Director of Public Prosecutions v Stephanson
[2022] VCC 1942
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT WARNAMBOOL CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
CR-21-02267
CR-22-00693
CR-22-01093
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| Abraham Stephanson |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE GEORGIOU | |
WHERE HELD: | Warrnambool | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 10 May 2022, 11 July 2022 and 2 August 2022 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 8 November 2022 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Stephanson | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2022] VCC 1942 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Obtain financial advantage by deception – 18 charges totalling the amount of $812,000 – attempt to obtain financial advantage by deception – 2 charges totalling the amount of $35,000 – continuing criminal enterprise offending - early guilty pleas – medical practitioner - significant breach of trust of patients – pre-meditated and calculated offending – payment of restitution in full – remorse – reasonable to good prospects of rehabilitation – gambling disorder – major depressive disorder – post-traumatic stress disorder – extra-curial punishment – impact of media attention – Covid-19 pandemic
Legislation Cited: s 6J Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).
Cases Cited:R v Hildebrandt [2014] VSC 321; Attorney-General v Saunders [2000] TASSC 22; Queen v Grossi [2008] VSCA 51; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; The Queen v Talia [2009] VSCA 260; Einfeld v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 87; DPP v Pell [2019] VCC 260; R v Verdins & Ors [2007] 16 VR 269.
Sentence: 2 years and 11 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 1 year and 6 months’ imprisonment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr D O’Doherty (10 May 2022) Ms J Fallar (11 July 2022, 2 August 2022) | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms A Roodenburg | Farrelly Legal |
HIS HONOUR:
1Abraham Stephanson, on Indictment No L12963272.1, you pleaded guilty to seventeen charges of obtaining a financial advantage by deception, and two charges of attempting to obtain a financial advantage by deception.
2On Indictment No N11150574, you pleaded guilty to a single charge of obtaining a financial advantage by deception.
3The circumstances of your offending are set out in the summary of prosecution opening on plea, exhibit P1. With one exception, at paragraph 4, you do not take issue with the matters stated therein.
Circumstances of offending
4Your offending occurred between 2 October 2019 and 4 December 2020 when you were employed as a medical practitioner at the Seaport Medical Clinic in Portland. All but one of your victims are your former patients.
5The way in which you offended was to seek loans from your victims, ostensibly to help pay for your father’s cancer treatment. Instead, you gambled the money so obtained or you used it to make payments on other items.
6In 2014 your father was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In 2017 he was diagnosed with myeloma. You were your father’s general practitioner attending to his general medical needs and assisted with his specialist appointments.
7In approximately mid-2019 a medical specialist informed your father of a particular treatment called “CAR T”, available overseas but not in Australia. The cost of the CAR T treatment in the United States was around $1,000,000. Your father researched other places where the treatment was available and settled upon treatment in Shanghai, China where it was far less costly. Your father was accepted for treatment in Shanghai, arranged a visa, and paid $200,000 from his own funds towards the total treatment costs of $300,000. However, before he was due to travel to China, his appointment was cancelled because of the COVID‑19 pandemic. The money he paid was refunded to him.
8Your father did not ask you for money to pay for the operation, nor did he ask you to ask anyone else for money on his behalf. You instructed your counsel that you nevertheless felt there was an expectation that you contribute towards the cost of such treatment.
9I will now deal with the particular circumstances of each of the charges.
Charge 1
10In approximately September 2019 you sent a text message to your patient, Brian Taylor, asking him to meet you at the clinic. You met with him on a Saturday afternoon and during the meeting told him your father had blood cancer requiring treatment overseas that was going to cost $400,000. You asked Mr Taylor for a loan. Mr Taylor arranged a transfer of $100,000 to your account on 2 October 2019. He loaned you the money for your father’s treatment, and for no other reason.
11On 7 October you prepared a document headed “Loan Agreement” which you and Mr Taylor both signed.
12You did not provide the money to your father nor did you use it to pay for your father’s medical treatment. Instead, you made four deposits totalling $99,000 into your Betfair account.
13Between 2 October 2019 and 16 December 2020 you repaid $63,000 of that loan.
Charge 2
14On 21 March 2020 you sent a text message to your patient, Noel Baulch, which read:
“Hi Noel hope you are keeping well … I have a personal family problem that I would like to talk to you about when you are free. I am very embarrassed and saddened by it but have decided to swallow my pride and ask for help from the small number of people I trust.”
15Mr Baulch and his partner, Joyce Ussher, discussed the message and contacted you. You told them your father was ill and required funds to pay for his cancer treatment. You asked them for a loan of $65,000 for the treatment. On 23 March 2020, Ms Ussher gave you a cheque for $65,000 and you gave her a “Loan Agreement” document which you and she signed.
16You paid $4,600 of that money towards your mortgage, and deposited $59,750 into your Betfair account on 27 March. You did not provide that money to your father, nor use it to pay for any of the costs associated with his treatment.
Charge 3
17In mid-March 2020 you contacted your patient, Haydn Geraldene. You told Mr Geraldene your father had cancer and needed to be sent to Israel for specialised treatment. You told him you were attempting to access a Commonwealth grant to assist in the payment of the treatment, but that if the grant did not come through you may need a loan. Approximately one week later you telephoned Mr Geraldene and told him the grant application was unsuccessful. You asked if he could lend you some money for your father’s treatment. In late March, Mr Geraldene made three transfers of $20,000 each into your bank account. You did not provide that money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of the medical costs associated with his treatment.
18Between 11 August 2020 and 16 December 2020 you repaid Mr Geraldene $37,000.
Charge 4
19
On 20 April 2020 you called your patient, Stuart Clark, and asked if you could send him an email about a personal matter. Mr Clark provided you with his email address. You then sent him an email advising of your father’s cancer diagnosis and stated your father was currently overseas and that you had exhausted your personal finances trying to fund his treatment. You asked Mr Clark for a loan. He agreed to lend you $10,000 for your father’s treatment. You provided
Mr Clark with a “loan agreement” document and said the loan would be repaid in six months. You offered to pay him 10 per cent interest, which he declined. On 26 April 2020 Mr Clark transferred $10,000 to your bank account.
