R v Denton
[2004] VSC 114
•7 April 2004
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted | |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1511 of 2003
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| PAUL NIGEL DENTON |
---
JUDGE: | Teague J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 5 April 2004 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 7 April 2004 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Paul Nigel Denton | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2004] VSC 114 | |
---
Criminal Law - Sentencing – thirteen offences – Incite to commit armed robbery – Traffick in amphetamine – Firearms offences – Concurrency and cumulation – Total of 5 years 6 months – 4 years non-parole period
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr M. Gamble | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr C. Beale | Doogue & O'Brien |
HIS HONOUR:
Paul Denton, you have pleaded guilty to thirteen offences.
In summary, the first nine as set out in the presentment are that, as at or shortly prior to 31 December 2002, you did:
1 Incite others to commit armed robbery;
2 Traffick in amphetamine;
3 Possess as a prohibited person firearms, namely a shotgun, air rifle and pistol;
4 Possess as a prohibited person a silencer;
5 Possess methylamphetamine;
6 Possess cannabis; and
7, 8, and 9 Dishonestly handle goods knowing or believing them to have been stolen.
In summarising the remaining four, I will use the numbers of the counts in the information:
They are that you did:
17 and 23 Possess property suspected of being the proceeds of crime;
19 Introduce heroin into the body of another; and
20 Use heroin and amphetamine.
The first of those thirteen offences is the one that I treat as the most serious. It is of inciting three men to commit an armed robbery of Jamie Dajcic. Dajcic was a dealer in illegal drugs in the Bendigo area. In late 2002, you came to buy from Dajcic, heroin and other drugs. You had redeveloped an addiction to heroin. You continued to use both heroin and amphetamine, Count 20. You started trafficking in amphetamine, Count 2. You introduced a Daniel Moeke to amphetamine. That included injecting him the first time, Count 19. He later became an addict. You liaised with Dajcic as to the collection of drug debts. You engaged Apineru Tuagalu to work with you on that collection work. At times, payment was made not with money but with goods. You handled those goods. You knew or believed those goods to have been stolen, Counts 7, 8 and 9.
In mid December 2002, relations between you and Dajcic became strained. That was because of what he owed in relation to a forged cheque scam. You proposed to three friends that Dajcic be dealt with. The three were Moeke, Tuagalu and Joseph Gray. At least at one point, the proposal that you articulated was that Dajcic be killed. That initial proposal appears not to have been meant to be taken seriously. There was persistence in your plan to rob Dajcic. Gray and Moeke were quick to back out. Tuagalu appears not to have had a change of heart until later. When you first spoke with Tuagalu about his helping you to get a gun, he said that he could not help you. Shortly after that, you again contacted him. You got him to drive you to Ballan. There you bought the sawn-off shotgun. You told Tuagalu that you wanted to deal with Dajcic out in the paddock. Nothing eventuated on the first night proposed. A week later, you were still talking of getting Dajcic’s drugs and his money. You said that you expected the money to be of the order of $30,000.
After you bought the shotgun, Tuagalu went to the police. He told them what you had told him and had done. Calls to and from your mobile phone were intercepted. The calls you made on 30 and 31 December 2002 were taped. What you said in those calls bore out what Tuagalu had told the police. You were arrested. At the time of your arrest, you had on you over $4,000 in cash and three mobile phones. Your home was searched. You were interviewed by the police about items found in your home. Those items included the sawn-off shotgun, a Beretta pistol and an air rifle, Count 3. The items included a silencer, Count 4. They included a quantity of methylamphetamine and cannabis, Counts 5 and 6. They included various items of money and stolen property, which might reasonably be suspected of being the proceeds of crime, Counts 17 and 23 .
When interviewed, you gave many answers that were scarcely credible. You claimed that the cash that you had on you was from savings, and that some weeks earlier you had won on the poker machines over $15,000. Other claims that you made included: that you found the shotgun in a derelict house at Daylesford, when by chance you were on the property; that the handgun belonged not to you but to a friend; that you won the silencer in a bet; and, that the air rifle was bought for your son, then aged 7.
