Director of Public Prosecutions v Whennen

[2018] VCC 2272

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised
(Not) Restricted
Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 18-00538

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

STEVEN WHENNEN

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MULLALY
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
DATE OF SENTENCE:	7 November 2018
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v WHENNEN
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VCC 2272

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Office of Public Prosecutions	Mr G. Hevey
For the Accused	Ms N. Smith

HIS HONOUR: 

1As is my practice in the course of setting out reasons for the sentence I will shortly impose in respect of sexual offending, in fact all offending, I do not propose to refer to the victims or their families by name.  That is not out of disrespect.  Of course, I know the victims' names and the families' names.  It is out of respect because the reasons that I publish will be available and I do everything that I can to ensure the anonymity of the victims and their families.  So it is simply by referring to them by the first victim and the second victim.  The first victim will be obvious, it relates to the indictment where there are two charges.

2Steven Whennen, you committed serious sexual offences against two very young victims.  Now is the time that you must meet the consequences.  You have pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 in relation to the first victim and one charge of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 in respect of the second victim.

3In respect of the first victim, the offending commenced on or around 6 January 2012 and continued until December 2016.  This conduct is broken into two charges because the victim was under the age of 12 up until 5 January 2015 and thereafter, your offending against him was when he was just over the age of 12.

4The maximum penalty in respect to Charge 1, the sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16, when the child was under the age of 12, is 25 years' imprisonment.  The maximum penalty in respect of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 when a child is over the age of 12 is ten years' imprisonment.

5I will deal first with the crimes you have committed against the first victim, including the devastating effects on him and his family, then I will turn to the second victim.

6In respect of the first victim, the first charge is a representative charge.  The charge represents four separate occasions in which you anally penetrated the first victim until you ejaculated.  The first three occasions were when you and the first victim attended a display train that was located in a park in Hamilton.  The sexual penetration of the child was actually inside the display train, that is in a public place, though it seems your violation of the child would not have been obvious to any passer-by.  The fourth instance of the offending represented by Charge 1 was sexual penetration of the victims anus in the toilets of the adventure playground in Hamilton.

7You and the victim had ridden bikes to the area near the playground and then you followed the victim into the toilets, where you penetrated his anus until you ejaculated on the floor.  I will return back to the utter depravity of this conduct shortly.

8In respect to the second charge of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 involving the first victim after he had turned 12, that conduct was charged as a course of conduct.  That involved anal penetration of the first victim many times in a number of different locations, firstly in your caravan which was at a panel beating workshop owned by a friend of yours in Hamilton.  The victim recalls this occurred between nine and ten times.  The victim also detailed that you anally penetrated him at a farm belonging to some family members, where you had gone with the victim to ride motorbikes.  He tried to resist but you persevered and he relented.

9On two occasions, the victim recalls you penetrating his anus until you ejaculated at the Hamilton Race Track where you were a casual employee.  Further, the victim states that you took him to your home in Hamilton on occasions where you penetrated his anus with your penis until you ejaculated.  He had on these occasions tried to refuse but you were unrelenting and ultimately, he simply lay on his stomach while you penetrated him.

10As is obvious enough, your dreadful offending against this vulnerable child was protracted, involving many instances at different locations.  You were an adult in your late 20s and early 30s.  The victim was a child between the ages of ten to 13 years old.  You simply put your perverse sexual gratification above all else, including your obligation to look after the child or at the very least not violate him.  Sexual offending of this kind simply bewilders, indeed horrifies ordinary members of our community.  It is the sort of dark conduct that all parents fear.  They hope their child is simply enjoying being a child, riding his bike, venturing out with a little more independence in a regional town.

11Sexual offending of this kind debases our community and also corrodes a sense that children are safe.  The impact on victim and his family has been profound.  I need to take some time to outline just how deep the effect of what you did to the young victim has been.  Before doing so, I make clear that I have read carefully the heartfelt victim impact statements in respect of both young victims and their families, and they were read publicly during the plea.

