerous for you.  Your counsel made further extensive submissions on this topic.  The prosecution ultimately submitted that there was mitigation in the fact that gaol will be more onerous because of your post-traumatic stress disorder, but the Crown submitted that any mitigation ought to be moderate.

26I have adjusted your sentence and synthesised this psychological material, that is, that your PTSD will make prison harder for you.  I have considered it and given it appropriate weight, that is, it is a factor that moderates your sentence to some degree.  You have been, of course, in prison before for a very short period in 2022.  I expect that a long sentence will still be hard.  Ms Mynard concluded that you had developed addiction or disorders with respect to cannabis and alcohol, but that you will benefit from forced abstinence by your prison term.

27Before your remand you engaged with an alcohol and drug counsellor, however your work commitments meant that you had difficulty keeping appointments.  Ms Mynard also used her skills to make enquiries and draw some conclusions as to your insights and remorse.  She wrote the following in paragraph 71:

Mr Shahadat demonstrates developing insight into the role of alcohol and poor decision-making in his offending.  He acknowledges the seriousness of his actions, recognises that "someone needs to be punished", and expresses distress at the reality that his earlier fear - that alcohol would cause him to harm someone - was realised.

28Your reflections, she thought, conveyed genuine remorse and a willingness to accept accountability, noting: 

He remains troubled by unresolved questions about the accident, but this does not appear to diminish his acknowledgement of responsibility.

29Your father also wrote a letter in which he said you had expressed remorse for your actions in many conversations with him.  In recent days, you have written a letter to the family of the deceased.  The letter does express your more developed insight and your understanding that while you will be punished, ultimately you will reunite with your family, something you denied to Mr Quaye and his family.  It seems there is more substance to your expressions of remorse of late.  I take that into account.

30Genuine remorse is important in these offences.  It means something to the community and to the victims in particular.  Your pleas of guilty came after a committal and case management.  It is unnecessary to say more about the timing of the plea, other than what your counsel said, which I accept is accurate.  Her words were 'whilst it is not an early plea, it was not also a late plea and no trial date was set'.  The plea itself has significant utilitarian value. You have saved the family of the deceased and the other witnesses the stressors of a trial, and have saved the resources that are expended in running a criminal trial.

31Thus, your sentence will be less than it otherwise would have been had you gone to trial and been convicted, which was in my view inevitable.  Another factor in sentencing is that you are still relatively young, now aged 24, and 23 at the time of your crime.  Principles of sentencing youthful offenders are well established and here I refer to the Court of Appeal decision in Azzopardi[1].  What needs to be understood is that you are at the upper end of the cohort of youthful offenders.  Also, the courts have emphasised how this crime is often committed by young offenders who drive without regard for the safety of others. 

[1]Azzopardi v The Queen [2011] VSCA 372.

32As the seriousness of offending elevates, as this one does, involving the taking of another person's life, the sentencing purpose of rehabilitation must yield to the primary sentencing purposes of denunciation and general deterrence. But your rehabilitation remains important.  The sentencing purpose is that I must establish conditions that may facilitate your rehabilitation.  I have few tools in that regard.  What I have is to allow for a period of potential parole.  Whether and when you gain parole, is for others, not the court.  In this area, Parliament has intervened with respect to the ratio between a head sentence and a non-parole period.

33Those matters are connected to the fact that, first, the culpable driving is designated a Category 2 offence requiring imprisonment unless one of the strict exempting criteria is made out.  Your counsel did not argue that any exempting criteria were established in your case.  Thus, there must be a sentence of imprisonment and your counsel did not suggest anything other than the fixing of a head sentence and a non-parole period.  The offences are also part of the standard sentencing regime. 

34Thus, there are two legislative guideposts for sentencing judges, the 20 years' imprisonment as the maximum term and eight years' imprisonment as the standard sentencing term.  What is set out in the Sentencing Act with respect to standard sentencing in s 5A(1)(b) is the following:

…The period specified as the standard sentence for the offence is the sentence for an offence that, taking into account only objective factors affecting the relative seriousness of that offence, is in the middle of the range of seriousness.

35And sub-paragraphs then read:

For the purposes of subsection 1(b), objective factors affecting the relative seriousness of an offence are to be determined:

(a) without reference to matters personal to a particular offender or class of offenders; and

(b) wholly by reference to the nature of the offending.

