Director of Public Prosecutions v Suafoa (a pseudonym)

[2023] VCC 1154

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT Melbourne

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

JASMINE SUAFOA (A PSEUDONYM)

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE GWYNN
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	21 JUNE 2023
DATE OF SENTENCE:	30 JUNE 2023
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Suafoa (a pseudonym)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VCC 1154

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:Criminal Law

Catchwords:              Causing injury intentionally – Common law assault

Legislation Cited:      Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)

Cases Cited:Bugmy v The Queen 249 CLR 571; R v Verdins & Ors (2007) 16 VR 240

Sentence:                  Three years and two months imprisonment with non-parole period of two years

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Ms L. Gurry (plea)	Office of Public Prosecutions
Mr B. Kerlin (sentence)
For the Accused	Ms M. Brown	Stary Norton Halphen

HER HONOUR:

1Jasmine Suafoa[1], you have pleaded guilty on indictment to two charges of causing injury intentionally committed on 6 November 2020 and five charges of common law assault committed between 28 September 2017 and 5 November 2020 against your two adopted daughters, Lila[2] and Irene Suafoa[3].

[1] A pseudonym.

[2] A pseudonym.

[3] A pseudonym.

2In sentencing you for these crimes, I must have regard to the maximum penalties for the offences you have committed. Causing injury intentionally carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and common law assault carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. These maximum penalties reflect the seriousness with which Parliament regards each of these offences.

3The circumstances of your offending were set out in a document entitled 'Amended Summary of Prosecution Opening' dated 14 June 2023.  This is an agreed document and it represents your acceptance of the elements of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty, as well as the factual basis on which I am to sentence.

4Whilst I have had recourse to the full document, and it was read to the court, I propose to refer to some of the facts so that the gravity of your offending and the factual context can be fully understood.

The Offending

5By way of background, on 29 March 2017, you and your then husband Te Suafoa[4], officially adopted Lila and Irene Suafoa, who were fraternal twins, and your husband’s nieces. Lila and Irene were aged between eight and 11 years at the time of your offending.

[4] A pseudonym.

6It was on 28 September 2017 that Lila and Irene travelled from New Zealand to Australia with your then husband and became part of your family home in Hoppers Crossing[5] where you resided with Te and, at that point, ten of your children.  Lila and Irene referred to your husband as 'dad' and to you as 'mum’.

[5] Location de-identified.

7Your offending came to the attention of the authorities when, on 6 November 2020, Lila and Irene ran away to their school and disclosed to the Assistant Principal that they had been physically hit and kicked by you.

8I will now briefly go through the circumstances of each offence.

Charge 1 and 2 – Causing Injury Intentionally Lila and Irene Suafoa

9On 6 November 2020 you told Lila and Irene to eat four pies before leaving the house to go shopping. The children were left with some of their other siblings. Your husband was not present.

10When you returned from shopping you saw that two pies remained. Lila and Irene told you that they were full. You demanded that they eat the pies or they would get a hiding. Both Lila and Irene proceeded to eat pie, Irene becoming so full that she was physically sick.

11You told both girls to go to the lounge area and lie on their backs and they did as they were told.

12You closed the blinds and then stood with both feet on Irene’s stomach and then on Lila’s stomach. Lila felt pain and was crying and screaming because she found it difficult to breathe. She recalls that both her and Irene screamed with pain.

13After Lila stopped screaming you said 'one more', got up on a chair and then jumped on Lila’s stomach with both of your feet. Lila screamed and then vomited. The vomit contained blood.

14You also stood on the stomach and chest area of Irene who told you that she could not breathe. You remained standing on her stomach and then stepped onto her chest. Irene was screaming that she could not breathe and was shaking.

15You placed your hands around Irene’s neck, lifting her from the ground, up the wall and continued to hold her with both hands. You then released Irene who fell to the floor where she then hit her head.

16It was on that day that, when you attended an appointment, Lila and Irene took the opportunity to flee the home.

17On medical investigation Lila presented with many marks on her skin including bruising, scars and hyperpigmentation to her neck, front and back of her torso and on her arms and legs. She had tenderness in her right abdomen. Lila was found to have rib fractures, fractures to her wrist and arm and bruising to her liver with a possible small laceration.

18Photographs were tendered and show a large bite mark to Lila’s upper back and dark bruising to her spinal area.