20You did not give the money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of your father’s medical treatment. You ultimately deposited the money into your Betfair account.
21On 12 August 2020 you repaid Mr Clark the sum of $10,200.
Charge 5
22In May 2020 you sent a message to your patient, Christopher Smid, saying you wanted to discuss with him a private family problem. You later called him to discuss that problem. During the call you said your father had cancer and needed treatment in America. You asked Mr Smid for a loan. He agreed to lend you $15,000 for your father’s treatment.
23On 6 May Mr Smid attended the medical clinic. You gave him a “loan agreement” document and your bank account details. On 7 and 8 May, Mr Smid made three deposits of $5,000 each into your bank account.
24On 7 May you transferred $9,800 into your Betfair account. On 10 May you transferred $4,770 into your Betfair account.
25You did not give the money received from Mr Smid to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his medical treatment.
26On 13 August 2020, you repaid Mr Smid $15,200. Mr Smid is also the victim of your conduct in Charge 19.
Charge 6
27On 29 May 2020 you contacted your patients John and Lynn Atkins by text message. You later sent Ms Atkins an email requesting financial assistance to pay for your father’s cancer treatment. Mr and Ms Atkins agreed to lend you $30,000 for that purpose. You then sent them a “loan agreement” document and your bank details. However, before lending you any money, the Atkins received a phone call from your then partner, Lisa McIntosh, advising them not to give you any money as you were using it to fund your online gambling. Ms Atkins sent you an email confronting you about the purpose of the loan. You admitted to her your deception, that you were using the money to gamble, and that you had not been asked by your father to assist in the payment of his medical treatment.
Charge 7
28In May 2020, June Burton attended a medical appointment with you. You told her your father was in America receiving cancer treatment and that you had exhausted your finances. You said you needed an additional $70,000 to continue your father’s treatment. At this time you did not ask Ms Burton for money. Shortly after this appointment, however, you began to visit Ms Burton for dinner on Friday nights. During late May or early June, Ms Burton offered to lend you $50,000 to cover the cost of your father’s treatment. She offered you this money from the estate of her deceased uncle over which she had power of attorney. On 9 June you provided Ms Burton with a “loan agreement” document. On 13 July Ms Burton transferred $50,000 from her uncle’s estate to your bank account.
29On that same day you transferred the $50,000 from your bank account to your Betfair account. You did not provide the money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any medical costs associated with his treatment.
Charge 8
30On 14 June 2020 you contacted your patient Gregory Stevenson by text message, detailing your father’s illness and advising that he was in America awaiting further treatment. You said your father had about 30 days of treatment left, at a cost of approximately $2,300 per day. You also said that you were about $50,000 short and would accept any money that he was prepared to lend you. Mr Stevenson agreed to lend you $50,000 for your father’s treatment.
31The next day Mr Stevenson attended the medical clinic and you gave him a “loan agreement” document and your bank account details. He then went to his bank and arranged the transfer of the money into your account.
32You did not give the money received from Mr Stevenson to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any medical costs associated with his treatment.
Charge 9
33On 1 August 2020, you contacted your patient, Victoria Nash, requesting financial assistance to pay for your father’s cancer treatment. Ms Nash stated she was not in a position personally to lend you any money. You asked her if there was anyone in her family who could lend you money. You later had a phone conversation with Ms Nash and her parents, Gavin and Joan Carr, during which you told them you were seeking a loan of $120,000 to finish paying for your father’s treatment. They agreed to lend you the money for that purpose.
34On 4 August you provided Mr and Ms Carr with a “loan agreement”, drawn up by Drew Gleeson Legal. Between 6 and 7 August, Mr Carr transferred $120,000 to your bank account. You did not give any of this money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his medical treatment costs.
35
On 6 August you transferred $84,000 to your Betfair account. On
10 August you made a number of financial transactions, including a payment of $20,000 to the tax office and $42,000 to your Betfair account.
36Between 7 September and 11 December 2020, you repaid Mr and Ms Carr the sum of $26,668.
Charge 10
37During July 2020 you contacted your patient, Wayne Smith. You later met with him at your clinic. You gave Mr Smith a letter seeking financial assistance for the payment of medical treatment for your father, who was overseas. Mr Smith went home to consider your request and did some research himself regarding gene therapy for lymphoma cancer. Following his research, he decided to lend you $70,000 for your father’s treatment.
38On 14 August, you and Mr Smith again met at the clinic. You provided him with a loan agreement document which you both signed. Mr Smith then arranged to transfer $70,000 into your bank account. Mr Smith withdrew the money from his superannuation account and informed you he intended retiring in June 2021, so it was important that the money be repaid by then.
39On that same day you made three deposits totalling $21,720 to your Betfair account. On 17 August, you made additional transfers of $44,000 with the reference “Home Loan”; $5,000 with the reference “Stephanson”; and three deposits totalling $80,838 into your Betfair account.
40You did not provide any of this money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his medical treatment costs.
41Between 22 September and 17 December 2020 you made repayments totalling $25,750.01 to Mr Smith.
Charge 11
42
In August 2020, Craig Surkitt attended a medical appointment with you. You had earlier sent him an email, to which he did not reply. At the appointment you told him you were okay for money at that time. However, on 16 August you sent him another email saying your plans had fallen through and you needed money.
Mr Surkitt agreed to lend you $10,000 for your father’s treatment. On 24 August you sent Mr Surkitt a loan agreement document and your bank details. Over the next two days he transferred $10,000 to your account. You then made a number of transfers from your account, including $5,480 to your Betfair account and $2,800 to an unknown account.
43You did not provide this money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his medical treatment costs.
Charge 12
44
On about 29 August 2020 you sent an email to your patient Vicki Taylor, requesting financial assistance to pay for your father’s cancer treatment.
Ms Taylor and her husband decided to lend you $12,000 for that purpose. On
31 August, you went to Mr and Ms Taylor’s home and they gave you $12,000 in cash. You gave them a “loan agreement” document. On that same day, you made four deposits into your bank account totalling $10,000. On the following day you transferred $10,000 to your Betfair account.
45You did not provide this money to your father, nor did you use it to pay any of his medical costs.