12The courts and the community have come to appreciate just how devastating and long felt are the effects of sexual abuse on children.  That said, the impact on the victims is one factor in the sentencing synthesis and I have ensured that I have not been overwhelmed by the profound difficulties faced by the victims both the first victim, the second victim and their families.

13The great disruption caused by the then inexplicable and deteriorating behaviour of the young first victim was simply the stuff that rips families apart.  The victim and his mother were broken and perhaps will struggle to recover for some time.  The efforts of the mother of the first victim are remarkable and are expressive of the sort of values I need to reassert.  That is, protection of children and care for them.

14She wrote that her child, as he grew up, was a young placid boy who loved life.  It was during Grade 6 that changes to his personality were noticed and were dramatic.  She said from that time on, she was desperate and sought help from various agencies, from child and adolescent mental health services, from psychologists and psychiatrists, paediatricians, the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne and dieticians and counselling.  These were to no avail as her child made no progress and she remained in a continual state of concern, which was impacting greatly upon the family and her both physically and her mental health.

15She says, "As a mum, I have to do everything possible to get my happy, go lucky boy back."  She speaks about the significant financial imposition upon her family as they moved the child from one school to another, incurring very significant private school fees to try and see if he could cope.  But he now attends an alternative education and this is as a result of him not being able to be maintained in mainstream school.  She notes, "He still struggles some days with it."

16She says, "I've never felt so worthless.  I didn't get out of bed or leave the house because of the extreme verbal abuse from my son."  She says that, "There was great difficulties caused within the family."  Her older son who had been close to the victim, that all fell away and there was great anger as a consequence of the changes to him.  She speaks of the impact of your crime on the victim, causing irreversible marriage problems for her.  She says, "As the victim's mother, there were times I have hit rock bottom.  His pain was my pain.  I continually asked myself now why?  Why didn't I see it?  Why didn't I know?  And to this day, I still shoulder the blame for what transpired.  I will always feel guilty for the rest of my life.  I know I have a supportive family and close friends, but nothing will alter the fact that I failed to keep my baby safe." 

17I will return back to this theme shortly because it looms large also in the impact upon the victim's father.  He said that the sexual molestation of his child has affected him in many ways.  He says he cannot put into words the damage to the father-son bond.  He has guilt because he feels he did not protect his son.  He notes that he was away as an interstate truck driver and huge burdens fell on his wife, the mother of the victim, and he feels that he has failed his family during that time.  He acknowledges the difficulties that it has caused financially to the family and also to the marriage.  It has placed, what he says, a huge strain on their marriage.  He has lost the mateship of his son, as they did many things with cars and motorcycles together.

18A family friend, who is very close to the victim and his mother notes the very significant change to him through the period of the sexual abuse by you,
Mr Whennen.  She senses that things may now be improving but she feels great guilt as well.

19As I said, and it will become evident when dealing with the victim impact statements of the second victim, one theme that appears here and in many victim impact statements prepared by parents is the profound sense of guilt they as parents think that they somehow let the child down, did not adequately protect the child.  What needs to be said publicly is that none of the parents here are to blame in any way whatsoever.  You and you alone, Mr Whennen, by your sexual depravity are responsible for these devastating crimes.

20However, to make the parents feel as they do is itself dreadful.  My words will not erase the feelings of the victims' parents, I am realistic about that.  But the very experienced Vincent J spoke of the importance of rehabilitation of victims and their families.  His point was that the acknowledgement of the victims or the impact on the victims was important but that acknowledgement can be brought undone if ultimately the sentences themselves leave the victims and their families without a sense of justice being done.  He said,

