Director of Public Prosecutions v Spiteri

[2022] VCC 2265

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT Melbourne

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-21-00627

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

LIAM SPITERI

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE HAMPEL
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	27 July 2022, 29 July 2022, 8 September 2022, 12 October 2022
DATE OF SENTENCE:	14 December 2022
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Spiteri
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2022] VCC 2265

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:Criminal Law

Catchwords:              Guilty plea - carjacking - recklessly cause injury - commit an indictable offence on bail – drive while suspended – failing to provide passcodes to devices

Legislation Cited:      

Cases Cited:Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37

Sentence:                  Total effective sentence of 5 years and 9 months. Non parole period of 2 years and 9 months.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Ms C. Duckett	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms T Bolton (plea) Mr J Milides (sentence)	Valos Black & Associates

HER HONOUR:

1On 27 August 2020 Wee Kah Wai was working as a food delivery driver. Just before 4 pm he was sitting in his parked car, in a residential street in, Keysborough, waiting for his next call.

2Two cars drove into the street, and parked, one in front, one behind his car. You, Liam Spiteri, were in the passenger seat of the car that had parked in front.

3You and the driver got out of your car. You went to the passenger side of Mr Wai’s car, while the other man went to the driver’s side.

4He reached through the driver’s window and removed the keys from the ignition as you opened the passenger door and got into the car, whilst yelling abusive, racist slurs at Mr Wai.

5The two of you punched Mr Wai to the head and continued to hurl insults at him. As the assault continued, he was pulled out of his car. You and your co offender patted him down, and demanded that he give you his wallet. He was relieved of his wallet which contained $320 in cash, personal identity cards and bank cards from the pocket of his pants, his wedding ring and his personal and work phones. At some stage during the assault he fell to the ground and covered his head as the assault continued.

6The assault eventually stopped, as suddenly and inexplicably as it had started, and he then heard his car being started and driven off. He looked up to see it being driven off in convoy with the one which had been parked in front of his car.

7It is this that gives rise to the indictable charges to which you have pleaded guilty and come to be sentenced for today, that is Charge 1 of carjacking and Charge 2 of recklessly causing injury.

8You were on bail for other offences at the time and you have also pleaded guilty to a summary charge of commit indictable offence whilst on bail.

9Passers-by found Mr Wai bleeding, distressed and wandering on the road. He was bleeding from his head and his face. He had sustained serious facial injuries. When he was taken to hospital CT scans revealed a right orbital ‘blowout fracture’ involving both the lower and inner eye socket walls. The fracture of the inner wall of the eye socket was 27 millimetres and pushed inwards by 10 millimetres with associated herniation. The fracture of the right orbital floor was depressed by 6 millimetres with herniation of the orbital fat. That shows the severity of the punches that he received to that eye area.  There was also a small haematoma associated with the orbital floor fracture, and a fracture of the inner wall of the right maxillary sinus with associated blood, that is the jaw.

10A comprehensive matching of CCTV footage, EastLink and CityLink records and the GPS tracking monitor that you were at the time required to wear allowed police to reconstruct your movements.  That reconstruction demonstrated that you were the passenger in the car that had parked in front of Mr Wai’s, that you were present at the time that Mr Wai was assaulted, and that it was you who drove his car for the next hour before abandoning it in Caroline Springs, not far from where you lived with your mother.  Swabs later taken from Mr Wai’s car yielded DNA which provided further circumstantial evidence connecting you with the offences.

11You were not in fact licenced to drive at the time. Your probationary licence had been suspended and driving whilst suspended gives rise to summary Charge 12, to which you have also pleaded guilty.

12You were not arrested until 15 September 2020.  A search warrant was executed at your home and that led to the finding of two passcode locked mobile phones. When directed by police to provide the passcodes, you declined to do so.  Failure to abide by a direction to provide the passcodes to the phones in those circumstances constitutes an offence and you have now pleaded guilty to a summary Charge 11 – failing to provide information to access a data storage device.

13When interviewed by police, you gave mostly ‘no comment’ responses. You maintained your denial of involvement, and put identity in issue, and that remained the case until shortly before your trial was due to commence and after I had dealt with and resolved, not in your favour, a number of pre-trial issues.  That included the admissibility of the account of the victim Mr Wai whose fear had led to his unavailability to give evidence, and the DNA evidence found on the car door.

