R v Kashif Bilal

[2011] NSWDC 76

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Kashif BILAL [2011] NSWDC 76
Decision date:	01 July 2011
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Cogswell SC DCJ
Decision:	In respect of the offence of attempted sexual intercourse without consent, a fixed term of 5 years imprisonment. In respect of the offence of indecent assault, a fixed term of 2 years imprisonment. In respect of the offence of solicit to murder a non-parole period of 6 years and balance of the term of 5 years.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - attempt sexual intercourse - indecent assault - solicit to murder - no prior convictions - working for insulation company and visited victim's home where sexual offences occurred - remanded in custody and police received information that offender wanted to have victim murdered - undercover police operative authorised to engage in conversation with offender - offender agreed on details of the murder with the undercover operative - evidence from prisoner who was in custody with offender - submission that offender was acting in fear of the prisoner - offender given permanent protection visa in 2008 after deserting from the Pakistani Navy - report from psychologist - plea of guilty entered at earliest opportunity - solicit to murder offence falls in the middle of the range of objective seriousness
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 s 26, s 61I, s 61L
Cases Cited:	R v Louizos [2009] NSWCCA 71
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Kashif Bilal
Representation:	Ms H Roberts for the Director of Public Prosecutions Mr M Paish for Mr Bilal Ms Summerfield for the Director of Public Prosecutions Ms Havryliv for Mr Bilal Mr Sandilands for Mr Bilal (withdrew partway into proceedings)
File Number(s):	2009/230218 2009/329212
Publication restriction:	It is an offence to publish the name, or any information that identifies a complainant in certain sexual offence cases.

SENTENCE

1. I am sentencing a relatively young man without any prior convictions for a pair of serious sexual offences committed by him on a teenage girl in her home and for an extraordinarily serious effort by him to then arrange for the victim of his sexual assault to be murdered.

2. It is important for a judge in sentencing any offender to set out briefly what happened which brought about the charges against a person who is being sentenced. Because the victim of the sexual assaults is entitled to have her identity protected I will refer to her simply as the victim.

3. Kashif Bilal, then aged twenty-two, was working for a company that sold and installed housing insulation. On 15 October 2009 he turned up at the victim's home at about twenty to six in the evening. He asked whether he could come inside to look at the roof cavity. The victim told him that he could not do that because she was at home by herself and she was not allowed to let anyone in the house. Mr Bilal said, " Just for five minutes " and he opened the front screen door and walked into the house. The victim felt uncomfortable but did not stop him. She showed him the access to the roof which happened to be outside her bedroom. Mr Bilal took himself into her bedroom and said, " This is a nice room ".

4. Then what happened is this. Mr Bilal grabbed the victim. He started kissing her around the neck and her breasts. He tried to pull down her tube top and bra. The victim said " no " and puller her top back up. She tried to push him away and understandably felt fearful for her safety. She fell to the floor.

5. She could feel Mr Bilal rubbing his penis against her. She managed to get up and sat on the bed with her head in her hands. Mr Bilal was trying to pull her pants down. He said it would "just take five minutes". He tried to pull her up from the bed but was unsuccessful. She stayed fixed in place, sitting on the bed. The victim heard Mr Bilal take off his belt and unzip his pants. Mr Bilal took out his penis. The victim put her head down. She felt as if she was choking because Mr Bilal's thumb was on her neck as he tried to get her to lift her head up. She felt his penis in her face. He kept saying to her " five minutes ". He tried to push his penis into her mouth. She closed her eyes and kept her hands over her mouth and her face to prevent that happening.

6. As a result of that part of the episode which I have just described Mr Bilal was charged with attempting to have sexual intercourse with the victim.

7. Mr Bilal was unsuccessful in his attempts to put his penis into her mouth. He nevertheless put his penis down the top that she was wearing, in between her breasts. The victim felt his penis rubbing between her breasts and then she felt him ejaculate.

