Director of Public Prosecutions v Spanidis
[2015] VCC 1906
•16 December 2015
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-15-00531
CR-15-01639
CR-15-01860
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| PATTIE SPANIDIS |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE HOWARD | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 27 October 2015 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 16 December 2015 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Spanidis | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2015] VCC 1906 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence following pleas of guilty to numerous offences of dishonesty arising from work as a travel agent – total of $455,647 involved – serious breach of trust – prior convictions for similar offending – importance of general deterrence and specific deterrence – TES: 6 years’ imprisonment with minimum of 4 years imprisonment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Prosecution | Mr P Pickering | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Offender | Mr J Fitzgerald | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
1. Pattie Spanidis, you have pleaded guilty to 23 charges of obtaining a financial advantage or property by deception and to theft, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, and to two summary offences for which the maximum is 30 penalty units or three months’ imprisonment on each.
2. In summary, you offended in the course of your work as a travel agent over 1 year and 5 months, from November 2013 until April 2015. Your crimes involved a total of $455,647; massive breaches of trust; the commission of some offences whilst on bail with conditions not to operate your travel business; and frequent attempts to divert suspicion by the use of false documentation and/or promises to your clients. Regrettably, this all followed your conviction for similar conduct in 2011, when you were sentenced to imprisonment but allowed to remain at large in the community. That will not happen again on this occasion.
3. I must now sentence you on behalf of the community.
Background and context
4. It will be helpful to mention some matters of background and context. In 2008, you were working for a travel agency in Melbourne. You were responsible for managing customers’ accounts and receiving payments from clients, often involving your receipt of credit card details. Between July 2008 and November 2009, you committed a large number of dishonesty offences, the majority involved you making unauthorised charges against clients’ credit cards to pay for trips they had never booked, so that you could cover other payments that were due. The amount involved was $89,701. You also dishonestly transferred $8,352 from your employer’s account into your own account. You were caught and sacked in October 2009. You repaid the money from family loans. Remarkably, you got employment with another travel agent where you dishonestly arranged for a client to unwittingly deposit $3,187 into your personal account. In order to cover this client’s travel bookings, you dishonestly drew on your employer’s accounts.
5. On 18 May 2011, you were convicted of these offences and sentenced to 8 months’ imprisonment, to be served as an Intensive Correction Order, which expired in January 2012 without further incident.
6. But you were then obviously a bad risk as an employee of a travel agency. In 2013, you set up your own travel company, Priority Q Travel (PQT), which you operated out of your home. Sometimes you made bookings directly, other times through a travel wholesaler, Travel Managers Australia Pty Ltd (TMA).
Circumstances of offending
7. The circumstances of your offending are set out in comprehensive agreed prosecution summaries read out at the plea hearing. There are 3 indictments with attached schedules, which I will summarise only.[1]
Indictment 1 (E12979657)
[1]At the plea hearing indictment 2 was referred to as indictment 3, but I have reversed them to give a better understanding of the chronology of events.
(a) Using credit card details to falsely make bookings
8. Indictment 1 contains 18 charges involving numerous victims. There are three categories of offending. The first concerns your dishonest use of credit card details which had been provided to you by your clients so you could make legitimate bookings for them. You used these details to falsely obtain gift certificates, hotel accommodation and airline tickets for other clients thereby obtaining a financial advantage by deception. This enabled you to continue to operate and promote your business as an ongoing profitable enterprise and to promote goodwill and patronage. There are 5 such instances between 7 November 2013 and 28 August 2014 involving a total of $49,365 and an additional sum of 886 euros (charges 1, 3, 6, 11 and 15). When confronted by a number of your clients about this conduct, you falsely claimed a mistake had been made by another agent or the airline company and offered upgrades or a refund, neither of which ever happened. In summary, those incidents comprise as follows.
· Using the details of Lorraine Little, you made five unauthorised transactions to the value of approximately $16,257 (charge 1). Ms Little provided a victim impact statement. As well as the loss of her monies, she spoke of being robbed of her trust in herself and others; the burden of delay; loss of her dignity and self-worth; and humiliation and anger, particularly embarrassment at her own gullibility and stupidity, as she put it, in being fooled by you. She says a lot more, but that gives the flavour I think.
· You made seven unauthorised purchases totalling $9,091 using the details of Angela Megias (charge 3). The total loss was $6,148.
