Director of Public Prosecutions v Taskiran
[2020] VCC 1569
•30 September 2020
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
CR-20-00499
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| HUSEYIN TASKIRAN |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE D SEXTON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 3 August 2020 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 30 September 2020 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Taskiran | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2020] VCC 1569 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic); Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1958
Cases Cited:R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; Brown v The Queen [2020] VSCA 212
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr P. Raimondo | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr T. Bourbon | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
Introduction
1 Huseyin Taskiran, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of armed robbery, which carries a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment.
2 You have also admitted your criminal record.
Offending
3 The circumstances of your offending were set out in the summary of prosecution opening on plea dated 2 July 2020 (Exhibt A). That document, which was read out at your plea hearing on 3 August 2020, forms the factual basis upon which you will be sentenced.
4 Your offending can now be briefly summarised.
5 At about 9.20 pm on 4 December 2019, your victim, Mr Bollampally, was working at the 7-Eleven store in Werribee. At around that time, he observed you enter the store, approach the self-service coffee machine and whilst making yourself a coffee, he observed you to place a muffin in your jacket.
6 You then attended the front counter and offered to pay 10 cents in cash and the remainder on your card for the coffee. Mr Bollampally asked you whether you were going to pay for the muffin, at which point you denied having the muffin, told Mr Bollampally that you had a knife, removed the knife from your bum-bag, and then removed the knife from the sheath and used the knife in a swiping motion towards him. This knife was about 10 centimetres long. An image taken from CCTV footage shows you at the counter, lunging towards the victim whilst holding the knife.
7 Mr Bollampally moved backwards so as to be out of your range and, thankfully, he did not sustain any physical injuries. You then left the store without paying for the coffee or the muffin. The incident was captured on CCTV footage as I have indicated. Your conduct in this regard forms the basis of the charge on the Indictment, armed robbery.
8 The police were subsequently called to attend and investigate. Subsequent investigations involved Mr Bollampally identifying you as the offender from a photoboard.
9 A few weeks later on 27 December 2019, police executed a search warrant at your room in a residential facility where you were then staying in Glenroy. You were then arrested. Police conducted a search of your premises and in your bedroom, located various items, including several knives, pairs of scissors and box cutters. You were conveyed to the Broadmeadows Police Station for questioning where, in the presence of an independent third party, you answered 'no comment' to the allegations, save for saying that it might be you in the CCTV footage stills that were then shown to you.
10 You were remanded in custody on the date of your interview, 27 December 2019, and you have been in custody since, a period of 278 days.
Impact on your victim
11 Your victim, Mr Bollampally, provided a victim impact statement dated 30 June 2020, which was tendered at your plea hearing (Exhibit B).
12 At the request of Mr Bollampally, this statement was not read aloud in Court and, in the interest of protecting his privacy, I will not now recount the details, save to say that your offending has clearly had a significant adverse impact on Mr Bollampally.
13 Victim impact statements are an important means through which victims of crime can meaningfully participate in the sentencing process, by informing the Court of the often serious and long lasting impacts on them. I have taken into consideration the victim impact statement of Mr Bollampally as one of the sentencing factors in formulating an appropriate sentence in your case.
Nature and Gravity of your Offending
14 Armed robbery is, of course, a very serious offence, as reflected in the statutory maximum of 25 years’ imprisonment. It is, by its nature, a theft with the use or threat of force in order to facilitate the theft, whilst being armed with an offensive weapon – in your case, a knife.
15 Armed robbery is therefore essentially a crime of violence. Sadly, it is a prevalent offence, particularly armed robberies on what are often called 'soft targets' such as late night convenience stores. In addition to the sentencing purpose of denunciation, general deterrence therefore is a prominent sentencing purpose for this crime. Individuals such as Mr Bollampally have a fundamental right to engage in their employment without having to be exposed to the terrifying nature of an armed robbery, and any sentence imposed must serve to deter others from engaging in such serious offending.
