Director of Public Prosecutions v Tomuli
[2016] VCC 1737
•18 November 2016
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-16-01483
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| DANIEL TOMULI |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE PARRISH | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF PLEA HEARING: | 10 November 2016 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 18 November 2016 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP V Tomuli | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2016] VCC 1737 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence – attempted aggravated burglary; non-prohibited person possessing an unregistered category A or B Longarm and criminal damage - pleas of guilty
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1958; Firearms Act 1996; Sentencing Act 1991
Cases Cited: R v Mills (1998) 4 VR 235; Azzopardi & Ors v R (2011) 35 VR 43.
Sentence: Total effective sentence of twenty-eight months imprisonment; non parole period of 18 months imprisonment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms M. Sammut | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms T. Hartnett | Galbally & O’Bryan |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Daniel Tomuli, you have pleaded guilty to the following offences:
Charge 1 – that you, at Prahran in Victoria, on 22 February 2016, attempted to enter as a trespasser, a building situated at 4/72 Commercial Road, with intent to steal therein and, at the time had with you a firearm and knew that your co-offender had with him an offensive weapon, namely, a metal pole, and at the time of attempting to enter, a person was then present in the building and you knew that a person was so present, or was reckless as to whether or not a person was then so present.
Such offence of attempted aggravated burglary is contrary to s.77 and s.321M of the Crimes Act 1958, and through the operation of those sections, and s.321P or the Crimes Act 1958, carries a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment.
Charge 2 – that you, at Prahran in Victoria, on 22 February 2016, being a non-prohibited person, had in your possession a Category A or B Longarm that was not registered.
The offence of being a non-prohibited person possessing an unregistered Category A or B Longarm is contrary to s.6A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 and for a first offence carries a maximum penalty of 120 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment (a second or subsequent offence carries a maximum penalty of 1,200 penalty units or ten years’ imprisonment).
Charge 3 – that you, at Prahran in Victoria, on 22 February 2016, intentionally and without lawful excuse, damaged a door and two CCTV cameras belonging to Warren Jones.
The offence of criminal damage is contrary to s.197(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 and carries the maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment.
2 The prosecution has prepared a written summary of the circumstances surrounding the offending. Such summary has been marked as an exhibit (Exhibit 2), and has been accepted by you and your counsel as an appropriate representation of the offending. The important matters of such summary are:
(a)You are currently 22-years-old (having been born 21 January 1994) and were also 22 years old at the time of the offending;
(b)At the time of the offending, you were with a co-accused, Nicholas Cheaib (“Cheaib”), and a third male offender who has not been identified;
(c)The victim of your offending was Warren Jones (“Jones”), who was 51-years-old at the time of the offending and living with his partner,
Robert Epps (“Epps”) at Unit 4/72 Commercial Road, Prahran (“the address”);
(d)At about 1.30 am on 22 February 2016, you, Cheaib, and the unknown further offender, drove to the address in a black Ford Territory (registration TBF 590), which is registered to you. Attached to the vehicle was a trailer with no registration;
(e)When you and the others arrived at the address, Jones was home with an acquaintance, John O’Hara. At about 2.00 am, the intercom doorbell was rung at the premises three times. When Jones answered the intercom, one of you said:
“Where’s Robbie? We’ve got the place surrounded.”
Jones replied:
“Robbie’s not here. What do you guys want?”
One of you said:
“Bullshit, he’s there. Open the door or we’ll shoot it open.”;
(f)You then held up a double-barrelled shotgun and pointed it at the intercom camera;
(g)Jones rang his partner, Epps, and told him about you attending the premises, and Epps informed Jones that he would return home. Jones was on the third level of the unit and he was asked by one of you to come down to talk to them. Jones then walked to the second level and opened the sliding door that leads to a “Juliette” balcony, when you told Jones to turn off the spotlight. Initially Jones covered the light with his hand, but you insisted that he turn it off, after which Jones turned the light off and told you and the others that he had spoken to Epps and that he was on his way back home;
(f)Cheaib became aggressive, telling Jones to open the door, again mentioning that the door would be shot open. At that moment, Jones noticed that you were pointing the gun at him and Jones yelled out a couple of times:
“Help help, they’ve got a gun, call the police”;
(g)Cheaib, who had been holding a blue metal pole, threw it upwards towards Jones, and the three of you ran to your vehicle and drove away;
(h)When police arrived at the premises a short time later as a result of a 000 call from a neighbour, Jones opened the door to police and saw that the door handle was bent, with scratches on the door and the lock damaged. Furthermore, two CCTV cameras set up at the address had also been ripped down.
