R v Munro
[2018] VCC 918
•9 May 2018
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication | |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-16-02250
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| PAUL MUNRO |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE TRAPNELL | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 14 July 2017, 17 November 2017, 14 December 2017 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 9 May 2018 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Munro | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 918 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE
Catchwords: Import Tier 2 goods contrary to Customs Act1901 (Cth) s 233BAB(5) – Attempt to import firearms or firearm parts with the intention of trafficking contrary to Criminal Code (Cth) ss 11.1(1) and 361.2 – Importation of 12 Thureon brand automatic assault rifles and attempted importation of a further six Thureon brand automatic assault rifles – Importation of six AR15 automatic assault rifle lower receivers – Importation of 30 1911 model 45 calibre semi-automatic handgun frames and attempted importation of a further 96 1911 model 45 calibre semi-automatic handgun frames – offences considered to be very serious examples of these offences – offences involved sustained offending against the legislative object of the offence provisions of a very serious kind – four Thureons recovered from criminals by Victoria Police in the course of investigating other serious criminal activity – accused entirely motivated by greed and the need to support an extravagant lifestyle – accused carried out the principle role in the offending on a commercial scale, using deceptive means and co-ordinating the roles of others – moral culpability assessed as being very high – offending was premeditated, highly organised, well planned, relatively sophisticated and sustained over a period of nearly 3½ years –general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment primary sentencing considerations – specific deterrence and protection of the community of some relevance – significant mitigating circumstances – accused aged 64 – early pleas of guilty – no finding of remorse – some relevant relatively minor prior convictions – excellent employment history – familial support – good prospects of rehabilitation – severe adverse medical conditions – significant custodial hardship – Verdins principles not engaged – low risk of reoffending – delay – totality principle applied – need to avoid crushing sentence given age and physical health problems – first case of its kind – no established current sentencing practice
Legislation cited: Customs Act1901 (Cth) s 233BAB(5) – Criminal Code (Cth) ss 11.1(1) and 361.2 – Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss 16A; 16B; 16E; 16F and Part 1B, Division 4 – Sentencing Act1991 (Vic) ss 6AAA and 18 – Judiciary Act1903 (Cth) ss 68 and 79
Cases cited:Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584 – Barbaro v The Queen (2012) 226 A Crim R 354 – Huynh v The Queen [2017] VSCA 216 – R v Khoder El Ali (2017) NSWDC 46 – R v Falconer [2017] VCC 1596 – DPP v Nguyen [2015] VCC 1772 – R v Radjenovic [2011] BCSC 1841 – R v Villella [2001] O.J. No. 4690 (S.C.J) – R v Felawka [1993] 4 SCR 199 – Ungureanu v The Queen (2012) 272 FLR 84 – R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
Other material cited: The National Firearms Agreement
Sentence:Total effective sentence 10 years 3 months’ imprisonment – non-parole period 6 years
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Prosecution | Ms L Skoblar | Ms A Pavleka, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Cth) |
| For the Accused | Mr B J Newton | Randles Cooper Lawyers |
1 Paul Munro, you have pleaded guilty to an indictment containing six charges — four charges of import tier 2 goods contrary to s 233BAB(5) of the Customs Act1901 (Cth) (‘the Customs Act’) (charges 1–4), and two charges of attempt to import firearms or firearm parts with the intention of trafficking contrary to s 11.1(1) and s 361.2 of the Criminal Code (Cth) (‘the Criminal Code’) (charges 5 & 6).
2 The maximum penalty for import tier 2 goods is 10 years’ imprisonment. The maximum penalty for attempt to import firearms or firearm parts with the intention of trafficking is 10 years’ imprisonment.
3 The prosecution filed a prosecution opening dated 14 July 2017, which I am told by your counsel I can treat as a statement of agreed facts.[1]
The facts
[1] Exhibit P1
4 Between 15 and 18 January 2013, Thureon Defence (‘Thureon’), a small firearm manufacturing company based in New Holstein, Wisconsin, USA, exhibited at the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (‘SHOT’) show in Las Vegas, Nevada. The owner of that company, Andy Huebschmann, occupied a booth at the show.