Charge 13
46During August 2020 you contacted John Nahkla, a pharmacist, asking to meet at the medical clinic. Mr Nahkla attended the clinic some days later and met with you. You gave him a letter that had information concerning your father’s treatment for cancer. Mr Nahkla read the letter. You told him that you had to take your father to China for treatment, that you were covering all payments, but you were running short of cash. You requested a $40,000 loan to pay for your father’s treatment. You offered 10 per cent interest, which Mr Nahkla declined, but agreed to 5 per cent interest with repayments to be made in 10 months.
47A couple of days later, you gave Mr Nahkla a letter dated 31 August, which you had signed, along with your bank details. On 9 September Mr Nahkla transferred $40,000 to your bank account.
48On 14 September you deposited $40,000 into your Betfair account. You did not give the money received from Mr Nahkla to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of your father’s medical treatment costs.
49Between October and December 2020 you repaid Mr Nahkla $12,600.
Charge 14
50On 16 October 2020 you contacted your patient Laurence Hare by email, asking for funds to assist in paying for your father’s cancer treatment. Mr Hare agreed to lend you $5,000 for that purpose.
51On 12 November you sent another email to Mr Hare asking if he was still prepared to lend you the money, saying that one of your backers had pulled out at the last minute. Attached to that email was a “loan agreement” document that you had signed. Mr Hare replied to your email asking for confirmation of the bank account details. You did not respond and, in the end, you did not receive any money from Mr Hare.
Charge 15
52On 31 October 2020 you sent your patients Patricia and Barrington Brown emails requesting financial assistance for your father’s cancer treatment. You received a reply that Mr Brown had an upcoming appointment with you and the matter could be discussed then.
53On 2 November Mr Brown attended the medical appointment. Mr Brown told you that he and his wife would lend you $10,000 towards your father’s treatment. You gave Mr Brown your bank details and he deposited $10,000 into your account.
54You transferred that money to another of your accounts and then made multiple purchases. That same day you also transferred $21,100 to your Betfair account.
55You did not provide the Browns’ money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
Charge 16
56On 31 October 2020 you sent your patient, Albertus Kuuper, an email requesting financial assistance to pay for your father’s cancer treatment.
57Mr Kuuper and his wife agreed to lend you $50,000 for that treatment. On 4 November you provided Mr and Ms Kuuper a loan agreement document. Between 5 and 6 November, Ms Kuuper deposited $50,000 into your account.
58Between 5 and 9 November you deposited $27,402 into your Betfair account. You also spent $20,204.28 on personal expenses including Tax Office payments, BAS payments and transfers to other linked accounts. You did not give the Kuupers’ money to your father, nor use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
Charge 17
59On 31 October 2020 you sent an email to your patient Thomas Carswell, requesting a loan to help pay for your father’s cancer treatment. Mr and Mrs Carswell asked for additional information, including what amount would be useful. You told the Carswells that you were getting a reduced rate as a professional courtesy from the Mayo Clinic, and you had about $70,000 in ongoing costs before the therapy could be completed. You said that any amount they could lend you would be appreciated. Mr and Mrs Carswell decided to lend you $15,000 towards the cost of your father’s treatment.
60On 7 November you attended the Carswells’ home and spoke further about your father’s diagnosis and treatment in the USA. You said that the $15,000 they had offered was all that you needed to finish paying his medical treatment.
61On 10 November you sent the Carswells a “loan agreement” document and your bank details. Over the next two days they transferred $15,000 to your account.
62On 10 November you made multiple purchases of various items and also transferred $19,000 to your Betfair account. On 11 November you transferred $17,840 to your Betfair account. You did not give the Carswells’ money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
Charge 18
63On 14 November 2020 you contacted your patient Frank Zeigler, asking for financial assistance to pay for your father’s cancer treatment.
64Mr Zeigler agreed to lend you $40,000 for that purpose. On 24 November you provided him with a loan agreement document and your bank details. On that day, Mr Zeigler transferred $40,000 to your bank account. You then transferred the $40,000 to your Betfair account. You did not provide that money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
Charge 19
65
On 20 November 2020 during a medical consultation with Christopher Smid, he asked you for financial advice as he had some money to invest. You told
Mr Smid to “do what we did last time” and mentioned that you had already paid around $275,000 towards your father’s treatment costs. Mr Smid asked how much you needed to complete the treatment and you asked for $75,000.
66
On 4 December, Mr Smid attended the clinic. You gave him a loan agreement document and he gave you a bank cheque for $75,000. That same day, you deposited the cheque into your bank account. On 9 December you transferred $74,700 to your Betfair account. You did not give the money received from
Mr Smid to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
67I turn now to Indictment N10798424.
68On approximately 7 June 2020 you contacted your patient, Margo Benbow, seeking financial assistance to help pay for your father’s treatment in China. Ms Benbow and her husband agreed to lend you $20,000.
69On 11 June you sent a loan agreement and your bank details to Ms Benbow. Between 12 and 15 June, Ms Benbow transferred $20,000 to your account. Between 12 and 16 June you made multiple transfers to your Betfair account totalling $20,860. You did not give any of Ms Benbow’s money to your father, nor did you use it to pay for any of his treatment costs.
70The total amount you received from your deceptions on both indictments was $812,000. At the time of the plea hearing, you had repaid $190,418.01. The amount outstanding is $621,981.99.
71You also attempted to obtain by deception the sum of $35,000 in total.
Investigation and arrest
72In December 2020, Mr Zeigler was contacted by his bank regarding certain transactions on his account. Following that contact, Mr Zeigler enquired of the bank whether the money had gone to medical institutions. He was told it had not. Mr Zeigler contacted police to report the matter.
73On 14 December 2020, Mr Kupper was contacted by his bank. He and his wife attended their branch and were told that the bank’s fraud department were looking into you as there had been suspicious activity on your accounts.
74On 15 December 2020, Senior Constable Hudson was contacted by Mr Zeigler and the Kuppers regarding the money they had loaned you. Senior Constable Hudson’s enquiries resulted in the issuing of search warrants and, ultimately, your arrest and interview on 19 December 2020.
