Director of Public Prosecutions v Talbot (a pseudonym)
[2016] VCC 995
•9 May 2016
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-16-00811
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| GABE TALBOT (a pseudonym) |
---
JUDGE: | Her Honour Judge Cannon | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 26 April 2016 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 9 May 2016 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Talbot (a pseudonym) | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2016] VCC 995 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence – Plea of guilty – Persistent sexual abuse of child under 16 – Incest – Gross breach of trust over significant period – Significant age difference between accused and victims – Accused has history of poly-substance abuse
Legislation Cited: Sex Offender Registration Act 2004
Sentence:Total Effective Sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 10 years’ imprisonment – s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991 declaration – Pre-sentence detention declared 437 days – Life sex offender registration
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director | Ms C. Duckett | Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| of Public Prosecutions | ||
| For the Accused | Ms N. Karapanagiotidis (Plea) Mr T. Bourbon (Sentence) | VLA |
HER HONOUR:
1 Gabe Talbot, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of persistent sexual abuse of a child under the age of 16, and two charges of incest. Each of these offences has a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment which reflects the seriousness with which Parliament regards these offences. This is a matter that I must take into account when sentencing you.
2 The particulars of the sexual acts in respect of Charge 1, which you have admitted, were committed against Linda Francine on one or more occasions, and they are as follows: (a) wilfully committing an indecent act with the complainant by rubbing against her from behind; (b) wilfully committing an indecent act with the complainant by putting his hand down her pants from behind; and; (c) sexual penetration of the complainant by introducing his penis into her vagina.
3 The particulars of the sexual acts in respect of Charge 3, to which you have admitted committing against Beth Francine on one or more occasions are: (a) sexual penetration of the complainant by introducing his penis into her vagina; (b) wilfully committing an indecent act with the complainant by touching her groin area whilst she was menstruating; (c) sexual penetration of the complainant by the introduction of his penis into the complainant’s mouth; and; (d) sexual penetration of the complainant by introducing his penis into the complainant’s anus.
4 The prosecution opening was accepted on your behalf as being an accurate one. I was told that you were born on 30 June 1980 and at the time of the alleged offences you were between 29 and 35 years old. The victims in this matter, Beth Francine and Linda Francine, are sisters, and were your stepdaughters. In the course of my sentencing remarks, I might refer to Linda as the “first victim” and Beth as the “second victim” to reflect the sequence of charges on the indictment.
5 Beth was born of 4 April 1996. At the time that the offences commenced, she was approximately 12 years old. She made her formal complaint when she was 18 years old.
6 Linda was born on 30 June 1997. At the time the offences commenced, she was about 11 or 12 years of age. She made her formal complaint when she was 17 years of age.
7 In 2004, you commenced a de facto relationship with Leanne Krysten, the victims’ mother. When you met Ms Krysten, Beth was 8 and Linda was 7 years old. You had no children of your own at that time and you were employed as a labourer in a textile factory. You spent time with both the girls and treated them as though they were your own daughters.
8 On 15 April 2008, you and Ms Krysten had a child together; his name is Michael. Your relationship with Ms Krysten eventually became tumultuous and you spent periods of time living apart.
9 I now come to Charge 1 involving Linda Francine, a charge of persistent sexual abuse between 1 January 2009 and 29 June 2013.
10 On an occasion between 1 January 2009 and 18 August 2011, over the Labour Day weekend, while you were living at a house in suburban Melbourne, arrangements were made so that each of the victims could have a girls’ night out with their mother. While one of the girls went out for dinner, then spent the night with their mother at a rented apartment, the other child would remain in your care.
11 Linda was first to have a girls’ night with Ms Krysten. The next night, she remained with you whilst Beth had her girls’ night.
12 That night, it was hot, and you and Linda, the first victim, were sleeping on the same mattress that had been placed downstairs due to the heat.
13 The first victim awoke during the night and felt something behind her. It was you. To quote from the opening, you were, “humping her from behind”. The first victim froze as she did not know what was happening. Linda then heard you lick your fingers. You then put your hands down the back of her pants towards her nether regions. This made the first victim get off the mattress. She tried to tell you to stop, but she thought you were asleep. At this time, the first victim thought that you might have thought that she was Ms Krysten.
14 The first victim waited until the next morning, when her mother returned to the house and told her what had happened. When confronted, you said that you did not even know that you were doing it and you were crying. There was yelling and crying but ultimately “everything cooled off”.