5 You travelled to Las Vegas from Australia, attended the Thureon booth and said that you were interested in purchasing some Thureon brand weapons. You contacted Huebschmann several weeks after the trade show, and enquired as to whether or not Thureon would be prepared to supply unassembled firearms in kit form.
6 In March 2013, Thureon agreed to supply you with six assault rifle kits, along with triggers and machining plates, which were required to convert the weapon from its semi-automatic function, as manufactured, into a fully automatic machine gun,[2] for an agreed total price of US$5,300. You left instructions to contact a US-based associate named Ricky Stafford in relation to the supply of these firearms.
[2] A semi-automatic firearm requires the trigger to be depressed each time a round is fired, whereas a fully automatic firearm will continue firing rounds once the trigger is depressed until either the trigger mechanism is released or the magazine is expended. See Victoria Police, Forensic Services Department, Major Crime Scene Unit, Operation Ironsight – 2106, Seized Firearms Demonstration DVD (Exhibit P2); evidence of A/Sgt A Pringle.
7 A fully automatic Thureon assault rifle, which can operate in automatic or semi-automatic mode, can fire up to 1,000 rounds of ammunition per minute. I viewed a DVD[3] demonstration of the test firing of a number of the weapons seized by police as part of this operation, including three Thureons. The Thureon in full automatic mode is a truly terrifying weapon; a piece of military hardware clearly designed to kill humans in great numbers. It has no use other than as a mass killing machine and it has no legitimate place in civil society.
[3] Exhibit P2
8 On 3 March 2013, Stafford acting on your behalf paid Thureon US$800 by way of deposit for the order of six assault rifles. The balance of US$4,500 was paid by Stafford, acting on your behalf, to Keith Finch, the sales manager of Thureon, on 11 July 2013. The cheque was delivered to Thureon along with a handwritten letter that was penned by you.
9 On 23 July 2013, Thureon issued an invoice to you for the six assault rifles recording the payment of US$5,300. On the same day, the consignment of assault rifles was shipped from Thureon to the designated shipping address. The delivery instructions directed that Stafford be contacted upon their arrival.
10 The assault rifles that were sent as part of this shipment were void of branding, serial number or other identifying marks, except for a small Thureon brand logo that was etched onto the magazine release. (Charge 1)
11 In early April 2004, you left Australia and headed to a gun show in Tulsa, Oklahoma where you met with Dale Nygaard, a US Federal firearms licensee, who was exhibiting at the show. You also travelled to New Holstein, Wisconsin where you met with Huebschmann and provided him with two AR15 lower receivers. You asked him to machine them to ‘full lower receivers’ and also to make a machine plate for the receivers so that they could be drilled to accommodate a trigger set. The purpose of these modifications was to turn the otherwise semi-automatic weapons into fully automatic weapons.
12 The AR15 is a lightweight, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle. It is the civilian version of the US military M16 carbine. Once again, its primary role is as a military carbine, designed to kill humans.
13 You advised Huebschmann that you had ordered a further four AR15 Lower receivers. The receivers arrived at Thureon for modification, having been supplied by a company named Remsport Manufacturing. You specifically asked for the AR15 receivers to be machined to accept a fully automatic trigger. All six receivers were subsequently machined to accept fully automatic triggers and then shipped to you in Australia. (Charge 2)
14 At some point during 2014, you asked Huebschmann to machine unfinished handgun frames for 1911 model .45 calibre semi-automatic pistols that would be supplied by Remsport Manufacturing. Huebschmann agreed to machine the handgun frames and they were delivered to Thureon for the purpose of being converted to completed firearm lower receivers. The completed weapon had no identifying manufacturer marks or serial number.[4]
[4] DVD evidence of A/Sgt Pringle (Exhibit P2).
15 On 19 January 2015, you departed Australia to attend the annual SHOT show being held in Las Vegas between 20 and 23 January 2015, where you met with Huebschmann. At the conclusion of the show, Huebschmann returned to Wisconsin where he commenced preparing a further six Thureon assault rifle kits you had ordered, as well as 30 semi-automatic handgun frames which had previously been supplied by Remsport. At your request, the assault rifle kits were devoid of branding, serial number or any other identifying marks, including the small Thureon brand logo, which had been present on the magazine release mechanism of the Thureon assault rifles you imported earlier. You expressly requested that the Thureon brand logo be removed because you were aware that one of these weapons, previously imported by you, had been seized by law enforcement officers in Australia.