Victim Impact Statements
75A number of victim impact statements were tendered at the plea hearing.
76I will briefly summarise the statements of those victims who were content to have their statements read in open court.
77Mr Smid states he has been caused a great deal of anxiety and stress. He has had many sleepless nights thinking about how this happened to him, in particular, being taken advantage of by his trusted doctor, a person in whom he felt he could confide. He feels hurt, disappointed, frustrated and angry. He genuinely believed he was assisting someone who needed help.
78Wayne Smith states that when you approached him for a loan you knew he was about to retire and that he withdrew money from his superannuation account to help you. He became stressed as a result of your conduct for which he needed counselling. At the time he prepared his Impact Statement he had little hope of retrieving the funds. He considers his trust in you violated.
79Lyn Atkins considered you a great and caring doctor whom she ‘infinitely’ trusted. She had no reason to doubt your story concerning your father’s cancer treatment. She states you spent an hour answering her questions with what she now knows to be lies. She feels devastated and sickened by your betrayal. She is sad, angry and embarrassed that she fell for what she describes as your “disgusting, pitiful scam”.
80When Ms Atkins approached you, she states you apologised, said you were getting treatment for your gambling, and you had in fact stopped gambling. You swore to her this was true. It clearly was not. She states you have shattered her faith in her ability to judge people and will find it very hard to trust anyone seeking help in the future.
81Mr Zeigler stated that as a result of what you did, he and his partner had to review their financial future, thinking they had lost all of their funds. When they learned of your offending, it caused them emotional disbelief, distress and a breach of the faith and trust they had placed in you over many years. Notwithstanding their reaction, Mr Zeigler acknowledges that he still holds you in the highest regard and appreciates your tireless devotion to him and many others within the community. He states that once all matters are appropriately settled, he will continue to support you.
82Mr Stevenson feels shocked, helpless, hurt, angry and frustration at being let down by a person he trusted. He now questions his own judgment and states he has lost faith in mankind. He no longer sees the world as a safe place.
83Ms Taylor states she was in a state of disbelief when she found out about your crimes. She states she and her husband were taken advantage of by a person in such a trustworthy profession, a person whom they had known for a considerable period of time. She feels sick to the stomach that they were so foolish. Her own father died of cancer and that fact influenced her decision to help you. Ms Taylor feels guilty and ashamed for simply trying to help someone.
84Mr Taylor is hurt and very angry at being lied to by his doctor whom he also thought was a friend. He states it will be a long time before he helps someone else in trouble.
85Mr Hare is angry and hurt that his trust in you held so little value. He fears that he can no longer trust people, including friends and acquaintances. He states that he trusted you with his life, particularly as you had the title of “Bioethics” on your resumé.
86Ms Kuuper is hurt and angry that you used her knowing she suffers depression, anxiety and pain. She is angry that she gave you money she could not afford because she trusted you to be honest. She states you knew her state following the loss of her son, but you still took advantage of her. Ms Kuuper cries nearly every day wondering if they will ever be able to own their own house instead of renting. Mr Kupper states you knew of the tragic losses he and his wife suffered, and considered you not just a friend and doctor, but someone who was as close to family as one can get. Your conduct has caused him distress and a loss of trust in people.
87Ms Carswell is upset and embarrassed that she and her husband were gullible enough to believe your story. Your conduct has taken away her confidence in her ability to judge people as trustworthy. She is now much more wary of people’s motivations. Mr Carswell speaks of his shock at being betrayed by a person whom he fully trusted.
88Mr Brown states he and his wife gave you their savings which had taken a very long time to accumulate. They were shocked and felt hoodwinked. Mr Brown states the words “you can trust me, I am a doctor” will echo in his ears forever.
89Ms Ussher has been deeply emotionally affected. The absolute trust she had in you has gone, and she will never be able to trust completely again.
90Mr Carr thought he had a genuine doctor/patient relationship with you. The relationship, he said, was one of ultimate trust and so he did not hesitate to assist your gravely ill father, apparently stuck overseas. At the time of the loan his wife was also gravely ill. Your deception caused great angst to her during her last months. Sadly, he too has now passed away.
91Impact statements were also obtained from a number of persons who did not want them read out in Court. Out of respect for their wishes, I will not refer to them in the course of my sentencing remarks, but I assure those victims I have had full regard to each of their statements.
92Many of your victims spoke of the financial impact your conduct has had upon them. Notwithstanding that they will all be repaid, most have lived with the uncertainty of financial loss. A number were directly impacted financially as a result of their loans to you.
93It is clear that your conduct has had a profound impact on each of your victims. The word ‘trust’ features in just about all the impact statements. Your victims feel betrayed and some feel gullible and foolish in taking you at your word. Despite your gross breach of trust, some have taken an understanding approach to your gambling predicament.
Police Interview
94On 18 December 2020 you were interviewed by police in relation to the Kuppers and the Zeiglers. You admitted receiving money from the Kuppers and acknowledged there was a “trust and bond” between you. You grieved with them when their son passed away. You said you believed the loan agreement between you was legally binding. You disclosed to police you gambled their money saying you intended to raise more money to pay for your father’s treatment. You admitted approaching the Zeiglers for a loan for your father’s treatment. You acknowledged receiving their money and using it to gamble.
95You also acknowledged receiving loans from others and having used the money to gamble. You told police there were three or four others from whom you obtained loans for the purpose of treatment. You said there were still others from whom you loaned money and managed to re-pay. You did not provide police with the details of the other victims.
96You told police that whilst you considered your conduct to be unethical, you did not believe it to be illegal. Your motivation you said was to help your father but that the way you went about it was wrong. You also told police that your intention in asking for the money was to pay for the treatment, and not to gamble. The reason you said it went to gambling was that you did not have enough money for the treatment. You said that it all came down to how much money you raised. If you had enough you wouldn’t have gambled. You also admitted to having a gambling problem and that you lost large amounts of money over the years.
Personal Circumstances
97
I turn now to your personal circumstances. You were born in Cyprus on
29 April 1972. Both your parents reside in Victoria, as does your only sibling.
98At the age of five you and your family migrated to Australia as refugees. You have vivid memories of living in a refugee camp following the outbreak of war in Cyprus, and of being exposed to violence and death.