14So it was one month before the listed trial date that you pleaded guilty to these charges. Whilst it is not a plea of guilty entered at an early stage, it is nonetheless one of considerable utility.  It spared the witnesses from having to give evidence at trial, it reduced the backlog of trials in this court compounded by the backlog due to Covid, and it is an acceptance and acknowledgement of your legal and moral responsibility.

Objective gravity

15The two indictable offences to which you have pleaded guilty are serious.  The maximum penalty for carjacking is 15 years imprisonment and the maximum penalty for causing injury recklessly is 5 years imprisonment. The maximum penalty for the summary offences are these: commit indictable offence whilst on bail, 3 months’ imprisonment; failing to provide information to access a data storage device, 2 years’ imprisonment; driving whilst suspended, 2 years’ imprisonment or 240 penalty units.

16In addition, the offence of carjacking is what is described as a category 2 offence, that means that a custodial sentence (other than one combined with a community corrections order) must be imposed unless there is a special reason not to do so. It was acknowledged here that a custodial sentence was warranted and that the exception provisions in relation to a non-custodial sentence for a category 2 offence were not enlivened.

17It is clear, as was acknowledged, that the carjacking and the circumstances of the causing injury recklessly were serious offences that warranted a term of imprisonment. This was a brazen, brutal and brutish attack on a randomly selected innocent man. He was unknown to you, he was just sitting in his car, minding his own business and going about his own business. He had done nothing to draw himself to your attention or to attract your ire. He had done nothing to harm, or threaten to harm you, nothing to generate any perceived need for revenge or punishment.  It is clear that in those circumstances, that this is a serious offence of its type, it being so totally motiveless.

18That Mr Wai was subject to racist slurs in addition to a physical attack sufficiently severe to fracture his eye socket makes both the carjack and the recklessly cause injuries even more serious examples of their type. When looking at the related summary offences to which you have pleaded guilty, it is clear that they indicate a common theme of having no respect for authority, and doing what you like regardless of the rights of others.

19Mr Wai was terrified during and after the ordeal. So afraid was he of further attack that he discharged himself from hospital, against medical advice and was unable to be located by police at the time of trial. No victim impact statement has been provided by him. It is not necessary however to have one provided, to understand the likely effect on him of such a shocking and unwarranted attack, and one accompanied as it was by gratuitous racist slurs.

20It is clear therefore that subject to considerations personal to you denunciation, deterrence and just punishment must loom large in the sentencing mix.

21Having regard to your criminal history, specific deterrence as well as general deterrence must play a role.

22You have, at the age of now 27, amassed a troubling criminal history dating back to when you were 19 in 2016. The neuropsychologist, Ms Hall, who assessed you recently, described your criminal history as versatile.  Between 2016 and the time of the commission of these offences, you have been sentenced in the Magistrates' Court on seven separate occasions, often for multiple offences committed over a period of time.  The offences for which you were sentenced in the Magistrates' Court were serious offences involving the infliction of violence (intentionally cause injury, recklessly cause injury and assault), threats to inflict injury, possession of firearms and other weapons, extortion and robbery.  On each occasion you were sentenced to a community correction order (whether stand alone or in combination with a term of imprisonment) those terms generally being no longer than the time that you had already spent on remand. The community correction orders all had comprehensive treatment and rehabilitative conditions attached to them.  They are a reflection not only of the hope for your rehabilitation, the giving of weight to it, given your youth, and what I will say soon about your traumatic childhood and background, and the obvious desire that you kept on manifesting to engage in rehabilitative programs.  However, with each of those orders you have shown yourself unable to sustain engagement with community corrections for the terms of the CCOs and you were not able to remain offence free during them. You have been dealt with five times for breaching community correction orders and your history of bail compliance is even worse. You have been dealt with 12 times before for breaching bail.

23In addition, and relevant to the circumstances of the carjacking and to the summary offence of driving whilst suspended, you have relevant driving offence priors which have resulted in multiple licence suspensions or cancellations.  You have been dealt with for multiple charges of driving whilst unlicensed, suspended or disqualified. Your other traffic priors involve excessive speed (exceeding the speed limit by more than 30, 40 and 45 kph) dangerous driving, both as a stand-alone and when under pursuit, and failing to stop on police direction, exceed the prescribed alcohol content, driving whilst under the influence of a drug, as well as a number of offences relating to driving unregistered and unroadworthy vehicles.

Personal history.

24You were 25 at the time of the offending.