3 The incident was captured on CCTV camera and the prosecution tendered four photographs, two of which were taken by the police when they attended (being photos of the Juliette balcony and the blue metal pole thrown by Cheaib, see Exhibit 3), and also two photographs taken from the CCTV footage showing you holding the shotgun (see Exhibit 4).
4 Furthermore, the prosecution detailed that on 31 May 2016, a search warrant was executed at 5 Amity Way, Cranbourne West, where you reside. You were arrested and taken to the Cranbourne Police Station to be interviewed. During the interview you made full admissions and, in particular, the prosecution referred to the following questions and answers:
·“I got asked to – to do a job for someone, someone that I did not know. And, yeah, yeah, I ended up here. Didn’t get paid for shit. I was told that I was gunna get paid a lump sum of money to do the job but I never got paid.” [Q and A 29]
·“I did not know the two people, the two people I knew up higher was Michael and Geoff or, whatever. I did not know the people that I was doing the job for. It was just a random question from a random person, and I guess - I said before I never got paid for the job, but I was told I was getting paid.” [Q and A 30]
·Cheaib told you that you would be well-paid [Q and A 166].
·The reason for attending the address was to recover money from a guy. [Q and A 60].
·“The person who had owed the money to our guy was supposedly was -a drug dealer.” [Q and A 32]
·You did not know how much money was owed or who it was owed to. [Q and A 120]
·You drove your vehicle to the address. [Q and A 32]
·You held the shotgun [Q and A 33] – it had not been originally intended to take a shotgun, but a shotgun ended up in your possession the same day, so it was decided that you and the others would use it “to make the job easier” [Q and A 98 – 107, 148]. The shotgun was not loaded at the time [Q and A 140].
·The trailer was taken in the event that if the money could not be paid, property and equipment to the value of the money would be taken instead [Q and A 123].
·Your brother sold the gun and you were disappointed as you had intended to keep the gun to protect your family [Q and A 213 – 217].
·In relation to the reason for offending, you said to police:
“Just stupidity, stupidity. My mind wasn’t right at the time when I made those decisions … I do realise now, that hey, it was a stupid decision to try and do. There is other ways to try and make money and that’s what I know now.” [Q and A 264-265)
5 I was informed by the prosecutor that the case against you is put on the basis that you were involved in the commission of the offences by ss.323(1)(c) and s.323(1)(d) of the Crimes Act 1958, in that you were complicit in such crimes.
6 I was also informed by the prosecutor that at a committal case conference on 24 August 2016, you indicated that you would plead guilty to the offences and that the Crown accepts that such plea was at the earliest opportunity.
7 Following your interview on 31 May 2016, you were remanded in custody, where you have remained to this date. I was informed by the prosecutor at the plea hearing, that you had then served 163 days of pre-sentence detention, up to, but not including the date of the plea hearing.
8 Your co-accused, Cheaib, has requested a committal, which is set down for hearing on 11 January 2017.
Your criminal history
9
The prosecutor tendered your criminal record (Exhibit 1), and you agreed that the contents of such document was correct. In this respect, I note that on
27 January 2009 at the Dandenong Children’s Court, a charge of theft was found proven, but dismissed, with no conviction being recorded upon yourentering into an undertaking to be of good behaviour for six months.
10 I was also informed of the following matters:
(a)On 18 July 2016, at the Dandenong Magistrates’ Court, you were convicted and fined an aggregate amount of $1,500 in relation to offences involving handling and retaining stolen goods, two charges of theft, two charges of driving while suspended, possessing methamphetamine and possessing a dangerous article in a public place – all such offences said to have occurred between late-December 2015 and February 2016;
(b)On 25 August 2016, at the Dandenong Magistrates’ Court, you were convicted and fined an aggregate sum of $2,000 for offences involving the theft of a motor vehicle and driving while suspended – such offending said to have taken place on 10 April 2016;
(c)On 7 November 2016, you were to appear at the Dandenong Magistrates’ Court in relation to charges involving possession of cannabis, possession of ammunition without licence, reckless conduct endangering serious injury, committing an indictable offence while on bail, driving in a manner dangerous, driving while suspended, driving an unregistered motor vehicle, careless driving, failing to stop at the scene of an accident, driving an un-roadworthy vehicle and failure to have full and proper control of a vehicle. These offences allegedly occurred on 25 May 2016, some six days before you were remanded in custody. The hearing of these matters are now to be heard on 21 November 2016.
