R v Kiseloski and Bajic
[2013] VCC 2186
•4 November 2013
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-13-00922 CR-13-00982
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ALEXANDER BAJIC JOHN KISELOSKI |
---
JUDGE: | His Honour Judge Maidment | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 1 November 2013 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 4 November 2013 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Kiseloski and Bajic | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2013] VCC 2186 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms J. Fallar | |
| For the Prisoner Bajic | Mr R. Barton | |
| For the Prisoner Kiseloski | Mr S. Norton |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Alexander Bajic and John Kiseloski, you have each pleaded guilty to various charges on a single indictment. You, Bajic, to trafficking in methylamphetamine and trafficking in cannabis, to possessing an unregistered general category hand gun - two separate charges - disposing of a general category hand gun to a person who is not a licensed firearm dealer and possession of a drug of dependence, namely cannabis. You, John Kiseloski, have pleaded guilty to trafficking in a drug of dependence, possession of documents for trafficking in a drug of dependence relating to the manufacture of methylamphetamine, possession of a drug of dependence - two charges, one of possessing cannabis and one of possessing methorphan - possessing an unregistered general category hand gun and possessing counterfeit money.
2 Each of you have also pleaded guilty to related summary offences - you, Bajic, to possession of ammunition improperly stored and to dealing in property reasonably suspected of being unlawfully obtained and you, Kiseloski, to improperly storing fireworks and dealing in property reasonably suspected of having been unlawfully obtained.
3 The prosecution tendered and relied upon a prosecution opening for plea which is a detailed summary of the evidence relating to each of the charges on the indictment and the related summary offences; that is Exhibit A on the plea hearing I am not going to read it again. Suffice to say that the document shows that each of you were engaged for the periods that are set out in the Indictment - in your case, Bajic, between 29 June 2012 and 5 October 2012 and you, Kiseloski, between 21 August 2012 and 17 October 2012 - in the business of trafficking in methylamphetamine. That is a particular serious offence, having regard to the prevalence of the commission of that offence in our community in Victoria and of the use of that drug within the community. It does, in my opinion, require the court to look to imposing sentences that not only adequately denounce offending conduct of that kind but send a message to other persons within the community that offences of that kind will attract stern punishment. It is important that the courts play their part in deterring trafficking in methylamphetamine.
4 The way in which each of you conducted your respective businesses of trafficking methylamphetamine between the dates that I have just identified involved you, Bajic, in selling from your home address and in particular from a shed which you had set up for the purposes of running your trafficking business and concealing that from your wife and family. You set up your shed with monitoring equipment in a way which was designed to protect your business and you possessed an unregistered hand gun in the form of a revolver and ammunition which you informed an undercover operative with whom you dealt during the course of your trafficking operation, that anyone who sells a minimum of seven grams of ice, meaning methylamphetamine, should carry and have access to a gun. You said that the sole reason for carrying a gun was to protect your family in case there is trouble with your customers.
5 You, Kiseloski, were an upstream trafficker, one of Bajic's upstream traffickers and you conducted your business as a person who was further up the chain of trafficking in methylamphetamine and you conducted it during the period that is set out in the Indictment. You too were in possession of an unregistered general category hand gun. It is clear that you were conducting your business for profit and indeed you had in your possession a sum of money involving $13,585 in cash which was found at your premises either in your wallet or in a safe in your bedroom at the time of your arrest.
6 It is acknowledged by the prosecution that although you were trafficking for the purposes of profit that each of you were users of methylamphetamine at that time and it is accepted by the prosecution that that is a matter that I should properly consider in assessing your degree of criminality and the appropriate sentence in respect to each of you. I do accept that each of you were at that time in part trafficking for the purposes of feeding your habits.
7 Possessing a general category hand gun is also a serious offence and again it is important that the courts treat offending conduct involving possession of unregistered general category hand guns as serious offences with a view to deterring others from committing such offences.