· You did the same using the details of Merton Oxha, for a total of $12,054 (charge 6).
· You used the details of Eva Gonzalez to make unauthorised purchases from your wholesaler TMA for unidentified services to the value of €886. (charge 11).
· And the same for Neville Goddard for a total of $14,906 (charge 15).
(b) Obtaining property by deception
9. The second category concerns you significantly obtaining property by deception (charge 2). Between 2 and 30 June 2014, you made bookings for airline tickets for 14 different clients with travel wholesaler, TMA. This was done through Amy Shaw, another agent who also dealt with TMA. There were 16 dishonest transactions to the value of $227,185. To cover TMA’s liability you provided Ms Shaw with four fraudulent bank deposit receipts which purported to cover the cost of the bookings paid by your clients. When it became clear that TMA had not received these funds, you simply provided two more false bank receipts to divert further suspicion. You made repeated promises to TMA to make the payments and even provided a letter acknowledging that you owed them $230,000, but ultimately you repaid only $3,000.
10. Amy Shaw provided a victim impact statement and attended court. She had been a close friend of yours for 12 years and trusted you. She felt keenly the abuse of your friendship. She suffered significant anxiety and stress at being wrongly suspected of dishonesty herself and having to cope with continual demands to repay the monies involved. She faced crippling financial debts. Her personal life and ambitions were defeated and, at times, she felt suicidal.
(c) Theft of monies from accounts
11. The third category concerns your straight-out theft of monies paid to you by clients for various overseas airline tickets you were meant to book for them. There are 10 such instances between 13 June and 12 September 2014 amounting to a total of $56,215 (charges 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 and 18). A number of these clients found out before they departed and you put them off with false promises of upgrades or refunds, which never happened. Others were stranded overseas when they discovered the tickets you were meant to have paid for had been cancelled. In two instances (charges 9 and 10) you provided substitute tickets but these had been paid by your unauthorised purchases using the credit card of another client, Neville Goddard. In summary, you stole as follows.
· $19,994 from Merton Oxha (charge 4).
· $1,641 from Ines Cavuoto (charge 5).
· $1,991 from Alan and Irene Horton (charge 7).
· $15,535 from Lachlan and Meagan McGhie, who paid for tickets and hotels for their honeymoon in America and Mexico (charge 8). Ms McGhie said in her victim impact statement that she and her husband suffered significant anxiety and distress as a result of your offending. They lost trust in people, particularly given the hollow promises you made to them, and they were disturbed by your apparent lack of remorse or concern at the emotional and financial turmoil they suffered. The loss of the couple’s honeymoon holiday impacted heavily on their relationship and affected Ms McGhie’s productivity at work as she was constantly distracted by the problem you created.
· $3,575 from Mia Trugillo, (charge 9). The actual loss was $1,787.
· $2,065 from Angela Jiminez (charge 10). The actual loss was $1,359.
· $3,763 from Nadine Budge (charge 12). The tickets were meant to be to Europe and return for the client and her partner. They were not supplied until the day of departure and, to the distress of your clients, they turned out to be only one-way tickets to Malta and they ended up with no return tickets at all. The actual loss was $2,446. I received a victim impact statement from Nadine Budge. She and her partner suffered anger, humiliation, anxiety, stress and disappointment over the matter. Their holiday had been 18 months in the planning and was ruined when they were left stranded in a foreign country and had to cut short their trip by six days. Much time was spent trying to sort out the return tickets. Much of their preciously saved spending money had to be used to pay for the return flights which, of course, meant they could not do many of the things they had planned.
· $868 from Toni Edwards (charge 13).
· $3,167 from Georgia Egan (charge 14).
· I will come to the final charge of theft (charge 18) in a moment.
First arrest on 29 August 2014
12. TMA made a complaint to police and you were arrested for the first time on 29 August 2014. In a police interview, you acknowledged that you had a debt to TMA but, otherwise, made no comment as to other allegations. You were charged with two offences concerning the TMA matter and released on bail, which included a condition that you were not to operate your own travel agency, PQT.
13. You blatantly ignored this bail prohibition. Between 30 August and 4 September 2014, you purported to purchase airline tickets for your PQT customers from Flight Centre on three occasions to the total value of $33,661. You produced to the Flight Centre officer a number of falsified CBA BPAY receipts so as to prove you had the money in the bank to pay for the tickets (charge 16 - OPD).