16
I am satisfied that your conduct represents an unsophisticated endeavour on your part. Whilst the value of the items stolen is not a determinative factor when assessing the gravity of your offence, the stolen property obtained was negligible – a coffee and a muffin. You went to the counter and offered some form of payment for the coffee, and the event quickly escalated when
Mr Bollampally enquired as to whether you were going to pay for the muffin. You were not wearing a disguise when you committed the offending, nor did you attempt to conceal your identity during the offending.
17 I accept that your offending was largely spontaneous, and its duration was momentary. You were, however, in possession of a 10 centimetre knife, which may suggest a degree of forethought on your part, though I note that several knives and other sharp implements were located in your premises at the residential facility where you were later arrested.
18 Your victim was not injured physically, although, in my view, your use of the knife in a swiping or lunging motion towards the victim moves the objective gravity of your conduct away from the lowest level examples of the offence of armed robbery.
19 Clearly, there are significantly more serious examples of the crime of armed robbery. However, you engaged in erratic and threatening behaviour whilst armed with a knife, on a soft target at night. Your offending, therefore, represents a concerning example of the crime of armed robbery.
Personal Circumstances
20 You are 38 years of age, having been born in Sydney in 1982. You grew up with your parents and four siblings – two older brothers, one older sister and one younger sister. At the age of nine, your family moved back to Turkey after your father retired. He is now in his mid-seventies and has previously worked as a butcher and then as a truck driver. Your two older brothers remained in Australia, apparently they left the family home in order to escape your father’s violence. One of your brothers has described your father as a very violent man who was physically abusive to his children on a regular basis.
21
Much of your personal background was obtained by forensic psychiatrist,
Dr Prashant Pandurangi, in a psychiatric report dated 11 July 2020, which was tendered at your plea (Exhibit 2). According to Dr Pandurangi, your underlying mental illness has affected the degree to which you have been able to provide a clear chronology of your background circumstances. It is unclear, for example, whether you attended school while in Turkey. Subsequent to your schooling, you appear to have obtained employment in odd jobs as a panel beater, at a restaurant and at a hotel. You were apparently married while in Turkey, when you were in your late teens, though only for some six months.
22 You remained in Turkey until about the age of 18, when you returned to Australia with your parents in the year 2000. You appear to have worked since then, largely in menial jobs for short periods of time for cash. You have lived in various locations for different periods of time, including a youth refuge and with both of your brothers; your older brother, Aiden, being your carer for approximately three years.
23 You have had a few intimate relationships and, from one of those relationships, you have a son born in September 2001. Your son has grown up in Sydney with his mother, your former partner, and it seems you have had very limited contact with him over the years.
24 One of your older brothers died of a drug overdose in 2018. You remain in contact with your other brother but have no contact with your sisters. Your parents remain in Turkey.
25 You have apparently relied heavily on the assistance of organisations such as The Salvation Army, particularly with respect to obtaining accommodation. Your finances have been managed by the State Trustees.
26 According to Dr Pandurangi, you have for many years, received treatment from various mental health services. Your first contact with mental health services was in 2001, with the early psychosis team (EPPIC) at Royal Park. You have previously been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. In his report, Dr Pandurangi set out a chronological account from collateral material in relation to your mental health treatment over the years.[1] According to material from EPPIC, you had presented to St Vincent’s Hospital in March 2001 with auditory and visual hallucinations. You were hospitalised in April 2001 for in excess of three weeks, after reporting florid psychotic symptoms. A prior psychiatric hospitalisation dating from Turkey in 1996 was noted, without any details being available. You were noted as having been diagnosed with schizophrenia during hospitalisation in February 2003.