8 Each of you admitted either prior convictions or prior court appearances or both. In your case, Bajic, the only court appearance was in 2000 and involved attempted theft from a motor vehicle. You were dealt with with a fine without conviction on that occasion. In your case, Kiseloski, your offending conduct goes back to possession of cannabis or use of cannabis in 1992 and involved you in trafficking in cannabis in 1994 and use and possession of cannabis and cultivation of narcotic plants in 2006 and possession of cannabis and amphetamines, using amphetamines and possessing a prohibited weapon and the unlicensed storage of ammunition, storing it in an insecure manner.
9 You were convicted and sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for breach of an intervention order, unlawful assault, damaging property and failure to answer bail. That, I understand, was as a result of a domestic dispute. The most recent of your court appearances involved your conduct in relation to your bankruptcy and I do not regard that as having any relevance so far as sentencing in this case is concerned.
10 The maximum terms of imprisonment for trafficking in a drug of dependence is 15 years. For possession of an unregistered hand gun the maximum is seven years. For trafficking in cannabis the maximum is 15 years. Disposal of a general category hand gun, except to a licensed firearm dealer, the maximum term of imprisonment is five years. Possessing cannabis is one year and dealing with property suspected to be the proceeds of crime the maximum is two years. The maximum for possessing cartridge ammunition is 40 penalty units. The maximum for possession of documentation for the purposes of trafficking is 10 years' imprisonment and for possession of methorphan, five years' imprisonment. Possession of counterfeit money, the maximum is 10 years' imprisonment. That deals with the maximum sentences that are not only available but to which I am entitled to have regard and required to have regard in determining appropriate sentence in this case.
11 I incorporate in its entirety the prosecution opening of the plea, Exhibit A, into my reasons for sentence.
12 Dealing with matters personal to each of you and starting with your, Mr Bajic, I was provided by your counsel with a report dated 9 November 2012 from Dominic Greco, a psychologist, a report from Lindsay Vowells, a neuropsychologist, dated 29 August of this year, a letter from Emma Robertson from the Court Integrated Services Program dated 26 November 2012 and a letter dated 9 February 2013 from Dr Loretta Evans, a neuropsychologist.
13 You, Bajic, were born in Australia of parents who migrated to Australia from Serbia. You returned to Serbia for a period of three years in about 1980 and then returned to Australia. You apparently had a somewhat difficult childhood as a member of a migrant family in Australia but you successfully completed year 10 at Altona North High School and you commenced work as a sign fabricator where you worked for about 18 months. You had, unfortunately, been involved in a serious motorbike accident when you were in year 8, aged 14 years of age, and were off school for six months in which you sustained, amongst other injuries, a fractured skull, together with permanent deafness to your right ear.
14 You have, it seems, been on Newstart benefits over a period of time but you worked as a forklift driver, as a delivery driver and you owned a petrol station business in Werribee for two or three years up to about 2006 but you closed that due to the inability to make the business financially viable.
15 You have a supportive family and you were married in 2008 after a 10-year de facto relationship and your wife apparently suffers from schizophrenia and has relied significantly upon you for support and for being the primary driver of your wife and children.
16 It seems that you commenced use of marijuana when you were 15 years of age and became a user of ice for a period of about 18 months prior to this offending conduct. You were a heavy user of ice at the time of your offending conduct.
17 You may have suffered a brain injury as a result of various factors, including the motor accident that you had when you were aged 14 and for that reason it seems you had more thorough neuropsychological testing from Dr Lindsay Vowells. Dr Lindsay Vowells' report appears to be comprehensive in testing your functioning and analysing the degree to which you suffer from an acquired brain injury. It is quite possible, it seems on the analysis of Dr Vowells, that there may be a number of factors which have contributed to your acquired brain injury, including of course the motorcycle accident when you were aged 14 or 15, a subsequent motor car accident in 2011 when you hit your head; when you played football at school you may have had concussion and also, of course, you have been a heavier user of illicit drugs over a period of years which she opines would have exacerbated the brain injuries that you may have suffered from other traumas referred to.
18 The net effect of her analysis is that she has found deficits and your counsel submitted that the deficits were of a kind which were properly to be taken into account in reducing your moral culpability and the need for the application of general deterrence in your case.