8. That ejaculation and the behaviour accompanying it brought about a charge of indecent assault.

9. Mr Bilal persevered, he tried kissing the victim on the lips. He sat on her bed and asked for her phone number. The victim gave him her number as she wanted to get his number.

10. The police came and spoke with the victim and other neighbours. The next day, at 1 o'clock in the morning, the police arrested Mr Bilal. He had only been in Australia for about eighteen months and an interpreter was needed. He agreed to be interviewed. He agreed that he had entered the house but denied assaulting the victim.

11. He was charged with the two offences that I have already referred to. He was refused bail. He was then transferred to prison.

12. Whilst he was in prison the police received what they regarded as credible information that Mr Bilal wanted to have the victim murdered, so that he could be released from gaol. An undercover operative was authorised to engage in conversation with Mr Bilal. That conversation occurred at one of the New South Wales prisons on 9 December 2009.

13. During the conversation Mr Bilal agreed that the victim would be killed for a sum of $10,000 which he agreed to pay upon completion of the murder and his release from gaol. The conversation was recorded by the undercover operative and I will refer to some of the passages from the transcript of that recording. When the operative arrived Mr Bilal told him that he, Mr Bilal, had a problem. They discussed in general terms that the problem was with the girl. The operative said that there was " a different price for whatever you need done ".

14. The operative then asked this specific question, " Do you want the hospital or do you want the cemetery? " The recorded reply is, " The cemetery ". The operative checked by saying, " Cemetery. A graveyard?" Mr Bilal answered, " Yeah ". The operative checked a further time, saying, " So what do you want? The hospital or the graveyard ". Mr Bilal answered, " The graveyard ". A short time later in the conversation he gave the victim's name. He spelt out her given name and her surname. He was asked by the operative, " Whenever we do it, do you want us to torture her?" Mr Bilal answered, " No " adding, " Just finish ". When the undercover operative asked, " What about the body?" Mr Bilal replied, " I don't know. That's your problem."

15. Mr Bilal was alert to the possibility that the police might try to track down himself or the person he regarded as the contract killer and Mr Bilal said to the operative that when " everything has happened, they might come to you as well, because you visited me." He said a little later that after the anticipated death of the victim he would " make sure that the first three or four months, I just, just mostly, I do everything very careful." He was aware that he would be asked and pushed by the police.

16. Towards the end of the conversation he was asked by the operative whether he was a hundred per cent sure. Mr Bilal answered that he was waiting for the operative to come so that he could proceed and added, " I am a hundred per cent sure." He went further and said that he was, " More than hundred per cent. I know I don't have any chance." The operative finally checked again about the cemetery or the hospital and Mr Bilal answered, " No, cemetery " and added again that he was one hundred per cent sure.

17. Interestingly the operative asked whether he would feel guilty about it. Mr Bilal was obviously convinced of his innocence of any sexual assault and replied, " Look, if I'd really done something to her and then I do something to, wrong again, then I've got chances to get - maybe I feel guilty. But I never tried to hurt anyone. And there is no chance of feeling guilty now."

18. At one stage he said he would need to take out a loan to pay the $10,000 and that he could get a job to pay it off. It would have to be in instalments so as to allay suspicion of his involvement given that he would be obviously a suspect.

19. Mr Bilal was taken to the Parramatta police station from custody on 23 December 2009 where he was formally placed under arrest and charged with the offence of solicit to murder. He pleaded guilty to all three of the offences at what the prosecution agrees was the earliest available opportunity. 20. So he comes to be sentenced by me for three crimes. There was the attempted sexual intercourse. That is against s 61I of the Crimes Act 1900 and carries a maximum penalty of fourteen years imprisonment. The indecent assault is a crime against s 61L of the Crimes Act and Parliament has fixed a maximum of five years to that crime. Finally there is the solicit to murder which is an offence against s 26 of the Crimes Act . Parliament regards that crime so seriously that it has fixed a maximum twenty-five years imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of ten years to that crime.