99Your father worked as an engineer and your mother raised you and your sister.
100You describe your father as an extremely stern man who had high expectations of you. He was, apparently, very controlling and determined the course you would study and at which university. Despite your poor relationship with him, you continued to seek his approval and respect up to the time of the present charges. He has not spoken to you since you were charged with these offences.
101You excelled academically at school and graduated from Monash University in 1995 with a Bachelor Degree in medicine.
102Upon your graduation from University you commenced work as an intern and subsequently a surgical trainee at the Alfred Hospital. You were successful in obtaining one of only four positions in neurosurgery at the Monash Medical Centre. In 2004, your neurosurgical traineeship was cancelled upon discovery of child pornographic images on your computer.
103Your medical registration was cancelled in September 2005, but you gained permission to practice after 1 March 2007. A number of conditions were imposed on your ability to practise medicine. You were not permitted to return to your neurosurgical traineeship.
104During the period of your suspension, you worked in supermarkets and in other casual jobs. You also completed studies in bioethics.
105In 2009 you commenced general practitioner training and obtained work at the Seaport Medical Clinic. You completed your general practitioner training and became a Fellow of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners in 2016. Your work was stressful given the high patient load you were required to carry. It appears you were a hard worker, well-liked and highly regarded by your patients.
106Following your move to Portland, you met and formed a relationship with Lisa McIntosh. Together you have a daughter born in 2015. Your relationship with Ms McIntosh ended in 2019, but you remain on good terms.
107You were again suspended from practising medicine on 22 January 2021 after being charged with the current offences. You have since lived on your savings and money from the sale of many possessions. You have been on unemployment benefits since January 2022.
108You have also spent time and money renovating your house to maximise its selling price. It was sold earlier this year with the funds being restrained.
109Your sister Rhoda Stephanos provided a reference and gave evidence at the plea hearing. She was an impressive witness. She gave evidence of your father’s high expectations that you do well academically. You were, in her opinion, groomed by your father to be as perfect as you could be, at all times. You were expected to complete the following year’s academic work before the school year in fact commenced. She considers you remained a good son, particularly in assisting him with his illness.
110Your sister stated that following your conviction for the child pornography offence, you did what you could to stay out of public life. On one occasion when you and she were in Elsternwick, she saw you attacked by a stranger which, because of what was said by your attacker, appeared to be related to your earlier conviction.
111Your sister has discussed your offending with you and considers that you are very remorseful. She and your mother, from whom I also received a reference, remain supportive of you. Your mother speaks of your time in refugee camps following the outbreak of war, migrating to Australia and the difficulties you encountered during your school years, particularly with bullying and racism. According to your mother, you struggled with many issues, both at home and more widely. She states you received many academic rewards throughout your schooling. She also states you were greatly upset by your father’s illness and that your father asked you to accompany him to China to oversee his treatment.
112I have also read references from Lisa McIntosh, June McIntosh, Effi Panayi, Brian Phuah, Joe Ragg, David Hol, Betty Malseed, David Burke, Elmar Lepp, Ronald and Marlene Robinson, Tracey Naughton, and W Bassett. I do not intend to recite them here in any detail. They mostly speak of your professionalism, compassion and commitment to your patients. It is clear you went to great lengths to ensure your patients received the best of care. The referees also speak highly of you as a kind and caring member of the community.
113Lisa McIntosh describes you as her best friend and a wonderful father to your daughter. She confirms much of what has been submitted concerning your father’s domineering and abusive behaviour towards you and others within your family; your struggles in Portland, particularly your difficulties with your fellow doctors at the clinic; the workload you were carrying; and your efforts to seek help for your problem gambling. Ms McIntosh also confirms that you have been targeted in the Portland area with persons trespassing and invading your home, damaging your property and the theft of your belongings.
114I was provided with a number of police incident reports detailing criminal activity directed towards you and your home over the period 2016 to late 2020.
Sentencing Considerations
115The maximum penalty that may be imposed in respect to Charges 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16 and 19, by reason of the operation of Part 2B of the Sentencing Act 1991, is 20 years’ imprisonment. In each of those offences the value of the financial advantage was $50,000 or more.
116Pursuant to s6J of the Sentencing Act, I direct that there be entered into the records of the court in respect to each of those offences the fact that you are sentenced for a continuing criminal enterprise offence.
117The maximum penalty for the balance of the charges of obtaining a financial advantage by deception is 10 years. The maximum penalty in respect to each of the two attempt charges is five years.
118I have had regard to the maximum penalties in determining the appropriate sentence to be imposed. They provide a yardstick by which to measure the seriousness with which Parliament views your offending.
119In my opinion, your offending must be regarded as particularly serious given a number of considerations including the period of time over which you offended, the pre-meditation and planning involved, the amounts of money defrauded and your gross breach of the trust your victims placed in you as their doctor.
120Your offending involved telling your victims lies, sometimes elaborate lies, concerning the need for money. You exploited your position as their trusted doctor to obtain funds to feed your gambling addiction, relying upon your father’s grave illness for that purpose. I do not accept your assertion to police that you would not have gambled had you raised enough funds to pay for your father’s treatment. The fact is you fraudulently obtained more than enough money to pay for the anticipated treatment cost in Shanghai of $300,000. It is plain, in my opinion, that you were addicted to gambling and that is why you offended.
121I accept your counsel’s submission that it was always your intention to repay the monies you borrowed. The “Loan Agreement” documents reflect your belief that you were legally obliged to repay each of the debts. You have in fact repaid approximately $190,418 of the monies fraudulently obtained. The sale of your family home and your agreement to the compensation orders will ensure that each of your victims’ financial loss will be met.