19 I was referred helpfully to the Court of Appeal decision in Le v. Le (2011) V.S.C.A. 391 and to the effect of the decision which was that it is not necessary to show a causal link between the mental deficit and the offending conduct for the application of the Verdins' principles. As was pointed out in Le v. Le by the Court of Appeal, the evidence may lead to the conclusion of an impaired ability to exercise appropriate judgment or make calm and rational choices and it seems to me that the reports that have been placed before me by your counsel, in combination in particular the report of Dr Vowells, support the conclusion that there has been or there is in existence a mental impairment or there are mental impairments which do have the capacity to and are likely to have affected your ability to exercise appropriate judgment and to make calm and rational choices at the time when you engaged in the offending conduct. It seems to me, and I think it is conceded by the prosecution, that it is appropriate that I should give you a discount in sentence for the reduction in moral culpability that arises from that and I propose to do so.
20 I noted in the course of discussion during the plea with your counsel that although those deficits may well have been present, you were still able to organise your business, you were still able to set up your shed with surveillance equipment. It required some planning and it required some careful thought as to how you were going to be able to conduct a business over a period of months without your wife discovering what you were doing under the nose of your wife and your family members. You acquired firearms either to sell or in order to protect yourself during the course of that planning process and you were able to maintain a business during the period covered by the charge and to do so covertly and successfully. Albeit you did not act with a great deal of sophistication and albeit that you attracted the attention of the authorities and engaged with undercover police officers during the course of that business.
21 So although I accept that there should be some reduction in moral culpability, I do not regard your moral culpability is extinguished by any means. I still regard you as being significantly culpable for your offending conduct.
22 You have no relevant prior convictions and it is a great pity that you moved on from the use of cannabis to the use of ice. It may well be that had you not got into the habit of using ice that you would never have got engaged in this business. It has undoubtedly been a blight on your life ever since you did become involved in using ice and I accept that entirely.
23 You have, it seems, made efforts through the Stepping Up program to deal with your habit and ‑ ‑ ‑
24 MS FALLAR: I am so sorry, Your Honour, to interrupt. Stepping Up is in relation to Mr Kiseloski.
25 HIS HONOUR: I thought there was reference to it by - I have the note of - yes, I do not know why I have a note of that from Mr Crisp but any rate.
26 You were regarded by the case manager in the CISP program as a person suitable for such programs. I think it may have been in connection with that that the reference to Stepping Up was made by Mr Crisp. But at any rate it was submitted on your behalf that I should find that you are a good candidate for rehabilitation.
27 Having regard to your lack of criminal record and the fact that you have reached a good age without having committed any offences of this nature in the past suggests that you do have good prospects of rehabilitation.
28 You pleaded guilty at the earliest reasonable opportunity and there was no doubt that the fact that your wife suffers from schizophrenia and during periods when you have been in custody and to the extent that you will be in custody in the future that will impact upon the service of the sentence that I will be imposing upon you. It was submitted on your behalf that your wife's condition and your absence from the family would constitute exceptional circumstances that I should take into account in reduction of sentence.
29 I am not satisfied that they constitute exceptional circumstances. It seems to me that you made a very calculated choice in determining to engage in this business and to protect your wife and family with firearms and to conceal what you were doing from your family at the time and it seems to me that you family circumstances should not be regarded as exceptional in all of the circumstances. However, I do accept that the fact that you have placed them in that position will make serving your sentence all the harder.
30 Also I take into account in assessing your prospects of rehabilitation, the fact that you have a good work history up until recent times. You have the capacity it seems to run a business. Although your mental impairments, I suspect, and your somewhat generous personality may well have made the success of that business less than optimal.
31 I am prepared to sentence you as a drug-addicted user who was, at least in part, carrying out the business of trafficking for the purposes of supporting your habit. I will come back to deal with you a little bit further in a few minutes.
32 Turning now to you, Kiseloski, I was provided helpfully by your counsel with a chronology of relevant events and outline of submissions on your behalf which are Exhibit 1, a report from the Stepping Up consortium, a letter of reference from a very reverent Kiseloski and a letter of reference from your partner, Nicole Jacobi.