21. The prosecution represented by Ms H Roberts of counsel, the Crown Prosecutor, and by Ms C Summerfield from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Ms Roberts called as a witness a prisoner who had been in custody with Mr Bilal when Mr Bilal was first arrested and bail refused. Mr Bilal discussed various aspects of his predicament with this prisoner. He also discussed the idea of avoiding his predicament by arranging for the murder of the victim. The evidence of that prisoner was challenged in various respects by the solicitor then acting for Mr Bilal, Mr Sandilands, who part way through the case had to withdraw for professional reasons and was replaced by Mr M Paish of counsel. It became apparent that the prisoner was serving some twentyfour years for offences including acting with an intention to pervert the course of justice and murder as well as kidnapping.

22. There were some issues which arose regarding that prisoner's evidence and whether or not Mr Bilal was acting in fear of that prisoner - he claimed he was - and whether or not the initiative for the idea of murdering the victim was suggested by the prisoner or by Mr Bilal. First I should say that where I have any reservations I do not accept the evidence of the prisoner. There were significant restrictions on Mr Sandilands's ability to cross-examine the prisoner because his identity could not be disclosed. In addition he has the convictions which I have recorded. I put the minimum amount of reliance on anything he has said.

23. Mr Sandilands and then Mr Paish called their client, Mr Bilal, to give evidence. He confirmed that everything he had told the Probation and Parole Service and a psychologist qualified to interview him was correct. He gave evidence that he was from Pakistan and was with the Pakistani Navy when in Darwin he deserted. He was granted a visa as a permanent resident. He had genuine concerns that he would be shot if he returned to Pakistan because of his desertion and there was some evidence that he was the subject of a notice so far as Pakistani authorities were concerned.

24. Asked about why he committed the offences he said he made a wrong decision. He said he could not face his parents or the community. He claimed that he was in fear of the prisoner whom he had discussed these things with and thought that he might himself become a victim. He may have been in fear of that prisoner but at the relevant time he was in a separate Corrective Services institution and in fact corresponded with that other prisoner. He had never been in custody before and was twenty-two when he first went into prison. He repeated that he was very embarrassed, thinking that he could never be in that situation ever in his life. He could not work out how to tell his parents or his friends. He said that he was on a green card which means that he was on a suicide watch. It was when he was on the green card that he decided to go ahead with the plan to eliminate, so to speak, the victim of the crimes which resulted in him being bail refused and in prison. He said he was very much depressed whilst he was in prison.

25. At one stage he said he had been assaulted by the prisoner. That may or may not have happened. I do not regard it as necessary to make a finding on that because I do not regard it as relevant because he was separated from that prisoner at the time that he made the arrangement with the undercover operative. Asked by Mr Paish what his feelings were regarding his efforts to solicit the murder of the victim he acknowledged that it was " totally wrong and I'm very sorry for that." He said that he was taking responsibility for that crime.

26. He said that he was under stress at the time that he was in prison and was concerned about his family. He said his mental condition was not stable adding " in other words on green card and my brain was fully a mess, I couldn't think properly ." He said that was " the main reason that everything went like this ." He acknowledged the conversation which he had with the undercover operative and repeated that he was feeling depressed and his brain was in a mess.

27. Cross-examined by Ms Roberts he acknowledged that he had corresponded with the prisoner when the prisoner was at another location. He had provided the prisoner with his, Mr Bilal's, MIN number and told him where he was. He repeated that he was in " that much stressed condition, whatever I did I was ashamed of that I betrayed my religion, whatever I was going to tell the family, friends. The whole thing was messing me up." He was there referring to the situation he found himself in gaol bail refused on the sexual assault charges.

28. He acknowledged in cross-examination by Ms Roberts that he had gone to some effort to get the name of the proposed victim correct so that he could pass on the name to the person he regarded as the one he was making the contract with to have her killed. He acknowledged that he, after making the arrangement, did not ring the police and warn them about the arrangement that he had made. He acknowledged to Ms Roberts that that was because his main concern was himself and that he did not want to be in gaol.