"This notion of social rehabilitation is one that I do not believe has been accorded anything approaching significant recognition as an identifiable underlying concern of the criminal justice system.  It seems to me that the process of social and personal recovery which we attempt to achieve in order to ameliorate the consequence of a crime can be impeded or facilitated by the responses of the courts.  The imposition of a sentence often constitutes both practical and ritual completion of a protracted, painful period.  It signifies the recognition by society of the nature and significance of the role that has been done to affected members.  The assertion of its values and the public attribution of responsibility for that wrongdoing to the perpetrator.  If the balancing of values and considerations represented by the sentence which, of course, must include those factors which militate in favour of mitigation of penalty is capable of being perceived by a reasonably objective member of the community as just in the process of recovery is more likely to be assisted.  If not, there will almost certainly be created a sense of injustice in the community generally that damages the respect in which our criminal justice system is held and which may never be removed.  Indeed, from the victims' perspective, an apparent failure of the system to recognise that the real significance of what has occurred in the life of that person as a consequence of the commission of the crime may well aggravate a situation."

21As for the crime you committed against the second victim, you had known the second victim and his family for some time.  On 8 April 2017, the victim was 12 years and five months old.  He was riding his BMX bike at the skate park.  You were there as well with your bike.  It began to rain heavily and you took the victim to the nearby panel beating workshop for shelter.  You knew the owner of the workshop, you knew he was away for the weekend.  He had given you permission to go to the workshop so long as you did not bring anyone else there.

22While at the workshop, you had the victim pull down his pants and you gave him a condom to put on.  You put a condom on your naked, erect penis as well.  You had the victim lie on the bed and you penetrated his anus.  It caused him pain and he told you to stop, which you did.  The victim got up off the bed, as you did as well.

23The victim called his father who came to pick him up shortly thereafter.  You then spoke to the father about cars, your mutual interest.  The victim did not tell his father there and then of what you had done to him.  Later that day, when at the toilet, the victim saw blood on the toilet paper he was using.  The victim kept what had happened to him to himself for two months because of other family stresses.  It was something that weighed on his mind but he could not bring himself to tell his parents until June 2017.

24You were arrested on 16 June 2017.  In respect of the allegations put to you in relation to the second victim, you exercised your right to remain silent.  Your arrest prompted the parents of the first victim to ask their son if anything had happened to him.  This brought out all that you had done to the first victim in the years before.

25The adverse impact of your crime on the second victim and his family have also been profound.  He wrote, "This should not have happened."  He said he could not tell what happened to him.  His life was turned upside down.  But he could not tell because of what was happening to his older brother and it became unbearable.  He could not go to school some days, he would get angry and he did not know why.  He said with profound insight, "Having to be interviewed by detectives isn't something any 12 year old kid should have to go through."

26He says that he will not go near the skate park and has had to give up or has given up "Something that I once enjoyed doing with my friends."

27At the start, he said he could not sleep.  He had to get tablets from the doctor but they did not work all the time.  He has a counsellor "Who is pretty good to talk to," he says and he is trying to move on.  He also says with, again, insight into the experience that those in the courts unfortunately come across time and again, he says "I'm guessing I'll never forget what happened," but he is trying to get back to normal.

28His mother wrote with a heavy heard and with tears in her eyes, she reflected back on the day that she learnt that what had happened to her son, "A day that changed our lives forever."  It was the day that he made known to them that he had been violated in the most unimaginable way.  She says, "It is a situation no mother should have to process."  She speaks about "Doing everything along with her husband to protect and love and nurture our boy.  Every aspect of our physical, emotional and spiritual being has been affected by this sickening act done to our child.  Watching him carry this burden has and still is something that no mother should endure.  My once social outgoing boy has become withdrawn, at times angry, as he deals with the grief and heartache of this senseless act."  She says, "It's so unfair."

29Looking to the future, she says that she has "An unclear picture of how this will affect my son long term, which worries be greatly.  Parents are entitled to think optimistically of the future of their children," but she worries for him and that has been caused by what you did.  She says that this was a very difficult process, the criminal justice experience.  She says something that we in the courts do know but perhaps need to be reminded of time and again because this is our workplace and perhaps we have become immune.  She says, "I would have to say the worst experience I have ever had to endure was giving evidence in court at the committal, being asked to repeat in my son's words what he had told me was emotionally indescribable."

