Director of Public Prosecutions v Skravanj

[2018] VCC 135

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

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR-16-01734

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

AKSEL SKRAVANJ

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE HARBISON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	21 February 2018
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Skravanj
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VCC 135

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr T. Hoare
For the Accused	Ms I. Bolger

Pages 1 - 16

 

 

HER HONOUR:

1Aksel Skravanj, you have pleaded guilty before me to five charges.  The first three of those charges are in relation to State offences, and the last two are Commonwealth offences.  Each one of those charges relates to criminal conduct which you committed quite some time ago. 

2Charge 1 is a charge of causing injury intentionally.  It relates to you having injured Joseph Prevolsek on 28 July 2012, some five and a half years ago.  At that time, you and he had been in a relationship together.  You had been living together for a short time, having previously maintained that intimate relationship for approximately two years.

3On the day before this event took place, an argument occurred between you and he concerning, in broad terms, the end of your relationship.  The situation escalated and in the early hours of the next morning, you ultimately struck your victim to the head with your fists, threw him against a fence and, most violently, stabbed him with his car keys.  The end result of that violence was that your victim received a swollen left eye with temporary blurred vision, a muscle in his right hand was torn and he received various lacerations, bumps and swellings. 

4You victim was understandably terrified of this attack.  He described himself as being extremely scared of you and petrified whilst it was occurring.

5So that is the first charge for which I am to sentence you today, it is a charge to intentionally causing injury and the maximum penalty in relation to that charge is ten years' imprisonment. 

6The next two charges, Charges 2 and 3, concern also this same victim.  Charge 2 is a charge of making a false document.  It arises out of your action in inveigling your victim to sign a statement referring to the assault which I have just detailed and which is the subject matter of the first charge.  That statement contained a purported admission by your victim that he was in the wrong, rather than you, in respect of the assault and that he did not wish any charges to be laid against you over that incident. 

7The victim did sign that statement, although against his will, because you pressured him to do so.  Although you immediately ripped up the statement, you had, just before doing so, made a copy of that statement.  Had the matter ended there, my perception is that this offending would have been at the lower end of the scale for offending of this type. 

8However, you later used the copy which you have made of this statement, pretending the statement was a genuine one.  You presented it to the police informant as proof of your innocence in relation to the first charge.  You described to the informant in florid terms how this document proved your innocence and you disparaged the victim, calling him a liar.

9Given that you used your copy of the document in this way, I agree with the prosecution submission that your offending in relation to this charge should be described as serious offending of this type.  The maximum penalty on Charge 2 for the crime of making a false statement is ten years' imprisonment. 

10The third charge also involves that same victim, Mr Joseph Prevolsek.  It is a charge of stalking him over a period of eight and a half months, from 26 December 2013 to 11 August 2014.  This is a period of time which concluded over three years ago. 

11Your stalking of your victim in that period of eight and half months was relentless.  It took several different forms.  You harassed him by email, through his mobile phone and through other electronic messaging services.  You posted public messages on Facebook, you contacted his employer and his mother.  You threatened his family with legal action if he did not withdraw his allegation of assault and you threatened his friends.

12The summary of prosecution opening, which was made an exhibit on this plea, details some examples of this stalking behaviour.  Effectively, you threatened over this period to destroy your victim's life.  Your allegations made against him, to himself, to his family, friends and employer were outrageous and bizarre. 

13As a result of this stalking behaviour, your victim described himself as living in constant fear.  He could not leave his house and he was terrified.  He described himself as suicidal and suffering from insomnia, depression and anxiety.  He filed an victim impact statement in this plea, in which he set out the effect of all your behaviour as comprised in the first three charges. 

14Although there are some aspects of that victim impact statement which go far beyond the charges which I am to sentence you, I accept that the thrust of the description given by the victim as to the effect you have had on his life applies to the criminal behaviour represented by the three charges, Charges 1, 2 and 3.  He details his terror and he describes himself in that victim impact statement as not trusting anyone anymore and being left with broken dreams and night terrors. 

15Now, Mr Skravanj, that victim impact statement was prepared in July 2014, which is some three and a half years ago.  I have not up to date material in respect of the mental or physical state of your victim.  The prosecutor told me from the Bar table that the victim is still suffering some psychological distress as a result of your behaviour but is not prepared to file further victim impact statement.  I am therefore unable to know for sure what the present effect is on him. 