25Your childhood was, I accept, and on all accounts deeply traumatising. You were subject to what is fairly described as extreme abuse by your father. Your parents separated when you were somewhere between 10 and 13 years of age; the time varies in different histories provided by you to experts, but around that time. You have not had contact with your father since 2014. Your mother suffered violence at the hands of your father, some of which you witnessed or were subjected to. You experienced throughout your childhood difficulties with schooling and you ultimately attended a special school.  Since leaving school you have had only sporadic employment for limited periods in unskilled work across a range of roles.

26Not surprisingly, given the history that I have recounted, you have a long history of entrenched substance abuse starting when you were very young.

27You have maintained a close relationship with your mother, and indeed you were living with her at the time of the offending. You report also being close to your brother. So despite the traumatic effect of your father's conduct on you and the family, your relationship with your mother and brother appears to be intact and supportive.  Despite the extremely troubling criminal history and the traumatic background, you appear to be a personable young man of whom your family and friends speak highly. I was provided with very comprehensive letters of support from your partner, Ms Todorovska, who like your mother is again here today; a close friend of yours, Mr Zomaya; your mother, Ms Digiglio; your boxing coach, Mr Pocev, you are apparently a boxer of some talent; and as well as a reference from your most recent employer, Mr Ramaihi. He not only spoke highly of you generally but indicated that he was prepared to offer you employment in construction or cleaning upon your release.

28On the original plea hearing, psychological reports from the psychologist, Mr Ian Mackinnon and Ms Sandra Cokorilo were provided

29Mr Mackinnon’s report was prepared in March 2020, that is, before the commission of these offences, for the purposes of a then-pending Magistrates' Court consolidated plea hearing for a range of offences: violence, property and dishonesty, possession of drugs, endangerment, and driving offences. Mr Mackinnon noted that when he interviewed you, you were extremely distressed and that limited the amount of personal information that he could glean from you. It would appear from his report, he obtained a considerable amount of detail nonetheless.

30In his opinion, at the time of his assessment you were suffering symptoms that met the clinical criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Intermittent Explosive Disorder. Your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms were at that time moderate to severe. He identified two causes of the PTSD, the childhood abuse suffered at the hands of your father, and the enduring consequences of a life threatening attack by a dog (a pitbull) when you were only nine.

31The Intermittent Explosive Disorder, in Mr Mackinnon’s opinion, was inherently associated with the development of PTSD.

32He reported that the Intermittent Explosive Disorder was characterized by explosive outbursts of anger, violence and uncontrollable rage that was disproportionate to the given context.  He said this:

This tendency is likely to be triggered when Mr Spiteri perceives that others are threatening, challenging or belittling him and reflects his highly defensive and paranoid character. Essentially, in response to the severe victimization he suffered during his childhood, Mr Spiteri carries a chronic and deep-seated vigilance for threats and a deeply imprinted automatic behavioural repertoire to ‘ensure’ that he is never victimized again.

33Notably he added this:

Additionally, at times of heightened rage, Mr Spiteri can enjoy being the victimizer rather than the victim.

Mr Spiteri’s criminal history suggests he possesses antisocial and criminal traits with anger management problems and violent tendencies. By his own admission, Mr Spiteri has, in part, developed an identity that is built around his reputation as a dangerous and intimidating individual and others have used him to further their own criminal ends. When engaging in substance abuse, Mr Spiteri is more likely to act with aggression and violence.

34A recurrent theme on the plea was the need for, and your preparedness to engage in psychiatric and psychological therapy to address these deep seated and long-standing problems.

35You yourself wrote an eloquent letter to the court, demonstrating insight into your offending behaviour, into your personality disorders and problems and expressing a fervent desire to change your ways and to be assisted to do so.

36Mr Mackinnon noted that desire to receive and benefit from professional help at the time of the preparation of his report. He said that you had reported you had not engaged in any therapy for a sustained period and in his view you would expect to have to engage in therapy for years if you were to benefit significantly. That is significant and of note in light of the number of CCOs you have been on till then with the treatment or therapeutic options, and the difficulties that you had experienced in sustaining engagement.

37Mr Mackinnon noted your high levels of distress in the custodial setting, and the likelihood that your distress would continue if a further term of imprisonment were imposed.

38He noted the need for a comprehensive plan with close supervision if you were to have any reasonable prospects for reducing your risk of reoffending and making personal progress.

39Ms Cokorilo assessed you in January 2021, after your remand for these offences. She was of the view that the following diagnoses were warranted: major depressive disorder, recurrent and severe; generalised anxiety disorder; Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; and both Stimulant and Sedative, hypnotic or anxiolytic use disorder.  In addition, she diagnosed you as living with a borderline personality disorder.