29. Asked by Mr Paish at the end of his evidence how he felt about what had happened he gave this reply " whatever what happened in the first matter I totally disgust myself in that time. I never thought that I can be lower myself to that level and the second thing your Honour it was totally - I put myself in the situation that I can never put myself now because I was emotionally messed up at the time ." He said that the other prisoner " gave me that offer and I took it and I couldn't pull myself out of that, so it is a totally different thing now, I can't think these terrible things anymore ."

30. There was a good deal of evidence in the form of exhibits which were tendered by both parties. As I said Mr Bilal has no known criminal record. There was a pre-sentence report prepared by the Probation and Parole Service. It recorded that he was born in Pakistan and raised in a loving, protected and religious family. He was the second youngest. He was given a permanent protection visa in 2008 after deserting from the Pakistani Navy. He completed his responsible service of alcohol qualifications and worked very hard before these offences. The report noted that he had readily admitted responsibility for the sex offences. He added however that he " cannot fathom the reasons he committed these offences. "

31. Mr Bilal told the probation and parole officer "that he has had no previous sexual experience and he felt the victim showed interest in him ." He said that it would " never happen again." He gave an explanation about the solicit to murder which was exculpatory in a sense that he claimed he thought he was paying the victim's family off and when he realised that it involved a proposal to murder the victim he was too scared to withdraw.

32. He holds grave concerns for the safety of his family in Pakistan. Some of his family were affected by the floods in recent years.

33. As part of Mr Bilal's case there was admitted into evidence a report by a clinical psychologist, Peter Champion. Mr Champion noted a history which " suggested that he may have been experiencing an acute form of PTSD or associated disorder when he came to Australia." That is a reference to post traumatic stress syndrome. It noted he had experienced some mood disturbance when he was in Australia " being in a new country and isolated from family, and having concerns for their welfare ." He became depressed when he went into prison.

34. Mr Champion " did not elicit any clear report that at the time of the sexual offences Mr Bilal was suffering from active symptoms of mental illness of a type likely to cause the offending behaviour." There was a possibility he may have been suffering from some mood disturbance and anxiety at the time because of his recent experiences. He told Mr Champion that when he went into prison " he had become significantly depressed and out of his depth, and had been subject to suicidal thoughts ." Mr Champion noted that Mr Bilal was " unable to account for his actions in relation to the sexual offences ."

35. Mr Champion noted that Mr Bilal had " claimed that his mental state was poor at the time of his entry into prison, and if this is correct his judgment at that time may have been impacted." He is referring to the arrangements which Mr Bilal thought he was making for the murder of the victim. He accepted responsibility for his actions and regretted them and spoke of a sense of shame. He spoke of having made a " wrong decision ", " wrong in part because it was wrong for the victim to have such a thing happen to her, and for her to be 'dishonoured' in this way. "

36. Mr Champion tried to assess " risk factors for sexual offending ". He ranked his prognosis as guarded " particularly as Mr Bilal struggled to account for his actions in any real fashion." He said that that was not the same as saying there was a clear risk that he would offend again but " until if any behaviour and its psychological underpinning is better understood, the level of risk is difficult to judge ". He recommended that Mr Bilal be subject to psychiatric review in prison and psychological monitoring and recommended a referral to a sexual offenders program.

37. There was material tendered from Mr Bilal's record in the prison system and from the Justice Health records. Mr Bilal wrote a letter to the victim which I expect for very good reason was not passed on to her and served mainly the purpose of demonstrating his own shame and regret for what he had done. Mr Bilal has been very actively involved in improving himself in prison. I get the impression that he is quite an intelligent and articulate young man and this is borne out by a number of qualifications he has received whilst he has been actively involved in various educational and development programs in prison. As some offenders do, he wrote in his own words a letter to me, tendered by his counsel, explaining his circumstances and acknowledging his own fault. I have taken that into account.