19Irene presented with bruises, scars and hyperpigmentation. She had some tenderness to her abdomen consistent with tissue injury resulting from pressure but no internal injury.  Now Mr Interpreter I have noted that you are not interpreting at this stage, is everything okay?

INTERPRETER:  Yes, she's asked me not to interpret.  She's understanding (indistinct words).

HER HONOUR:  All right, thank you.

Charge 3 – Common Law Assault of Irene Suafoa

20HER HONOUR:  Charge 3, the common law assault of Irene Suafoa, was referred to as the 'cupcakes incident'.

21On an occasion between 28 September 2017 and 5 November 2020, Irene and Lila were eating cupcakes. When they did not wish to continue eating you told them they had to keep eating. Eventually Irene vomited.

22You kicked Irene on the mouth and slapped her to the mouth with such force that she went from a seated position to the floor.

Charge 4 – Common Law Assault of Irene Suafoa

23Charge 4, common law assault of Irene Suafoa, this has been referred to as the 'Yoghurt incident' and Irene Suafoa was again your victim.

24On an occasion also between 28 September 2017 and 5 November 2020 Irene lied to you about having eaten some yoghurt at school.

25In response you then stepped on her stomach and pulled her arms back.

Charge 5 – Common Law Assault of Lila Suafoa

26Charge 5 involves the common law assault of Lila Suafoa and was referred to as the 'cards incident'.

27On an occasion between 28 September 2017 and 5 November 2020 Lila and one of the other children were playing cards. You told them to stop. You then told Lila to lie down and you hit her with an electrical cord to the arm which then started bleeding. The electrical cord still had the plug attached. You then asked Lila to give you a hand and bit her elbow. She screamed and her elbow bled.

Charges 6 and 7 – Common Law Assault of Lila and Irene Suafoa

28Charges 6 and 7 also occurred between 28 September 2017 and 5 November 2020 and involve the common law assault of both Lila and Irene Suafoa, referred to as the 'Scripture readings' incident.

29Your family would regularly conduct Scripture readings and the children would be quizzed on passages.

30On one particular Sunday you asked Lila to tell you the meaning of a part of Scripture that she had read aloud. When she answered your question, you told Lila that she was incorrect.

31You then told Lila to lay on her back and you stood on Lila's stomach. The force was such that Lila started shaking uncontrollably and defecated in her pants. You took Lila's faeces laden pants and wiped the faeces onto Lila's face and put it into her mouth.

32You then told Lila to go to the backyard and use the hose to wash. Lila was crying. The facts to which I have just referred are led as context.

33During other Scripture reading sessions when Lila and Irene gave incorrect answers you would use an electrical cord to hit them both hard to the feet and on the legs with the plug. On one occasion Lila was struck 12 times and Irene, once with the electrical cord as I have just described. Both recall it being difficult for them to walk afterwards.

34It is the striking of Lila and Irene with the electrical cord which is the basis for Charges 6 and 7. 

35Also detailed in the Crown Opening were various incidents used as context evidence, that is, to set a complete picture of your offending overall. This evidence is relevant to your moral culpability and negates any suggestion that your offending was an aberration. I have already referred to one piece of context evidence. You are not charged with these particular events, nor will you be punished for them, but in brief compass the context evidence in addition to the one matter I have already referred involves:

(a)   other occasions when you told Lila and Irene to lie down and they were stood or jumped on by you;

(b)   making Lila shower in cold water and then go outside and stand naked;

(c)   hitting both Lila and Irene with items which included a rolling pin, pancake flipper, large spoon and stick;

(d)   on one occasion stepping on Lila's legs when you were wearing high heels;

(e)   hitting Irene with a metal ladle to her head causing it to bleed. Irene's hair was subsequently cut off which she believed was so that blood would not stick to her hair; and

(f)    making Lila and Irene miss school days to assist with the care of smaller children in the household and being physically punished when either of them did something wrong.

The Investigation

36On 6 November 2020 the Assistant Principal to whom the girls had fled contacted emergency services and the Department of Health and Human Services.

37Police attended, photographs were taken of the bruising and marks on each of the girls, and disclosures were made by Lila and Irene to Police in the presence of Child Protection Officers. Each presented with bruising on their arms, wrists, legs, backs and stomachs and were observed to be skinny, anxious and frightened.