40She continued:

His complex and multifactorial clinical profile, characterised by marked impulsivity, hyperarousal, affective instability and poor self-regulation, is associated with increased risk of aggression. His deficits in emotional regulation and impulse control undermine his ability to cope with stressors, to think clearly and respond calmly.  Affective states can alter cognition and behaviour, thus impairing impulse control and decision-making, ability to rationalise, and consider alternative responses. …
Mr Spiteri’s invalidating early environment has undoubtedly compromised his emotional and behavioural development and contributed to ensuing patterns of maladjustment evidenced by poor educational and occupational attainment, criminality and polysubstance use. Adolescents with histories of experiencing maltreatment are at particularly high risk of early initiation of substance abuse. His substance use disorders are thought to have developed as an early maladaptive mechanism to cope with emotional distress, resulting from … the victimisation by his father.
Substance use can heighten the risk of engaging in impulsive and reckless behaviour, as well as impair insight, decision-making and judgement, and has undoubtedly further impacted on Mr Spiteri’s functioning. Although his substance use disorders are in remission by the virtue of imprisonment, it is noted that he abused buprenorphine in custody until recent months when he began a methadone program.

41Not surprisingly given those assessment, Ms Cokorilo assessed your risk of reoffending as high.  She said:

On the basis of his extensive criminal priors; history of polysubstance abuse; psychopathology characterised by impulsivity and emotional dysregulation; antisocial peer group; psychosocial adversity including unemployment and financial hardship; and limited prosocial structures and supports.

42She too recommended intensive interventions, including referral to a psychiatrist to recommence treatment with psychostimulants, intensive trauma informed psychological interventions, including dialectical behaviour therapy, as well as specific interventions directed to anger problems, substance abuse and your mental health.

43She said:

It is likely that Mr Spiteri would require frequent and ongoing treatment, therefore if sentenced to a further custodial period he would benefit from placement where he could access intensive treatment for substance misuse and mental health. He may be a candidate for completing part of his sentence in a residential rehabilitation facility due to the limited success he has had in remaining abstinent from substances within the community. Noting the chronicity of his self-medication and low coping resources, he would benefit from a disposition that promotes long-term engagement with alcohol and other drugs specialised interventions to promote his insight into triggers, risk periods, and to develop alternative strategies and a relapse prevention plan.

Any community sanctions would likely need to involve a high degree of support and supervision towards compliance with treatment needs, and require a case manager with advanced skills to manage boundaries and to limit behaviours stemming from his personality structure. It is respectfully recommended that Mr Spiteri is supported to engage with the above recommendations to reduce the high risk of recidivism.

44I accept Ms Cokorilo’s opinions. Although Mr Mackinnon’s assessment was more limited because of the circumstances he described, and surprisingly did not directly address the substance abuse and its correlation with your offending, it is generally consistent with Ms Cokorilo’s findings.

45It is clear therefore that you have had a traumatic history which has profoundly affected your personality structure. In addition to the Borderline Personality Disorder diagnosed by Ms Cokorilo, it has resulted in the development of a number of disabling psychological disorders and your risk of reoffending is high.

46Any sentence must reflect the enduring impact of that childhood abuse, and the resultant early descent into substance abuse.  The principles in cases such as Bugmy clearly apply with considerable force here.[1]  Although you must be held accountable for your own wrongdoing, the genesis of your current state lies in matters well beyond your control, when you were subjected to behaviours no child should ever have been subjected to, and that must be properly taken into account and valued.

[1] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.

47You continue to express a strong desire to engage in residential rehabilitation, not just for the substance abuse, but to start on the intensive psychological and psychiatric therapy that was recommended by Ms Cokorilo and Mr Mackinnon. Throughout the hearings before me – and they have gone on for most of this year - you have exhibited palpable distress at your continued incarceration, and the conditions in which you were spending it.  You have been subjected to periods of solitary or extended lockdown not only because of Covid restrictions, but because of actions by the custodial authorities which have seen you in solitary for considerable periods, with sometimes only one hour a day outside your cell.  I take that into account as considerable hardship and accept that it has caused you enormous distress.

