R v Meaad Yazarlou
[2014] ACTSC 284
•19 September 2014
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Meaad Yazarlou |
Citation: | [2014] ACTSC 284 |
Hearing Date(s): | 19 September 2014 |
DecisionDate: | 19 September 2014 |
Before: | Refshauge J |
Decision: | 1. The conviction for intentionally possessing child pornography be confirmed. 2. Meaad Yazarlou be sentence to fifteen months’ imprisonment to commence on 19 March 2014, to take into account the period of periodic detention that he has already served. 3. The balance of the sentence be suspended from 19 September 2014 for a period of eighteen months. 4. Meaad Yazarlou be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offenders good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of eighteen months from 19 September 2014 with the following conditions: a) a probation condition that he be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for eighteen months or such lesser period as the person delegated to supervise him considers appropriate and that he obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, especially as to psychiatric or psychological counselling; and b) that he permit officers of the Australian Federal Police to have access to any computer that he operates. |
Category: | Principal Judgment |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – Judgment and punishment – Sentencing – Breach of good behaviour order – Re-sentencing |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) |
Cases Cited: | Commonwealth Director ofPublic Prosecutions v Cole (2005) 91 SASR 480 R v Yazarlou (Unreported, ACT Supreme Court, Refshauge J, 14 November 2012) |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Meaad Yazarlou (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Ms K Musgrove (Crown) Self-represented (Offender) |
| Solicitors Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Self-represented (Offender) | |
File Number(s): | SCC 144 of 2012 |
Refshauge J:
In November 2012, I sentenced Meaad Yazarlou for offences relating to access to child pornography and possession of child pornography. I set out the facts and Mr Yazarlou’s subjective circumstances in my reasons for sentence of R v Yazarlou (Unreported, ACT Supreme Court, Refshauge J, 14 November 2012) at pp 3-6.
I sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment on the charge of using a carriage service to access child pornography and directed that the first six months be served by periodic detention. This was a Commonwealth offence, as set out in my reasons for sentence. I then suspended the sentence and released him on a recognizance release order. I am told that the document that he signed was not a recognizance that would be in the appropriate form under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and that, as a result, Mr Yazarlou is not bound by that document. See Commonwealth Director ofPublic Prosecutions v Cole (2005) 91 SASR 480.
As to the charge of intentionally possessing child pornography, I sentenced him to fifteen months’ imprisonment with the first six months concurrently served by period detention and then the balance suspended. This was a Territory offence as set out in my reasons for sentence. I made a Good Behaviour Order for two years with a probation condition that he be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for two years and six months and to obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, especially as to psychiatric or psychological counselling and that he permit the officers of the Australian Federal Police to access any computer that he operates. Mr Yazarlou signed the proper undertaking.
The convictions rendered him liable to obligations under the Crimes (Sex Offenders) Act 2005 (ACT) which, amongst other things, requires him to report annually. He failed to do so on 1 December 2013 and was dealt with by the Magistrates Court on 18 June 2014, when he was convicted and released on a good behaviour order for a period of seven months. That conviction, however, constitutes a breach of the good behaviour order and would have constituted a breach of the recognisance for the Commonwealth offence had the correct recognisance been signed by him.
It now falls on me to deal with Mr Yazarlou under s 110 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for the breach of the Good Behaviour Order. I am obliged, on satisfaction that he has breached the good behaviour order, to cancel the Good Behaviour Order and either to re-sentence him or to impose the sentence that I suspended.
I am satisfied, and there was no contest, that Mr Yazarlou has breached the Good Behaviour Order by the commission of the further offence.
I note the sentence imposed by the Magistrates Court. I note also the information provided most helpfully by Ms K Musgrove from the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, who appeared to prosecute the breach, that Mr Yazarlou has been compliant. He completed his periodic detention without difficulty and has been compliant with Corrective Services since then. Her submission is that I should re-sentence Mr Yazarlou and impose the same sentence that I then imposed.
I offered Mr Yazarlou the opportunity to obtain legal advice and initially he was of the mind that that may be necessary given the potential consequences of the imposition of the balance of the term of imprisonment that I had imposed. Having heard the submissions by Ms Musgrove, however, he indicated that he was prepared to proceed to have sentence imposed immediately. In the circumstances I will do so and will accept the recommendation of the prosecution.
Mr Yazarlou, please stand:
1. I confirm the conviction of intentionally possessing child pornography.
2. I sentence you to fifteen months’ imprisonment to commence on 19 March 2014, to take into account the period of periodic detention that you have already served.
3. I direct that the balance of the sentence be suspended today for a period of eighteen months.
4. I require you to sign an undertaking to comply with the offenders good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of eighteen months from today with the following conditions:
a) a probation condition that you be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for eighteen months or such lesser period as the person delegated to supervise you considers appropriate and that you obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise you especially as to psychiatric or psychological counselling; and
b) that you permit officers of the Australian Federal Police to have access to any computer that you operate.
[His Honour then spoke directly to Mr Yazarlou]
Mr Yazarlou, I have not made exactly the same order because it seems to me that you have already spent a considerable period of time under supervision and it is not necessary to simply extend that by the full period that I originally gave, but if you continue to conduct yourself as you have then there should be no difficulty.
You are now understanding your obligations, I hope, that you have under the Crimes Child Sex Offenders registration legislation and will make the necessary reports to the police, both as to your personal information which you are required to advise them and attend for your annual review. In that event there should be no difficulty but if there is some assistance that you need then an officer of Corrective Services is available to assist you and support you, as well as to exercise some form of control.
| I certify that the preceding twelve [12] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Refshauge. Associate: Date: 1 December 2014 |
0