15 On an occasion between 1 January 2009 and 16 April 2011, while you were living at the same address, the first victim was in bed when you started, (as recorded in the opening) “acting kind of weird” wanting the first victim to ‘play with herself’. On another occasion between 1 January 2009 and 16 April 2011, when you and the family were about to move house, the first victim was upset because she felt that her biological father had abandoned her. While she was speaking to you about her sadness, you comforted her, telling her that you and her mother loved her. This was the lead-up to you putting your penis into the first victim’s vagina. The first victim said that, “it felt like forever,” but it was probably only ten minutes. It was this occasion upon which she lost her virginity.
16 This was the first episode of penile vaginal penetration, for the purposes of Charge 1.
17 The circumstances referred to before this, place this conduct in its correct context. In sentencing you, I have also had regard to the fact that you sexually penetrated this complainant after having assured her mother that the previous incident on the Labour Day weekend was unintentional. On any view of things, if you needed to be, you were placed on clear notice as to the intolerable nature of any sexual dealings with the first victim, or her sister, for that matter, yet you went on to offend against each of them. I have also had regard to the fact that when you sexually penetrated the first victim on this first occasion, she was especially vulnerable, having sought comfort from you in respect of her feelings of abandonment from her father.
18 In 2011, you and Ms Krysten moved to a house in Skye with Linda, Beth and Michael. While living there, you sexually abused Linda on a regular basis. The first victim’s bedroom was at the rear of the premises. One day, you and the first victim went to her bedroom. The first victim was on her hands and knees on the bed, while you sexually penetrated her from behind. During this episode, her mother, Ms Krysten, walked into the room and turned on the light. On seeing what was happening, Ms Krysten turned off the light and walked out. You then withdrew your penis from the first victim’s vagina and left the room. Ms Krysten asked the first victim whether it was her choice and threatened to call the police. You also spoke with the first victim, telling her that she had to tell Ms Krysten that it was her choice, or she would get into trouble.
19 The first victim ultimately told Ms Krysten that she had just wanted to know what sex was. Ms Krysten told the first victim that she could not be like that, and the first victim agreed. In sentencing you, I have had regard to the fact that you exacted the first victim’s co-operation to protect you by the false threat that she would be the one who would get into trouble if she did not. In passing, I make the observation that unfortunately, rather than protecting her daughter without question, Ms Krysten placed an extra burden on Linda’s shoulders. This is not something that I factor in when sentencing you but I do factor in that this was an added burden placed on the child which you exploited by pressuring her to lie, in essence, by getting her to say that the sex was her idea. The entire scenario to which the first victim was subjected was utterly abhorrent and despicable.
20 By way of uncharged acts and contextual information, I was told that the sexual abuse continued. On one occasion, you became so angry and frustrated with the first victim that you dragged her to her bedroom and sexually abused her. While you were abusing the first victim on her bed, two wooden slats of the bed broke. Ms Krysten queried how this had happened but Linda told her that she had been jumping on her bed. On other occasions, at the same house in Skye, the first victim and you would go into the master bedroom at the house, and you would place a blanket over both of you in case someone walked in. You would then either put your penis into the first victim’s vagina, which is a particular of Charge 1, or you would place your penis in her mouth, which was not particularised.
21 During 2011, the relationship between you and Ms Krysten began to break down and ultimately you decided to live apart. Ms Krysten remained at the house with her children whilst you moved into a unit in Patterson Lakes. When you separated, Linda spent time between the two residences. During this time, Ms Krysten said that Linda was unmanageable, suicidal and exhibiting sexualised behaviour that caused her concern.
22 During this time, you were employed at a company that made pet food in Narre Warren. After you separated, on occasions, you would sleep in the office. During this period, you would take the first victim to the office. There, you would sexually abuse her, having sexual intercourse with her on a blow-up mattress in the office. This was in the laundry area of the site and also took place on the production bench.
23 The first victim fought with Ms Krysten and Ms Krysten eventually kicked her out of the house. When this happened, Ms Krysten was worried about where her daughter would live and you told her that Linda could live with you. Ms Krysten apparently thought at this time that you were trying to help her.
24 Whilst Linda lived with you, you continued to sexually abuse her. You would penetrate the first victim’s vagina, and anus, which is not particularised for the purposes of the charge, but you would penetrate her vagina and anus with your penis and you did not use a condom.
25 I was told by way of uncharged or context information, that while Linda lived at Patterson Lakes, you introduced her to smoking cannabis from a bong that you had made. During this time, you supplied her with alcohol. On one occasion, you gave her ecstasy and on another, you put cocaine in her drink. During this time, you also bought the first victim lingerie and you bought a vibrator which you used to penetrate the first victim. You also made the first victim use the vibrator on herself. During this time, the first victim became pregnant and you organised the termination of the pregnancy. You and Linda told medical staff that she had become pregnant to a boy called ‘James’ at the beach.