14. Flight Centre began an investigation of your unfunded purchases of airline tickets and demanded that you make payments for them. On 9 September 2014, you provided to Flight Centre, what purported to be an ANZ lodgement receipt for $35,402, being the amount then outstanding. This receipt purported to represent that you had paid that amount to the bank in favour of Flight Centre. In fact, the receipt was false and no such payment was made to ANZ, hence you dishonestly obtained for yourself a financial advantage, namely the deferral of the payment of the debt owed by you to Flight Centre (charge 17).
15. Despite the offending in charge 3, on 12 September 2014 Ms Megias paid you $3,616 for the purchase of tickets which she had booked. You stole that money and no tickets were provided (charge 18 – theft).
Second arrest on 17 September 2014
16. On 17 September 2014, you were arrested by police for the second time. A number of allegations concerning your dishonest conduct were put to you but you made no comment. However, you did admit that you had continued to operate your PQT business, using your laptop to finalise bookings for existing customers, that you did not have the funds to do so, and that the sending of the false BPAY receipts to Flight Centre was a stalling tactic on your part.
17. Charges 16 and 17 are aggravated by the fact you were on bail when committed and they contravened the prohibition against operating your travel business. The breach of bail is dealt with in the related summary offence (summary offence 7). Charge 18 is aggravated by its commission whilst you were on bail.
18. You were charged with a breach of bail offence and remanded in custody overnight. The next day you were, surprisingly, released by the Magistrates’ Court and one of your conditions of bail was that you were “not to undertake any activity whatsoever relating to the travel industry or to do so with the arranging or booking of any travel or accommodation whatsoever”. No doubt the position was plainly clear to you, but you acted contemptuously in response.
Indictment 2 (F12771014)
19. This brings me to Indictment 2, which contains 4 charges, two of theft and two of obtaining a financial advantage by deception involving a total of $5921.
20. On 9 February 2015, your client, Allan Griffiths, paid you $802 for airline tickets and hotel accommodation for him and his partner, Paula Pellegrini, for a trip to Sydney. When the couple were at the airport ready to depart, you called them and said there had been a mistake with the flights and that they would need to pay for the flights with their credit cards and you would arrange a refund the next day. This was false and you dishonestly obtained a financial advantage, being the use of the clients’ credit card to purchase other tickets valued at $1,078 (charge 3 – OFAD).
21. When the couple checked into their hotel, they were told that no payment had been made on their booking. You failed to refund any moneys to them.
22. In March 2015, you contacted Ms Pellegrini with a special offer to a trip to Bali for her and her partner, and her son. To that end, on 13 March 2015, Mr Griffiths paid you $2,634. You stole that amount and the $802 which had been given to you for the Sydney trip, making a total of $3,436 (charge 1 – theft). You also stole $660 from Ms Pellegrini, which she had paid to you for an upgrade to business class on the three tickets to Bali (charge 2 - theft).
23. Between 9 and 21 April 2015, you made unauthorised purchases to the value of $747 using Ms Pellegrini’s credit card details (charge 4 – OFAD).
24. The offending in this second indictment is aggravated by the fact that you were on bail at all relevant times and contravened the condition that you not be involved with the travel industry in any way (summary offence 5).
25. Ms Pellegrini and Mr Griffiths made victim impact statements. Ms Pellegrini was your long-time friend. You had spent special family and social times together and she had lent heavily upon you to cope with the suicide of her ex-husband. Her credit rating was damaged as a result of the debts you incurred using her details and she was very troubled by constant demands for payment of money as a result of your conduct. Ms Pellegrini felt betrayed, foolish and embarrassed by your deception, particularly, she felt guilty for the financial loss to her partner and she was most troubled by the effect of your conduct on her young son who has autism and could not understand why the trip to Bali had been cancelled. Ms Pellegrini had become more socially reclusive and suffered sleeplessness and anxiety and she had to seek help from her GP.
26. Mr Griffiths felt a lot of anger and hurt as a result of your actions. He had trouble sleeping. He felt anxiety and belittlement as a result and much time and money was wasted because of your offending.