33 You come from a Macedonian background. Your father came to Australia in about 1977 and you were born in Footscray. You had a happy childhood, completed year 11, worked mostly in the concreting industry but you have also run your own business for a period of time. You have done significant restoration work on cars over a period of time and you currently live with your family and Ms Jacobi at your parents' home. You are, I am told, committed to a staple relationship with Ms Jacobi and I have no doubt at all that your family and your partner will support you. You also have a significant extended family that will help you I think in your process of rehabilitation.
34 You have, unfortunately, also become involved in the taking of ice and you have a long history of drug abuse which no doubt has contributed to this recent offending conduct. You also, I think - and the report from Dr Hannes of the Stepping Up consortium supports this - have made significant inroads into dealing with your habit to a point where it is the view of Dr Hannes in his report that you would appear to have minimal counselling needs at the present time. That is no mean achievement and I think it does bode well for your rehabilitation.
35 You were though an upstream trafficker. You were higher up the scale in terms of the hierarchy within the trafficking business than your co-offender. You were undoubtedly doing it for profit as well as for supporting your own habit and you had in your possession $13,585 at the time of your arrest.
36 You too have pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and deserve full credit for that. It was submitted on your behalf that it was particularly creditworthy given that you have, by pleading guilty, enabled the case to proceed without exposing the identities of undercover police officers. That goes for both accused, I think, in that regard but nevertheless I think that it is sufficient to say that you do deserve full credit for your plea of guilty and your early indication of your plea of guilty and the facilitation of the administration of criminal justice that that represents.
37 I do accept that you did have a substantial drug addiction at the time of your offending and that in part the business was conducted for the support of that habit.
38 It was submitted that you cooperated with police and I think that that is right. You chose not to participate in answering questions during your interview with police but that is your right and I do not think that that detracts in any way from the proposition that you have been cooperative and sought to facilitate the administration of justice.
39 You have been on bail for a substantial period, all apart from a period of 11 days now, I think, in custody and have complied with stringent bail conditions during that time. The matter has been hanging over your head for more than 12 months and that too I take into account as being a stressful time. It is to your credit that you have used that time wisely, stayed out of trouble and sought to rehabilitate yourself. That goes for both you and your co-offender.
40 You undoubtedly, I think, do have reasonable to good prospects of rehabilitation. I say "reasonable to good" because I have to take into account that you do have a criminal history which involves trafficking in cannabis. It ought to have been enough for you to have been caught for that to put you off ever getting involved in offending of this kind. But you chose to run the gauntlet again, to take the chance again. That suggests there is some basis for being guarded about your prospects of rehabilitation, staying out of trouble in the future and I think that I need to pay proper regard to deterring you from committing further offences as well as, most importantly, deterring others from committing offences of this kind.
41 You do not seem to have any mental impairments and apart from heavy drug abuse over a period of time, really no excuse for your offending conduct. There is no capacity for me to reduce your moral culpability on the basis of any mental impairment. Although I stress, I do take into account that in the case of each of you you were offending partly to feed your own habit and I accept entirely that addiction to ice is a difficult habit to deal with and that there would be very compelling reasons as an addicted person why you would be tempted to engage in serious offending conduct in order to support that habit whilst you were suffering from the addiction.
42 Nevertheless, it is not otherwise, I think, to be regarded as a mitigating circumstance. You chose to get involved with ice in the first place. You were the first person to make that choice and I have to, I think, give proper effect to the will of parliament and the fact that the offence of trafficking in a drug of dependence carries a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years.
43 I think you have a good future and I suspect that your family will rally around you and give you the support that you need to stay away from drugs in the future. I hope that is so. Because if you get back into drug use again you are almost certainly going to get back into offending conduct again. I suspect that Ms Jacobi has the capacity, with other family members, to set you on the right road and I approach sentencing you in that expectation, albeit with the reservations that I have spoken of.
44 Just dealing with both of you now, trafficking in methylamphetamine is prevalent in our community. However, your level of trafficking I think is to be regarded as towards the lower end. However, you were both engaged in the business of trafficking and for, at least in part, commercial motives. It is necessary for the court to impose sentences that express the denunciation of this court for conduct of this kind, punish you adequately and, most importantly, deter others. It is very important, it seems to me, that sentences do have a general deterrent effect on others.