26 Following this termination, the first victim started taking the pill to make sure that she did not get pregnant again. You were evicted from the unit in Patterson Lakes and came back with the first victim into the house at Skye.
27 When you moved, you took the vibrator with you and the first victim hid it under her pillow. The vibrator was thrown out when the first victim became concerned that it was “too suss”.
28 In sentencing you in respect to Charge 1, I am mindful of the three particular acts which are nominated by the prosecution in respect of the offending and the incidence of these and I am also mindful of the fact that some of the information which was opened, was only relied on as context or background information.
29 I now come to Charge 2. Charge 2 is a representative charge which means that you are only to be sentenced in respect of the one occasion relied on by the prosecution, rather than the entire conduct described. However, in sentencing you, I take into account the impact on the first victim on the entirety of the conduct represented and sentence you on the basis that the said occasion is not an isolated incident, lest it be said otherwise.
30 However, I cannot and I have not inflated the sentence in relation to this charge to cater for all of the represented occasions of incest.
31 By way of background, I was told that you, Ms Krysten and the three children, moved on to Carrum Downs. While you were in Carrum Downs, you met a family, the Irvings. At one stage, the Irvings went away and you house-sat for them over the New Year period.
32 On New Year’s Eve, you took the first victim into one of the bedrooms and penetrated her vagina with your penis. Ms Krysten walked into the bedroom while you were on top of the first victim. When you saw Ms Krysten, you walked out. The first victim then barricaded the door of the bedroom using an air-conditioning unit and tried to get to sleep. The prosecution nominated this occasion as the occasion for which I sentence you for the purposes of Charge 2.
33 The following day, Ms Krysten and the children returned to the house in Carrum Downs and you stayed at the Irvings’ house. Ms Krysten started asking the first victim why she would do that, but understandably, the first victim thought that it was more of an accusation than a question and did not want to listen. Linda said that you had intercourse with her, “sort of 80 times,” as she thought it was over 50 times. I was told that this estimate pertained to the entire period that you sexually abused her- that is, the period encompassed by Charges 1 and 2. So I am unable to discern how many occasions precisely related to Charge 1, and how many were represented by Charge 2. However, on any view of things, it is clear, that you sexually penetrated the first victim on a number of occasions, for the purposes of each of these charges.
34 Coming back to Charge 2, the last occasion that you sexually abused the first victim, was after New Year at your brother’s workplace and where you also worked at the relevant time. You asked the first victim and your son, Michael, to come to your workplace. By this time, the first victim was self-harming and there were concerns about leaving her alone or with Michael. This day, you left Michael watching YouTube or something on the computer and took the first victim to the breakfast room of the production area. You were attempting to have sex with her on a bench, but Michael kept coming into the room interrupting you. Each time he did, you would you stop and take Michael back out of the room. Eventually you sexually penetrated the first victim from behind so that you could see Michael coming into the room. This was the last time that you had sexual intercourse with the first victim.
35 By way of other information, which was relevant to the offending against the first victim, I was told that during the period of offending when the first victim told you that she could not do this anymore, you would pull her down and choke her and push her with your feet. You would also threaten the first victim, that she was going back to her dad’s if she did not do what you told her to do in respect of sexual acts. The Crown relied on that conduct that I have just described as aggravating your offending and I sentence you on this basis.
36 I was told that you were also aggressive to Ms Krysten and stood over her but you were not physically violent towards her. This is a piece of background information. It may help to explain Ms Krysten’s failure to protect her children from you- although, it does seem that at one stage, she was at least able to speak about going to the police, and at a later stage, she was able to live separately from you, and unfortunately was happy for you to supervise her daughters.
37 On Sunday, 8 February 2015, you took Linda for a drive in the car. During the drive, you encouraged her to commit suicide, and you were looking for a tree that was big enough for her to hang herself from. When you returned from the drive, you would not allow Linda to enter the house. Ms Krysten then rang the Frankston Hospital but Linda would not speak with the hospital. Ms Krysten later took her to the hospital where she was placed in the psychiatric unit.
38 On 17 February 2015, Linda was readmitted to the Frankston Hospital, as the anti-depressants she was prescribed did not appear to be working. While she was in hospital, her grandparents visited her and during their visits, she disclosed the physical and sexual abuse she had suffered at your hands.