Indictment 3 (F13142007)
27. Indictment 3 contains one charge of obtaining a financial advantage by deception. Between January and July 2013, you had a client, Continental Pty Ltd, for whom you arranged corporate travel bookings. To do this, you had been provided with the details of the company credit card. Thirteen months after that relationship had ceased, between 4 and 14 August 2014, you falsely used those details to purchase flights and travel services to the value of $47,898. You made 28 separate transactions over that 10 day period. These bookings were made by you for other clients who had already paid you for their flights and travel services and this helped you to continue to run your business, generally and successfully. This offending occurred just after the TMA offences when you had given that victim an undertaking to repay your debt to them (indictment 1, charge 2), and two weeks before the Flight Centre offences (indictment 1, charges 16 and 17), and is part of a consistent pattern of offending at that time.
Third arrest on 28 May 2015
28. You were arrested for the third time and interviewed by police on 28 May 2015. You made a partial no comment response, save that you admitted you had been the operator of PQT and had been provided with the credit card details by Continental for making corporate travel bookings. On 27 August 2015, you were charged on summons on the Indictment 3 matters.
Fourth arrest on 31 July 2015
29. You were arrested for the fourth time on 31 July 2015 and made a no comment police interview. You were charged with the Pelligrini/Griffiths offences in Indictment 2 and released on bail.
30. You were committed for trial on 18 September 2015 on the Indictment 1 and 2 matters, at which time you pleaded guilty to all charges. This was the earliest time. The Indictment 3 matters came on for committal mention on 23 October last and, by agreement between the parties, the proceeding was fast tracked so that all outstanding matters could be dealt with at your plea hearing on 27 October last. Bail was revoked after your plea hearing and there is now 51 days’ pre-sentence detention up to, but not including, today.
Background and personal circumstances
31. I shall now turn to your background and personal circumstances which are set out in a psychological report of Carla Lechner dated 12 October 2015 and in a helpful written submission provided by your counsel.
32. You are now aged 46 and apart from the conviction in May 2011 which I have described, you have no prior or subsequent convictions. You were born and raised in Melbourne, part of a close and nurturing Greek family. Your parents migrated from Greece and they were a hardworking couple. You had an older brother and sister. You describe a normal and happy childhood. You successfully completed Year 11 at a well-regarded grammar school and then completed a 12 month course at a travel and tourism college. You were then fully and productively employed in the travel industry over the next 20 years, from 1998 to 2008, eventually moving into management roles. You worked for a couple of years in Sydney and overseas. When you were in Melbourne, you lived with your parents.
33. You have been in a long term de facto relationship since 2008, but it has now finished, although you remain on amicable terms with your former partner. You have no children. You have no contact with your parents or siblings and apparently they are unaware of these proceedings. You were declared bankrupt in March this year. You have no assets and until you were incarcerated following the completion of the plea hearing, you were in receipt of the dole.
34. You have no history of drug or alcohol abuse. You have no gambling or other addictions. According to your counsel, you can give little explanation for your offending. Your counsel said you did not spend the misappropriated money on a lifestyle of luxury or extravagance, but I note the observations of the psychologist that there is a history suggestive of a chronically low self-esteem which you have tried to mask through giving the impression of competency and success. You did say you wanted people to view you as an “amazing” person and that the proceeds of your offending were used to provide your partner the same view of yourself as generous, competent and financially comfortable. Later you told the psychologist that some of the proceeds of offending were utilised to pay for your mortgage and to finance a number of holidays both overseas and within Australia, and that you were spending beyond your means.
35. You were assessed by the psychologist on 28 September last. You presented with symptoms of Adjustment Disorder with Depression in the extreme range, the latter being primarily reactive to your current situation and pending sentence. The psychologist noted your emotional isolation, including from your partner, and said that your offending seems to relate to your desire to present yourself as competent and “amazing” with this need for external affirmation overriding your moral decision-making. You did impress as capable of reflecting on the impact that your behaviour has had on both yourself and others. You did express regret for your actions, acknowledging that you had let people down and ruined your life. However, you have limited insight into the ongoing nature of your offending. I note that no Verdins claim was mounted.
Mitigating circumstances
36. There are a number of mitigating circumstances. You have a good family background and upbringing. Having left school, you obtained an appropriate professional qualification and worked fully and productively until 2008 in your chosen industry. You have lost the chance to ever work again in that industry.
37. You are a mature offender and apart from the matter in 2008 (which is, of course, of great significance), there are no other prior or subsequent convictions. You have pleaded guilty to all the charges in what were complex matters at the earliest time, thereby saving considerable time, cost and inconvenience to the community. Your pleas have had that utilitarian benefit and have served the ends of justice. For that reason alone, you should receive a significant discount in penalty. I am satisfied you regret your offending, but there is no suggestion of fulsome remorse and there is a lack of insight into the real nature and seriousness of your offending. Although some of the offences occurred some time ago, it has not been argued that delay is a sentencing factor but I generally take that into account in your favour. I also generally take account of your personality disorder and current depression.