30She has, through her life experience, seen life's ups and downs, life and death as a nurse and through her own family but this is a matter that she wonders whether time will heal.

31I am not able to capture, I am sure, all that was expressed by the second victim's mother but it is a profound impact upon her, as it was on her husband who says that nothing in the world could prepare a father for the bomb like this to explode in his family.  He says that he is not someone who feels comfortable in writing down how he feels and it is something that troubles him greatly.  His dear boy, as he described him, they had a great relationship but he feels that his innocent boy is gone, now turned into an angry and at times closed book.  Since he was violated, his father immense guilt that this happened, and I reiterate what I had said, but in this case, his father has a sense that he trusted you, someone he had known for many years, and he would not have dreamed that this would have happened.  He regrets leaving his son anywhere near you and finds it hard to trust anyone in the future

32As I have said, he writes, "I'm not generally one to show emotions and probably hide a lot but I am telling you now, this the worse I've ever felt."  He finds it difficult to carry on or to be as involved in his work.  That is an impact brought about by you.  They are left, as he writes, "We are now left with the dilemma of what to do from here.  My son is so shattered.  He's begging us to sell up and move but that's a difficult thing."

33As to the gravity of your offending against the second victim, to anally penetrate a 12 year old child only has to be said for the seriousness and depravity to be exposed.  The second victim was simply enjoying himself, riding his bike in his local community.  You as a family friend were trusted by him to do the right thing when the rain came and you suggested going somewhere for shelter.  Again, I state that the community is horrified that such attacks on children could occur.  The community's justifiable expectation is that the courts will punish sexual predators such as you with severe terms of imprisonment.  The community, in particular young children, must be protected from you.

34A maximum term of the offence of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 in this instance is ten years.  However, the very young age of the second victim, just beyond the age where the maximum penalty is two and a half times as long, being 25 years is a matter that elevates the seriousness of the crime.  That is because of his young age.  That also applies to Charge 2 on the first indictment.

35I am mindful that the penetration here was brief and you stopped when asked to by the victim, however the crime of penetration of a child under the age of 16, who is just over 12 years old, is grave because of the violation of the child's body however briefly that the penetration was.  It introduces into the world of a 12 year old child concepts that are foreign to them and diminishes their sense of innocence.  It also involved pain and injury. 

36 As I have said, in respect of your offending against the first victim, crimes of this kind simply bewilder decent members of our community.  Beyond that, it has a corrosive effect upon society as parents fear that their children are not safe doing ordinary things that have been done by children for decades, simply riding a bike to the park.  Your conduct is what parents fear and what the community abhors.  Accordingly, I must give very significant weight to denunciation and deterrence.

37As will be made clear when discussing your prior criminal history, the deterrence must be directed to you as well as to others who might be minded to sexually abuse children.  Protection of the community is also a matter of very significant weight. 

38As to your prior offending, you do not have a lengthy criminal history, however, you do have a very relevant prior conviction for similar sexual offending when you were in your late teens or early 20s.  In March 2003, you pleaded guilty to the crime of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16.  The County Court judge sentenced you to a community based order that lasted for 18 months and in addition, to you being required to perform 200 hours of unpaid community work.  You were also required to attend for assessment and treatment in a sex offenders program.  I was provided the sentencing remarks of the County Court judge who imposed the sentence in the County Court sitting in Warrnambool.

39What can be seen from the sentencing remarks was that in the period from February 2001, to January 2002, you were doing odd jobs for the victim's grandmother.  At various times, the grandmother was looking after the victim and perhaps other young children.  But the victim then was a six to seven year old young male child, with special needs.

40Precise circumstances of your offending were not made clear to Her Honour.  But Her Honour found that you penetrated the child on four to five occasions.  It seems these incidents were in the context of you telling the child to play games with you, which you knew to be rude.  You are not to be
re-sentenced for this previous crime of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16, but it is relevant.