[1]Dr Prashant Pandurangi, Confidential Forensic Psychiatric Report, (11 July 2020), Paragraph 24
27 Documents from Werribee Mercy Hospital CCU (Community Care Unit) from August 2019 noted that you had completed an 11 week drug and alcohol rehabilitation at Westside Lodge from January to March 2019, after which you were admitted to the Community Care Unit on 18 April 2019, for long-term rehabilitation in relation to drug use. You were noted as having been hospitalised at the Psychiatric Unit at Werribee Mercy Hospital on 11 September 2019, less than two months before the armed robbery for which you now fall to be sentenced. You were noted as suffering from a deterioration in your mental health over a period of one week, with paranoia, delusional thought and misinterpreting, and recent use of methylamphetamine was noted. You were eventually discharged to the Community Care Unit on 29 September 2019, and prescribed an antipsychotic medication, Clopixol. You were discharged from the Community Care Unit in early October 2019 to Glenville Lodge and referred to the North Western Mental Health area service for community follow-up.
28 At a follow-up assessment on 4 October 2019, you presented with chronic psychotic symptoms and were prescribed Clopixol Depot 300 milligrams fortnightly.
29 On 30 November 2019, a matter of days before the armed robbery, you presented to the Emergency Department at Werribee Mercy Hospital in relation to a decline in your mental state. You were noted to have used heroin that day. You had earlier been given an injection of Clopixol on 23 November 2019 and had earlier been reviewed by a psychiatric registrar on 26 November 2019 at Glenville Lodge. You were then noted to be presenting with some residual psychotic symptoms, and you were prescribed Olanzapine in addition to the Depot injections.
30 Clearly, your mental health difficulties have been complicated through illicit drug use. You apparently began using illicit substances at around the age of 19 or 20, commencing with cannabis. You have instructed that you used cannabis in an effort to alleviate the distressing symptoms that you have suffered, as a result of your paranoid schizophrenia. You then progressed to experimenting with other drugs, such as Ecstasy and amphetamines, and you began using methylamphetamine in 2011, and heroin in 2012.
31 You indicated to Dr Pandurangi that heroin had been your drug of choice, and that it would assist in calming you down. You reported using heroin for a couple of years before attending drug rehabilitation, and being prescribed Methadone in 2019, but you would occasionally relapse into heroin use. You informed Dr Pandurangi that you stopped Methadone around November 2019, in the weeks leading up to the current offending.
32 You have a criminal history dating back to 2004. In March 2004, you received a community based order of 12 months for dishonesty offending, together with assault and resist police. In 2005, you received a Good Behaviour Bond for cultivate and use cannabis. In 2009, you received financial penalties for assault police, resist police and possess controlled weapon. In 2012, you received a Good Behaviour Bond for possess controlled weapon, possess heroin and recklessly cause injury. The condition attached to the Good Behaviour Bond required you to obey all lawful directions of North Western Mental Health, indicating that your mental health difficulties were known to the Court as early as 2012.
33 In 2014, you received a community corrections order for matters which included cultivate and possess cannabis, dishonesty offending and recklessly causing injury. Again, the conditions attached to the Court order included mental health assessment and treatment. You were subsequently dealt with in 2015 for non-compliance with the community corrections order. Clearly, both drug use and mental health difficulties have been relevant to your prior offending and Court sanctions.
Applicable Sentencing Factors and Principles
34 I am required under the Sentencing Act 1991 to take into consideration various sentencing factors and principles in formulating an appropriate sentence in your case. I have already referred to the maximum penalty for the offence of armed robbery, the impact of your offending on your victim, and the objective gravity of your offending.
35 I turn now to a consideration of your moral culpability for the offending.
36 I have already set out in some detail your mental health challenges in the months and weeks before the armed robbery. According to Dr Pandurangi, you reported that approximately two months before the armed robbery, you were discharged from a Community Care Unit and were living at a boarding house in Glenroy. You reported that most of your disability pension was used for the rent, leaving you with limited funds to buy food and cigarettes. You reported then doing cash in hand work as a security guard for the four weeks leading up to the offending. You reported having previously attended the store on several occasions when you had been living at the Community Care Unit.
37 Whilst you denied using any illicit drugs when speaking with Dr Pandurangi, I note in your assessment interview, for the purposes of a community corrections order assessment,[2] you reported that you had been using methamphetamine with your girlfriend earlier in the day. I note that, both in relation to your reporting to Dr Pandurangi and to the Community Corrections assessing officer, you denied various aspects of the offending.