16 In late January 2015, you delivered a wooden crate to Huebschmann which contained engine parts and a false bottom, the purpose of which was to conceal the firearms for shipment to Australia. You also delivered approximately 30 slides suitable for fitting to the handgun frames. Huebschmann charged you US$1,000 per assault rifle and US$2,000 for machining the semi-automatic handgun frames, making a total cost of US$8,000. You paid approximately half of this amount to Huebschmann prior to leaving the United States and the outstanding balance was subsequently paid to him by Nygaard, who was acting on your behalf.
17 On 11 March 2015, Huebschmann sent the crate via Inexpress Couriers to K & H Mechanical Repairs at an address in California. This destination was provided to Huebschmann by you. The company is recorded with the Australian Border Force as a client in their integrated cargo system as a consignor of goods, including vehicles and vehicle parts and accessories to Australia. The crate was subsequently shipped to Australia. (Charges 3 and 4)
18 On 11 January 2016, you telephoned Huebschmann and asked if he could supply another six fully automatic Thureon assault rifles and also if he would be willing to machine more 1911 semi-automatic handgun frames. A short time later, Thureon received a consignment of 1911 semi-automatic handgun frames from Remsport Manufacturing.
19 In late March 2016, you departed Australia and attended the Tulsa gun show where you made arrangements for building wooden crates with false bottoms for the purpose of shipping the firearms back to Australia.
20 On 9 April 2016, you delivered one of two wooden crates to Huebschmann and gave instructions on how the firearms were to be concealed to avoid detection by Australian Customs. You supplied a handwritten note with an address of where the crate containing the concealed firearms was to be shipped; namely, ‘JT Imports’ also known as ‘JT Core Supplies’. The Australian Border Force has JT Core Supplies recorded as a client in their integrated cargo system as a consignor of goods, including vehicles and vehicle parts and accessories, to Australia. (Charges 5 and 6)
21 On 28 June 2016, special agents from the United States Government’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (‘ATF’) attended Thureon’s premises on behalf of Victoria Police and interviewed Huebschmann. He said that he supplied you with the previously imported firearms, that he was in the process of preparing 96 semi-automatic handgun frames and six Thureon assault rifles for shipment to you and that the firearms prepared for and sent to you were the only firearms he had sent to Australia. ATF Special Agents seized the firearms, firearm frames and the shipping container that had been supplied by you in April 2016.
22 Victoria Police commenced interception of your telecommunications service and placed you under surveillance.
23 On 17 July 2016, investigators intercepted calls between Huebschmann and you in which Huebschmann said that he had not heard from you, to which you replied that you thought the box was right to go and was on its way. Huebschmann said that the Orlando nightclub shooting had put a ‘crimp’ in getting firearm parts. He also said that the big bunch of stuff that we drilled the two holes in (referring to semi-automatic handgun frames) would not all fit in. You replied that it was fine and to put in 60-70 and send the rest to Nygaard. You confirmed that they should be held there at Thureon because another crate would be coming soon. Huebschmann then suggested that he could get export permits and you replied: ‘No’. Huebschmann asked if you had some money coming your way. You stated that you did and mentioned that a friend from Australia who sells stainless steel tube in Wisconsin would carry some US cash across. If that failed you would get some money to Stafford and have him deliver money to Huebschmann.
24 On 4 August 2016, investigators intercepted a call between Huebschmann and you in which Huebschmann indicated that he had left a message for you as he needed a phone number, as a requirement for shipping, for a person at JT Core where the crate was to be delivered. You advised that your daughter sent an email with the relevant number for JT Core. Huebschmann asked if Nygaard had some money that he could drop off because shipping was $1,000 and Huebschmann needed money to pay for recent surgery he had undergone. You said you could maybe send a couple of thousand dollars.
25 On 4 August 2016, after you had been informed that the consignment was on its way to Australia, you met with a Victoria Police covert operative at a hotel in Swan Hill. During this meeting you offered to supply him with Thureon assault rifles for $15,000 each and 1911 model semi-automatic handguns for $5,000 each. You told him that you met the owner of Thureon Defence at the SHOT show in the United States of America and that is how you get the weapons.