41Although the sentence was a merciful one, the reasons of Her Honour were considered and directed at endeavouring to rehabilitate you as a young 19,
20 year old man with intellectual disabilities.  I note that there was no appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions in respect to the sentence being inadequate. 

42Of concern is that following your arrest and remand for these offences, you were examined by an experienced medico legal psychologist and in speaking of your prior conviction, and the community corrections order, you said to her that you felt that you were pressured to plead guilty to the charge in 2003.  And further, that although you attended the Sex Offenders Program, you "Wished you never went to it.  It was a group of about twenty men and I learnt things I'd never heard before.  I learnt to stay away from kids and so I did".  That last statement stands in stark contrast to the serious offending that you engaged in from 2012 until your arrest. 

43Plainly, you have little insight into your offending conduct.  You did not take up the chance you were given to learn and then reform your sexually deviant ways.  This diminishes any confidence that I can have in your prospects for rehabilitation.  It necessarily adds to the weight I must give to deterrence to you and to the need to protect the community from you.

44The other criminal conviction in your past was lighting a fire, that endangered property and life.  This was dealt with in the Magistrates' Court at Hamilton on 1 March 2001, when you were in your late teens.  You were without conviction placed on a community based order for twelve months.  It seemed that the fire you lit was a grass fire that placed livestock and property at risk.

45The prior sexual offending against a child, together with your serious offending against both victims in these matters before me, makes it clear that you are an ongoing risk of future sexual offending.  The psychologist Ms Lechner, having applied the relevant tests, concluded that you fit the diagnosis for a paedophilia disorder. 

46In her view, taking into account the results of all measures, and her clinical review, she concluded that you were a moderate to high risk of future sexual offending.  It was her view that you needed to undergo further assessments and treatment by the Sex Offenders Program to determine the best treatment for you, both in custody and upon your ultimate release.

47It seems clear to me that you remain a real risk to the sexual safety of children, given your past history and this offending and your lack of insight into the danger that you present to children.  The assessment of moderate to high risk is in my view, probably as accurate as these predictions can be.  Of course the risk that you present is that you will commit very serious, penetrative sexual offences against very young children, having befriended them.  Again, this emphasises why my sentence must operate to protect the community, in particular, young children.

48As to your personal circumstances, you are now 36 years old.  You were raised in Hamilton, the third eldest of six children.  Your father left the family when you were about five.  You lived with your mother until she died in May of 2014.  You then moved to live with your older brother.  As a child, you attended local schools in Hamilton up to Year 9.  You then went to the local TAFE obtaining a general education as opposed to a particular trade or skill.  Schooling was difficult and you describe being abused and belted up because you were a slow learner. 

49You reported to Ms Lechner that when you were 10, some 14 year old boys abused you and one penetrated you.  This happened once.  At 19, you were set upon by older men who threatened to rape you, but did not.  There was no analysis of how this experience connected to your offending, save that
Ms Lechner opined that this led to "Confusion about sexual boundaries and sexual orientation".  I do not ignore that you have yourself been a victim of sexual assault at a young age, and that sexual abuse has long term adverse effects.

50After leaving school, you had been employed on a casual basis as a groundsman at the Hamilton Racecourse or racetrack.  Your continuous work history is a matter that goes in your favour.  You have had no involvement with drugs and only drink moderate amounts of alcohol from time to time.  The IQ testing done by Ms Lechner placed you in the mildly intellectually disabled range, with an IQ of 64.  That was also the finding of the psychologist who tested you in 2001 and 2002.

51Whereas on the basis of this test, you have an intellectual disability, you have, in practical terms, never had any specialist services provided to you via Disability Services or the NDIS, save that you have been in receipt of a disability pension for some time.  Nonetheless, your low intellect is a matter that I take into account in respect of the sentence to be imposed.  What was put forward by your counsel, and I accept, was that your low intellect and lack of guile, means that incarceration weighs more heavily on you.  You have struggled in custody since you were remanded in June of 2017 and you reported that you tried to jump off a balcony, but were prevented, that you are constantly scared by the violence you observe.