39 On 25 February 2015, the police were contacted and attended the hospital. At this time, Linda would not make a statement to police but she did provide details of the abuse.
40 On 26 February 2015, police arrested you at your home. You were then taken to the Frankston Police station where a record of interview was conducted. During the interview, you said the following things: you said that Linda had sent you a text two days earlier, letting you know that she had told people what you had done to her and that she told people so that she could get out of the psychiatric unit. You said that incest was the most abominable thing that you could possibly think of and you had a temper issue but you had never beaten the children.
41 You said that Linda had been self-harming recently and you took her for a drive and said, “Look, if you really want to do this,” and you called her bluff. You said she went off the rails when her mother and you split up but your relationship was “gold”. You met the guy ‘James’ once, that got her pregnant, and when Linda called and said she was scared as she thought she was pregnant, you got her a pregnancy kit and took her to the clinic when she was 14. You said that Linda was infatuated with her because you gave her the time of day and it was embarrassing, and you did not nip it in the bud and she was really clingy.
42 You said that Leanne walked in on a compromising position that you were apparently in and you had all been drinking and Leanne would be able to shed more light on this. You said that there was one other occasion and you were drug abusing pretty hard and could not tell the details of it as you were out of control. You said Linda wanted to know what it was like to have sex with you and the next day you were pretty hung over and she was still acting normal and you asked her if she had instigated it and she told you that you were fine but you could not recall if you had had sex with her.
43 You said you categorically had not sex with Linda 50 times, and that she said “a lot of crazy shit”. You said it was not your baby, although she had told you that it was, that Linda had sent you inappropriate sexualised messages and you thought that was why her phone was smashed; that it was like she wanted you to be her boyfriend. You said the first time was in Sandhurst, and you did not recall it, but Leanne came in and saw you having sex and it was a pretty bad stage for you.
44 You said that it was not like you forcibly raped her and nothing changed so it was easy to sweep it under the carpet. You thought the second occasion was when Linda was on top of you in Eric Irving’s room but being totally frank you did not think that there was a second occasion and you were hammered but Leanne had told you that she had walked in and seen you. You did not give Linda drugs and she stole alcohol and your pot went missing. You said that you were disgusted and embarrassed about it but you did not intend to do it and it was only two occasions, which is a reference, as I understand, to the sexual conduct.
45 You said that you were not going to sit there and say that you were the reason for Linda being messed up or anything like that. You said Linda would say anything to get where she wants to get, and would throw you or her mother under a bus if the end justified the means.
46 You said that twenty per cent of the time, she was the best kid, and the other eighty per cent, she was mean.
47 You said you were self-medicating through alcohol rather than getting counselling.
48 I make the following observations in relation to this record of interview, Mr Talbot: While you ultimately had some decency in admitting to some sexual abuse of Linda, you sought to blame her or your substance abuse for what you did. You also sought to vilify Linda and minimise your responsibility for the offending. Further, you told lies to the police, a principal one being that ‘James’ was responsible for the pregnancy that you knew very well you had caused. For the most part, I regard your record of view as dreadful; it reflects very little in the way of remorse, insight or moral fibre as at that time.
49 Following the record of interview, you were remanded.
50 I now come to the victim, Beth Francine, the second victim, and the charge of persistent sexual abuse of a child under the age of 16 years (Charge 3).
51 By way of background and context, I was told that you moved to Abbey Place, Langwarrin with the family, including the first victim, and that the second victim, Beth Francine, had a bunk bed with a ladder across the front of it in her bedroom. You started coming into this bedroom and getting into her bed to cuddle her when no one else was in the room. This made her feel uncomfortable.
52 You later began touching the second victim’s breast and bottom over her pyjamas. A while later, you started to touch her breasts and bottom under her clothing.
53 While Linda was on the girls’ night out with Ms Krysten, Beth stayed in your care. That night, you had Beth dress in one of Ms Krysten’s silk lacy lingerie tops. Beth kept trying to cover herself up. You and she slept on a mattress on the floor in the lounge room. On an occasion between 4 April 2009 and 3 April 2010, when Beth was aged about 13 years of age, you came into her bedroom. You pulled down her pants and told her to relax. You were touching the second victim and then penetrated her vagina with your penis. This happened over about half an hour and the second victim was scared. Beth said that you penetrated her vagina approximately 100 times in her bedroom and about 20 times in the lounge room of that house.
54 On mornings after these molestations, you would act as if “everything was okay and that nothing had happened and that nothing was wrong”.