26 On 8 August 2016, the covert operative telephoned you and said that he was interested in purchasing 1911 model semi-automatic handguns and Thureon assault rifles. You confirmed that if he purchased the weapons, they would be supplied with ammunition.
27 On 9 August 2016, the covert operative telephoned you and asked if he could purchase a Thureon within the week. You said that you did not have anything available, but you would speak to previous customers to see if you could get one back, in order to sell it to the covert operative.
28 On 10 August 2016, you telephoned the covert operative and said that you had spoken to someone who was considering selling back a Thureon. The following day you spoke with the covert operative and told him that you were unable to obtain a Thureon, but you assured him that there would be ‘stuff’ coming soon’.
29 On 16 August 2016, the covert operative contacted you and told you that he had shown pictures of the Thureon assault rifles to a friend from Sydney and he was ‘rapt’. You agreed to meet the covert operative in Bendigo on 18 August.
30 On 18 August 2016, you met with the covert operative at McDonalds in Bendigo at which time you agreed to supply him with five Thureon assault rifles and ten .45 calibre 1911 model semi-automatic handguns for a total price of $110,000. You agreed that you would meet with the covert operative on 30 August 2016, at which time you would bring a Thureon to show him and that you would require a deposit of $22,000.
31 On the same day, after this agreement was made, investigators intercepted a telephone call between you and an associate, Mark White, in which you asked White whether he remembered doing ‘a bit of machining’ for you and ‘drilling a few holes’. White said he did remember. White confirmed that he had a ‘complete article’ there; meaning a Thureon fully automatic assault rifle. White asked if you meant a little one or a bigger one and said that ‘we did two lots, they were a bit different’. White said he kept one for himself, whereupon you asked if you could borrow it ‘to show a bloke’. White agreed to lend you the Thureon assault rifle. You said that the one you had, you ‘got rid of it’. You said you would pick it up and take it down the road and show a bloke and then bring it back.
32 On 19 August 2016, you telephoned the covert operative and said that you could meet him on 30 August in the Geelong area. On 26 August you confirmed by telephone that you would have a Thureon for him to inspect at the meeting.
33 On 29 August, investigators intercepted a phone call between you and White in which you confirmed that you would borrow a Thureon from him to show to the covert operative. You advised White that the purchaser is from Melbourne but that he was buying the assault rifle for someone in Sydney. White cautioned you about dealing with someone you did not know well. White advised that he did not do anything with anyone who did not come with a recommendation. The conversation then turned to an email that had been received from Nygaard, which included a list of items that you and White were importing into Australia using White’s dealer licence. The list of items included a large volume of parts of 1911 model semi-automatic handguns. The handgun parts discussed by you with White were all suitable for use in turning the semi-automatic handgun frames that had been imported, or were being imported by you, into operating firearms.
34 Later that day, investigators intercepted a phone call between you and White in which you confirmed that you wanted him to remove the lower receiver of the Thureon that you intended to show the covert operative.
35 On 30 August 2016, you collected the upper half of the assault rifle from White at his home near Geelong and placed the weapon in the boot of your car. You drove to a car park at the end of Jetty Road, Clifton Springs where you met the covert operative. You opened the boot of your vehicle and showed the assault rifle to him. He agreed to pay the deposit which he had with him. At this time you were arrested by the police. White was arrested a short time later.
36 You participated in a taped record of interview in which you were less than frank. You told police the following:
· You were previously a licensed firearms dealer, but your license had been cancelled. Nonetheless, you still imported bits and pieces of firearms through other dealers.
· You first saw Thureon assault rifles at a Las Vegas gun show.
· You imported Thureon parts, but only through the post.
· You gave the Thureon parts you imported to a friend of yours from Shepparton called ‘Dave Bailey’, who has since passed away.
· You believed firearms were coming in large quantities into Australia after they arrived in New Guinea, having been put together in Asia.
· You met the covert operative that morning as an intermediary for a person you only knew as ‘Ronnie’ from Shepparton.