122I accept the submission that I may have regard to what will be the full financial restitution to be paid to each of your victims. Your counsel relied on the decision of R v Hildebrandt[1] in which Emerton J, as her Honour then was, stated that “the payment of restitution is relevant and mitigating. It is an indication of contrition and remorse, and ensures that you have not profited from your crimes.”[2]
[1] [2014] VSC 321
[2] Ibid [68]
123In Attorney-General v Saunders[3] the Court stated that there was “no error in principle in the proposition that while an offender should not be allowed to purchase his or her immunity from proper punishment … it is nonetheless true that if the deficiency can be made good, particularly before the date of sentence, then the severity of punishment may be ameliorated. Restitution brought about by remorse may also attract greater consideration than restitution made merely for the purpose of ameliorating the severity of punishment.”[4] I am prepared to accept that your consent to entering into the compensation orders which will see the full restitution to each of your victims, is brought about by your genuine remorse. Restitution will also reduce somewhat the impact of your offending on your victims.
[3] [2000] TASSC 22
[4] Ibid [7]
124Although you instructed your counsel that the offending arose in the context of your desire to fund your father’s treatment, it was also submitted there were other stressors in your life that caused an increase in your gambling. These are set out in the report of Carla Lechner, clinical psychologist, dated 21 April 2022.
125Ms Lechner notes that you developed a gambling addiction in response to environmental stressors. You told her you started gambling following your move to Portland as it made you feel less isolated and it made you feel better about yourself. Those stressors included work-related issues and public knowledge of your prior conviction that resulted in bullying, blackmail and derision in the small community of Portland. A number of false complaints were made against you. There were break-ins at your family home and threats of violence. In 2019 and 2020, you report being targeted by three males who, on 6 or 7 occasions, verbally, physically and sexually abused you. You believed the males were part of a vigilante group punishing you for your previous offending. You did not report the assaults to police. You first disclosed them to your solicitor in relatively recent times and you discussed them with Ms Lechner when interviewed.
126Ms Lechner states:
“Mr Stephanson described a number of traumatic experiences … including “growing up before Australia (in) refugee camps, a lot of violence, people dying … the sexual assaults”. He reports suffering nightmares, flashbacks, poor sleep, hyper-vigilance and chronic anxiety. He fulfils the criteria of a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.”
127You did, in fact, reach out to the organisation CASA for counselling following the sexual assaults but because of your history they were not able to assist.
128I accept that you started gambling to cope with your social isolation following the move to Portland. Gambling also provided you with a means to escape the stressors in your life. You told Ms Lechner you had lost a lot of money but you were gambling within your means. However, following the assaults upon you in 2019 and 2020, you report relapsing into extremely problematic gambling.
129You sought assistance for your gambling addiction by completing several online courses and obtaining some psychiatric counselling. Those early efforts were unsuccessful. However, you state you have not gambled since January 2021 when you sought specialist treatment for your addiction.
130Ms Lechner administered a number of psychological tests. In her opinion, you presented with symptoms of a Gambling Disorder in remission, Major Depressive Disorder, and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. She states that you have the capacity to engage in reflective and consequential thinking, although that ability appears to have been impaired when you were in the grip of your gambling addiction and unable to assess properly the ethics of your offending.
131You acknowledged to Ms Lechner your breach of trust, saying you had a close relationship with your patients, that there was mutual respect and care, and that you have damaged their trust.
132Although you are currently engaged with a psychologist for mood management, Ms Lechner considers you have more deep-seated issues centring on trauma and maladaptive strategies involving addictive behaviours. These need to be addressed in a long-term and more intensive therapeutic relationship.
133
It is somewhat difficult to reconcile your conduct given your obvious intellect, your previous conviction and its consequences on your ability to practise medicine, and the warning you received from Ms Atkins in mid-2020, when she confronted you. I can only conclude that this is reflective of the strong grip your gambling addiction had upon you, against a background of
Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression.
134While I accept Ms Lechner’s opinions, which were not the subject of any dispute, I do not accept your assertion to her that you gambled the money in the hope of generating more money to assist with your father’s treatment costs. As earlier stated, you were able to borrow more than sufficient monies to pay for your father’s treatment costs. You fraudulently obtained the monies to feed your gambling addiction. You justified your actions in the faint hope that a win would possibly solve your financial difficulties.
135Several other reports were tendered regarding your mental state and attempts at treatment which I will briefly mention.
136Fred Nittsjo, psychologist, provided a brief report dated 14 February 2022. He states you have been a “consumer of Portland Mental Health Service for over 12 months since your legal troubles began”. His report deals with your risk of suicide, particularly if you are sentenced to a term of imprisonment.
137A separation summary of the Flinders Medical Centre shows that you were an inpatient between 11 January and 13 January 2021. You referred yourself to the service seeking assistance with your gambling disorder. In the short time you were there, you began exposure therapy and demonstrated a good understanding and motivation to continue with treatment. However, after the service became aware of your previous conviction, you were discharged as it conflicted with hospital policy. Following your discharge, you engaged in nine telephone consultations between January 2021 and September 2021 with cognitive behavioural therapist, Dr Ben Riley.
138
A report from Dr Malaya Singh, Senior Psychiatric Registrar,
Portland Mental Health Service states you first consulted her on 17 March 2022. Dr Singh states you first came to the attention of the Portland Mental Health Service in December 2020 in crisis after being referred by police because of suicidal concerns. You were then diagnosed with Pathological Gambling Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder, and were accepted for treatment. You were treated with a number of medications and it was recommended you continue your psychotherapy sessions with Mr Nittsjo.
139Your counsel, Ms Roodenburg, submitted there was a nexus between your mental health and your offending. In her written submissions, Ms Roodenburg stated:
“Ms Lechner notes that the physical and sexual assaults suffered by (you) in 2019 and 2020 led to the development of symptoms of acute Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and a relapse into extremely problematic gambling.”
Accordingly, it was submitted, there is a nexus between your mental health and your offending. Whilst I am not able to find, on the balance of probabilities that those assaults occurred, the diagnosis of acute Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder was not challenged.
140
Relying on the decision in The Queen v Verdins,[5] Ms Roodenburg submitted your moral culpability was reduced; that your mental ill-health should have a bearing on the type of sentence to be imposed; should moderate the weight to be given to general and specific deterrence; and that it is evident that a sentence of imprisonment would weigh more heavily on you than a person in normal health and would have a significantly adverse impact on your mental health. Specific reference was made to the risk of suicide referred to in Ms Lechner’s and
Mr Nittsjo’s reports. Ms Roodenburg also relied on Ms Lechner’s opinion that you require long-term and intensive therapeutic treatment that, according to her, is “extremely unlikely to be available within a prison environment”.
