Director of Public Prosecutions v Vulic
[2021] VCC 593
•13 May 2021
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR 20-01771
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| MATE VULIC |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE McINERNEY |
| WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
| DATE OF HEARING: | 13 May 2021 |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 13 May 2021 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Vulic |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 593 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence – Plea of guilty – Attempt to pervert the course of justice – Acquire and dispose of a trafficable quantities of firearms – Family history unmarked by criminality - Lower end of criminal behaviour – No prior offences – Imprisonment – Time served
Legislation Cited: s.101A Firearms Act 1996
Sentence:Total effective sentence of 340 days imprisonment with 340 days pre-sentence detention.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms J. Warren | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms P. Marcou with Mr T. Brown | Malkoun & Co Lawyers |
HIS HONOUR:
1In this matter, the Court has before it amended Indictment, K12371162.1. Mr Vulic is aged 32, having been born on 15 March 1989. He lived at the time at 17 Daly Close, Sunbury. The charges that he has pleaded to today are set out by way of the amended opening of the prosecution, being Exhibit A.
2The amended opening, even with the clarification given by counsel today, is difficult in some ways. However, it is clear that insofar as Charge 1 is concerned, the amendment from the earlier Indictment clarifies that the perversion of justice related to the tampering with the CCTV, which was taken from Mr Vulic’s home subsequent to unrelated events concerning police officers which insofar as Exhibit A, is set out at paragraphs 1 through to 16. And as the Prosecution said, the actions detailed therein of Joel Papa and Cruz Noonan are detailed by way of background. It is not suggested by the prosecution that Mr Vulic was involved in any way in the shooting incident detailed therein.
3However, as detailed in the particulars as to Charge 1, it should be seen that clearly once Mr Vulic became aware of those matters, and the fact is that one of the incidents concerning Charge 2 relates to two of those alleged perpetrators leaving his home with a rifle subsequent to the text message, he deleted and altered the time of the closed circuit television footage.
4Fortunately, with the police expertise, they were able to recover such footage. They were able to recover from the footage the movement on the 12th of Mr Noonan and Papa, and on the 13th another person, moving what is believed to be in context of the text messages, two rifles from Mr Vulic's premises. Hence, making up the particulars set out in s.101A of the Firearms Act.
5The seriousness of both of these charges should not be underestimated. The offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice is a common law offence with a maximum penalty prescribed under the Crimes Act, pursuant to s.320, of 25 years imprisonment. The crime insofar as Charge 2 is concerned has behind it the Parliamentary intention, as shown in the materials as to a sentence tendered by the Prosecutor, the very important message that Parliament has set out that this type of criminality can be most serious. The maximum prescribed for an offence against s.101A of the Firearms Act is one of 1200 penalty units or 10 years' gaol.
6In regard to the circumstances as demonstrated in regard to Charge 1, I accept the classification set out in paragraph 11 of the further submission of the Prosecutor. Insofar as Charge 2 is concerned, albeit its seriousness and that it involves two separate disposals making up the trafficking charge, the particular circumstances, apart from the description in the phone message obtained again by way of analysis of Mr Vulic's phone, is about all that the Prosecution can put to the Court.
7However, I have before the Court a plea made on that basis. Mr Vulic comes before the Court in regard to those charges without any prior offending. Insofar as the plea made, the materials that have been tendered to the Court today include not only Ms Marcou’s submissions which I will make Exhibit 1.
· Exhibit 1 - Plea submissions of Ms Marcou and Mr Brown;
· Exhibit 2 - SACStat Sentencing Snapshot of higher courts;
· Exhibit 3 - Courses undertaken in gaol, in particular kitchen, cleaning and construction;
· Exhibit 4 - Eight negative drug screens between October 2019 and March 2020;
· Exhibit 5 - Character Reference of Anton Tunjasevic.