52Your low IQ and lack of insight, was not said to lower your moral culpability or mean that deterrence to you was to be moderated or generally.  With that said, I do not ignore that you struggle to understand proper social values with respect to children.  However, as was conceded by your counsel, these aspects of your lower IQ means protection of the community is of greater necessity and weight.

53For about a year prior to your arrest you were involved in an age appropriate relationship.  You have had no contact with your previous girlfriend since your arrest.  You do have some contact in prison with a man who owned the panel beating workshop.  Apart from this, you are isolated. 

54As was properly conceded by your counsel in her comprehensive written, and her oral submissions, was that the only option available to me was the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment, with affixing of a non-parole period.  You will need supervision and support when you return to the community.  However, if and when you are granted parole, is a matter for others, not me.  I will allow for the potential of parole, but the head sentence that I impose is set, mindful that you may have to do every day of that head sentence. 

55Likewise, the minimum term I fixed is what I considered justice requires in terms of incarceration, for the crimes that you have committed.  No more and no less.  I agree that you will need to undergo lengthy sex offenders treatment in custody and in the community upon release.

56The separate offending and its impact on the separate victims, and more broadly, the victims families must be acknowledged.  I have revisited the sentences to ensure that the totality of your crimes is met by the total sentence I imposed.

57I am also mindful of the operation of the serious offender provisions in the Sentencing Act, which come into play in respect of the sentence that I intend to impose in respect of the second victim or the second indictment.  Thus, the term of imprisonment that I intend to impose in relation to the second victim, is to be cumulative, unless I otherwise order.  The tension between the principles of totality and the operation of the serious offender provisions in the Sentencing Act, has been the subject of appellant analysis in recent times.

58My order for some cumulation, but not complete, is made mindful of those authorities, and in order to avoid a sentence that is simply an outlier.  Nonetheless, there is good reason in principle, and by the operation of the statute, that there is a substantial amount of cumulation in respect of the second victim, upon the sentences imposed in respect of the first victim, and indeed, within the two charges involving the first victim.

59The High Court and our Court of Appeal in Victoria have recently restated the need for sentences imposed for sexual violations against children, to adequately express the community's denunciation and to recognise that Parliament has set very lengthy maximum terms of imprisonment for these offences.  In particular, the first offence in respect of the first victim.

60As I will make clear, your plea of guilty have meant that your sentences are less than they otherwise would have been.  You ran a committal in relation to the first victim, though by statute, the victim himself could not be cross-examined.  Shortly thereafter, the matter was negotiated into a plea of guilty.  In respect to the second victim, you indicated a plea of guilty before any contested committal.  Well before one was even arranged. But beyond this utilitarian benefit of not testing the victim's account or pleading guilty as early as you did.  Further, expressions of remorse by you are problematic.  What you said to
Ms Lechner, as she recorded it in her report was the following.  I will edit and redact in the names of the victims,

"Mr Whennen acknowledged his role in the matter concerning the second victim.  He said I've known him for a while.  I knew his father.  Riding BMX bikes in the particular.  I don't know what was going through my mind, but went down to the shed.  I asked if he wanted to have sex, he said 'All right'.  I said 'you don't have to', we were doing it.  He changed his mind and I stopped, then we looked at motorbikes".  He, that's you, "admitted that you wanted to have sex with the victim, 'Because I liked him".  You stated that you had an erection, but did not ejaculate.  I never thought about his age.  I shouldn't have did anything.  Sometimes I don't realise what I'm doing".

61In respect of the first victim, you said,

"We've been friends since I first met - I don't know what happened there.  I liked him and that as a friend.  Things happened that shouldn't have.  We had a falling out.  I knew I did the wrong thing.  I'm ashamed of what I've done.  At the time, I didn't think it was wrong.  I never forced anyone".

