Director of Public Prosecutions v Wright
[2013] VCC 2095
•14 November 2013
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised (Not) Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-13-00132
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| PAUL WRIGHT |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE GUCCIARDO | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | ||
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 14 November 2013 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v. Wright | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2013] VCC 2095 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject :Intentionally cause serious injury, reckless cause serious injury, armed robbery.
Catchwords: Sentence after trial - Relevant prior history – Verdins principles to moderate sentence – Parity considerations -
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence: TES of 5 years, non parole period of 3and a half years
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms E. Broadbent | |
| For the Accused | Mr M. Kelly |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Paul Wright, you were found guilty by a jury of a charge of intentionally cause serious injury, one charge of recklessly cause serious injury and two charges of armed robbery.
2 In January 2012, in company with a co-accused to whom I shall refer to as B, you met your victims, to whom I shall refer to as M and K, near a tavern in a bayside suburb. You had a discussion with them and during that discussion M unwisely revealed to you that he had money on him. Though K did not want M to go with you, he went with you to a gaming venue at a hotel at that location and with the expectation that he would be taken by you to a place where he could meet females later in the night.
3 M left the hotel venue with you and B and when K voiced her disapproval of M following you to another place, you and B started arguing with K, a female, and started calling her names and insults. M then intervened on her behalf. At a time when M was asking you to settle down and not speak to K in that fashion, you began pushing each other and punches were thrown. B tried to punch M and M punched B. B told M that he had just come out of gaol and that he would "cut you up real bad." B had a knife in his hand and you shouted in encouragement to him "cut him up, cut him up."
4 B stabbed M with the knife, cutting his forearm causing a three centimetre long laceration. M was bleeding heavily from his arm and realising this, he ran but was followed by B and yourself. You chased M along busy public roads and as you did so you continued to encourage B to injure M by yelling loudly "just cut his throat, cut his throat."
5 Ten metres up the road you caught up to M and when he asked you what you wanted you said "give us your money." He gave you $200 but you said "no, give us the lot." That was $900. M was feeling ill from his injury and he made his way up to the median strip, still heavily bleeding.
6 At this time K caught up with where the two of you were and was arguing with you about what had happened. At that time you hit her to the face and she fell on the road. You then took her bag. B was present with his knife. She was trying to hang onto her bag and you ripped it off her and after a while she lost consciousness. The handbag contained personal property and this was to the total value of $300.
7 You and B then ran from the scene. Both M and K were taken to a hospital where they were admitted and treated. M had concussion, bruising, swelling to his face and underwent surgery to repair the stab wound which damaged his triceps tendon. He had a fractured nose. K had a fractured nose, loose teeth, concussion, bruising and swelling of the left eye.
8 B was arrested some ten days later and made full admissions. He pleaded guilty before this court and in June of 2012 he was sentenced by Her Honour Judge Campton to four and a half years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.
9 B was 35 years old and it is accepted that for the three days prior to this offending he had used amphetamine, Xanax and Valium. His criminal history is substantial, mostly dishonesty offences committed to finance his drug habit. He also had priors for recklessly cause injury in 1996 and 2009 and recklessly conduct endangering life and causing serious injury in 1998.
10 His guilty plea meant he was entitled to a discount on his sentence and Her Honour declared that but for his plea she would have sentenced him to six and a half years with a non-parole period of four years. Her Honour found that he had some prospects of rehabilitation and she accepted that B would serve his time harder than usual due to the fact that he would be in protective custody. She took into account the fact that it was B who wielded the knife and inflicted the serious injury on M.
11 I recite these matters as the issue of parity between you and B is a proper principle to consider in the circumstances and a matter which I take into account when I come to impose your sentence.
12 I have not received Victim Impact Statements but heard the evidence of M and K during the trial and accept that theirs would have been a frightening and traumatic experience which will have in all probability the type of long consequences in their lives which we often see in these type of matters in this court. The witnesses were going about their business in an endeavour to have some entertainment and some convivial and friendly exchanges. Their confidence and trust were sadly betrayed by you and your mate.
13 I accept that the armed robbery was probably a spontaneous event with little planning but that does not detract from its seriousness. You were taking advantage of the situation but it is clear you knew that B had a knife and was prepared to use it for the purposes of the robbery. You encouraged him to severely injure M in a calculated and repulsive fashion and you then seriously injured a defenceless woman in a punitive assault designed to inflict injury and facilitate another robbery upon her
14 Such offences committed in public areas , particularly at night, around entertainment precincts, are all too frequent and cause the community concern. The community looks to the court to denounce such behaviour and endeavour to deter like-minded people from behaving in this violent way.
15 There is no doubt that as to the injury to M, which you did not personally inflict, you were aiding and abetting B. The armed robbery you committed together and the other charges you committed as the main offender.
16 In fixing a sentence I take into account your personal circumstances.
17 You are 38 years old. You have lived with your parents, although you have experienced periods of incarceration. Your parents are old-fashioned, hard-working persons and you get on well with them. You have been in almost daily contact with them, although they find it difficult to visit you.