45 Each of you I think needs some deterrence from committing further offences and I am bound to balance all that against the need to facilitate your rehabilitation as far as I reasonably can. I did consider whether it was appropriate to impose a sentence that did not require your immediate incarceration. It would have been nice and I would have preferred it frankly if I could have given you a community correction order, each of you, with conditions of treatment and so on. I think I would have been failing in my duty if I had done that and you will have gathered by now that I feel compelled to impose a sentence that involves an immediate custodial sentence, particularly in order to deter others from committing offences of this kind.
46 I invited the prosecution to specify a range of sentences within which they submitted I should select an appropriate sentence. In your case, Bajic, the prosecution submitted between two and three years as an overall sentence and a period of between 15 months and two years for a nonparole period.
47 In your case, Mr Kiseloski, the period was between two and a half and three and a half years with a nonparole period of between 18 months and two and a half years.
48 It seems to me that those ranges are appropriate. They do seem to accord with current sentencing practice. What concerns me about each of you frankly and which brings your offending up to a point where that does seem to me to be an appropriate range is that each of you chose to possess unregistered hand guns and that too seems to me to be a serious feature of your respective offending conduct. It is also troubling in your case, Mr Kiseloski, that you had in your possession a document which was concerned with the manufacture of methylamphetamine. That too is a serious offence and I need to give proper effect to the will of parliament in relation to material of that kind.
49 Doing the best I can to balance all of the competing considerations and to impose a sentence that is just and promotes your rehabilitation as much as I reasonably can I am ready to impose sentence upon you starting with you, Mr Bajic. For the offence, the subject of Charge 1, of trafficking in methylamphetamine I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for two years. For Charge 2, possession of an unregistered general category hand gun, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for one year. For trafficking in cannabis, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for three months. For possession of another unregistered general category hand gun I sentence you to imprisonment for one year. For disposing of a hand gun to a person who was not a licensed firearm dealer, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for eight months. For possession of cannabis I convict you and discharge you. For the summary offence of the possession of ammunition, I convict you and discharge you. For dealing in property reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of crime, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for one month.
50 I declare that the sentence on Charge 1 is to be regarded as the base sentence and I order that five months of the sentence of one year imposed on Charge 2 and four months of the sentence imposed on Charge 4 be served cumulatively upon one another and upon the sentence of two years imposed on Charge 1. The total effective sentence is therefore two years nine months and I order that you serve a period of 22 months before becoming eligible for parole. I declare - I think it is 44 days now ‑ ‑ ‑
51 MS FALLAR: That is correct, excluding today, yes.
52 HIS HONOUR: - - - not including today, of pre-sentence detention as time served under the sentences that I have imposed and order that they be deducted administratively from the period that you will actually have to serve and that that matter be noted in the records of the court.
53 But for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to three years and 10 months' imprisonment with a nonparole period of two years and six months. I make the orders for forfeiture, disposal of property and for the obtaining of a forensic sample from you in accordance with the drafts that I have been supplied with. I need to say about the obtaining of the forensic sample by engaging in a forensic procedure that you will be required by an authorised member of the police force to provide a scraping from the inside of your mouth. If you provide that, all well and good. If you fail or refuse to provide, the authorised officer will be authorised to obtain a blood sample and may use reasonable force to enable that forensic procedure to be completed. I am sure you will not put the officer to that trouble when you are requested. You may sit down for the moment.
54 Mr Kiseloski, on Charge 7 on the Indictment of trafficking in methylamphetamine I sentence you to two years and five months' imprisonment and convict you. For possessing a document containing instructions relating to the manufacture of a drug of dependence with the intention of using the document for the purposes of trafficking I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for nine months. For possession of cannabis I convict you and discharge you. For Charge 10, possession of methorphan, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for one month. On Charge 11, possessing an unregistered general category hand gun, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for one year and on Charge 12, possessing counterfeit money in the form of two counterfeit $50 notes, I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for five months. For the summary offence involving the fireworks I convict you and discharge you. For dealing with property, being reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of crime I convict you and sentence you to imprisonment for six months.