36The relevant parts of the Act go on to say that I can only consider other standard sentences when considering or having regard to current sentencing practices.  But importantly, the Act itself goes on to say that these aspects of standard sentencing regime do not limit the matters the court is required or permitted to take into account, and that the well-known sentencing methodology of instinctive synthesis remains as the appropriate way to exercise overall sentencing discretion.  Thus, I have followed the Court of Appeal's guidance with respect to standard sentencing as set out in Brown v The King[2].

[2]Brown v The King [2025] VSCA 39.

37On the issue of standard sentencing, the prosecution argued your crime was significantly above the middle range.  Your counsel submitted it was below, while conceding the gravity of the offending was still serious.  In my view, your offending in committing the crime of culpable driving causing the death of Mr Quaye is significantly over the middle level in the range of seriousness.  In terms of the objective factors, that is, the level of the blood alcohol and your speed and your driving were so egregious that a sentence well beyond the standard sentencing guidepost is warranted.

38A further matter of importance is that given you were born in the United Kingdom and hold only permanent residency, a sentence of imprisonment beyond 12 months will almost inevitably mean you face deportation. I accept that deportation is all but a certainty.  You have established a life in Australia, having moved at the young age of 11 with your whole family.  You have a young son, and he is important to you. Your family are very close and of importance in supporting you and would be on your release.

39The prospect of deportation is a matter of great concern to you.  The relevance to sentencing of this risk of deportation is that you will find prison that much more onerous because of the knowledge of deportation upon release.  It is an additional hardship, especially as you have such deep family connections in Australia and were well and truly set on having your whole life here in Australia.  The loss of that prospect will make gaol very hard. The submission of the prosecution was that your particular example of the offending places you in the higher end of the comparable cases of those recent standard sentencing cases where high blood alcohol and excessive speed have been at the core of the offending.

40Your counsel urged a more restrained approach so that what she called 'a crushing sentence', was not imposed.  Of course, as you wrote yourself, you will on release live your life wiser and more focused on doing the right thing.  Your sentence will not be crushing in the sense that you have no useful life left on your release.  Your counsel also emphasised in the assessment of gravity, that I should not forget the factors outside of your control in your case which were absent in some of the comparable cases.

41As I hope I have made clear, the primary sentencing purposes here are, first, deterrence to others.  I must ensure that the all-important message is delivered with crystal clarity.  That is, if you drink and drive at such homicidal speeds and you take someone's life, you will face years of imprisonment.  Also important is denunciation of your reprehensible and mindlessly selfish conduct.  Because of your desire for selfish thrills, you took away the life of a much-loved decent man.  You have caused lifelong heartbreak for his wife and family.  They will never be the same.

42The denunciation must be in more than these words, but have practical expression in the sternness of the sentence.  Of course, my sentence is not to be seen as the value of Robert Quaye's life.  His life was precious and priceless to all who knew him.  My sentence is what I conclude is the just and appropriate sentence after considering all the circumstances of the offence and you as the offender.  The non-parole period I will announce is what justice requires you serve in prison.  I see no basis for the sentence to be lower than the percentage fixed by Parliament.

43Thus, doing my best, for committing the crime of culpable driving, you are sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 10 years and six months, and I fix a non-parole period of seven years.  The presentence detention - I should have got it.

44MS ANDERSON:  Twenty-one days not including today.

45HIS HONOUR:  You have served 21 days awaiting sentencing.  This figure having been reckoned, I now declare that the 21 days is part of the sentence I have just imposed, and I will ensure that it is entered into the records of the court, so the prison authorities well understand you have already done 21 days of the sentence imposed. 

46Had you pleaded not guilty to the offence, I would have imposed a sentence of 13 years' imprisonment with a minimum of 10 years' imprisonment.  Your licence must be affected.  By order of the court, all licences are cancelled, and you are disqualified from driving for a period of four years.

47Pursuant to the provisions of 89C, I make a declaration that alcohol contributed to the offence of culpable driving, and I make that declaration pursuant to that section of the Act.

48Is there anything further required?

49COUNSEL:  No, Your Honour.

50HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.  Mr Shahadat, I acknowledge you attending.  The court is not a place where you can now spend any time with those who care for you.  You must go with those Corrections Officers while I remain on the Bench.  Thank you.

51I thank counsel for their very considerable assistance and to the permanent prosecutor.

‑ ‑ ‑