18 You are functionally illiterate which has limited your ability to do anything but menial labouring jobs. When you were in your teens an intellectual disorder was diagnosed. This disorder means you probably do not have the wherewithal to live independently. You have had one intimate relationship with a woman some years ago. That finished when you were gaoled. Having left school at age 13 you worked at a disability place until the age of 16 and you have received a disability pension since then. You have a substantial history of drug abuse, including alcohol, cannabis, speed, ice, heroin, ecstasy and benzodiazepines. You have used heroin, in particular, since age 23 because its effect was a form of self-medication.
19 I accept that because of your history you are likely to be at least partially institutionalised. The last period of reclusion was for some years and you told a forensic psychologist that it took you a year and a half to get used to being out again.
20 Dr Weishaupt provided a report of her assessment dated 9 September 2013. You told her you were suicidal at times . Formal testing showed you were severely depressed and anxious. You have habitual anger issues which impact on your function. You are quick-tempered with little provocation, impulsive and lack general control. In most situations Dr Weishaupt was of the opinion you are likely to express your anger in aggressive, violent behaviour. You display clinically significant deficits and cognitive impairments which leave you vulnerable to peer pressure and anti-social and criminal behaviour. Importantly, she compares your intellectual ability to a child. In this sense you present as someone who does not appear to have the cognitive abilities to apply learning or thinking needed to change your responses or your patterns of behaviour.
21 I accept your intellectual deficits, your psychological issues and your chronic substance abuse have exacerbated each other and these matters have, as Dr Weishaupt put it, a central relevance to your offending.
22 Your prospects of rehabilitation must be very guarded, if not bleak. I accept that the Verdins principles are activated, in the sense that your moral culpability is somewhat reduced in the context of your offending and that you are not a proper vehicle for matters of specific and general deterrence which need to be sensibly moderated.
23 Whilst acknowledging and taking these matters into account, the consideration of the protection of the community must be taken into account as a factor which the sentence must address. This, in my view, can be dealt with by way of a disposition of imprisonment and in my view should be a factor in the synthesis of relevant matters without disproportionately weighing upon the others.
24 I also accept that your sentence may be more arduous in its service because of your depression and anxiety and intellectual disability. Although you have contact with family, it is increasingly difficult for that to occur in person due to your parents' age. The fact that you may be on the cusp of institutionalisation does not mean the court ought to consider you will experience reclusion as an easy lifestyle and my disposition must encompass considerations of endeavouring to avoid such an outcome for the long-term benefit of the community as well as your own, which is never served by the outcome of institutionalisation.
25 You have a relevant and significant prior criminal history. In 2006 you were convicted of recklessly causing serious injury and imprisoned for three years with a non-parole period of two. In 2005 you were sentenced to six months' imprisonment for robbery. Terms of imprisonment were imposed in 2003 for recklessly cause serious injury, in 2002 for recklessly cause injury, attempted robbery and assault. On yet another occasion in 2001 you were convicted of recklessly cause serious injury and intentionally cause serious injury in 2000. As far back as 1994 you were placed on a Community-based Order for intentionally and recklessly cause injury and recklessly cause serious injury, assault and assault with a weapon.
26 You have numerous dishonesty and drug offences - a very poor record. I mention it because it raises concerns for your rehabilitation and it emphasises the need for some specific deterrence.
27 In 2006 His Honour Judge Morrow sentenced you in this court for offences committed in 2004, when as a result of a dispute arising out of drug use amongst drug users, you attacked a man, stabbing him some dozen times, one thrust penetrating his neck and rupturing his carotid artery, causing embolic strokes. You were then 30 years old.
28 Dr Danny Sullivan, an experienced psychiatrist, assessed you at the time and found that you had a mild intellectual disability consistent with ill-considered reactive impulsive behaviour. He was of the opinion that you did not have a mental disorder. His Honour imposed a sentence cumulative on a sentence you were then undertaking.
29 A plea was made on your behalf and it was urged upon the court that it ought not impose a crushing sentence. I do not intend to do that in any shape or form, rather impose a sentence which adequately and appropriately deals with all the relevant factors to be taken into account and with your criminality. Of course you have lost the advantage of any discount upon a plea of guilty which would have generated to your benefit.
30 On intentionally causing serious injury, Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to two and a half years' imprisonment. On armed robbery, Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. On recklessly cause serious injury, Charge 5, you are convicted and sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment, and on armed robbery, Charge 6, you are convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment, which will be the base sentence.
31 I order that three months of the two years on the recklessly cause serious injury be served cumulatively with the armed robbery on Charge 6. In my view the recklessly cause serious injury was to a large extent part and parcel of the armed robbery and only slight cumulation is required. I order one and a half years on Charge 3, the armed robbery on M, to be cumulative on Count 6, the base sentence. I order a further three months of the sentence on Charge 1 be cumulative on Count 6.
32 That is a total effective sentence of five years. I order a non-parole period of three and a half years.
33 Is there an agreed number of pre-sentence days having been served?
34 MS BROADBENT: There is, Your Honour. The number of days is 628 not including today.
35 HIS HONOUR: ‘Dies a quo non computatur in termine’ . I declare 628 days, excluding today, as pre-sentence detention which I will have noted in the court's records.
36 I make a compensation order in the sum of $300 for K and $900 for M, whose names and addresses will be identified in the order which I have signed.
(Prisoner removed.)
- - -
0
0
0