38Lila and Irene were taken to the Royal Children's Hospital where they remained for some days for treatment, scans, and assessment.  

39On their release from hospital child protection authorities removed Lila and Irene from the care of you and your husband and they were each placed with a foster carer. Child protection authorities also removed your other 11 children.

40A Family Violence Safety Notice with full non-contact conditions was served upon you by Victoria Police, protecting Lila and Irene from you.

41On 12 November 2020 a visual and audio recorded evidence or 'VARE' statements were taken from Lila and Irene.

42As referred to earlier both Lila and Irene underwent medical examination once taken from your care post 6 November 2020 and the injuries identified by medical professionals are detailed in the Crown Opening.

43There were numerous injuries to both children. In relation to Lila the examiner stated that the visible injuries were simply too numerous to count. The areas of bruising on Irene were too numerous to count.  Their injuries identified were not consistent with accident but possibly consistent with repeated physical punishment over time.

44You were arrested by police on 28 December 2020 and subjected to interview. As is your right, you answered 'no comment' to all allegations put to you.

45On 18 June 2021 a Family Violence Intervention Order was granted by the Magistrates’ Court, further protecting Irene and Lila Suafoa from you.

Offence Gravity and Victim Impact

46The purpose of a victim impact statement is to give those affected by your crime the opportunity to participate in the criminal justice process by informing the court about the effects of the crime upon them.

47Both Lila and Irene Suafoa have completed victim impact statements. These documents were read to the court so the profound impact of your offending upon them should not be lost upon you.

48In her victim impact statement, Lila Suafoa speaks of being scared, frightened and to crying a lot. She was confused as nothing like what she experienced from you had happened to her before; you had originally appeared nice and then became mean. She spoke of not being allowed to attend school or see family because of obvious injuries. Lila says that she feels weird because of the scars that she now has.

49Lila continues to have nightmares and gets scared lying on her back as it reminds her of the bad things that have happened to her. She remains scared of you.

50In her victim impact statement Irene also speaks of being scared and frightened and confused by your change in behaviour. She blamed herself for what happened to her when of course she did nothing wrong. Irene was frightened for her sister as well.

51Fortunately, I understand that both Lila and Irene have found a foster placement in which they are housed together, have access to support services and are regaining their happiness. It is clear, however, from the victim impact statements, that for each of them the effect of your offending continues to this day and likely into the future.

52Your offending is obviously serious, grave and cruel.

53You held a position of trust as a carer of Irene and Lila in circumstances where they moved countries to be in the care of you and your husband. You breached the trust given to you by other family members and clearly the role you had as a parental figure in relation to each child.

54Irene and Lila were aged between eight and 11 years at the time of your offending against them and new to Australia, adding to their vulnerability.

55Your abuse would appear to be regular and, on occasion, particularly sadistic. It occurred in the family home, an environment in which both Lila and Irene were entitled to feel safe and to be safe. 

56It is perhaps more by good fortune than good management that the injuries suffered by both Lila and Irene were not more severe. I accept that the injuries sustained by both Lila and Irene are not, objectively, at the higher end of seriousness in terms of actual injury. 

57You, however, were well aware of your wrongdoing given the occasions when the girls were not allowed to attend school which they attributed to them showing signs of obvious injury and, in relation to Charges 1 and 2, your shutting of the curtains before you stood and then jumped on their stomachs. You are not of small stature.

58Charges 1 and 2, causing injury intentionally, occurred last in time. In the context of your offending in the lead up to Charges 1 and 2, one can only imagine the sheer terror of Lila and Irene as you asked them to go to the lounge, lay down and then shut the curtains.

59Jumping on to the stomach and/or chest area of a child is inherently dangerous, as is two hands to the throat area.

60Your actions were often humiliating and degrading.

61Your offending has occurred in circumstances of family violence, family violence perpetrated by you, in a maternal role, against two children, Lila and Irene Suafoa. Your duty was to protect them. Instead, you intentionally caused them harm.

62The sentencing principles of general deterrence, just punishment and denunciation loom large.

63Given the duration of your offending against two separate victims, specific deterrence and community protection are also important.  

64The Crown have referred me to a number of cases to assist in formulating sentence and I have had regard to each of those decisions. Whilst different in circumstance, in one of those cases, The Queen v Hughes[6] Justice Croucher said and I quote:

The Court will not tolerate the intentional injuring of young and vulnerable children, by those entrusted with their care, in anger and with cruelty but in the name of discipline. The community should understand that such offending can result in a gaol sentence, even if the injuries are towards the lower end of a scale of gravity.

