R v Bilal Bakkour; R v Nasis Javelosa; R v Hussein El-Skaf; R v Mohamad Hello

In the matter of the Crown versus Bilal Bakkour, Nasis Javelosa, Hussein El-Skaf, and Mohamad Hello, the Supreme Court of New South Wales was tasked with determining the appropriate sentences for these individuals, who had pleaded guilty to knowingly facilitating car rebirthing activities. The new offence under section 154G(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, introduced to address this predatory and serious criminal activity, necessitated a careful consideration of the purpose of the legislation, the offenders' conduct, and their personal circumstances.

The court had to determine the appropriate starting point and range for the sentences, taking into account the objective seriousness of the offence, the offenders' early guilty pleas, and their individual circumstances. The court also considered the need for deterrence, rehabilitation, and denunciation in light of the serious nature of the offence and the offenders' persistent criminal behaviour. In assessing the objective seriousness, the court determined that it fell above the mid-range due to the predatory behaviour and regular criminal activity involved.

The court found that the offenders' early guilty pleas and evidence of remorse warranted some discount from the starting point. However, their ongoing criminal conduct and the need for general deterrence meant that the sentences should still reflect the seriousness of the offence. After weighing these factors, the court sentenced Bilal Bakkour to a period of four and a half years imprisonment with a non-parole period of two and a half years, backdated by one month and 24 days. Nasis Javelosa was sentenced to a period of imprisonment of five and a half years with a non-parole period of three years, backdated by two months and 26 days. The other two offenders, Hussein El-Skaf and Mohamad Hello, received sentences that were not specified in the text.