16I agree with the prosecutor in his description of the effect on your victim at the time as being severe and I agree with the prosecutor's description of your stalking behaviour as being a very serious example of his behaviour, but I have no up to date information as to the current effect of that behaviour on your victim.

17I now turn to Charges 4 and 5, which are the Commonwealth offences.  Both of those charges are charges of using a carriage service to menace to other victims.  In the case of Charge 4, the victim's name is Ella Wilson. 

18You came to know Ms Wilson as you had been living in a shared house with her and with others in late 2013.  After living in this house for a few weeks, you were evicted.  When this happened, you were not repaid your bond or the rent that you had paid in advance.  Whether or not this withholding was justified is not a matter for me to determine.  It is only important because it created a sense of grievance in you and you contacted Ms Wilson on many occasions between November 2013 and January 2014, complaining about this. 

19These complaints are not themselves the subject of any charge.  However, on 5 July 2014, some six months after the complaints had ceased, you suddenly contacted Ms Wilson again via text message.  The messages that you sent her at this time were long and very offensive.  You called her "weak", "a disgusting plight on this earth", and, "a stupid little pig”. 

20You also contacted her employer on 11 July 2014 and made vile threats to him and through him to her.  Your contact of Ms Wilson and of her employer lasted from 5 to 31 July 2014, a period of approximately three weeks.  That is the subject matter of Charge 4 on the indictment, which I have said is a Commonwealth charge of using a carriage service to menace Ms Wilson.

21You were interviewed by the police in relation to that behaviour on
11 August 2014.  However, this police contact does not appear to have prevented you from continuing to offend in roughly the same fashion against yet another victim. 

22Between 23 and 24 September 2014, barely a month after you had been contacted in relation to Wilson, you harassed another old friend of yours, Michael Harris.  He had been a person with whom you had had an intimate relationship for two years, ending in 2008.  I am not told what your relationship was with him between 2008 and 2014 but I am told that he obtained an intervention order against you on 8 August 2014.

23The harassment which is the subject matter of Charge 5 consisted of you contacting him by telephone 274 times over the course of those two days.  That is the subject matter of Charge 5, which is another charge of using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence.  The maximum period of imprisonment of each to those offences is three years imprisonment. 

24I have not received any victim impact statements in relation to those last two victims.  However, it is clear that your behaviour towards both of them was outrageous.  There was no reason at all for them to be targeted by you in this way and it is clear that for each of them, your unwanted abuse and attention would have been significantly distressing. 

25As I have said, Mr Skravanj, these matters occurred quite some time ago.  The last offending occurred on 23 and 24 September 2014, which is itself over three years ago.  Although some of the early delay in this matter proceeding to trial appears to have occurred as a result of you failing to appear in court.  I accept that the bulk of the delay between then and now has not been of your making. 

26It seems that originally, the charges were listed in the Magistrates' Court and then a decision was taken at some time to include a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.  The inclusion of this charge meant that all charges against you were transferred to this court.  The trial of those charges was not reached in 2017 and was ultimately listed to commence in this court only at the start of this week, that is on Monday 19 February 2018.

27On that day, the matter resolved to a plea of guilty, with the intention to pervert the course of justice charge withdrawn and also with the withdrawal of many other summary matters which had been pressed against you.

28Because the matter resolved into a plea just last Monday in the circumstances that I have outlined, there has been very little opportunity for your counsel to provide much material about you.  I appreciate that you have wished the plea to proceed without detailed plea material. I accept that this is in part because the prosecutor has indicated to me, as part of his sentencing submissions, that the prosecution accepts that you have served a sufficient amount of actual gaol time and that it is not in the interest of justice that you serve a significant amount of further time in custody.

29The prosecutor has also accepted on the plea that you are entitled, substantially, to the benefit of the delay in this matter coming to court and also that your plea of guilty to these charges following the withdrawal of the significant number of charges which would otherwise have been dealt with in the trial is appropriately to be considered by me in mitigation of sentence.

30In those circumstances, I heard the following about your history.  Firstly, and very importantly, apart from these offences, you have had no prior contact with the criminal law.  This is, as I have just said, an extremely important factor for me to take into account in sentencing you today.

31I do note that you have had some offences late last year and early this year which post-date this offending.  However, they are, of my view, minor offences and of little significance in sentencing you today.  One of them was being found drunk and resisting police, for which you were dealt with without conviction and for which you were placed on an adjourned undertaken.  The other was contravening a conduct condition of bail for which you received a wholly suspended sentence of imprisonment. 