38. Given your offending in 2008, followed by your extensive and repeated offending in this case including committing offences twice whilst on bail, I would have to be guarded as to prospects of rehabilitation. Much in that regard will depend on whether you obtain appropriate psychological support for your disorder and depression and whether you appropriately engage with it.
Other sentencing considerations
39. There are, of course, other important sentencing considerations. The first is the maximum sentences applicable, which stand as the yardstick for the worst possible cases. Yours is not in that category. Another consideration is current sentence practice for this type of offending, but a review of the Sentencing Advisory Council Snapshots for offences such as yours reveals a very broad range of circumstances of offending meriting both custodial and non-custodial dispositions.[2] As is often said, every case must turn on its own facts and circumstances and that is particularly true in your case.
[2]See, for example, SAC Snapshot No.169 (May 2015) for obtaining a financial advantage by deception.
40. What is clear is that you engaged in very serious offending. It was sophisticated, calculated and sustained over a lengthy period of almost a year and a half, involving a very substantial sum of $455,647, massive breaches of trust, and the commission of some offences whilst you were on bail for others, and it was characterised by frequent attempts to divert suspicion by the production of false documentation or promises or both. There has been profound and enduring victim impact and one of the worst features of it all is that you betrayed and exploited those in the industry whom you worked with and even the trust of close friends. You should feel a great deal of shame and remorse for the victim impact in this case. Although some of your offending was, as it is put, “robbing Peter to pay Paul”, other of it was motivated by greed, personal gain and self-aggrandisement. It is clear you made significant personal gain from your crimes. And that the offending came to an end through no effort on your part.
41. The principle of general deterrence is of particular significance in a case such as yours. In DPP v Bulfin,[3] Charles JA said:
“…offences of the kind here in question almost invariably involve a carefully calculated course of conduct over a long period, repeated deliberate acts of dishonesty, substantial amounts of money, and, frequently, losses (often tragic in their impact) to large numbers of small investors. The offender often holds a position making it possible, or has the ability, to disguise or camouflage the conduct in question. Detection is difficult, the investigation of the crime usually lengthy and very expensive, and the problems of trial and proof will frequently be extreme. ... The result of such considerations, in my view, is that the element of general deterrence will usually carry particular significance in sentencing for crimes such as the present, both in relation to the total effective sentence and the non-parole period; together with a requirement for strong denunciation by the sentencing court.”
[3][1998] 4 VR 144. This passage was recently cited with approval by the Court of Appeal in Gianello v R [2015] VSCA 205 and in Dyason v R [2015] VSCA 120.
42. Regrettably, your offending followed your conviction in 2011 for very similar dishonesty offences committed in 2008 in your role as a travel agent. Although you were sentenced to imprisonment for that conduct, it obviously had no impact or deterrent effect upon you. It was painfully clear that you should never have worked in a position of trust in the travel industry ever again and highly regrettable that there was not a protective regime in the industry which would have prevented you from doing so.[4] The need to impose a sentence which will personally deter you from committing such crimes again looms large.
[4]Without objection, the prosecution advised that the Australian Federation of Travel Agents website reveals - (a) in 2014 the licensing scheme for travel agents was removed as a result of government competition policy and formally ended on 1 July 2014; (b) from 1 July 2015 an industry endorsed accreditation scheme has been operating; (c) there is no current requirement for accreditation; and (d) the Travel Compensation Fund has closed and claims could be lodged up to 30 June 2015 (exhibit M).
43. You readily acknowledged the appropriateness of imposing a term of immediate imprisonment. That was hardly surprising in all the circumstances. However, your counsel submitted that a combined sentence of imprisonment, two years or less, with release upon a community correction order was appropriate. Particular reliance was placed upon the well-known and oft-cited guideline judgment of Boulton.[5]
[5]Boulton v R [2014] VSCA 342.