55 When the second victim was menstruating, you would touch her in her groin area and feel that she was wearing a sanitary pad. This made her feel uncomfortable, embarrassed and disappointed that you were still trying to sexually abuse her while she was in her cycle.
56 On an occasion between 4 April 2010 and 3 April 2011, when the second victim was about 14 years old, she had a discussion with you about who your real mother was. After this conversation, the second victim was feeling sorry for her, and you went outside so you could have a smoke. While outside, you got the second victim to put your penis into her mouth and perform oral sex.
57 You would also penetrate the second victim’s vagina with your tongue. You had penile vaginal sexual intercourse with the second victim on a weekly basis. You also tried to have anal intercourse with her but it would cause her pain so you would stop. You often tried to get the second victim to drink alcohol but she was not very fond of drinking.
58 At the Sandhurst address, there were occasions that the second victim thought Ms Krysten would catch you in the bedroom. On one occasion, Ms Krysten did come into the second victim’s bedroom but you pretended to be asleep.
59 By way of uncharged acts or context evidence, I was told that when the second victim was 15 years old, the family went to New South Wales for a holiday. During this time, the second victim became more of a willing participant in the sexual activity. This is in no way a reflection upon her. Obviously, you had conditioned her to this point. There was an occasion at the Sandhurst residence, that you were in the kitchen with the second victim and a song called, “Put your arms around me,” started to play. The second victim told you to take the song’s advice, and you touched and kissed her.
60 On an occasion between 16 August 2011 and 31 January 2012, after you had moved to Patterson Lakes, the second victim was visiting you at your unit. After watching a DVD, you had sexual intercourse with her. The second victim told you, on this occasion, that she did not want to have sex anymore and thought that you had taken it quite well.
61 The sexual abuse then stopped for a couple of months, but it later started up again.
62 I come now to Charge 4, a charge of incest.
63 The charge of incest relates to one particular incident which occurred after the second victim and her family had moved from Sandhurst to Carrum Downs.
64 One night, you were sexually penetrating the second victim and told her that you felt unsafe, apparently referring to the fact that you were having unprotected sex. The second victim was so worried about becoming pregnant and asked you to get her a pregnancy test. You obliged and left it in her room. When the second victim used the pregnancy test, it did not work. When she told you that the test had not worked, you became angry. You also argued with the second victim, that if she was pregnant, it must have been someone else’s baby and not yours. The second victim had never had sex with anyone else but you. The second victim took a second test which showed a negative result. She felt upset that you were blaming her for being potentially pregnant.
65 On Monday, 16 March 2015, Beth Francine told a counsellor from Southeast Centre Against Sexual Abuse, that her stepfather had been abusing her since she was 12 years old. At this time, she was uncertain whether she wanted to report the abuse to the police.
66 On 27 April 2015, a police officer arranged for Beth to attend at the Knox SOCIT Unit and make a statement.
67 On 21 May 2015, police attended Port Phillip Prison and conducted a second record of interview with you, this time in relation to Beth Francine’s allegations. During that record of interview, you said the following things: you said that Beth was your stepchild and you were a father and friend to her, that it was false that you touched her “boobs and bottom”. You could not tell them anything about penetrating her with your penis; that regular sex between you and Beth did not happen and you could not tell the police anything. You denied all the allegations, although you admitted that you drank more than what someone should and that it was not okay to have sex with Linda and if you could go back and take back what you said in the first interview, you would, as you thought you were a good father. Therefore, in the second record of interview, you lied to the police about your sexual conduct involving Beth. You were then charged in relation to the second victim.
68 There are following aggravating features of your offending: firstly, you grossly breached the trust that each of your stepdaughters had placed in you; you are a person that they were entitled to look up to and to be protected by; you had taken on such a role when you commenced a relationship with their mother; instead, you defiled each of the victims, taking their childhood away from them; taking from them their entitlement to have a normal and happy development from childhood into adolescence, to engage in appropriate relationships with age-appropriate people and to flourish as young women. You took away their virginity.
69 Also, you had unprotected penile, vaginal sexual intercourse with each of the victims over an extensive period, exposing them to the risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Moreover, in relation to Linda, the risk of pregnancy was actually realised and you then subjected her to undergoing a termination. I have also had regard to the way in which you handled this very sad episode, again, ensuring that you were protected by having the complainant lie about the identity of the father, as if she were some wayward adolescent who got herself into trouble. Also, I have factored in that the first victim was only 11 or 12 years old when the sexual abuse began, and the second victim was about 12 years of age.