[2]Mr Sam Williams, Extended Pre-Sentence Assessment – Outcome Report (15 September 2020)
38 Significantly, according to psychiatrist Dr Pandurangi, you were suffering from schizophrenia at the time of the offending which, according to the chronicity of the condition, Dr Pandurangi considers to be a permanent condition in your case.[3] You are, according to Dr Pandurangi, a man who suffers from a chronic psychotic illness. According to Dr Pandurangi, when unwell, you present with persecutory delusions, hallucinations, passivity experiences and disorganised behaviour. According to Dr Pandurangi, after reviewing the collateral documentary material in relation to your mental health treatment in the lead-up to the offending, you had been hospitalised following a relapse of your schizophrenic illness and then placed in a boarding house. Follow-up reviews noted residual psychotic symptoms, probably reflective of your chronic enduring illness.
[3]Dr Prashant Pandurangi, Confidential Forensic Psychiatric Report, (11 July 2020), Paragraph 41
39 Dr Pandurangi also noted continued use of illicit drugs, mainly methamphetamine and heroin. According to Dr Pandurangi, you have used these substances not only for recreational purposes, but also to alleviate the distressing experiences of your underlying mental illness. According to Dr Pandurangi:
'The use of these drugs would have either precipitated relapses or exacerbated symptoms of his mental illness, but in my opinion, these are not causally related to his illness'.[4]
[4]Dr Prashant Pandurangi, Confidential Forensic Psychiatric Report, (11 July 2020), Paragraph 42
40 According to Dr Pandurangi:
'It is likely that his mental disorders (mental illness and substance abuse) would have contributed to the offending, by affecting his ability to exercise his judgement or rational decision making, but there is no indication to suggest that his mental state, at the time, would have affected his ability to understand the wrongfulness of his actions'.[5]
[5]Ibid Paragraph 48
41
In all the circumstances, in particular based on the expert opinion of
Dr Pandurangi, I am satisfied that your offending was impacted by your well established schizophrenia, together with your drug use. Whilst clearly the causal link between your mental illness and the offending is complicated through your drug use, I am nevertheless satisfied that the link is there. I do not agree with the prosecution’s submission that, because Dr Pandurangi assessed you sometime after the armed robbery, and is only able to state that your mental disorders 'likely' contributed to your offending, a reduction in your moral culpability is not enlivened by principle one in the well-known mental impairment case of Verdins[6].
[6]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
42 Dr Pandurangi’s opinion is necessarily based upon a post-event analysis of your likely mental state at the time of the armed robbery. It is frequently, if not inevitably the case, that an expert conducts such a post-event analysis when assessing an offender after the alleged offending. The expert is essentially conducting an assessment based upon the individual seen before them, coupled with an assessment of collateral documentary information in relation to an offender’s circumstances before, during and after the alleged event. In my view, this is what has occurred in this case. It is entirely reasonable, in my view, that an expert would therefore couch their opinion in the terms articulated by Dr Pandurangi.
43 The need for a rigorous analysis of any asserted link between mental illness and offending was recently emphasised in the decision of Brown v The Queen.[7] There, the Court of Appeal stated:
'Evidence-based decision-making is, of course, what Verdins both authorises and requires. What the sentencing judge needs is not a diagnostic label but a clear, well-founded expert opinion as to the nature and extent of the offender’s impairment of mental functioning and, so far as it can be assessed, of its likely impact on the offender at the time of the offending and/or in the foreseeable future'. [8]
[7]Brown v The Queen [2020] VSCA 212
[8]Ibid Paragraph [61]
44 In my view, there is cogent and unchallenged evidence before me of, to use the language of Brown’s case, the ‘likely impact’ of your impaired mental functioning at the time of the offending. That is, it likely effected your ability to exercise judgment or rational decision making.
45 Whilst any analysis is rendered more complex by virtue of your use of illicit substances at the relevant time, I am satisfied, based upon the expert opinion of Dr Pandurangi, that a moderation of your moral culpability is warranted pursuant to Verdins’[9] principle one. Pursuant to Verdins’[10] principle two, your schizophrenia also has a bearing on the kind of sentence that should be imposed.