[6] The Queen v Hughes [2015] VSCA 312 at [162]

65Of course, your offending went way beyond discipline.

Plea of Guilty

66In terms of the plea of guilty, the Sentencing Act1991 obliges me to consider the stage at which you entered your plea of guilty.

67It is conceded that your plea of guilty was at an early stage.

68It has saved the court the time and expense of contested proceedings and, of a particular importance, the need for witnesses to attend and give evidence saving Lila and Irene from having to relive particularly traumatic events.

69There is additional utility in your plea of guilty in the circumstances where the court is still responding to the resultant backlog from the COVID-19 pandemic. Your decision to plead guilty has given certainty and finality to these proceedings and warrants an additional amelioration in your sentence.

70Remorse is harder to discern but you have taken responsibility for your offending.

71These factors will all be taken into account in your favour.

72I turn now to your personal circumstances.

Personal Circumstances

73You are now 38 years of age and were born in Samoa.

74As you were growing up, I am told that family violence was very much part of your household as between your parents and the physical chastisement of you.

75Your father died when you were 10 years of age and your mother then moved to New Zealand, leaving you in Samoa with an older half-sibling.

76Your Counsel described your childhood as one characterised by family violence, poverty, and exposure to inappropriate levels of responsibility for your age. You do not seek to rely on the Bugmy principles.

77You had a limited education and were expected to go to school and then sell items at a local market.

78You left school having completed Year 10, and moved to New Zealand in 1999 where you initially worked as a cook for a period of about two years.

79In 2003 you married Te Suafoa and commenced having children.

80You had six children before moving as a family to Australia in 2013. Before moving to Australia there had been some 13 instances of involvement with your family by the New Zealand Ministry for Children. I am told that the primary concern was family violence between you and Te and excessive alcohol use.

81You had another four children together upon moving to Australia.

82As I referred to earlier, Lila and Irene became part of the family in September of 2017, taking the number of children in the household at that time to 12.

83Your eleventh child was born in 2018.

84Your Counsel points out that you were a mother from your late teens and, around the time of your offending, had the full-time responsibility of 12 to 13 children.

85Your home environment has always been one of the Mormon faith, with emphasis on marriage and family, and you report a strong connection to your church.

86Your husband, Te, worked but did not contribute to the child rearing, cooking, chores or shopping. He was violent towards you, with Police attending the family home in October of 2017 and taking out an intervention order on your behalf. The relationship, however, continued.

87In December of 2018, your seventh child, Aileen[7], was identified as having an intellectual disability. She was unable to qualify for the NDIS scheme.

[7] A pseudonym.

88There was further family violence perpetrated against you by Te in January 2019, resulting in police attendance but no further action.

89In August of 2019 Irene Suafoa disclosed family violence from Te but no charges were laid. Indeed, by August of 2019 the Department of Health and Human Services had received five separate reports relating to your family

90Merri Health commenced providing Integrated Family Support to your family by January of 2020, but services were interrupted by the COVID‑19 pandemic.

91In effect you had limited supports. You and your husband both came to abuse alcohol although you deny this being a problem at the time of your offending.  You were ill-equipped in this overall context to deal with the competing needs of so many.

92In short, you were overwhelmed, unsupported, unhappy and angry, anger which you appear to have taken out on Lila and Irene.    

Delay

93You have not specifically relied on delay, but I note the offending was identified in November of 2020 and you were not charged until early 2022. An application for summary jurisdiction was refused in the Magistrates' Court in late 2022 and you fall to be sentenced today, 30 June 2023.

94The relevance in delay lies in the burden on an offender from being charged until finalisation. A report from Laura Fleming, Psychologist, refers to you experiencing minimal stressors apart from that associated with the Court outcome.  I accept these proceedings have been a source of stress for you.

95Delay is also relevant to the period it offers to assess prospects for rehabilitation, a subject to which I now turn.   

Rehabilitation

96You have no prior criminal history.

97In March of 2021, your twelfth child, Summer[8], was born.

[8] A pseudonym.

98Uniting Integrated Family Services began working with your family in August of that year. 