70 The next matter I have taken into account as an aggravating factor is the significant age difference between you and each of the girls, which was in the order of 17 and 18 years.
71 Lastly, I have taken into account the regularity and duration of the persistent sexual abuse in relation of each of the victims.
72 Mr Talbot, your offending is most serious and is deserving of strong punishment and denunciation. You sexually abused each of the victims whenever you pleased, apparently regarding them as being at your disposal for this purpose.
73 As was accepted at the plea hearing, there was a good deal of overlap between the period during which you were sexually abusing one victim and sexually abusing the other- so, it could not be said that you were particularly attached to one of the victims. In saying this, in no way would your moral culpability be reduced if this were the case, however, your indiscriminate, wanton conduct towards the two victims at largely the same time, powerfully contributes to your moral culpability. Further, you lorded over and manipulated these two victims from the time they were young girls, taking advantage of their mother’s weak stance towards you when it came to protecting them. In all of the circumstances, I find that your moral culpability is very high.
74 Strong weight must be given to general deterrence in a bid to deter others from behaving as you have. I take into account the impact that your offending has had on the victims. In a most articulate and moving victim impact statement which Linda courageously read aloud, she spoke of the profound and devastating effects of your offending. She says that your offending has led to her spending most of her life in a dissociative state but there are triggers in her everyday life which take her back to what you did to her. Her family has turned against her. She says that they blame her for your offending. She spoke of the failure of her mother to protect her from you despite her cries for help, of her feelings of abandonment and helplessness. She spoke of how your offending has made it so difficult to form good relationships now, both intimate and friendships; of her feelings of worthlessness and of being a mere object, because this is how you treated her. She said that she had never learnt how to be herself, and the fact that you had robbed her of her childhood and sense of identity.
75 At the time she made her victim impact statement, she was living at a residential rehabilitation facility for mental illness, as she had nowhere else to go. She said that she suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, anxiety and depression which rules her life and she has intensive psychological treatment and medication to avoid self-harming, which she has turned to in the past. She said that it is only now that she has allowed herself to feel but she does not want to have to deal with all her bad memories of your offending but has no choice about this.
76 She spoke of the fact that all of the developmental stages of her life are missing and that she would never know what it was like to experience innocent simple pleasures, such as kissing a boy at high school that she liked. She said that because her Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder controlled her, a condition that she attributes to your offending, she had to move schools every year from Year 8 to Year 12.
77 To her immense credit, she has tried to complete her VCE this year and she has obtained a scholarship to do so. However, some of her lessons this year have triggered thoughts about the things you have deprived her of, such as, the various developmental stages that never happened to her because of your control over her.
78 She said that her mental health issues have resulted in her losing jobs, an apprenticeship and her dream to become a professional basketball player. She clearly the talent to achieve this as she had made it to the nationals, however, she could not face trying out for the state team because she was “living in hell”.
79 She struggles financially and says that she has no independent living skills. She is hoping that she can pass VCE so that she can do something meaningful in her life but she says that she just does not know how she will do this. She has less than six months to go in respect of her accommodation and then she will have to fend for herself.
80 She says that she does not know what she will do after this as she has no role model to help her, such as her mother. She feels frustrated, used, and scared, rejected and unloved. She said that if she had not been subjected to your abuse, she may have been working on a career by now.
81 She spoke of one of her worst memories being the abortion that she had to have and she recounts the most traumatic and humiliating details of this experience.
82 She said that so much of her life had been completely dominated and controlled by your offending; that she spent the last year of the abuse convinced that she wanted to die and she gave most disturbing details of your treatment of her and that of her mother when she was contemplating suicide.
83 Linda said that the violation that she had felt from years of the abuse was incomparable. She said that there was nothing in her life or in her future that could be put on the same scale as what you did to her. She said that she will never want to have a baby and that even the thought of babies leaves her upset for weeks on end. She said that she will never know what it feels like to be normal and she feels that no matter how hard she tries, she will always be haunted by you and what you have done.
84 I want to say to Linda, that she has already done a most courageous thing, by coming forward to the police and it is evident that she is a very intelligent and brave young woman who is capable of great things in life and I very much hope that she does complete her VCE and keeps on with her treatment and is able to pursue a future that is happy and rewarding. It is also obvious to me that she is very much deserving of being loved and is a person of immense worth.