55 I declare that the sentence on Charge 1 is the base sentence and I order that four months of the sentence on Charge 8 of possession of a document and six months of the sentence on Charge 11 of possessing an unregistered hand gun be served cumulatively upon one another and upon the sentence of two years and five months that I impose for the trafficking offence, making a total effective sentence of three years and three months' imprisonment and I order that you serve a minimum term of two years and two months' imprisonment before becoming eligible for parole. I declare 11 days of pre-sentence detention as time served under the sentences that I have imposed and I order that those be deducted from the period that you will be required to serve and that that fact be noted in the records of the court.
56 But for your pleas of guilty I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of four years and four months with a nonparole period of two years and 11 months and I make the orders for the obtaining of a forensic sample and for forfeiture and disposal of property in accordance with the drafts of which I have been provided.
57 MR NORTON: My apologies, Your Honour, can I just raise an issue with respect to the disposal order.
58 HIS HONOUR: Yes.
59 MR NORTON: There is within the schedule an iPhone 5 which is listed at Item No. 41. There are three iPhones altogether which are seized.
60 HIS HONOUR: Yes.
61 MR NORTON: Two of them are conceded as being belonging to Mr Kiseloski. That item described as 41 in fact belongs to Ms Jacobi.
62 HIS HONOUR: Right, okay.
63 MR NORTON: I seek that be deleted from the schedule, Your Honour.
64 HIS HONOUR: Yes.
65 MS FALLAR: That's correct, Your Honour. I was going to do all of that shortly but ‑ ‑ ‑
66 HIS HONOUR: Were you? Okay.
67 MS FALLAR: Yes, Your Honour, Item 41 ‑ ‑ ‑
68 HIS HONOUR: I will grant the order in respect of the amended draft, assuming that the amendment involves the deletion of Item 41.
69 MS FALLAR: Yes.
70 HIS HONOUR: Does that satisfy the ‑ ‑ ‑
71 MR NORTON: It does, Your Honour. Another issue that has been raised with me this morning - I don't have any instructions from Mr Kiseloski to object to any of the other orders. Mr Kiseloski's mother has raised an issue with respect to some of the money that was seized. I'm not sure what I can ‑ ‑ ‑
72 HIS HONOUR: Do you want to take a seat, Mr Kiseloski.
73 MR NORTON: I'm not really sure that there's anything that I can do to advance it, Your Honour, but I feel compelled to raise it. She has informed me that she takes issue with the forfeiture of all of that money.
74 HIS HONOUR: Look, I'm sorry, I'd assumed that the orders that were not the subject of any objection. If that's wrong, then I simply won't make the order in respect of that until it either sorted out or litigated.
75 MR NORTON: I would be grateful, Your Honour, if that - just in respect of the forfeiture. The other orders are all agreed upon subject to that issue that I've just raised.
76 HIS HONOUR: The forfeiture order involves the $13,585. Is that right?
77 MR NORTON: Yes. I can on behalf of Mr Kiseloski, my client, that we don't seek to be heard.
78 HIS HONOUR: I see, it's his mother that wants to be heard. She may have an interest in the money and I can't decide that one way or the other.
79 MR NORTON: No. So if the application can be either adjourned or - I'm not sure what the appropriate order would be and I can direct Mrs Kiseloski to appropriate representation, that they can then engage with the OPP and deal with the matter through those channels.
80 HIS HONOUR: Yes. Ms Fallar, it doesn't seem appropriate that I should make the order.
81 MS FALLAR: That's correct. First time I've heard of that. In relation to the mother's objection, in these circumstances Your Honour should not order the forfeiture in relation to the $13,585. In due course we will have the matter listed and indeed my learned friend is correct if the mother, Mrs Kiseloski, could obtain legal representation then we can deal with that in due course.