[5]R v Verdins & Ors [2007] 16 VR 269
141In The Queen v Grossi,[6] Redlich JA analysed a number of authorities that dealt with gambling addiction, and stated that the relevance of the disorder to the sentence to be imposed is to be assessed in accordance with the principles restated in Verdins. That assessment, His Honour said, will generally lead to the conclusion that the presence of a gambling addiction should not, on that ground alone, result in any appreciable moderation of the sentence.[7]
[6][2008] VSCA 51
[7]Ibid, [56]
142His Honour set out a number of reasons why that will be so, including that it will frequently be the case that crimes associated with gambling addiction will have been repeated and extended over a protracted period. In cases involving dishonesty, the crimes, he said, will commonly be sophisticated, devious and the result of careful planning. Furthermore, the gravity of such offences, if there is a breach of trust or confidence, will commonly attract an increased penalty, making such offences more appropriate vehicles for general deterrence. His Honour stated that when offences of this nature are committed over extended periods, the prominent hypothesis will be that the offender has had a degree of choice which they have continued to exercise as to how they finance their addiction, and the nexus of the addiction to the crime will often be unsubstantiated.
143His Honour also stated that the “disorder will not generally be directly connected to the commission of the crime, the addiction providing only a motive and explanation for its commission”.[8]
[8]Ibid, [56]
144As in the case of Grossi, your conduct was premeditated, calculated and systematic. You repeatedly exercised your choice to re-offend over a period of some 14 months, thus reducing the weight I should give to your gambling addiction. As earlier stated, you received a warning when you were confronted by Ms Atkins in mid-2020. Your conduct in approaching your victims, preparing loan agreement documents for their signature, and explaining to each of them that the money was required for the purpose of your father’s cancer treatment was deliberate, planned and involved a significant breach of trust.
145As neither party addressed me on the relevance of the decision in Grossi at the plea hearing, I sought further submissions from both the prosecution and defence. Submissions were filed in late October. I accept the submission of your counsel that it is the combination of your Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and the development of symptoms of acute Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that led to your relapse into problematic gambling behaviours. There is thus a nexus between your mental health disorders, your gambling and your offending.
146The impact of your mental health does, in my opinion, lead to some diminution in the level of your moral culpability and the need for denunciation. That is not to say that your conduct does not deserve to be denounced. It does. Furthermore, there is still a significant need for the sentence to deter others from committing similar offences. There is also a need to deter you from further offending. The sentence must also serve to punish you for your offending. Your disorders are not of such a degree that there should be anything more than a modest reduction in the need for deterrence and punishment.
147I accept that your Major Depressive Disorder and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder will mean that a gaol sentence will weigh more heavily on you than it would on a person in normal health, and that there is a serious risk that imprisonment will have a significant adverse effect on your mental health. Based on the materials tendered on your behalf, these are not insignificant considerations.
148I am required to have regard to the victim impact statements and I have done so. I have already commented upon the profound impact your offending has had upon each of your victims.
149You have pleaded guilty to each of the charges. I accept your pleas were entered at the earliest reasonable opportunity, following negotiation as to appropriate charges, amounts borrowed and repaid. The court and community have been spared the cost and time of a committal hearing and a trial. Witnesses have been spared the ordeal of having to give evidence. A trial of the charges would have occupied a considerable period of court time. Your pleas have facilitated the course of justice. They have significant utilitarian benefits. They were entered during the COVID‑19 pandemic which has had a significant impact on the administration of justice. As was stated in
Worboyes v The Queen[9]:“A plea of guilty during the pandemic ordinarily should attract a more pronounced amelioration of sentence than at another time. Although a sentencing judge need not quantify the extent of any ‘discount’, he or she must ensure that the plea of guilty results in a perceptible amelioration of sentence.”[10]
[9] [2021] VSCA 169
[10] Ibid [39]
150I accept your pleas reflect an acceptance of responsibility, genuine remorse for your offending and its impact on your victims. I also accept the genuineness of the shame you have expressed for your conduct and your understanding that it represents a significant breach of trust.
151You wrote to many of your victims apologising for your conduct. I accept that you are sincere in your apologies. The letters were dated 2 November 2021 and advised, amongst other things, that the victims would be repaid once your home was sold. Your letters were provided to the informant who, not wishing to cause the victims further trauma, decided not to pass them on until relatively recently. When the letters were passed on to the victims, I was informed that two victims declined to receive their letter and that you did not write to two of your victims.
152It was submitted by your counsel, and accepted by the prosecution, that at an early stage you advised your intention to repay each of your victims, and that such an indication is a relevant matter in mitigation of sentence.
153
These considerations weigh in your favour in my assessment of your prospects for rehabilitation and the likelihood of you committing further offences.
Ms Roodenburg also relied on your limited criminal history, your compliance with your conditions of bail since December 2020, there being no subsequent offending during that time, your substantial compliance with your obligations under the Sex Offenders RegistrationAct and your undertaking of treatment to deal with your mental health issues. She added that I should have confidence in your ability to rehabilitate given your intelligence and demonstrated ability for hard work.
154However, this is not the first time you have been in trouble with the law. You have a limited criminal history, but the most serious prior offence occurred, according to Ms Lechner, as a maladaptive response to work stress. I note your response to stress in this case, by gambling, was also maladaptive.
155In all the circumstances, I am prepared to find you have reasonable to good prospects for rehabilitation but that assessment is very much contingent on you obtaining the professional help you clearly need.
156Ms Roodenburg submitted I should take into account the fact that because of your offending your medical practitioner registration has been suspended and you are unlikely to again work as a doctor. She relied on this as constituting extra-curial punishment and as having a significant deterrent effect upon you.