85 I now come to the victim impact statement of Beth Francine. Beth says that she does not really enjoy her life and that your offending has affected her relationship with everyone, including that with her sister, Linda. She misses Linda, although she has tried to rebuild a relationship with her. She spoke of the splintering of the family, that she often feels numb but in relation to your offending, she feels so much hate, confusion, isolation, fear, shame and guilt. It has also impacted on her relationship with her mother, although she says that she still loves her. She said that she has experienced symptoms of depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and anxiety, but she says that these conditions have not been diagnosed. She has had suicidal thoughts and lacks motivation. She stresses about her children’s safety. She has flashbacks and things that trigger memories of your offending. She said that she has had to start a new life from scratch which has included moving to a new house, which is some distance from her counselling appointments, as well as from Linda and her friends. She said that she used to have a passion for music but that she had lost this, that she has become introverted, although it is also hard when she is alone. She said that she had been learning how to drive your car but it had been sold as it was triggering memories.
86 I want to say to Beth, that like Linda, she was sexually abused from a young age; this was not her fault and not something for which she should feel shame. The shame is yours, Mr Talbot. I do hope that she is able to make a happy life for herself and that she is able to overcome the difficulties that she is experiencing. I also hope that in time her relationship with Linda strengthens and that they can look to each other for comfort, love and support.
87 I have also had some regard to the victim impact statement of Ms Krysten.
88 I was told that throughout the offending, you were heavily abusing alcohol and cannabis, both synthetic and real, and that you also abused prescription medication like OxyContin. You have abused substances such as this since you were 14 years old and there has only been a handful of occasions since that time when you have been completely clear of such substances. Since you were incarcerated, you have been alcohol and drug-free. You have undertaken two drug and alcohol programs whilst on remand but have been somewhat limited in respect of other courses.
89 As your counsel properly submitted, your substance abuse is not a migratory matter but was put forward as a partial explanation for your offending. According to Dr Danny Sullivan, you are not a paedophile and he found no impairment of mental function which contributed to your offending. Despite your heavy substance use, you have been able to work over the years in various industries and have a solid work ethic. You also have a number of skills including qualifications in cooking, printing and forklift driving. You also have a partial qualification in business administration and you have worked as a piercist.
90 When a forklift driver, you had an accident, which resulted in you sustaining a crushed vertebrae. You made a WorkSafe claim for this injury which has now nearly completing resolved, although you experience pain now and then.
91 You are now 36 years old, and you have no criminal history. You have been in custody for over a year and I was told that you are well aware that you are likely to be sentenced to a substantial period in custody. You were caught up in the lockdown conditions whilst remand for two weeks and you are a protected prisoner because of your offending. In all likelihood, you will not be seeing your son, Michael, for at least the remainder of his childhood.
92 I was also told that Michael, who has just turned eight, may be suffering from some cognitive difficulties.
93 Dr Sullivan said that you had satisfied a diagnosis of polysubstance abuse or dependence predominantly involving cannabis and alcohol, although you had used a range of substances intermittently. He also gave a provisional diagnosis of recurrent depressive disorder of mild to moderate severity.
94 I take into account that your time in custody has been more onerous than might otherwise be the case and that your current mild depressive symptoms and the prospect of not seeing Michael grow up will continue to make time in gaol harsher than for someone without these difficulties.
95 Dr Sullivan was of the view that your substance use may have disinhibited you and have been associated with some of the offending. I take into account Dr Sullivan’s report in a general way, as your counsel most properly conceded that your moral culpability was not impacted by any impairment of mental function.
96 However, as I have already set out, I have taken into account, your current depressive symptoms in allowing that time in gaol will be harsher for you than for someone without that difficulty in combination with the others to which I have previously referred.
97 I take into account your plea of guilty and the stage at which it was entered. This was at the committal hearing stage where Beth and her mother were required to attend court to give evidence, but they did not end up giving evidence. Discussions on that day brought the matter to resolution. In the circumstances, I allow for a fairly substantial discount in the sentence that you would otherwise receive, as you have saved the witnesses the time and trauma of giving evidence and you have saved the community the time and expense of contested proceedings. However, the discount would have been more significant had you pleaded guilty at an even earlier stage.
98 I accept that you have some remorse for what you have done, however, in view of your sustained offending, the fact that you lied to police about it and had required one of the victims to attend a committal hearing, albeit that the hearing did not go ahead, I am not convinced that you have completely insightful remorse for what you have done. However, I accept that you have been prepared to take responsibility now for your offending and you have some remorse, which are matters in your favour.
99 I make it clear that in referring to the committal aspect, I am not punishing you for the course that you took, as at that time. It is just that taking such a course did not reflect much in the way of remorse as at that time. Having said this, I also make it clear that I have factored in that you did not go ahead with the committal hearing and that no witnesses were actually cross-examined.