Your personal circumstances, educational and vocational background
11
Your counsel tendered a report from the forensic psychologist,
Ms Danielle Harley, who assessed you on 28 October 2016 and reported on
31 October 2016 (see Exhibit A).
12 Partly based on such document, and other various submissions made by your counsel, I note the following:
(a)You were born in Christchurch, New Zealand, and you are the youngest of five siblings, with two older brothers and two older sisters. Following a holiday in Melbourne, your parents decided they wanted to relocate to Melbourne (for a better life) and according to you, your paternal aunt and grandmother relocated to Melbourne when you were three years old and, shortly afterwards, your parents and siblings followed. You lived with your parents, siblings, aunt and grandmother in the same house;
(b)You told Ms Harley that you felt loved and supported by your family and was not exposed to abuse or neglect. In particular, you reported feeling closest to your grandmother, as she was your primary care giver, given that your parents worked full-time during the day;
(c)There is no history of mental illness, criminal activity or substance abuse within the family, except for your older brother Jade - however this did not occur until many years later after your arrival in Melbourne;
(d)You reported to Ms Harley that you were bullied by peers at primary school, which caused you some distress and later caused you to fight back against those who taunted you. You considered that you were just aggressively responding to unfair treatment. You were never diagnosed with a mental health condition;
(e)Your eldest brother died in 2005 from medical complications when you were aged eleven. Furthermore, your grandmother died in 2006, as did your aunt in 2007, and your memories of that time was your family attempting to support each other during this difficult time. You recall, over the years from approximately thirteen to seventeen, you began absconding from the family home, and during Year 10 you prematurely completed your schooling;
(f)At the age of seventeen you began a relationship with your current partner, May, and that relationship has produced two children – Justice, aged five years old, and Malachi, four years old.
(g)On leaving school, you were unemployed for the rest of that year, after which you undertook a three-week course in basic motor mechanics, followed by working on an egg farm for twelve months. At about the age of 18, you commenced work as a crowd controller, or bouncer, at Kelly’s Hotel in Cranbourne and worked there full-time until the end of 2015, earning approximately $700 to $800 per week. Over the initial years working as a bouncer you socialised well with your peers and attended church regularly. According to Ms Harvey, at 21, you discovered your older brother, Jade, was using methamphetamines, which depressed you, as you did not wish to lose Jade as you had other members of your family. Apparently you commenced using methamphetamine yourself in order to demonstrate the consequences and, thereafter, you became destabilised, using approximately 1 gram of methamphetamine a day, which initially assisted you to stay alert while performing crowd control. However, over the year 2015 your condition deteriorated, causing you to fall away from your work and your family. In particular, your peer group and friends changed, leading to criminal activity.
(h)You reported to Ms Harley that you then began to engage in “debt collecting” with other “antisocial” friends, whereby you used your size, stature and any other means necessary, including weapons, to intimidate victims to pay their debts. Such activity not only provided income, but you told Ms Harley that it also provided you a sense of power and control. During this time, you were urged by your partner May to cease the use of methamphetamine and return to the fold of the family and church;
(i)You instructed your counsel that you were approached on the day of the offending to effectively supply “the muscle” to obtain drug money from Epps – who was alleged to be involved in the drug industry;
(j)It was also over the period from 2015 until you were remanded in custody on 31 May 2016 that other offences (not the subject of the plea), occurred.