157The cancellation of your registration following your conviction in 2005 did not result in your registration being permanently cancelled. Moreover, the cancellation of your registration did not deter you from committing the current offences. However, it is a factor that I may, in the exercise of my discretion, take into account. I was referred to the decision in The Queen v Talia[11] by your counsel. Although you targeted certain patients because you had developed a good relationship with them as their doctor, I do not consider that your offending arose strictly in the course of your employment. While it is not clear what will become of your registration in the long term, your registration was suspended on 22 January 2021. I was provided with a letter from your solicitors, Ball Partners, dated 3 March 2022, outlining what may follow upon your conviction. They suggest that the Medical Board of Australia will refer your case to VCAT seeking either cancellation of your registration or suspension of your registration for a period of time. Whilst Mr Ball thinks it more likely that your registration will be cancelled, I am not in a position to make such a finding.
[11] [2009] VSCA 260
158Having regard to your suspension to date, and the possibility that you may not be able to practise medicine at least for the foreseeable future, I accept that I should take into account this extra-curial punishment. I have no doubt your future employment prospect is a consideration adding to your current levels of stress and anxiety. As I have said, while I do not consider your offending occurred in the course of your employment, it was because of your trusted position as the victims’ doctor that it was able to occur. In that circumstance, I am prepared to give this additional punishment only modest weight.
159It was also submitted that you have suffered as a consequence of the intense media interest in your case. A number of media articles were published following your plea hearing that have caused you additional anxiety, particularly given that some also referred to your earlier conviction for possessing child pornography. Ms Roodenburg relied on the decisions in Einfeld v The Queen,[12] DPP v Pell[13] and DPP v Pusey.[14]In Pell, Chief Judge Kidd stated:
“While the manner and extent to which extra-curial punishment and public opprobrium should be taken into account by way of mitigation is not entirely settled I accept the position of the parties, and your counsel’s submissions in particular, that I should make some allowance for these matters in my sentence, and I have done so.”[15]
[12] [2010] NSWCCA 87 at [90]
[13] [2019] VCC 260
[14] [2021] VCC 478
[15] At [148]
160It is difficult to quantify the extent to which media attention has impacted on your psychological state, but I accept it has and I will make some modest allowance for this aspect of extra-curial punishment.
161I am required to have regard to current sentencing practice. It is but one of a number of sentencing considerations to which I must have regard. I have considered each of the cases to which I was referred by counsel as well as others.[16] It is clear from those cases that the circumstances in which the offence of obtaining a financial advantage by deception is committed, and its objective seriousness, varies widely, as do the personal circumstances of those who commit such an offence. Whilst I have had regard to each of those cases, ultimately, each case must be decided on its own individual facts and circumstances.
[16] Kelly v The Queen [2021] VSCA 202; Kepkey v The Queen [2021] VSCA 202; Matamata v The Queen [2021] VSCA 253; DPP v Munn [2019] VSCA 267; DPP v Blackberry [2019] VSCA 269; DPP v Scott & Scott [2021] VCC 2146; DPP v Stoicos [2019] VCC 53; DPP v Rowe [2017] VCC 1731; DPP v Sharma [2016] VCC 1021; DPP v Zakhour [2020] VCC 159; Zakhour v The Queen [2022] VSCA 63; DPP v Spinella [2021] VCC 724; Kovacevic v The Queen [2021] VSCA 49; Mao v The King; Niu v The King [2022] VSCA 211
162Your counsel submitted that all sentencing objectives may be achieved with the imposition of a community correction order or a combination of gaol and a community correction order. Notwithstanding the many points in mitigation forcefully advanced by Ms Roodenburg, I do not agree. In my opinion, a custodial sentence is the only sentence that will meet each of those objectives.
163In endeavouring to achieve an appropriate and a proportionate sentence, I have also had regard to the principle of totality to ensure that the total effective sentence reflects your overall criminality and to ensure that the sentence is not crushing. I also take into account that this will be your first time in custody, and that you will be in custody during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means that you are likely to endure more restrictive prison conditions including a period of quarantine, reduced programs, and reduced visitation rights, than would otherwise be the case.
Sentence
164Mr Stephanson, would you now please stand.
165On Indictment No.L12963272.1:
On Charge 1 you are convicted and sentenced to 16 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 2 you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 3 you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 4 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 5 you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
On Charge 6 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 7 you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 8 you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 9 you are convicted and sentenced to 16 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 10 you are convicted and sentenced to 14 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 11 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 12 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 13 you are convicted and sentenced to seven months' imprisonment.
On Charge 14 you are convicted and sentenced to one month's imprisonment.
On Charge 15 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 16 you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 17 you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 18 you are convicted and sentenced to seven months' imprisonment.
On Charge 19 you are convicted and sentenced to 14 months' imprisonment.
166The sentence imposed on Charge 9, that of 16 months' imprisonment, is the base sentence. I direct that three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 1; two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 2; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 3; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 6; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 7; two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 8; two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 10; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 13; two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 16; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 17; one month of the sentence imposed on Charge 18; and two months of the sentence imposed on Charge 19 are to be served cumulatively on the base sentence and on each other. This makes a total effective sentence of 35 months' imprisonment.
167On the charge on Indictment N11150574 you are convicted and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment. One month of that sentence is to be served cumulatively on the total effective sentence of 35 months imposed on Indictment L12963272.1.
168I direct that you serve a minimum term of 18 months before becoming eligible for release on parole. I consider that this is the minimum period that justice requires you to serve having regard to all of the circumstances of the case, particularly the need to allow for your continued rehabilitation, a process on which you have already embarked since early 2021, and which will ultimately best serve the protection of the community.
169Pursuant to s6AAA the sentence I would otherwise have imposed had it not been for your pleas of guilty is one of four years and three months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and nine months’ imprisonment.
170Ms Roodenburg, have you seen the compensation orders that have been provided to the court dated 8 November 2022?
171MS ROODENBURG: I have, Your Honour, and they're correct.
172HIS HONOUR: They're correct. And your client agrees, as has already been stated, to enter into such orders?
173MS ROODENBURG: He does, Your Honour.
174HIS HONOUR: Well, I will make those compensation orders as agreed.
175HIS HONOUR: All right. May I thank all members of counsel for the assistance in this difficult sentencing matter. All right. If there are no other matters I'll now adjourn the court.
- - -
0
20
0