82 HIS HONOUR: Yes. There is a forfeiture order in relation to other property. Is that right or not?
83 MS FALLAR: That is correct. Disposal, rather.
84 HIS HONOUR: It's only disposal, isn't it?
85 MS FALLAR: That's right.
86 HIS HONOUR: So the only forfeiture is the order in relation to the 13,585.
87 MS FALLAR: Correct.
88 HIS HONOUR: So there's none that actually refers to Mr Bajic at all.
89 MS FALLAR: Correct. In fact, as my learned friend has indicated, it's probably just a portion of that cash but we'll deal with that ‑ ‑ ‑
90 HIS HONOUR: No, that's not right. Sorry, there is a forfeiture order in relation to Mr Bajic's property and that's ‑ ‑ ‑
91 MS FALLAR: The firearms.
92 HIS HONOUR: - - - firearms and other bits and pieces, so that's correct.
93 MS FALLAR: That's correct.
94 HIS HONOUR: So it's only the forfeiture order that concerns the money that we ‑ ‑ ‑
95 MS FALLAR: Yes.
96 HIS HONOUR: Right. I won't make that order.
97 MS FALLAR: Thank you. If I may just seek further amendment in relation to the appearance. It should be Mr Rohan Barton for Mr Bajic because currently I think it's written down as Mr Ian Crisp.
98 HIS HONOUR: I don't know that you need to worry about that.
99 MS FALLAR: Very well.
100 HIS HONOUR: It was in relation to - the application was made in circumstances where Mr Crisp was representing Mr Barton.
101 MS FALLAR: Very well.
102 HIS HONOUR: I don't think it's necessary unless somebody really wants to make a fuss about that to amend the order accordingly.
103 MS FALLAR: My learned friend doesn't take issue ‑ ‑ ‑
104 HIS HONOUR: Mr Barton has really come along to hold the fort, I think, hasn't he, rather than to ‑ ‑ ‑
105 MR BARTON: That's correct, Your Honour.
106 MS FALLAR: Finally, Your Honour, just for my clarification - and it may just be my hearing - but I just confirm in relation to Mr Bajic on Charge 5, which is disposal of the shotgun, was that eight months or 18?
107 HIS HONOUR: Eight, yes.
108 MS FALLAR: Thank you, Your Honour.
109 HIS HONOUR: There is also one other order I need to make and that is in relation to the offence of - Charge 12, of possession of counterfeit notes. It's a Commonwealth matter ‑ ‑ ‑
110 MS FALLAR: Correct.
111 HIS HONOUR: - - - and I need to specify that that sentence commences today which means that it is to be served concurrently.
112 MR NORTON: If Your Honour please.
113 MS FALLAR: Finally, Your Honour, it is this: I apologise in relation to Mr Bajic, I did review that there is a Stepping Up in relation to that. It appears to have been buried in some of the CISP reports that was Exhibit 3.
114 HIS HONOUR: I had a note of it.
115 MS FALLAR: That's right.
116 HIS HONOUR: Nobody was addressing me on that day in relation to Mr Kiseloski so I didn't think I was going completely mad but I couldn't find the reference to it but I did hear the murmurs that were coming from the Bar table. I don't think that there was anything more about the Stepping Up program other than that he was deemed to be suitable for that.
117 MS FALLAR: That's correct.
118 HIS HONOUR: And that he had shown a willingness to undergo appropriate rehabilitative measures.
119 MS FALLAR: Yes. Your Honour, I have all the orders in here.
120 HIS HONOUR: I've got copies of them.
121 MS FALLAR: Copies, as well, thank you, Your Honour. In triplicate?
122 HIS HONOUR: I've actually signed all of them.
123 MS FALLAR: Thank you.
124 HIS HONOUR: Including the one that I'm just about to tear up which is the one involving the $13,585. So I have actually signed all of those orders and will provide them to you.
125 MS FALLAR: Thank you, Your Honour.
126 HIS HONOUR: I think the other ones are appropriately made. All right.
127 MR NORTON: Can I just confirm, Your Honour, whilst Ms Jacobi is here that Your Honour has deleted Item 41 from the disposal order.
128 HIS HONOUR: I haven't actually. Would you mind doing that.
129 MS FALLAR: We can do that. Thank you, Your Honour.
130 HIS HONOUR: Perhaps I should do it and initial it. I think that's the ‑ ‑ ‑
131 MS FALLAR: We need Your Honour's initial. Correct.
132 HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Yes, I have signed and dated that amendment.
133 MR NORTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
134 HIS HONOUR: Yes, thank you.
---
0
0
0