Report of Ms Harley
13 Ms Harley performed a large number of tests and, ultimately, concluded that you possessed an IQ composite of 75, which is equal to no better than five per cent of individuals of the same age. She also noted that score was considered to be above the cut-off point for being considered to have an intellectual disability. Ms Harley states, in part:
“Mr Tomuli maintained a period of living a relatively pro-social lifestyle when he formed a relationship with his current partner May when he was 17 years of age. During this time they had two children together. Mr Tomuli reported working full-time to support himself and his family, and they attended Church regularly. Mr Tomuli also advised of associating with pro-social peers in this context. It is noted that during this time however, Mr Tomuli accumulated some driving offences, which appear to indicate some level of ongoing impulsivity. At the age of approximately 21 years, Mr Tomuli started using Methamphetamines, reportedly in an attempt to get his brother, Jade, to cease using. This response did not have the desired effect however. Mr Tomuli rather deteriorated into daily methamphetamine use. Mr. Tomuli again distanced himself from prosocial support and pursuits in this context, engaging in debt collecting and prioritizing his use of methamphetamine, over family and legitimate employment. This likely ’activated’ previous maladaptive stress responses (internalisating and externalising distressing feelings) and justified reactive violent behavior towards those whom had ‘wronged’ him (accumulated unpaid debt). Mr Tomuli advised that his use of instrumental violence in ‘debt collecting’ (fear and intimidation tactics) provided him with a sense of power and control additionally, perhaps as an overcompensation for his feelings of worthlessness in the context of ongoing mood dysregulation. Mr Tomuli also reported secondary gain in the form of money and substances from this type of offending. During this time Mr Tomuli’s impulsivity and lack of consequential thinking were likely also heightened.
Across time Mr Tomuli deteriorated into an antisocial lifestyle, and was charged with the current offences. This appeared perpetuated by maladaptive emotion regulation strategies, mood disturbance, cognitive distortions justifying the use of violence and distancing himself from a pro-social support network and previous pro-social pursuits. Precipitating offending appears to be Mr. Tomuli’s association with antisocial peers and pursuits in this context, including the abuse of methamphetamine.
Mr Tomuli identified his girlfriend, children, and family as his supports and protective factors. He also described the presence of an alternate pro-social network and an affiliation to the church. Mr Tomuli reported that his goals were to be with his family in the community, be a positive role model for his children, and obtain legitimate employment. Mr Tomuli also advised that he wanted to remain abstinent from substances. Mr Tomuli acknowledged that these goals were not congruent with offending or violent behaviour. He presented with some insight into his precipitating and perpetuating factors to offending as described, though this remains developing. Lastly, Mr. Tomuli acknowledged a willingness to engage in offence-specific intervention, which may potentially ameliorate his risk of re-offending moving forward. Namely, Mr Tomuli would benefit from increasing his insight as to violent cognitive distortions and developing non-violent responses. Mr Tomuli is also likely to benefit from engaging in substance use and mental health intervention, though he reported little motivation in engaging in this type of treatment currently. Motivational or treatment readiness approaches therefore may need to be considered additionally.
Whilst there are moderate risk indicators of future offending both generally and violently according to the LSI-R and HCR-20, it is important to be aware of the fact that there is no certain way to predict whether or not a re-offence will occur; one can only assess the possibility or likelihood of such re-offence based on history and information presented and collected during the course of assessment.
Mr Tomuli’s primary risk for offending appears to be violent. Mr Tomuli’s violent offending has two different variants: one is precipitated by the expression of anger and one is precipitated by the need for power and control (which has seemingly manifested in the form of debt collection currently). That is, based on Mr Tomuli’s self-reports he may offend impulsively by reacting to feelings of anger if he felt someone had wronged him (either peer or stranger). Mr Tomuli may also offend with a somewhat planned and controlled manner using intimidation tactics (which may also involve the use of weapon). However both appear to lack elements of consequential thinking, are precipitated by substance intoxication, and may also involve antisocial peers.” (My emphasis.)
14 Ms Harley also noted her opinion that there is an absence of significant evidence to indicate that your cognitive or intellectual capacity interfered with the commission of the offences.
Your counsel’s submissions in relation to mitigation of sentence
15 Your counsel submitted your offending, particularly Charge 1, was serious offending, which does attract a sentence of imprisonment with a parole period. Your counsel also submitted that it is an appropriate characterisation to see your role in the subject offending as a person for hire to perform such activities, and your motive for performing such activities was merely monetary gain.
16 Your counsel further submitted that in mitigation of any sentence, the following matters are relevant:
(a)Your early plea of guilty, which the prosecutor accepted was at the “earliest opportunity”;
(b)Although slightly out of the range to be a young offender, within the meaning of the Sentencing Act 1991, the cases relevant to young offenders are pertinent, and rehabilitation should play a major role in the sentencing process;
(c)That you were cooperative with police and made frank admissions during your record of interview;
(d)The plea of guilty, and your cooperation with police, does form the basis of you exhibiting some remorse for your offending;
(e)You have a good family background and, on release from prison, you will have your family to return to, to be a good social support, as will be the church, which is very much involved in your family life.