· You did not know much about ‘Ronnie’ only that you met him through Dave Bailey.
· You met a person called ‘Andy’ from Thureon at a gun show and that Andy sent car parts to you.
· You only ever bought a couple of Thureon bits and pieces from Andy.
· You did not meet the covert operative to show him a Thureon and get a deposit from him.
· The Thureon and the 1911 handgun frames that were addressed to be sent to you were not yours and that they were to be delivered by you to Dale Nygaard.
Offence seriousness
37 The maximum penalty for these offences is 10 years’ imprisonment, which indicates the seriousness with which the Federal Parliament, on behalf of the Australian community, views the crimes you have committed. ‘It … reflects heightened concern about the threat to public safety posed by particular types of firearms, such as pistols, because of their ease of concealment for use by criminals.’[5]
[5] R v Khoder El Ali (2017) NSWDC 46 [60] (Whitford SC DCJ)
38 In introducing the Bill that created the offences charged in charges 1 to 4 the Attorney-General said: ‘These amendments demonstrate the government's continuing commitment to the approaches it has adopted under the National Firearms Agreement.’ The National Firearms Agreement (‘NFA’) is an agreement concerning firearm control made by the Australian Police Ministers' Council in 1996 in response to the Port Arthur massacre that killed 35 people. The laws giving effect to the NFA were passed by Australian Federal and State Governments only 12 days after the Port Arthur massacre. The NFA placed tight control on semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons, although permitting their use by licensed individuals who required them for a purpose other than 'personal protection'. The Act included a gun buy-back provision.
39 So far as charges 5 and 6 are concerned, the overall purpose of the legislation which created these crimes was described as being ‘to target firearms trafficking and to address the clear and serious social and systemic harm associated with this trade.’ In delivering the second reading speech the Justice Minister said:
The entry of illegal firearms into the Australian community can have a significant impact on the size of the illicit market. The growing pool of firearms can be accessed by groups and individuals to commit serious and violent crimes that can result in death. For example, in 2012, firearms were identified as being the type of weapon used in 25 per cent of homicides in Australia.
40 Illicit firearms are a blight on our society, particularly where, as here, they fall into the hands of serious criminals. This truism has formed a part of our national consciousness since at least the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre and it has been reinforced all too many times since that tragedy. Moreover, due to its enduring nature, a firearm can remain within the illicit market for many years and be accessed by serious and organised crime groups for use in the commission of crimes.
41 Undoubtedly, illicit firearms pose a serious danger to public safety and law and order. The Canadian courts have referred to the serious nature of crimes involving the importation of illicit firearms into that country. In R v Radjenovic,[6] Butler J considered the impact on the victims and the community of crimes of this nature. His honour, quoting from R v Villella[7] and R v Felawka,[8] said:
[6] [2011] BCSC 1841 [11]–[14]
[7] [2001] O.J. No. 4690 (S.C.J)
[8] [1993] 4 SCR 199, 211. See also (Butler J)
[11] The submissions of the Crown focused on the impact of gun crimes on the community. This is understandable. Crimes involving the use of firearms have become a significant issue for Vancouver and for communities across Canada. Our newspapers, all too frequently, report on crimes involving guns. Reports include shootings, murders, kidnappings, robberies, and home invasions, all of which are facilitated by firearms and, in particular, by the use of handguns.
[12] The Crown referred to many cases where our courts have commented on the serious impact of crimes involving guns. The comments of Trafford J. in R. v. Villella … are worth repeating. He describes the impact of firearms on criminal activity, underscoring the obvious connection between trafficking in firearms and the misuse of illegally acquired handguns:
First, the importation, distribution and possession of firearms are exceptionally serious crimes. There is no social utility in crimes of this nature. Seldom, if ever, is there any reasonable suggestion of good faith or justification to any such crimes. They lead to the use of firearms, causing death or grievous bodily harm, often to innocent people. The possession of firearms by some people is in furtherance of an intention to use them. Others possess them in contemplation of engaging in conduct, such as trafficking in narcotics, where the use of the firearm is possible, or likely. Still others may carry a handgun, loaded and operable, as a badge of power, or achievement, amongst peers, misguided though they are by the conventional norms of our society. The possession of a handgun may lead to a random, or intentional, act of violence, including the death of innocent bystanders in the area of any confrontation. Unforeseen, and provocative, circumstances can lead to a senseless act of violence, and consequential grievous bodily harm or death, and all of the emotional devastation that goes with it. The importation, distribution and possession of firearms lie at the foundation of all crimes involving the use of firearms. As such, they are properly characterized as exceptionally serious crimes.