44. The prosecution submitted that such a disposition would not be appropriate given the seriousness of your offending and your prior matter. I agree. Notwithstanding the punitive and rehabilitative nature of a CCO, the Court of Appeal recently stated:
“Acknowledging that a CCO might be appropriate ‘even in cases of relatively serious offences which might previously have attracted a medium term of imprisonment’, it should not be thought that Boulton offers a ‘Get Out of Jail Free’ card in situations where a sentence of imprisonment is necessary in a given case to satisfy the various purposes for which a sentence may be imposed.”[6]
[6]Hutchinson v The Queen [2015] VSCA 115, [17], per Priest JA, with whom Ashley JA agreed; cited with approval in Ellis v The Queen [2015] VSCA 320, [42]. See also, Atanackovic v The Queen [2015] VSCA 136, [160].
45. The principles of general deterrence, just punishment, protection of the community, denunciation and specific deterrence, all compel the need for the imposition of a term of imprisonment longer than 2 years, hence longer than than one which may be combined with a community correction order. Of course, in fixing that sentence, I must have regard in your favour to the principles of proportionality and totality and avoid the imposition of a crushing sentence upon you, which I have done. I am also conscious that this is the first time you, as a mature offender, will be sentenced to terms of immediate imprisonment.
46. Finally, on behalf of the community, I strongly denounce your offending.
Sentence
47. I will shortly provide the parties with a sentence chart, which I shall incorporate into the revised reasons for sentence. Ms Spanidis, please stand up. On each charge you are convicted.
48. On Indictment 1 you are sentenced to the following terms of imprisonment. On charge 1, to 18 months’ imprisonment. On charge 2, to 2½ years’ imprisonment. On each of charges 3, 4, 6, 8 and 15, to 12 months’ imprisonment. On each of charges 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, to 6 months’ imprisonment. On each of charges 16 and 17, to 2 years’ imprisonment. On charge 18, to 9 months’ imprisonment. On summary charge 7, to 2 weeks’ imprisonment.
49. On Indictment 2 you are sentenced on each of charges 1, 2, 3, and 4, to 9 months’ imprisonment. On summary charge 5, to 2 weeks’ imprisonment.
50. I have imposed comparatively higher sentences on charges 16, 17 and 18 on Indictment 1 and all charges on Indictment 2, compared with other offending, because they were committed whilst on bail. But I do not consider the sentences on those matters should be fully cumulative for that reason.
51. On Indictment 3 you are sentenced on charge 1, to 2 years’ imprisonment.
52. In all cases I have fixed the quantum of sentence having regard to the different amounts of money involved, as well, of course, to the circumstances of individual offending.
53. The base sentence is that imposed on charge 2 on Indictment 1. I make the following orders for cumulation, bearing in mind the principles of totality and proportionality and the need to avoid a crushing sentence upon you, as already acknowledged. I will cumulate on charges 1 and 4 on Indictment 1 as representative of, respectively, the first and third category of offending in Indictment 1, and on charge 1 on Indictment 2 as also representative. The cumulation is as follows - 12 months of the sentence imposed on charge 16 and 9 months of the sentences imposed on charges 1 and 4 on Indictment 1; and 6 months of the sentence imposed on charge 1 on Indictment 2; and 6 months of the sentence imposed on charge 1 on Indictment 3, are to be served cumulatively on the base sentence imposed on charge 2 on Indictment 1 and upon each other.
54. The total effective sentence is 6 years' imprisonment. I fix a period of 4 years' imprisonment before which you shall not be eligible for release on parole.
55. I declare that 51 days’ pre-sentence detention be deemed as having already been served on that sentence and that that declaration be entered in the records of the Court.
56. But for your pleas of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of 7½ years' imprisonment with a minimum of 5½ years.
57. I will make the order requested by the prosecution for a forensic sample given the seriousness of the circumstances of your offending, your prior convictions, the order is by consent or not opposed and the granting of the order is in the public interest. Accordingly, pursuant to s464ZF(2) of the Crimes Act 1958, you are ordered to undergo a forensic procedure for the taking of a scraping from the mouth and/or a blood sample in accordance with sub-division 30A of Part 3 of the Crimes Act until a sample of sufficient standard is obtained for placement on the database.
58. I should warn you that, notwithstanding your present consent, if at the time of the request, you do not consent to the taking of a mouth scraping under the supervision of an authorised member of the police force, then the sample to be taken will be a blood sample and police may use reasonable force to enable that forensic procedure to be conducted. Please sit down for the moment Ms Spanidis. I hand down that signed order to the prosecution.