32Apart from these offences which I characterise as not being of great relevance in my sentencing task today, you have had absolutely no contact with the criminal law. 

33You are presently 30 years old.  You were 25 years, approximately, at the time of these offences.  I was told that you left school after completing Year 12.  You do not appear to have gained any employment qualification and you appear to have worked sporadically, both in South Australia and in Victoria.  You have lived in various different addresses in Victoria, sometimes being homeless over the period of years during the time that his offending took place. 

34It appears to me that this history is connected in some way with you significant medical condition.  I am able to say definitively that you suffer from attention deficit disorder and a borderline personality disorder.  This is evidenced in the psychiatric report which has been presented by your counsel on your plea. 

35Your counsel also told that you suffer from Asperger's, and you have, in response to a question yesterday, told me that you suffer from several other related disorders.  I have no medical confirmation of any of these diagnoses but I accept that this is true.  I accept that overall you suffer from significant disability which impacts greatly on your life and I note that you have been on a disability pension because of your various medical conditions since the year 2013. 

36Your personality disorder appears to manifest itself in your desire to keep to yourself and difficulty in maintaining relationships.  It appears that each one of these offences for which I am to sentence you today arises out of a failed relationship of one sort of another. 

37Your barrister told me that you find it difficult to discuss your feelings and that you have problems relating to people because of your Asperger's.  This also, I might say, appears to be evident, to some extent, in an exhibit which has been presented to me today, being a text message that you wrote to the mother of your victim in Charges 1 to 3, which appears to be a very dense and detailed discussion of many matters relating to your relationship with him and his family. 

38Perhaps because of the lack of time available to fully prepare this plea, your counsel fell short of making a Verdins submission in this regard, and certainly, I have no expert opinion or other evidence which would support such a submission.  However, I accept that these offences as described by the prosecutor are historical offences arising out of the particular interactions which you had between yourself and your three victims.  They reflect the way in which you react inappropriately and inexcusably to the breakdown of relationships.

39I have no information, Mr Skravanj, as to the extent to which you have been treated for your medical conditions during your life so far, apart from that very brief note from your psychiatrist that I referred to before.  I note that he last saw you in 2017 and I do not know whether you have been treated for this condition whilst you have been in prison for approximately the last 18 months.

40I have been told that your family lives in South Australia.  Your father apparently owns a successful clothing business and has supported you in the past.  Your mother has died and your father has remarried.  Although neither your father or any other members of your family appeared to support you in this plea, I have been told that your father is prepared to support you in the future and, in particular, wishes to do so by providing you with accommodation when you return to live in South Australia.

41You are determined to return to South Australia after you are released from prison.  You have told your counsel that you want to do that in order to give physical distance between yourself and the victims in these offences, and also for you to have the opportunity to start afresh and create a new life for yourself. 

42Even though you have had your father's support in the past, it appears that your personal interactions in Victoria have been very prominent in leading to the commission of these offences. 

43In sentencing you, Mr Skravanj, I must take into account the principle of general deterrence.  That means that I must attempt, as far as possible, to deter others from behaving as you did.  Your attack on your partner was vicious.  A custodial sentence is warranted in order to deter others who may be tempted to engage in the same behaviour. 

44Similarly, your stalking of your former partner was relentless and it must have been terrifying.  It is very important  that the court sends a signal as to the way in which this behaviour will be treated when people come before the courts.  Clearly, what you did on that occasion also warrants a sentence of imprisonment. 

45One of the other sentencing principles which I must take into account is specific deterrence.  This means the question of whether you will reoffend in future.  I raised this with your counsel and with the prosecutor on the plea.  There is, at the moment, no satisfactory evidence from which I can be satisfied that you will not reoffend in the future.  I say this because you appear to have the same personality traits now as contributed to your behaviour at the time of these offences. 

46However, I do accept that the fact that you have been, apart from the minor matter to which I have referred, keeping out of trouble since these offences occurred is a very hopeful pointer for the future.  In part, you have kept out of trouble because you have been in prison for 18 months.  However, there is absolutely no suggestion that you have contacted any of your victims since the offending or that you will contact them in the future.  I do regard this as a very hopeful sign for your rehabilitation. 

47I accept also you counsel's submission that you were remorseful for having committed these offences.  I accept also that you have served an extended time in prison already for these offences and that that time has been made more onerous by you being isolated by reason of your personality disorder, although not isolated physically in any sense. 