[9]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
[10]Ibid
46 As conceded by the prosecution in this case, your schizophrenia warrants a moderation in the applicability of the sentencing purposes of both specific and general deterrence, in accordance with Verdins’[11] principles three and four. Furthermore, in light of Dr Pandurangi’s opinion that your 'enduring mental illness would render incarceration more onerous to him compared to others who do not suffer from those conditions',[12] a further mitigatory allowance is warranted in relation to Verdins’[13] principle five, a matter conceded by the prosecution in your case.
[11]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
[12]Dr Prashant Pandurangi, Confidential Forensic Psychiatric Report, (11 July 2020), Paragraph 50
[13]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
47 A further mitigatory allowance in the form of a sentencing discount, is warranted due to your early plea of guilty. You indicated your intention to plead guilty at the first committal case conference on 24 March 2020 and the prosecution concedes that this represents an early plea of guilty in your case.
48 Your plea of guilty carries a significant utilitarian value, as it saves the community the cost and inconvenience of conducting both a committal hearing and a trial. It also spares the victim from having to give evidence in Court about the offending, which would likely have been a distressing experience for him.
49 Whilst I note that both to Dr Pandurangi and to the Community Corrections officer, you have denied aspects of the offending, in my view, this aspect is contextualised by virtue of your chronic mental illness. I am satisfied overall that your plea of guilty reflects your willingness to take responsibility for your offending and reflects your willingness to facilitate the course of justice. This is particularly so, given the COVID-19 pandemic and its negative impact on the administration of justice in this State. The utilitarian value attached to your plea of guilty has significant weight.
50 Notwithstanding the complicating aspect of your enduring mental illness, your ongoing denial of aspects of the offending does not allow me to make a further mitigatory allowance due to any remorse on your part.
51 As conceded by your counsel, your criminal history means that some weight needs to be given to the sentencing purpose of specific deterrence in the sentencing exercise. That is, any penalty I impose must specifically deter you from engaging in such conduct in the future.
52 In sentencing you, I have taken into consideration the fact that you have now spent 278 days in custody, this period of detention being your first time in custody. I accept that your enduring mental illness has no doubt made this period of imprisonment difficult for you. I was informed, and accept, that approximately six weeks prior to your plea hearing, you were seriously assaulted by a number of other inmates in your cell. You indicated to Dr Pandurangi[14] that you got involved in an argument with a fellow prisoner, following which you were bashed by a group of fellow-prisoners, sustaining a broken tooth. You instructed your counsel that the assault left you with two black eyes, a broken nose and a broken tooth, which prevented you from eating solid foods until it was fixed in late July.
[14]Dr Prashant Pandurangi, Confidential Forensic Psychiatric Report, (11 July 2020), Paragraph 7
53 In addition to this incident, I accept that you have served a significant proportion of your remand under the restrictive conditions necessarily imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Like all prisoners, you have been restricted to your cell for long periods of the day. All in-person prison visits have been suspended, and a significant proportion of prison programs have been rendered unavailable to you. Like all prisoners, you have had to live with the ongoing anxiety associated with the consequences, should COVID-19 enter the prison system. As we now know, COVID-19 has entered the custodial setting. As has been recently acknowledged in various sentencing and other decisions within Victoria, a mitigatory allowance is warranted due to the consequences upon you of the COVID-19 pandemic. In all the circumstances, I am satisfied that these matters have brought into sharp focus the burden of imprisonment for you.
54 I turn now to consideration of your prospects of rehabilitation. According to psychiatrist, Dr Pandurangi, given the chronic and disabling nature of your mental illness, he would be guarded about your psychosocial recovery. You are, according to Dr Pandurangi, likely to require increasing supports in the community to manage both your illness and your illicit drug use.
