District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v JEFFREY [2011] NSWDC 138 Hearing dates: 7 April 2011 Decision date: 07 April 2011 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Berman SC DCJ Decision: For each of four matters sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of 18 months.
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Defrauding the Commonwealth - Dishonestly obtain benefit by deception - Lengthy period of offending Category: Sentence Parties: The Crown
Brian JeffreyRepresentation: Mr S Molloy - The offender
Director of Public Prosecutions - Cth
Legal Aid Commission
File Number(s): 2010/129566 2010/130079
SENTENCE
HIS HONOUR: Brian Jeffrey appears for sentence today after a lengthy period of offending. His correct name is Brian Jeffrey but when he was a much younger man he created a false identity, Brian Wilson, using his mother's maiden name. This was at a time when he was asked by a prospective employer what name he wanted to work under and for reasons he could not explain Mr Jeffrey decided that he would work under a false name. He said in Court that the best he could do to explain that decision was that he was a "goose head". That decision is of importance because of what Mr Jeffrey later did with his false identity. In short, he began to use that identity to collect pensions to which he was not entitled. Ultimately what he ended up doing was receiving pensions in both his correct name and his false name. Whilst he was entitled to the pensions in his correct name, he was not entitled to the pensions in his false name. Although it was one continuing offence, it has led to four offences due to a change in the legislation regarding the offence and a change in the nature of the pension that he received.
The offender first lodged claims for disability support pension in the name Brian Wilson as far back ago as 1991. He supported his claim for that pension by various documents, including documents showing a bank account in that name, tax file number, tax assessments and a certificate from his doctor which referred to injuries which does appear Mr Jeffrey genuinely suffered from.
He was very careful to ensure that it would be difficult to match his two identities, by having his pension paid into a different bank account and having correspondence going to a different address from that from where he truly lived. His offending extended all the way through to September 2009 when the authorities finally caught up with him. Over that time he has obtained more than $175,000 to which he was not entitled.
His first two offences are of defrauding the Commonwealth. They relate to a figure of $65,380 and his next two offences are of dishonestly obtaining a benefit involving almost $110,000. At first he received the disability support pension, as I have mentioned, but then when he became old enough the pension was converted to an age pension. That explains why there are four offences…
Continue reading R v Jeffrey
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Jeffrey [2011] NSWDC 138
- Case
- [2011] NSWDC 138
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine the appropriate level of punishment for the crimes committed, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, the length of the offending period, and the principles of sentencing. The prosecution argued for a significant term of imprisonment due to the persistent and calculated nature of the deceptions, while the defence sought a more lenient sentence considering mitigating factors such as remorse and the potential for rehabilitation.
The court found that the crimes were severe and had been committed over a prolonged period, indicating a pattern of dishonesty and deceit. The judge considered the principles of denunciation and deterrence, concluding that a fixed term of imprisonment was necessary to appropriately reflect the gravity of the offences. The court ultimately sentenced Jeffrey to 18 months in prison for each of the four counts, to be served concurrently. This decision was made in line with the overarching goal of ensuring justice for the victims and the community, while also considering the potential for the accused to reform and reintegrate into society.
Orders
Orders of the court
For each of four matters sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of 18 months.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.