17 Your counsel described your prospects of rehabilitation to be “cautiously optimistic” and that circumstances will be needed to be in place for you to be fully rehabilitated after release. In this respect, it was submitted, the supervision of the Parole Board would be important, and consideration should be given to a longer than normal parole period. Further, your counsel accepted that your hitherto main employment of crowd controller or being a bouncer would be out, given your subject offending, and it would be necessary to further educate yourself.
The response of the prosecution
18 Counsel for the prosecution highlighted the following matters in response to the submissions made by your counsel:
(a)That all said and done, this was an intended home invasion, with you acting as a “standover” man in company with two others and being armed with a shotgun;
(b)Such an episode must have been extremely frightening to the occupants of the premises;
(c)That, notwithstanding the comments of your counsel, a reading of the psychological report was that you considered it to be a satisfactory course of action to be violent to people in order to obtain debts to be paid.
19 Counsel for the prosecution submitted that it is important to take account of general deterrence, denunciation and protection of the community when coming to an appropriate sentence. Furthermore, specific deterrence is important, also, given what was submitted to be your lack of remorse and insight into the nature of your offending.
Conclusion
20 I consider that, in particular, the offence of attempted aggravated burglary (Charge 1) in the circumstances of this matter, is a particularly serious offence given that:
(a)The aggravated circumstances of the burglary were that you knew you were attempting to obtain an alleged debt from a person who you knew, or believed to be, in the premises, and that in order to obtain such debt, and you intentionally brought the shotgun to intimidate the person or persons at the premises;
(b)That your role in the event was perceived by you as essentially an intimidating role to frighten the person at the premises to repay the debt;
(c)Although I note that the shotgun was allegedly unloaded, your actions, as depicted on the CCTV footage, made it clear to the occupants of the premises that you had such a weapon and was threatening to use it.
21 I also consider Charge 2 to be of a serious nature, albeit, not as serious as the first charge, in that you were in possession of a shotgun being not registered to you. Again, Charge 3 involving the offence of criminal damage, extends to damaging a door and the two CCTV cameras belonging to Jones. Such an offence is not as serious as the first two charges but, again, highlights the frightening nature of what you were performing when confronting the occupants at the premises.
22 Although there are no victim impact statements, the frightening nature of the event is made clear when Jones noticed that you were pointing the gun at him and yelled out a couple of times:
“Help help, they’ve got a gun, call the police.”
23 I accept that the subject offences are your first recorded offending, save for the appearance at the Dandenong Children’s Court on 27 January 2009, when you were 15 years of age. Given your age and the nature of the offending at that time, I put little or no weight on that event as an antecedent.
24
Clearly enough, you have been involved in subsequent offending, initially between late-December 2015 and February 2016 (which resulted in convictions at Dandenong Magistrates’ Court on 18 July 2016) and on 10 April 2016 (which resulted in convictions at Dandenong Magistrates’ Court on 25 August 2016). I also note that you are awaiting the hearing of matters now to be heard on
21 November– such alleged offences occurring on 25 May 2016 – some six days before you were remanded for the subject offences. Such offending – at least in relation to the offending for which convictions were entered on
18 July 2016 and 25 August 2016, cannot be viewed as antecedents but is relevant, to some extent, of assessing your potential for rehabilitation.
25 Indeed, as I have already recorded, Ms Harley noted that your role in “debt collecting” used to provide fear and intimidation tactics which gave you a sense of power and control, and also “activated” previous stress responses which you considered justified reactive violent behaviour when those around you had “wronged you”. It is also to be noted that Ms Harley considered that you had “some insight” into your precipitating perpetuating factors for offending which remains “developing”. I do note that you apparently acknowledged your willingness to engage in some offence-specific intervention.
26 I do take into account your early plea of guilty in relation to the offences and, indeed, your cooperation with the authorities and, in particular, making full and frank admissions during your record of interview. Although the case against you would appear to have been ultimately quite strong, a plea of guilty, at the very least, has utilitarian value in saving the time and cost of a trial (see Phillips v The Queen [2012] VSCA 140 and in particular at paragraph [36]). It is always a question for the sentencing judge whether remorse, a willingness to facilitate the course of justice and the acceptance of responsibility are to be inferred from a plea of guilty (again, see Phillips v The Queen (op cit) at paragraph [96]). In the circumstances of this matter, I am not persuaded that your early plea of guilty and, more particularly, the cooperation shown by you in dealing with the relevant authorities, permit me to infer that you have any significant remorse for your offending.