55 I accept, in that regard, that you have been abstinent from illicit substances whilst in custody. I note a urine screen from 9 June 20 (Exhibit 3), confirming that you returned a negative result to illicit drugs. Clearly, however, you will require considerable efforts to assist you upon your release from prison. I understand that you retain the support of your older brother, Aiden. You have been assessed by Corrections as representing a high risk of general offending. I also have received and considered today, a report from Mr Paul Tulia, the forensic case worker from the Australian Community Support Organisation, confirming various supports and referrals available to you upon your release from prison, including emergency accommodation.
56 According to Corrections, you showed some insight into the negative impact of drug use on your relationships. You indicated that you were open to the idea of returning to residential rehabilitation. Concerningly, you indicated an intention to return to residing with your girlfriend, Christine (herself a drug user), upon your release from custody, despite not having spoken with her for the duration of your time in custody. In relation to the risks associated with drug relapse, you were unable to articulate strategies to mitigate this risk. Despite nominating your girlfriend Christine as your preferred option in terms of accommodation after prison, you indicated to Corrections that you were still in contact with The Salvation Army, who have indicated housing support is available, if needed, upon release.
57 According to Corrections, you displayed minimal insight into your mental health condition. You did, however, indicate that you would continue taking your medication upon release, although Corrections indicated some concern in relation to your compliance in that regard, given your presentation and history of non-compliance.
58 In written submissions, your counsel indicated that it was accepted that the Court should be somewhat cautious in assessing your prospects of rehabilitation, given your enduring mental illness, your history of drug use and your criminal history. I agree.
59 I also agree with the prosecution’s submission that your prospects of rehabilitation are somewhat guarded and heavily dependent upon appropriate interventions upon your release from custody. Indeed, as your current offending highlights, your chronic mental illness, together with drug use issues and overall instability of life circumstances, highlights the need for any sentence to have regard to the need for community protection.
60 Your counsel essentially submitted that all of the applicable sentencing factors and purposes could best be met through a combination sentence incorporating a term of imprisonment, together with an appropriately structured Community Corrections Order. The prosecution submitted that such a disposition is reasonably open in this case and would be within range. Your counsel referred to a number of previous sentencing decisions, said to be comparable, in relation to the need to have regard to current sentencing practices as one of the relevant factors when formulating an appropriate sentence in your case. I have considered those authorities, together with others, and the information available through the Sentencing Advisory Council and the Judicial College of Victoria, in relation to the issue of current sentencing practices.
Sentence to be Imposed
61 Mr Taskiran, I now come to the portion of my remarks where I announce the sentence to be imposed upon you.
62 In my view, a sentence of imprisonment is warranted to give effect to the need for any sentence to reflect denunciation of your conduct, protection of the community, general and specific deterrence and just punishment. In my view, all of these matters, together with the facilitation of your rehabilitation, can best be advanced through a combination sentence of imprisonment and a Community Corrections Order.
63 In my view, a further period of imprisonment of relatively short duration is warranted before you can be safely reintegrated into the community under the supervision of Corrections Victoria.
64 On the charge of armed robbery, you are convicted and sentenced to 13 months imprisonment. I declare that you have served a period of 278 days by way of pre-sentence detention. That period of time will therefore be deducted from the 13 months. In addition, I order that you undergo and complete a Community Corrections Order upon your release from prison.
65 The duration of the Community Corrections Order will be 18 months.
66 There are a number of, what are called, mandatory conditions attached to any Community Corrections Order. They include matters such as, that you must not commit any other offence for which you could be imprisoned during the time that the order is enforced. You must report to and receive visits from a Corrections representative. You must report to Community Corrections within two clear working days of your release from prison. You must advise Corrections within two clear working days of any change of address or employment. You must not leave Victoria without first getting permission and you must obey all lawful instructions and directions from Corrections.
67 In addition to those mandatory conditions, there are a number of additional conditions attached to your order and they are as follows. That you be under the supervision of a Community Corrections officer for the duration of the order, that is 18 months. That you undergo assessment and treatment, including testing for drug abuse or dependency as directed by Corrections. That you undergo any mental health assessment and treatment that may include psychological, neuropsychological, psychiatric or treatment in a hospital or residential facility as directed and you must participate in programs and/or courses that address factors relating to the offending as directed.