38. There is a reference from a work colleague who speaks very well of Mr Bilal before these offences. He was obviously a very hard worker and a faithful and practising Muslim. He was involved in sporting activities, particularly cricket and was very much attached to his family in Pakistan, contacting them most days. He helped out his family financially. To the author of that, the charges " were a complete shock". He thought that Mr Bilal " was not at all that type of person ". It was uncharacteristic behaviour.

39. Ms Roberts in helpful written submissions pointed out that the sexual assaults were aggravated by the fact that they had occurred in the home of the victim and that by the fact that the victim was vulnerable being only sixteen years old and alone at home. Those points were not in issue and I accept that the sexual assaults were both aggravated in those respects.

40. I accept Ms Roberts' description of the circumstances of the sexual offences being "frightening and humiliating for the victim ". The submission went on to say that " despite her manifest lack of consent, until he gained sexual satisfaction" he persisted.

41. I accept Ms Roberts submission that during the conversation with the undercover operative, Mr Bilal " does not demonstrate any reluctance to proceed with the plan to have the victim killed ". That to my mind deals with any question of Mr Bilal acting in fear or misunderstanding.

42. Ms Roberts points out that the intention or motivation accompanying the solicit to murder offence, namely the avoidance of the criminal of responsibility for his crime was a seriously aggravating feature. Ms Roberts went on to argue that Mr Bilal " sought to arrange the murder of a sixteen year old girl against whom he had already committed a serious sexual offence. Where the motive is to 'derail or pervert' court proceedings, this places the offence in the most serious category of offences ". Ms Roberts referred to a passage in the judgment of Howie J in R v Louizos [2009] NSWCCA 71 in grounding that proposition. I will deal with that submission shortly, but I do accept that the motivation of derailing the course of justice was a significantly aggravating feature of this crime.

43. Ms Roberts' submission was that the offending behaviour in the solicitor to murder " falls above the mid range of objective seriousness, motivated as it was by the offender's desire to pervert the criminal process by permanently silencing a Crown witness who was the victim of sexual offences committed by him ."

44. Mr Paish focused on aspects of the evidence given by the prisoner called by the Crown and indicated that reliance should not be placed upon his evidence and I accept that submission. Mr Paish drew attention to his client's " highly anxious mental state " noting that he was " susceptible to suggestion and open to considering behaviour that he would not envisage in ordinary circumstances ".

45. Ms Roberts made a distinction between Mr Bilal having a psychological or psychiatric condition which might reduce the moral culpability of his offence on the one hand and on the hand the fact that he was under great stress with an obsessive focus on his own predicament and that that contributed to his decision making. I accept that distinction. I agree with her that there is no sound psychiatric or psychological evidence that Mr Bilal was labouring under a psychiatric condition which would affect his culpability, but it is clear to me that given his age and his predicament and his background, that he was under a good deal of psychological stress when he was in prison. I am not at all suggesting that that excuses his behaviour of course, but one needs to see the behaviour in context.

46. Ms Roberts correctly observed or conceded appropriately that Mr Bilal was entitled to the maximum of twenty-five percent discount on his sentences because of his plea of guilty at the earliest available opportunity.

47. Mr Paish in further helpful written submissions addressed the objective seriousness of the offence of solicit to murder. He took issue with Ms Roberts' argued classification of the offence as falling above the middle of the range of objective seriousness. Mr Paish made reference to various decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal dealing with this particular offence. I accept what Mr Paish says, so far as the observations of Howie J in Louizos , those observations were not necessary for the decision which his Honour made which means in a legal sense whilst relevant they can be regarded as of less weight. I do not take his Honour's observation as saying that a motivation such as an intention to pervert the course of justice alone elevates an offence such as this into the upper range of objective seriousness. The Court of Criminal Appeal has made its views clear, in the various decisions which I was referred to, about how serious this crime is.