27 In particular, when one reads your record of interview, which does clearly contain frank admissions, I gained the impression that such admissions were not brought about by any true sense of remorse but, rather, the lack of intellectual wherewithal to say anything else. In this respect, the carrying out of the offending was not particularly sophisticated, in that you drove your own vehicle to the premises and, as I say, you were caught on CCTV footage wielding the shotgun.
28 I do accept that you have come from a loving, tight-knit family, which gave you social support, and will give you an environment to which you can return after your imprisonment. Furthermore, there is the prospect of becoming involved with the church again, which hopefully will be another support. I was informed by your counsel that your mother, sister and partner attended the plea hearing, which is indicative of your family support.
29 Obviously enough, given what will be your convictions in these offences and, indeed, the other convictions that you now carry, it is unlikely that you will be able to maintain employment as a crowd controller or bouncer on release from prison. As submitted by your counsel, it will be necessary to retrain yourself and I note, to your credit, that since being in prison, you have instructed your counsel that your drug use has come to an end and that you have undertaken various courses within prison involving food-handling courses and occupational health and safety courses.
30 Bearing in mind that you were 22 years of age at the time of the offending (and still are), you are not, by definition in the Sentencing Act 1991, a “youthful offender”. Notwithstanding, I do consider that the principles enunciated in the leading cases of the R v Mills (1998) 4 VR 235 and, in particular, at page 241 per Batt JA and Azzopardi & Ors v R (2011) 35 VR 43 and, in particular paragraphs [34]-[36] per Redlich JA, are apposite and relevant. In this respect, it was submitted by your counsel that rehabilitation of young offenders is a paramount consideration. I accept such submissions generally, but given the matters I have enunciated in these reasons, I consider the prospects of your rehabilitation to be, at best, “only reasonable”.
31 I consider that the relevant sentencing considerations are denunciation of such offending, general and specific deterrence, and the protection of the community (which relates particularly to Charge 1). After consideration of all the circumstances in this matter, I accept the submissions of both counsel that it is appropriate to order a sentence involving immediate imprisonment. In this sense, I am conscious of s.5(4) and s.5(4)(c) of the Sentencing Act 1991 and consider that the purpose or purposes for which the sentence is to be imposed cannot be achieved by a sentence that does not involve your confinement and, more particularly, cannot be achieved by a community correction order.
32 Please be upstanding.
(a)In respect of Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 24 months. This is the base sentence.
(b)In relation to Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to a period of imprisonment of six months;
(c)In relation to Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to a period of imprisonment of three months.
The court directs that three months of the sentence pertaining to Charge 2 and one month of the sentencing pertaining to Charge 3 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence imposed pertaining to Charge 1, making a total effective sentence of 28 months;
(d) The court orders that there be a non-parole period of 18 months.
(e)I declare that you have served 171 days pre-sentence detention, and such is to be administratively deducted from this sentence as time already served;
(f)Pursuant to s.464ZF(2) of the Crimes Act 1958, I order that you undergo a forensic procedure for the taking of a scraping from the mouth until a sample of sufficient standard is obtained for placement on the database. I must inform you that if, at the time of the request, you do not consent to the taking of a mouth scraping under the supervision of an authorised member of the police force, then the sample to be taken will be a blood sample, and police may use reasonable force to enable the forensic procedure to be conducted;
(g)Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, if not for your pleas of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of four years, with a non-parole period of two-years-and-six-months.
Yes, anything arising out of that, counsel?
MS HARTNETT: No thank you, sir.
MS SAMMUT: No thank you, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I have signed the appropriate orders in relation to that. Can I just make an enquiry, can the family see the accused downstairs, or is - - -
MS HARTNETT: They cannot see him downstairs, sir, no.
HIS HONOUR: No. I will stay on the Bench, I will allow the family just to approach the accused briefly under your supervision at this stage. So if the family just want to say anything to the accused before he is taken downstairs, they can do that briefly now.
MS HARTNETT: Thank you, sir. I might leave the Bar table for a moment.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, by all means. Yes?
MS HARTNETT: Thank you, sir, I'm grateful to the court.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, take the prisoner down, thank you. Yes thank you, we will adjourn sine die.
- - -
0
3
0