62Ms Lechner goes on,

"The concept of consent and of a child's mind have to be carefully explained to him".

63She then went on in her opinion to say,

"He understands his actions have been wrong, but it is somewhat unclear about exactly why, given that he perceived himself to have consent of his victims". 

64These are concerning matters and I cannot attribute to you, the usually significant mitigatory weight of remorse.  As discussed, your very limited insight and your entrenched paedophilia makes your prospects for a reform uncertain and it again, heightens the need for protection of the community. 

65Doing the best I can in respect to these matters, I impose the following sentences.  Could you please stand Mr Whennen.

66On the first indictment, J10791291, Charge 1, a representative charge, sexual penetration with child who was under the age of 12, you are sentenced to seven years imprisonment.  On Charge 2, a cause of conduct charge, sexual penetration with child who was under the age of 16, but 12 years and over, you are sentenced to five years and six months imprisonment.  I order that sixteen months of the sentence on Charge 2 be cumulative upon the sentence I imposed on Charge 1.  That gives, on that indictment, a sentence of eight years and four months.

67In respect of indictment H11674113, which has the single count - a single charge of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16, but over the age of 12, you are sentenced to three years and six months and I order that twenty months of the sentence that I have imposed on indictment H11674113 be cumulative upon the sentence of eight years and four months that I imposed on indictment J10791291.  That gives a total effective sentence of ten years and I fix a minimum non-parole period of seven years.  That is, you will not be eligible for parole for seven years.

68I note that you have served 510 days in prison on remand.  This figure having been reckoned, I declare that you have already served 510 days of the sentence that I have just imposed and ensure this declaration is entered into the records of the court, so the prison authorities are left in no doubt that you have already served 510 days of the sentence that I have just imposed.

69In respect of the single charge on indictment H11674113, the operation of the serious offender provisions of the Sentencing Act, you are a serious sexual offender and I make that declaration.  In respect of the Sex Offenders Registration Act, you are required to be registered as a sex offender on that register and the period of time is life. 

70What is required is that that will be an order made in respect of indictment J10791291, as I have discovered it is not necessary once there has been a registration order for life that there be a repeat of that in respect to the other matter. 

71There is a document that needs to be filled out.  It is simply this, I have got to give you a document that I sign that says that I have given you a document.  You have got to sign a document that says that I have given it to you.  Ms Smith will have to assist with that.  The important thing is that the document itself, many pages of it, describe the responsibilities that you have, once you are released and have to register on the Sex Offenders Register.  Consequences of not doing what is required are serious and you will have to have registration and all those matters explained to you as your release approaches whenever that might be.  If we have got that document, that can be provided too.  It is the last page that he has to sign, acknowledging that he has got all this.  If that could be given - taken down the back.

72What I have got is a document signed by Mr Whennen that acknowledges that he has been given notification, reporting obligations and notice of (indistinct), the reporting period.  That will be forwarded to the Chief Commissioner of Police.  Is there anything else required?

73MR HEVEY:  Section 6AAA, Your Honour.

74HIS HONOUR:  I am so sorry.  In respect of that - it is here.  I would have imposed, had you pleaded not guilty to the offences and been found guilty, a total sentence of twelve years with a minimum of nine.

75MR HEVEY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

76MS SMITH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

77HIS HONOUR:  Is there anything else required?  Thank you, Mr Whennen can be removed.  Ms Smith, thank you very much for your assistance, likewise
Mr Hevey.  I'm grateful to the police officer who assisted with the victim impact statements and to the families who have been here for the dignity that's been shown.

78MS SMITH:  Your Honour, can I just mention one matter for tomorrow briefly?

79HIS HONOUR:  Yes.  To all those who don't have to be here, feel free to leave.

80(At this stage the court proceeded with another matter.)

‑ ‑ ‑