48. I regard the motivation however, as very significant and as a seriously aggravating feature of the crime. Solicit to murder, as I said, is regarded by Parliament as so serious that it has fixed a maximum of twenty-five years and a standard non-parole period of ten years. This was a deliberate and premeditated act, although as Howie J with respect correctly observed in Louizos , " generally it will be unusual to find a case of solicitation that is not premeditated ."

49. Whether or not Mr Bilal acted of his own accord or whether he embraced a suggestion by the other prisoner is not in my opinion to the point. I would not find it mitigating in this case even if the idea was suggested in the first place by the prisoner. The point is, in my opinion, that the idea was embraced by Mr Bilal. There were too many steps which were the sole responsibility of Mr Bilal. He met the undercover operative. He made it very clear to the undercover operative that his intention was for the victim to be killed. He repeated it several times. He provided information about the identity of the victim. He did nothing afterwards to prevent the plan from being executed.

50. Mr Paish suggested that the planning did not advance far from talk. But that of course was a crime. The fact that it was not implemented is not a mitigating factor. The details provided by Mr Bilal were not minimal. He provided the victim's name and address. He had gone to some trouble to get those.

51. Mr Paish suggested that there was " evidence that the offender was not functioning well when he was admitted to custody " and referred to the green card. I accept Mr Paish's submission. The fact that Mr Bilal was on a green card is some objective evidence provided within the prison system that he was vulnerable. In addition I accept Mr Paish's submission that he was an " isolated and pliable individual in prison for the first time in a foreign country ". Mr Paish argued, and I think this makes sense, that his client's " emotional state was one that could readily be believed in all the circumstances ".

52. In addition there is the evidence from Mr Champion that if his mental state was poor at the time " his judgment at that time may have been impacted ". His mental state was obviously poor for the reasons which I have referred to and so it seems to me that it is relevant however in the sense that Ms Roberts points out. There is a link between Mr Bilal's emotional instability and the offence. It does not provide and excuse, it does provide context.

53. Mr Paish highlighted some mitigating factors. His client was twenty-two when the offences were committed and is now twenty-four. I expect that some of his behaviour could be attributed to his youthful immaturity as well as his circumstances that he found himself in. There is limited evidence, but nevertheless evidence, that he was regarded as a person of good character before these offences and had no known criminal convictions. I accept that the sexual offences were aggravated because they were committed in the home of the victim and because she was vulnerable being sixteen and alone. Remorse for those offences must be qualified by his expressed self interest and of course by the plan to have the victim killed. The sexual offences were, I accept, not planned. They were opportunistic but serious.

54. Ms Summerfield on behalf of the prosecutor acknowledges fairly that the sentences for the sexual offences could be concurrent. Both offences were part of the one relatively short but terrifying episode of criminal behaviour against the victim. There must of course be some accumulation of the sentences so far as the solicit to murder is concerned. Although motivated by the desire to avoid the consequences of the sexual assault, it was a separate and more serious crime committed in a considered way some time later.

55. I noted that Mr Champion's view that his prognosis is guarded so far as future offending is concerned. I accept that his prospects of rehabilitation are good. That is evidenced by the courses which he has been actively undertaking in prison, and by him being prepared to partake in specific programmes for sexual offenders. I think he is remorseful now for his offending behaviour. I think his remorse is obviously affected by the extreme position that he finds himself in, and by his shame so far as his family are concerned.

56. I take into account, looking at the appropriate sentence for the solicit to murder, the maximum which Parliament has fixed to this offence.

57. I would regard an overall commencing sentence, taking into account the serious aggravation of avoiding consequences of charges he faced, but at the same time his personal circumstances, as being fifteen years imprisonment.