99In December of 2021 Child Protection referred you to the La Mana Maori/Pasifika Project in the hope that organisation would be able to engage with your family in a culturally appropriate manner. Funding for this program expired after an initial assessment.  

100A letter from Healing Minds dated 26 January 2022, authored by Ms Sermin Baycan, Mental Health Social Worker, was tendered on your behalf and I have taken its contents into account. You were referred to that agency by Child Protection for positive parenting strategies and counselling with anger management. The letter confirmed that you and Te went to seven counselling sessions.

101You are both described as exhibiting an engaging, open, cooperative and positive attitude towards the counselling process and attended all appointments as arranged. You asked for assistance to possess better positive parenting strategies and to learn better anger management approaches.

102You told Healing Minds about your own upbringing in Samoa and that you and Te were subject to being hit with a stick or a belt and emotionally abused and that was considered both commonplace and acceptable. Healing Minds discussed with you that this is not acceptable parenting in Australia. This was a learning opportunity for you and I accept that you made some progress and attained new skills. It is submitted on your behalf that your own upbringing within a family where family violence was commonplace and then a marriage into somewhat similar context should be used to assess your moral culpability for your offending.

103What you subjected Lila and Irene to seems to be over and above your own experience. You do not claim that it was in the context of parental discipline.  It occurred on many occasions. On the material before me, I do not see a reason to reduce your moral culpability which I assess as high.

104You separated from Te in July of 2022.

105You gave birth to Reggie Suafoa[9] in October of 2022 and a protection application was taken out by Child Protection upon his birth.   

[9] A pseudonym.

106You are now not without support.

107Your two eldest children, Mike[10] and Mary[11], attended your plea hearing and you have family members present for your sentencing today. Your children Mike and Leonard[12], I am told, spend time at your home.

[10] A pseudonym.

[11] A pseudonym.

[12] A pseudonym.

108You currently reside with your sister, who has the care of Reggie, so you were, up until your recent remand, able to be in the same house as your thirteenth child. 

109Your niece has also provided a reference. She says that she has seen change in you since you have separated from Te Suafoa and that you have babysat her children when she is at work. She asks me to reconsider any decision to gaol you and to do so for the sake of your own children, who she says love and appreciate you. I have taken the content of your niece’s reference into account.

110Your church community is also a source of continued support.

111You have found casual work five days per week as a factory worker on a dairy processing line.

112You have re-partnered. I know little about your new partner or the benefits for you of this relationship. I am told that your new partner, who did complete a residential parenting assessment with you through the Queen Elizabeth Centre which would indicate a level of support. No materials from that service were tendered.

113The work that you have done in terms of parenting and managing your anger has been mandated. Your work with Healing Minds would indicate that you made positive progress with their program. 

114Otherwise it is difficult to assess your prospects for rehabilitation. The circumstances of your crimes were particular to the relationships at that time and your circumstances at that time. Your direct victims, Lila and Irene, were removed from your care with intervention orders preventing your contact with them.

115Orders in the Children’s Court have seen all of your children with protective orders in place and none living with you other than Reggie who is technically in the care of your sister.

Expert Report

116A report authored by Laura Fleming, Forensic Psychologist, dated 18 November 2022 has been tendered on your behalf. I have had recourse to its content.

117The report was commissioned for an opinion as to your psychological functioning, the impact of this in relation to your offending and any other contextual factors relevant to your case and future risk.

118Ms Fleming details much of your personal circumstances. She did not find that your history of being a victim of physical abuse and domestic violence resulted in you reporting current symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

119You did report to Ms Fleming a history of frustration and low mood in relation to feeling overwhelmed meeting the needs of your children and feeling unsupported by your children. I accept this is likely to be so.

120You told Ms Fleming that Lila and Irene acted against your advice and wishes and misbehaved on purpose. You believed they taught your children to use swear words and that, when neighbours complained about finding food in the garden, you believed that Lila and Irene were responsible. You blamed the children's early life experiences and exposure in their biological home for their behaviour.

121Whilst claiming to have found some benefit in your work with Healing Minds and agreeing with Ms Fleming that you had acted in a way that harmed your victims, you also indicated that Lila and Irene had lied and exaggerated their experiences. You denied standing on them. You justified your actions as 'minor' compared with those inflicted by their biological father.

122I know little about the circumstances in which Lila and Irene came to be in your care but if they did come from an abusive environment, they were hardly advantaged by coming to your home.