68 So, they are the conditions attached to the order. I will come back to those in a moment. Mr Raimondo, are there any ancillary orders in this matter? Sorry Mr Raimondo, you will need to unmute.
69 MR RAIMONDO: Sorry, your Honour. No, there's not your Honour.
70 HIS HONOUR: Yes. Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that had you not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years, with a non-parole period of 2 years. Now Mr Taskiran, I can only impose the penalty that I have announced, that is a term of imprisonment, followed by a Community Corrections Order if you agree to comply with the Community Corrections Order and you can only agree to the order if you understand what the order is. So the conditions are those that I have announced. I also further need to advise you of this, that if during the period of the Community Corrections Order you breach the order by either committing an offence punishable by jail, or not complying or not following any of these conditions without reasonable excuse, you can be breached.
71 What that means is you can be prosecuted, brought back before the Court and punished for breaching the order. The penalties include a term of imprisonment, but you can also be re-sentenced in relation to the armed robbery itself. So, it is important that you understand the nature of the order and the consequences if you happen to breach the order. Now, in this COVID environment, it is not possible for obvious reasons, for you to sign the order, indicating that you understand and agree to follow the order.
72 I will accept, and it is allowable under the relevant provisions of the Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1958, verbal consent from you to the order, but what I am going to do Mr Bourbon is stand down very briefly, now that I have announced all of the conditions and the mechanism through which your client can consent to the order. I will stand down to give you time to speak privately with your client, just so that the parties understand. I am not sure if this has occurred in previous hearings involving both of you. The Community Corrections Order is noted as having been verbally consented to through audio visual purposes and that is an acceptable form of recording consent to the order. So before I stand down, Mr Bourbon are there any questions or any issues you need to raise in relation to the sentence?
73 MR BOURBON: Was that a question directed to me, sorry Your Honour? Your Honour dropped out briefly.
74 HIS HONOUR: Sorry. Did you have any issues or questions in relation to the sentence imposed? Your client has 13 months less nine and a bit months.
75 MR BOURBON: Yes. No, your Honour, that's clear to me and I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak to Mr Taskiran briefly.
76 HIS HONOUR: Yes. Mr Raimondo, any issues with regards to the sentence? Have I missed anything or are there any ambiguities?
77 MR BOURBON: No, Your Honour.
78 HIS HONOUR: Yes, well all right I will temporarily stand down Mr Bourbon, allow you some confidentiality with your client. I think that means Mr Raimondo you are going into something called the lobby, - - -
79 MR RAIMONDO: Yes, your Honour.
80 HIS HONOUR: - - - so that can take place and I will come back when I am told to. Thank you.
81 MR RAIMONDO: Thank you, Your Honour.
82 ##A:S# (Short adjournment.)
83 HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Mr Bourbon, how did you go?
84 MR BOURBON: Thank you your Honour, that was fruitful if I can put it that way. Your Honour we're ready to proceed. Thank you for that opportunity.
85 HIS HONOUR: Yes. All right, thank you. Mr Taskiran, you have had a chance to speak with your barrister in relation to the order that I have made. Do you, understanding the nature of the Community Corrections Order, do you agree to comply with the Community Corrections Order?
86 OFFENDER: Yes I do, Your Honour.
87 HIS HONOUR: And you understand that there are consequences if you breach the order?
88 OFFENDER: Yes I do.
89 HIS HONOUR: Yes all right, well I will sign the order and indicate that Mr Taskiran has provided his verbal consent and that will be noted on the Community Corrections Order itself.
90 MR BOURBON: As Your Honour pleases.
91 HIS HONOUR: Yes, thank you. Yes, thank you I have signed that order, that will take effect. Any other matters Mr Bourbon?
92 MR BOURBON: No, Your Honour.
93 HIS HONOUR: Mr Raimondo?
94 MR RAIMONDO: No, Your Honour.
95 HIS HONOUR: Thank you.
- - -
0
3
0