58. I need to consider, because that crime has attached to it a standard non parole period, where it falls within the range of objective seriousness. Ms Roberts argues that it is above the middle of the range of objective seriousness. In my opinion this crime falls in the middle of the range of objective seriousness. It has all of the features which must attach to a crime of solicitor to murder, however it is aggravated significantly, as I have found, by the motivation of wanting to avoid the consequences of the charges. On the other hand, the vulnerable and pliable position which Mr Bilal found himself in is relevant to assessing its objective seriousness. I would regard it, as I said, in the middle of the range of objective seriousness. It is not low or high within that range, it is in the middle.

59. I would regard an appropriate sentence for the attempted sexual intercourse without consent as seven years imprisonment and an appropriate sentence for the indecent assault as three years imprisonment.

60. Mr Bilal has pleaded guilty to all of these offences that means, as I have already referred to, he is entitled at law to a discount of twenty-five per cent on the sentences that would otherwise be imposed.

61. I would propose to discount the proposed fifteen years sentence for solicitor to murder to a sentence of eleven years.

62. I would propose to discount the sentence of seven years for attempted sexual intercourse to five years and the proposed three years sentence for indecent assault to two years.

63. I propose to commence the sentences from the date when Mr Bilal went into custody on 16 October 2009.

64. The sentences for the sexual assaults will be concurrent, for the reasons which I have given. They will be fixed sentences without a non parole period because of the sentence which I will impose for the solicitor to murder.

65. I will accumulate the sentence for solicit to murder by two years on top of the sentences for the sexual offences.

66. I regard an appropriate non parole period for the solicit to murder as eight years imprisonment. However because that sentence is a cumulative one, I regard it as a special circumstance and will reduce it to six years.

67. The overall result will be a sentence of thirteen years imprisonment with a non parole period of eight years imprisonment.

68. In fixing an overall non parole period, which is somewhat less than the standard of seventy-five per cent relationship between the non parole period and the overall sentence, I bear in mind that there are special circumstances so far as Mr Bilal's age, and the accumulation of sentences. However that adjustment is not significant because the parole period itself is, of necessity, quite long, and will allow plenty of time for him to undergo further rehabilitation.

69. I am going to sentence you now, Mr Bilal, if you would stand up please. In respect of the offence of attempted sexual intercourse without consent I convict you and sentence you to a fixed term of five years imprisonment, to commence 16 October 2009, and to expire on 15 October 2014. In respect of the indecent assault I convict you and sentence you to a fixed term of two years, to commence on 16 October 2009 and to expire on 15 October 2011. In respect of the offence of solicit to murder I convict you. I set a non parole period of six years, to commence on 16 October 2011, and to expire on 15 October 2017. The balance of the term will be five years, commencing 16 October 2017, and expiring 15 October 2022. Have a seat, Mr Bilal.

HIS HONOUR: Ms Havryliv and Ms Summerfield, first just check the arithmetic and the commencement dates. The overall intention is 13 years with an eight year non-parole period. Ms Havryliv?

HAVRYLIV: Yes, I've done the mathematics as well and it's correct.

HIS HONOUR: Mathematics is all right. Ms Summerfield?

SUMMERFIELD: It's correct, your Honour.

70. Mr Bilal, your overall sentence is thirteen years. It commenced when you went into gaol, 16 October 2009, and it finishes on 15 October 2022. Of that you must serve eight years, commencing 16 October 2009, expiring 15 October 2017. The first date on which it appears you will be eligible to be released on parole is 15 October 2017. Whether you get parole is a matter for the Parole Authority. I do not order parole.

71. Your sentence comprises the five years for the attempted sexual intercourse, two years for the indecent assault - they run together - and then eleven years for the solicit, commencing two years into the sentence, and a minimum of six years for that, making up the overall minimum of eight years, do you understand that?

HIS HONOUR: Now, Ms Havryliv, I asked my associate to prepare a clean copy of Mr Champion's report because Corrective Services Authorities, I understand, those who classify prisoners, say they are very much assisted by any psychological or psychiatric report. With your permission, if your client is happy with that, I will send this clean copy with him into custody, do you agree with that?

HAVRYLIV: Yes, I do agree with that.

**********

Decision last updated: 25 August 2011