123Your minimisation of your offending to Ms Fleming raises genuine concerns as to how far your rehabilitation has actually progressed, although you did tell Ms Fleming that you were now aware that physical solutions to an angry mood were not acceptable. You did express some remorse for your actions.

124In terms of psychological assessment, there was no evidence of personality disorder, traits of intellectual impairments or medical or neurological problems.

125In Ms Fleming's opinion you suffered from an adjustment order at the time of your offending and that you displayed great difficulty managing or adjusting to a particular stressor. She hypothesised that you struggled to parent two or more children in a background of limited support and domestic violence. She says that symptoms usually resolve within six months of the stressor ending.

126Your Counsel does not seek to call into your aid the principles of R v Verdins & Ors.

127Ms Fleming assessed you as being a low risk of recidivism. The assessment evaluated you across four domains which included:

(a)   a history of antisocial behaviour or criminal activity;

(b)   pro-offending attitudes and values (and antisocial orientation);

(c)   antisocial companions and peer group; and

(d)   emotional/personal factors.

128I place limited weight on the risk assessment given your children have been removed from your care, the minimisation of your offending and that your childhood, adult history and social constructs have been one in which physical chastisement is acceptable. Your learnings otherwise are very much in their infancy. You do appear to be open to support and assistance but community protection and specific deterrence remain relevant to the sentencing exercise.

129I do accept Ms Fleming's findings that imprisonment would weigh more heavily upon you due to your naïveté to the custodial setting and your separation from a newborn child and your other children. You were remanded into custody on 21 June 2023. Today a communication was received from a psychiatric nurse stating that you are 'presenting with an acute stress reaction with associated suicide and self-harm (which appears to have settled) secondary to incarceration and missing children'. I do take this all into account in a general sense.

Deportation

130You are not an Australian citizen.

131You hold concerns that you will be returned to New Zealand in circumstances where your current partner, all of your children, as well as other important family members are in Melbourne.

132I do accept that this uncertainty as to your status weighs heavily upon you, adding to the burdensome nature of your time in custody and is relevant in that way to the sentencing exercise.

Sentencing Submissions

133In terms of sentencing submissions your counsel contends that all relevant sentencing considerations can be reflected in the imposition of a combination sentence, that is a term of imprisonment in combination with a community correction order.

134Section 44 of the Sentencing Act1991 states that when sentencing an offender in respect of one, or more than one, offence, a court may make a community correction order in addition to imposing a sentence of imprisonment only if the sum of all the terms of imprisonment to be served (after deduction of any period of custody that under section 18 is reckoned to be a period of imprisonment already served) is one year or less.

135The prosecution submits that having regard to all the circumstances and applicable sentencing principles a sentence of imprisonment comprising a head sentence with a non-parole period is the only appropriate sentence.

136I accept that submission. However, in your case I do see merit in an extended period of supported transition into the community through parole. 

Ms Brown and Mr Kerlin, I just wanted to check were there any matters you want to raise or any factual errors? 

COUNSEL:  No, Your Honour.

HER HONOUR:  My associate brings to my attention that I might have read that Ms Suafoa felt unsupported by her children.  If I did say that I meant to reference Ms Suafoa feeling unsupported by her husband.

MS BROWN:  Yes, Your Honour.

Sentencing

137The basic purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are punishment, general and specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In sentencing you, I must have regard to a range of matters such as the seriousness of your offending, your culpability for it, your personal circumstances and those of your victims.

138I am also required to balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interest of the community in seeking to ensure, as far as possible, that offenders are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. 

139I have taken into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in section 5 of the Sentencing Act 1991 where relevant to your case. I have taken into account current sentencing practices for the offences to which you have pleaded guilty and the important principles of both totality and proportionality.  

140I do propose to impose an aggregate sentence as I am satisfied that the offences are founded on the same facts, or form, or are part of, a series of offences of same or similar character.

141Jasmine Suafoa, you are convicted and sentenced to three years and two months' imprisonment. I set a period of two years before you are eligible for parole. Eight days are reckoned as having already been served.

142Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 requires me to state the sentence I would have imposed had you not pleaded guilty to the charges. If not for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to four years and six months’ with a minimum of three years before being eligible for parole.

143COUNSEL:  As Your Honour pleases.

144HER HONOUR:  Thank you.  I will close the court sine die.

- - -