48Intensive rehabilitation of the sort that was recommended by Ms Cokorilo and by Mr Mackinnon is just not, on the material before me, available to you in custody. In the many hearings on this plea, there were intense discussions about the limited sentencing options that were available, and the complexity associated with trying to do something more creative and constructive that could assist to get you the treatment you so desperately want and are so much in need of.  The options were further complicated by the fact that carjacking is a category 2 offence and therefore a combination sentence is not available, unless exceptional circumstances are made out. In any event, given your history of breaches of your community corrections orders in the past, and the recommendations of Ms Cokorilo and Mr Mackinnon in relation to the intensive residential rehabilitation that you should undertake and the strict supervision you would need, it was accepted that that was not capable of being provided through a community correction order. I was however, prepared to consider other options if a residential rehabilitation option could be found. That led to a further adjournment of your plea because at the request of Odyssey, who had assessed you, a neuropsychological assessment was required.

49The neuropsychological assessment of Ms Hall dated 28 September 2022, and it, like the report of Ms Cokorilo, I found of considerable benefit.

50She noted that your premorbid intellectual abilities were estimated to fall in the Low Average range, but most importantly I thought, she found that you did not (although you had long believed this to be the case) suffer from an intellectual disability or from an acquired brain injury.  In her view non-cognitive factors (your complex childhood trauma, maladaptive coping strategies, mental health issues, substance abuse, and personality traits) are the most relevant in terms of explaining your past and most recent contact with the criminal justice system.

51She agreed with Ms Cokorilo’s diagnoses of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder and stimulant and other substance use disorders.  In her view, a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder was also warranted.

52She said:

The trauma experienced by Mr Spiteri during the developmental period very likely led to the emotional, behavioural and interpersonal difficulties he had as a child, which were the precursors of his severe personality disorder as an adult. I agree with the opinion of Ms Cokorilo (report dated 18/01/2022) that Mr Spiteri meets criteria for a diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). Specifically, Mr Spiteri’s diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder is supported by a pervasive pattern of instability in interpersonal relationships, clear difficulties with regulating negative emotions, history of deliberate
self-harm and self-destructive behaviours, substance misuse, and marked impulsivity. Moreover, Mr Spiteri’s dysfunctional personality traits extend to emotional dysregulation, aggression and anger, self-centeredness, irresponsibility, and antisocial attitudes. On a background of significant behavioural issues commencing in childhood resulting in his expulsion from school, as well as a long and versatile history of offending behaviours, my impression is that he also meets the DSM 5 criteria for a diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD). Personality factors have certainly played a major role in his history of offending.

It must be noted that Mr Spiteri will be at increased risk of re-offending and other poor psychosocial outcomes should his substance use remain problematic going forward. It is strongly recommended that he actively participates in drug and alcohol counselling prior to and subsequent to his eventual release back into the community. He may benefit from participating in a longer-term residential rehabilitation program at the time of his release as this would provide him with an extended period of abstinence from methamphetamine and GHB use. Positively, he expressed a desire to participate in a period of residential rehabilitation and I would strongly support this.

53She echoed the concerns of Ms Cokorilo and Mr Mackinnon about the negative impact of further incarceration on your mental health and your ability to engage in meaningful therapy which was necessary to address your risk of reoffending.

54Following the receipt of Ms Hall's report, and your lawyers working with your family having secured a place for you, for which you had been assessed to be suitable at The Cottage, a residential rehabilitation program in Shepparton, I released you on bail to attend at that residential rehabilitation program and adjourned the matter for six months, in effect a deferral of sentence.

55It was my hope, and expectation, as I said at the time, that if you remained in that program and made significant progress, that I could then structure a sentence which would take into account the time served, and the period in residential rehabilitation, as being sufficient to account for the overall sentence for the carjacking and would not require a further term of incarceration before release under supervision into the community, which could be achieved by me structuring the sentences for the other offences, so trying to separate out the offences rather than looking at totality and looking at a somewhat artificial way of dealing with the objective gravity of the offence of carjacking.  But given the severity of your symptoms and the reasons for them and the significance of the application of the Bugmy principles, I considered this was worth the attempt.

56Unfortunately, Mr Spiteri, your fervent desire to engage in residential rehabilitation was not matched by a sustained capacity and you were exited from the program within two weeks of your entry into it. Your bail was subsequently revoked and you were again returned to custody.

57In those circumstances, I consider that the only realistic sentencing option left is a custodial sentence, with the fixing of a non-parole period for the offending overall.  I do not consider that the time that you have spent is sufficient for the carjacking offence, in the circumstances.  I am not able to impose a term of imprisonment with a CCO for the carjacking unless I find exceptional circumstances, which I do not.