8The eight screens, which is a positive step, show in the period of October 2019 through to March 2020, periods in which Mr Vulic was in gaol, eight separate screens in which negatives are recorded. They show when one takes into account that he comes before the Court with no priors, provided he does as is indicated to the Court and by his counsel, change his ways and not get tied up with people who are involved in these sort of crimes, then the Court can have some confidence in Mr Vulic’s rehabilitation.
9Insofar as the plea, his background and family history which is unmarked by criminality, and is positive. The offences themselves, while they can obviously encompass variations of criminal behaviour, I accept in regard to both charges both that we are talking at the lower end of criminal behaviour.
10While Mr Vulic does not have any priors, he does unfortunately have a conviction, not for the same offence, but again involving a firearm, subsequent. He has served four months for that offence, but it does serve to demonstrate a concern. With a person that comes from such a hardworking family, who has done his apprenticeship himself and have been in concreting himself, it is hard to understand why he placed his life in such jeopardy.
11I hope the propositions put to me insofar as Mr Vulic’s future are correct. I take into account that during his time in custody, he has been subject to the restrictions mandated as a result of the COVID‑19 lockdown. There has also been, given those circumstances, a period of delay. I accept the early plea and the prospects of rehabilitation. I also accept in the totality of these circumstances that the period served is significant.
12Now, I take the view clearly that a period of gaol is necessary. However, ultimately, I accept the “nailing of the defence's colours to the mast”, without in anyway necessarily putting to the Court a period. But what was put essentially is that the period served should be sufficient in all the circumstances. I do accept that.
13If you would stand please, Mr Vulic.
Sentence
14You will be convicted on both of these charges.
15In regard to both charges, you will be sentenced to a period of imprisonment on each charge of 340 days. The total effective sentence therefore in regard to both charges is one of 340 days.
16I declare pursuant to s.18 that the 340 days you have served to date is deemed to be part of this sentence. The consequences of that is that you are free subject, to the formalities being taken care of by the officers to leave today.
17There is a requirement from the Parliament that I should demonstrate to you by way of indication what the benefit to you that your plea has been. I find that very difficult. The fundamentally important thing in regard to you is the low level of criminality, relatively I put, not in any way taking away from the seriousness of the crimes, and the fact that you have got to your age of 32 without any priors. But you now have four charges proved against you. You would not want to come back to Court again. Those considerations and matters of mercy will not apply. You understand that?
18OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
19HIS HONOUR: In those circumstances, can I indicate that the period that I would have sentenced you to on both charges would not have been 340 days but would have been a period in each instance of two years, making an aggregate of two years. Hence, instead of getting an aggregate sentence or a total effective sentence of 340 days, it would have been two years.
20I understand there is to be a disposal order signed, Madam Prosecutor. But I do not think we have got that yet, have we?
21MS WARREN: I think it has been emailed to you - - -
22HIS HONOUR: What does it relate to?
23MS WARREN: The firearm and the hard drive, Your Honour. The CCTV hard drive.
24HIS HONOUR: What do I want to dispose of the hard drive for? It is not a pornography matter is it?
25MS WARREN: Your Honour, that was the hard drive that the CCTV was deleted from.
26HIS HONOUR: That is what I mean. Why would I dispose of that unless - - -
27MS WARREN: Well, it was used in the commission of - - -
28HIS HONOUR: Is it wanted, Ms - - -
29MS MARCOU: They can have it, Your Honour.
30HIS HONOUR: Right. Well, I will sign that order. That will come in due course, will it?
31MS WARREN: I believe it has been sent but there might be a gap in the internet, Your Honour.
32HIS HONOUR: I have made the declaration under s.18. I think that is all I need to do, is it not?
33MS MARCOU: Yes, Your Honour.
34HIS HONOUR: Yes, thank you all. Thank you for the comedy cases.
35Yes, all right. Mr Vulic, very dangerous what you were part of. Do not do it again. All right?
36OFFENDER: No problem, Your Honour.
37HIS HONOUR: You might be so lucky next time. All right. Thank you all for your assistance.
- - -
0
0
0