100 I take into account your background:
101 You were born in country Victoria and had four siblings. When you were 11 years old, you discovered that your sister was in fact your mother and that the people who you regarded as your parents were in fact your grandparents. Understandably, this was a difficult for you to process and caused some strained relationships for you.
102 You see this revelation as having had a lasting impact upon you. You still regard your grandparents as your parents.
103 I also take into account your history of relationships which was set out by your counsel and referred to in Dr Sullivan’s report.
104 In terms of education, I was told that you attended school until Year 10. You were not very academic but you excelled at sport.
105 You continue to receive support from your family who are in regular contact with you, notwithstanding that your parents live in Coffs Harbour. They have visited three or four times whilst you have been on remand and you speak to them regularly by phone.
106 I have taken into account the letters which have been tendered on your behalf which reflect strong family support. How sad it is that Linda Francine, in particular, cannot say the same.
107 In any event, family support is a matter which counts in your favour insofar as prospects of rehabilitation are concerned and I have taken it into account.
108 In view of your sustained offending against two different victims, your struggles with substance abuse over a lengthy period, but on the other hand, taking into account your strong work ethic and multiple work skills, your lack of criminal history, lack of causative mental condition, your family support as well as the fact that you have been substance-free for about a year now, I find that your prospects of rehabilitation are fair to good. In making this finding, I have also had regard to Dr Sullivan’s assessment of you.
109 In the circumstances, I place moderate weight on specific deterrence. Ms Karapanagiotidis, who, as is her custom, gave a most impressive and realistic plea on your behalf, submitted that although a substantial term of imprisonment was warranted I ought to allow for a measure of concurrency, so as to accommodate the principle of totality.
110 Ms Duckett, for the Crown, submitted that a term of imprisonment was warranted but most properly submitted that a disproportionate sentence was not warranted as the principle of totality could adequately deal with your case. She submitted that a measure of cummulation was called for as between each of the charges, reminding me that you are to be sentenced as a serious sexual offender after being sentenced on Charge 2.
111 I have had regard to the cases to which Ms Duckett referred me and to current sentencing practice, as best I can in the circumstances of your case.
112 I should say that in relation to Ms Duckett’s submissions concerning aggravating features as far as they concerned the use of the vibrator, in particular, I am not persuaded that I ought factor this in as an aggravating feature, in circumstances where it could have been alleged as one of the particulars of the offending, or have a charge relate to it. Therefore, I make it clear that I have not sentenced you on the basis of that aspect, although I have taken it into account in a general background sense.
113 Could you please stand up, Mr Talbot?
114 You are convicted in respect of each of the offences.
115 Firstly, I make an order for a forensic sample to be taken by way of a scrapping from the mouth. I make the order because of the seriousness of the offending, because you do not oppose the order and because it is in the public interest to make the order. I warn you that if you do not cooperate with this procedure, then an authorised officer may use reasonable force to take the sample.
116 Secondly, by reason of your convictions for these offences, you are to be recorded as a registrable offender for life. You must first report your personal details to the Chief Commissioner of Police annually for the rest of your life. You must first report these details within 7 days after your release from custody. Details in writing of these reporting conditions will be served upon you now by my associate and I will ask your counsel to assist in you acknowledging the notice and signing it.
117 MR BOURBON: May I approach Mr Talbot?
118 HER HONOUR: Yes.
119 MR BOURBON: Mr Talbot understands and has signed that document, Your Honour.
120 HER HONOUR: Thank you. .
121 You are to be sentenced to the following periods of imprisonment:
122 Charge 1, 9 years, which will be the base sentence;
123 Charge 2, 3 years;
124 Charge 3, 9 years;
125 Charge 4, 3 years;
126 After the sentence on Charge 2, you are to be sentenced as a Serious Sexual Offender, which will be noted on the records. I direct that 1 year from Charges 2 and 4 and 4 years from Charge 3 be served cumulatively with each other and with the base sentence, given a total effective sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment, and I direct that you serve 10 years’ imprisonment before becoming eligible for parole.
127 I declare that you have already served 437 days by way of pre-sentence detention, which will be reckoned as already served.
128 If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentencing of 19 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 15 years’ imprisonment.
129 Take a seat for a moment, please, sir.
130 Anything arising counsel?
131 MR BOURBON: No, Your Honour.
132 MS DUCKETT: Nothing arising, Your Honour.
133 HER HONOUR: Thank you. Could you please remove Mr Talbot?
134 OFFENDER REMOVED
- - -
0
0