59. I will make unopposed compensation orders in favour of particular victims who have so applied. [7] Accordingly, I order that you pay compensation to –
[7]In all, there are 9 agreed compensation orders. In some cases, the amount of compensation sought is less than the amount of the charge. This is because partial travel was received, and/or a victim received compensation from the Travel Compensation Fund, and/or a victim was reimbursed by their bank.
· Lorraine Little of 1/47 Nicholson Street, Abbotsford VIC 3067 in the sum of $11,663.62;
· Angela Megias of 1116/22 Dorcas Street, South Melbourne VIC 3205 in the sum of $3,616.72;
· Lachlan and Meagan McGhie of 14 Reed Street, Spotswood VIC 3015 in the sum of $6,453;
· Mia Trugillo of 44 Union Street, Northcote VIC 3070 in the sum of $1,787.77;
· Nadine Budge of 22 Moore Street, Coburg VIC 3058 in the sum of $1,881.95;
· Toni Edwards of 8 McCutcheon Street, Northcote VIC 3070 in the sum of $868.56;
· Georgia Egan of 24A Nepean Highway, Hampton East VIC 3188 in the sum of $3,167.46;
· Allan Griffiths of 24 Miriam Street, Rosanne VIC 3084 in the sum of $3,436; and
· Paula Pellegrini of 18 Grove Road, Rosanna VIC 3084 in the sum of $660.
60. I hand down those signed orders for compensation and the sentence chart.
61. I ask counsel, are there any mechanical issues arising from the sentence imposed?
62. COUNSEL: No, your Honour.
63. I shall note on the orders provided to Corrections that this is the first time the offender has been sentenced to immediate imprisonment, that she presents with symptoms of Adjustment Disorder with Depression and that she should be closely monitored and that she is not taking any particular medication at the moment.
64. Ms Spanidis, you need to go with the prison officer now. Thank you, please remove the offender.
65. [Offender removed.]
----
DPP v Spanidis - Sentence Chart
| Charge No | Offence | Max | Sentence | Cumulation | Comp Order |
| Indictment 1 (E12979657) | (Griffiths/Pllegrini) | ||||
| 1 $16,257 | OFAD | 10 years | 18 months | 9 months | Lorraine Little $11,663.62 |
| 2 $227,185 | OPD | 10 years | 2½ years | BASE | - |
| 3 $6,148 | OFAD | 10 years | 12 months | - | Angela Megias $3,616.72 |
| 4 $19,994 | THEFT | 10 years | 12 months | 9 months | - |
| 5 $1,641 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | - |
| 6 $12,054 | OFAD | 10 years | 12 months | - | - |
| 7 $1,991 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | |
| 8 $15,535 | THEFT | 10 years | 12 months | - | Lachlan & Meagan McGhie $6,453 |
| 9 $3,575 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | Mia Trugillo $1,787.77 |
| 10 $2,065 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | - |
| 11 [€886] | OFAD | 10 years | 6 months | - | - |
| 12 $3,763 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | Nadine Budge $1,881.95 |
| 13 $868 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | Toni Edwards $868.56 |
| 14 $3,167 | THEFT | 10 years | 6 months | - | Georgia Egan $3,167.46 |
| 15 $14,906 | OFAD | 10 years | 12 months | - | - |
| 16 $33,661 | OPD (on bail) | 10 years | 2 years | 12 months | - |
| 17 $35,402 | OFAD | 10 years | 2 years | - | - |
| 18 $3,616 | THEFT | 10 years | 9 months | - | - |
| Summary charge 7 | Breach bail | 3 months | 2 weeks | - | - |
| Charge No | Offence | Max | Sentence | Cumulation | Comp Order |
| Indictment 2 (F12771014) | (All on bail) | ||||
| 1 | THEFT | 10 years | 9 months | 6 months | Allan Griffiths |
| 2 $660 | THEFT | 10 years | 9 months | - | Paula Pellegrini |
| 3 | OFAD | 10 years | 9 months | - | - |
| 4 | OFAD | 10 years | 9 months | - | - |
| Summary charge 5 | Breach Bail | 3 months | 2 weeks | - | - |
| Indictment 3 (F13142007) | (Continental) | ||||
| 1 | OFAD | 10 years | 2 years | 6 months | - |
| TES | 6 years | ||||
| NPP | 4 years | ||||
| s.6AAA | 7½ years, with 5½ years minimum | ||||
| 464ZF | Yes |
0
5
0