You were asked about Jamie Dajcic. You said that he was the dealer who supplied you with heroin. You claimed that friends of yours had wanted to run through Dajcic’s caravan, and take his drugs and money. You claimed that you were just going along with your friends to some extent. The police obtained statements from the other men you named as your friends. Those friends made it clear that the plan to deal with Dajcic was all yours.
You have committed a series of serious offences. Several of them call for a term of imprisonment. That term must be moderated as I must apply the principle of totality. The inciting of others to attack and rob Dajcic deserves the strongest condemnation. Your trafficking in amphetamine was not at a high level. On the other hand, there was much more than the occasional transaction to support your own habit. You chose to acquire a number of firearms. There was more than one reason underlying that choice. The circumstances of the acquiring of the shotgun are particularly troubling, given your plan to deal with Dajcic. In focusing on the inciting, the trafficking in speed and the acquiring of the shotgun, I am not opting to treat the other matters lightly. Your disregard for others is evident in your choices to take illegal drugs, and to inveigle at least one other into that scene. Your disregard for the victims whose losses can be very painful is evident in the times that you chose to handle stolen goods and the proceeds of crime.
I turn from the offences to your background. You were born in March 1971 to parents serving in the British Army. The family came to Australia when you were 9. You were educated in Bendigo to Year 11. In 1989, you started an apprenticeship as a fitter and turner. Within 2 years, you had run into trouble with illegal drugs. In 1991, you served two short terms of imprisonment. That followed an attempted armed robbery on a fish and chips shop. In 1992, you started a relationship with a Melissa Hine. You moved to South Australia. Although the relationship was on and off and did not last long, a daughter was born in 1993, and a son in 1995. Between 1992 and 2001, you came before the courts several times, mainly for thefts and other drug-related offences. Until 2001, you received no further sentence of imprisonment. In 2001, you received two terms of imprisonment. You were released from prison in May 2002. Shortly after your release, you were called on to take your son and daughter because their mother was ill and had to be hospitalised. Having the children with you enabled you to get a house to live in.
In the last half of 2002, you chose to set yourself up in a manner calculated not to help your children but to let them down. You started taking heroin again. You started a relationship with a woman, considerably younger than you, who had a problem with drugs. Her former boyfriend and his associates made trouble for you. You decided that you would need some protection. You made the unwise choice to acquire a couple of firearms. With your drug habit and the making of purchases, you needed money. You made the unwise choice to traffick in amphetamine or speed. You introduced one friend to speed, injecting him for the first time. He became addicted. It was another bad choice, for which it is proper that you should suffer adverse consequences. Those various choices ultimately led to your deciding to plan to rob Dajcic. I accept that at the time your life was in considerable turmoil. But you made the choices that led to it being that way.
There are a number of mitigating factors for which I must allow. You have pleaded guilty. In more than one way, that choice must be taken into account in your favour. You did so at the first reasonable opportunity. I say that, recognising that you were earlier charged with the more serious offence of inciting murder. I accept that the period spent on remand has been the more difficult because of the problem of your being significantly separated from your parents. I am prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt on one issue reviewed on the plea. That was as to whether you had chosen to desist from the earlier declared plan to use the shotgun when robbing Dajcic. I accept that you have, while on remand, taken steps towards rehabilitation. You are not to be written off as having no prospects of rehabilitation. In that regard, your prior convictions are troubling, particularly as four were serious enough to warrant a term of imprisonment. On the other hand, I accept that violence has not been a feature of your past criminal conduct.
I impose a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years on Count 1. I impose sentences of imprisonment, with concurrency periods on count 1 as follows:
Count 2, 2 years, 1 year concurrent.
Count 3, 2 years, 1 year concurrent.
Count 4, 1 month, all concurrent.
Count 5, 3 months, all concurrent.
Count 7, 2 months, 1 month concurrent.
Count 8, 2 months, 1 month concurrent.
Count 9, 2 months, 1 month concurrent.
Information 17, 2 months, 1 month concurrent.
Information 19, 3 months, 2 month concurrent.
Information 20, 1 month, all concurrent.
Information 23, 2 months, 1 month concurrent.
On Count 6, I impose a fine of $100.
With cumulation, the effective total is five years and six months. I declare, and direct that it be recorded, that you have served 464 days of pre-sentence detention. I fix a non-parole period of four years.
0
0
0