58Despite the clear need to reflect denunciation, deterrence both general and specific, protection of the community and just punishment, the length of the sentence must reflect your reduced moral culpability by reason of your traumatic childhood and its long-term effects on you.  Although your prospects for rehabilitation must be regarded as guarded, the sentence must be structured to encourage you to maintain your desire to engage with, and to facilitate your engagement with the long-term therapy that you so clearly need, the residential rehabilitation that you so clearly need, and the tightly structured supports and supervision you will need on release into the community.

59You are still young, Mr Spiteri, and have the support of your mother and your brother and of your partner.  You have the capacity to form relationships with young women who have no history of substance abuse or involvement in the criminal justice system and despite the somewhat bleak assessment of your antisocial peer group, it would appear your mother, your brother, your partner and indeed a previous partner, have all been strongly prosocial and supportive forces for you. Contrary to your long-held belief, you do not suffer from an intellectual disability or an acquired brain injury and your intelligence is in the low/average range. You have the capacity, if you can maintain a sustained engagement with rehabilitation and therapy, to lead a happy and meaningful life.

60The sentence that I impose will be structured to reflect and encourage that.

61In fixing on the sentence, take into account also the other matters that were relied on by Ms Bolton and by Mr Milides. 

62I have already mentioned your guilty plea. Although it was entered relatively late , it has significant utilitarian benefit particularly in these Covid times and I take it as an expression of genuinely held remorse. 

63Additionally, I take into account the onerous conditions in which you have served your times on remand to date, in part due to Covid, in part due to other factors which have led to Corrections placing you in solitary for extended periods.

64Given your vulnerability and your psychological state generally, imprisonment is more onerous for you than it is for other people, and imprisonment in solitary even more so.  I take that into account, both in relation to assessing the weight to be given to your pre-sentence detention and in assessing the overall sentence.

65I also take into account the fact that it is likely that imprisonment will continue to be more onerous not only because of your conditions, but because of other further likely negative impact of Covid on the prison population.

66This matter has been hanging over your head for some years.  Although the delays have been in part due to the time it took before the matter was resolved, and in part due to the attempts to see if you could engage in long-term structured residential rehabilitation, nonetheless it has been hanging over your head unresolved for a considerable period and I accept that has, in itself, taken its toll on you.

67So despite the objective gravity of the offending to which I have referred and the need to give those principles of denunciation, deterrence and just punishment weight, despite the need clearly to give protection of the community weight, you clearly are not a person who is to be made an example of, because of the circumstances that have led to this very complex psychological profile that you present today.  So the sentence is moderated considerably to reflect those matters but nonetheless in my view, it must be a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period.

68I urge the Corrections authorities to read and consider very carefully the reports, particularly those of Ms Hall and Ms Cokorilo, but also that of Mr Mackinnon, the report from The Cottage, from Ms Hutchinson and the testimonials that have been provided. They show a picture of a very complex person whose needs are complex but who has got real prospects if he can be helped, of having a better and more meaningful life.  So the sentence is all designed to reflect that.  I now come to sentence you formally, Mr Spiteri.

Sentence

69On all charges to which you have pleaded guilty you are convicted.

70Charge 1, carjacking, you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 5 years.

71Charge 2, recklessly cause injury, you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 2 years.

72Summary Charge 8, commit an indictable offence on bail, you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 1 month.

73Related summary offence 11, failing to provide passcodes to devices, you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 3 months.

74Summary Charge 12, drive while suspended, you are sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 2 months.

75I direct that 6 months of the sentence on Charge 2, and 1 month of the sentences on each of the related summary offences 8, 11 and 12 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence on Charge 1.  That makes a total effective sentence of 5 years and 9 months.

76I fix the period of 2 years and 9 months as the time that you must serve before being eligible for parole.

77I declare that you have spent 600 days, tell me again, Ms Duckett.

78MS DUCKETT:  698 days, Your Honour, exclusive.

79HER HONOUR:  I declare that you have spent 698 days in pre-sentence detention and direct that that be counted and reckoned as part of the sentence already served.

80I declare pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 that but for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 10 years imprisonment and I would have fixed a non-parole period of 7 years.

81I make the disposal order sought.

82On related summary Charge 12, I make an order (pursuant to s89A(c) of the Sentencing Act 1991) disqualifying you from obtaining a drivers licence for a period of 12 months. So the cancelling all licences held by you and disqualifying you for a period of 12 months.

- - -