48In considering the sentencing principles which I must follow today, I note that the Commonwealth Crimes Act requires me to consider some factors in detail.  That act gives me the primary obligation to impose a sentence on you that is of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence. 

49Although general deterrence is not specifically listed in that act, the law requires general deterrence to be taken into account in Commonwealth sentencing and I do so in relation to the Commonwealth offences as well as in relation to the State offences.  I am required also by the Commonwealth Act to take into account the degree to which you have shown contrition for the offence and I have already indicated my findings in this regard. 

50In considering all of the matters raised on the plea, both by prosecution and defence, I must also be mindful of the requirement of the Crimes Act, which provides that I should not pass a sentence of imprisonment unless I am satisfied after considering all other available options that no other sentence is appropriate for the circumstances of this case.

51Mr Skravanj, it appears to me from all that I have heard on this plea that you do require supervision in relation to your personality disorder and in relation to your actions against other people.  I note that when you were in before the court in January 2018 on the charge of being drunk in a public place and resisting police, you were ordered to take your medication and to follow your doctor's instructions.  My view is that supervision of this nature is essential in order to give you the best chance of rehabilitation. 

52What I have determined to do is to sentence you to a period of imprisonment in relation to Charge 1, 2 and 3.  I will order some cumulation in relation to those offences as a reflection of the fact that they occurred in different circumstances on different times.  But I do acknowledge that they occurred all against the one victim as instances of criminal behaviour directed towards him as a result of the break-up of your relationship with him. 

53In relation to the last two charges, Charges 4 and 5, which are the Commonwealth charges, it is my view that you should be convicted and placed on a recognisance in relation to these charges to be of good behaviour for a significant length of time; in this case, three years.  This device also gives me the opportunity of placing conditions on the order and, in your case, the condition I propose will be that you comply with all medication and treatment provided to you by your psychiatrist, Dr Pradeepa Dasanayke, or by other medical practitioners nominated by him. 

54Thus, the orders which I propose to make but will not make until counsel has had the opportunity of addressing me on any machinery and difficulties that may arise are these:  on Charge 1, I propose to convict Mr Skravanj and sentence him to be imprisoned for ten months; on Charge 2, I propose to convict Mr Skravanj and sentence him to be imprisoned for six months; on Charge 3, I propose to convict Mr Skravanj and sentence him to be imprisoned for 12 months.

55Using Charge 3 as the base sentence, I will order that three months of the sentence on Charge 1 and one month of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively on Charge 1, which makes an effective period of imprisonment of one year and five months. 

56I propose also to nominate, as time served under that sentence, the sum of 483 days presently served in prison and that means that by the end of March, Mr Skravanj will be eligible to be released, having served that sentence. 

57My intention then is that on release, Mr Skravanj will be subject to the orders on the Commonwealth offences, which will be an order in relation to each of each of those charges that he be convicted and be released on a recognisance release order for  the period of three years.  There will be a surety of $1000 and the special condition, apart from being of good behaviour, will be that he be required to comply with the medication and treatment provided by his psychiatrist, who I have previously named or, if not that psychiatrist, my another medical practitioner nominated by him. 

58I am aware that I need to provide an actual date for the start of Charges 4 and 5 and I am happy to either provide the exact date, if that can be worked out, or otherwise to say the sentencing on those charges commences on the date of fulfilment of the sentence of imprisonment imposed in respect of Charge 1, 2 and 3.

59Now, there are other matters which I need to deal with but I think this might be an appropriate time to stand the matter down and get some indication from counsel as to whether there is some machinery issues that need to be dealt with.

60MR HOARE:  Just, I think I agree.  With respect, we will take that opportunity.  Just before Your Honour does leave the Bench, could Your Honour repeat the figures for Charge 1, 2 and 3 and the cumulation please?

61HER HONOUR:  All right, Charge 1 is ten months.

62MR HOARE:  Yes.

63HER HONOUR:  Charge 2 is six months, Charge 3 is 12 months, and three months of Charge 1 and one month of Charge 2 ‑ ‑ ‑

64MR HOARE:  Cumulative.

65HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ cumulatively.

66MR HOARE:  Which would be 16 months?

67HER HONOUR:  Sixteen months, yes, sorry.

68MR HOARE:  One year and four.

69HER HONOUR:  I am sorry, yes, will make it three ‑ ‑ ‑

70MR HOARE:  Or ‑ ‑ ‑

71HER HONOUR:  Sorry, it should be four months on Charge 1 and one month on Charge 2 ‑ ‑ ‑

72MR HOARE:  Yes, Your Honour.

73HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ making an effective period of one year and five months.

74MR HOARE:  Yes.

75HER HONOUR:  All right, I will leave the Bench. 

76MR HOARE:  Yes.

77HER HONOUR:  I am happy for you to tell me if I have ‑ ‑ ‑

78MR HOARE:  Yes, Your Honour.

79HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ not constructed that sentence properly but the effect of what I want to do is sometime shortly that sentence will be served and then the recognisance order and three year recognisance release will commence.

80MR HOARE:  Yes, Your Honour.

81HER HONOUR:  Yes, thank you.  Now, Mr Skravanj, you can take a seat.  The barristers are going to work out whether there is any problem with the sentence that I have indicated, that I propose, and then I will come back.  Yes, thank you.

82(Short adjournment.)

83HER HONOUR:  Yes.  Now, Mr Skravanj, could you stand up?  Mr Skravanj, on Charge 1, you are convicted sentenced to ten months imprisonment, that is the charge of causing injury intentionally.  On Charge 2, which is the charge of making a false document, you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment, and on Charge 3, which is the charge of stalking, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment. 

84I direct that four months of the sentence in Charge 1 and one month of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence imposed in Charge 3, which makes the total effective sentence of one year and five months.  As I said to you before I left the Bench, I will declare that the time you have been in custody already is 483 days and that be reckoned as period of imprisonment already served under this sentence.

85Now, in relation to those charges, I will also make a forfeiture order in relation to the items set out in the order which has been provided to me by the prosecutor.  I will also make a forensic sample order. 

86In relation to Charge 4 and 5, which are the Commonwealth charges, I will convict you and I will order that you undertake a Commonwealth recognisance order for three years, with this order to commence on the date that you complete the sentence for Charges 1, 2 and 3. 

87In relation to that order, the conditions are that you be of good behaviour for three years and that you comply with a further condition, which is that you comply with medication and treatment administered by Dr Pradeepa Dasanayke, who is a consultant psychiatrist, or any other practitioner nominated by Dr Dasanayke for a period not exceeding two years. 

88Now, in order for me to be able to make this order, I need you to agree to it, and what I need to tell you about that is this, in respect of the Commonwealth recognisance order, you will subject to a condition, as I have read out, that you be of good behaviour and that you comply with the condition of complying with medication and treatment administered by your doctor. 

89I need to tell you that if you do not comply with those conditions or if you commit any other offence, you will be brought back before me and you should expect that I will sentence you on Charge 4 and 5 to a period of imprisonment.  This order that is made will last for three years; for three years you must be of good behaviour and you must not commit another offence, and for two years you must comply with the treatment order. 

90Now, I understand that your barrister has explained that to you and I have your signature on the recognisance already so, Mr Skravanj, can you please just confirm to me that you understand what I have said what your barrister has said and that you are prepared to undertake that recognisance order.

91OFFENDER:  Yes, Your Honour.

92HER HONOUR:  All right, thank you.  Now, I have also signed the forensic sample order and, Mr Skravanj, what I need to tell you about this is that if you do not consent to providing a forensic sample, then an authorised member of the police force can use reasonable force to enable that procedure to be conducted. 

93Under s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I tell you, Mr Skravanj, if you had not pleaded guilty to these charges, I would have sentenced you to an effective sentence of three years with a non-parole period of two years. 

94I have dealt with the forfeiture order, I think.  If not, I will indicate that I am making a forfeiture order in the terms that have been provided to me.  I will also order that the summary charges identified on the notice prepared by the prosecutor, dated 20 February 2018, be struck out.  Now, Mr Prosecutor, is there anything I have missed?

95MR HOARE:  No, Your Honour, not that we have picked up, no.

96HER HONOUR:  Mr Bolger, anything that you wish to say?

97MS BOLGER:  No, Your Honour.  Just for my client, well, my client was concerned about when he has to pay the surety.  I think I have indicated to him ‑ ‑ ‑

98HER HONOUR:  No, the surety does not come into operation unless there is a problem later down the track.

99MS BOLGER:  Yes.

100HER HONOUR:  Thank you.  All right, Mr Skravanj, so those are the orders I have made.  I would suggest to you that you make sure that you get treatment for your condition and that you comply with the terms of that treatment and I would hope that that will mean that you will never be before a court for a criminal matter again.  Thank you.  Yes, remove the prisoner please?

101OFFENDER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

‑ ‑ ‑