[13] In R. v. Felawka, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 199 at 211, Justice Cory was more direct in describing the dangers of handguns:
A firearm is expressly designed to kill or wound. It operates with deadly efficiency in carrying out the object of its design. It follows that such a deadly weapon can, of course, be used for purposes of threatening and intimidating. Indeed, it is hard to imagine anything more intimidating or dangerous than a brandished firearm. A person waving a gun and calling ‘hands up’ can be reasonably certain that the suggestion will be obeyed. A firearm is quite different from an object such as a carving knife or an ice pick which will normally be used for legitimate purposes. A firearm, however, is always a weapon. No matter what the intention may be of the person carrying a gun, the firearm itself presents the ultimate threat of death to those in its presence.
[14] In short, [Butler J concluded,] weapons trafficking promotes violent criminal activity. It is not merely an underground commercial enterprise. It is a serious offence that strikes at the heart of a civil society.
42 These comments are equally applicable to our society. Accordingly, general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment must be given primary consideration in sentencing you in this case.
43 I accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that the sentences I impose on you ‘must signal to those involved in unlawfully introducing firearms into Australia for profit that the potential substantial financial rewards to be gained from such activities are neutralised by the risk of severe punishment.’ The observations of Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ in Wong v The Queen[9] in relation to the importation of illegal drugs into Australia are apposite here. Their honours said:
In relation to the offence of being knowingly concerned in the importation of heroin, like features can be identified as bearing upon the formulation of applicable principles. Those features include the difficulty of detecting the offence and the great social consequences that follow from its commission. The former suggests that deterrence is to be given chief weight in the sentencing task; the latter, that stern punishment will be warranted in almost every case.[10]
[9] (2001) 207 CLR 584
[10] Ibid 607–8 [64]
44 The firearms you imported and attempted to import were all high-powered and operable in semi-automatic and automatic mode. The availability of such weapons is highly restricted under Australian law because they pose a serious danger to public safety and law and order. Moreover, you arranged to have semi-automatic weapons converted to fully automatic weapons, which significantly increased their lethality. Accordingly, I consider the offences you committed are very serious examples of these offences.
45 I accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that:
The legislative object of the offences is to deter and eliminate conduct which frustrates the orderly and controlled importation into Australia of dangerous goods and firearms so as to protect the community from harm that may be caused by their uncontrolled introduction. It is submitted that Mr Munro’s offending very seriously offends against that legislative object.
46 I also accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that your ‘role and motivation involved sustained offending against the legislative object of the offence provisions of a very serious kind.’
47 It is a particularly concerning aspect of this case that a number of the weapons you imported fell into the hands of Australian criminals. Of the 12 Thureons imported by you (charges 1 and 4), I am now told seven have been recovered. Of these, four were recovered by Victoria Police in the course of investigating other serious criminal activity.
48 On 23 April 2014, Victoria Police Trident Taskforce members seized a fully automatic Thureon assault rifle in Caroline Springs. This firearm was seized from a man who was subsequently charged with trafficking a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine.
49 On 3 February 2015, Victoria Police armed crime squad members seized another fully automatic Thureon assault rifle in Williamstown. This firearm was seized from a man who was subsequently charged with trafficking a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine and the armed robbery of a cash-in-transit vehicle, in which approximately $280,000 was stolen.
50 On 20 January 2016, Victoria Police north-west regional crime squad members seized a third fully automatic Thureon assault rifle in Rockbank. This firearm was seized from a man who was subsequently charged with trafficking a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. On this occasion a 1911 model .45 calibre semi-automatic handgun, the frame of which was also imported into this country by you (charge 3), was also seized.
51 A fourth fully automatic Thureon assault rifle was recovered from an unspecified crime scene. The fifth was the one you borrowed from White to show to the covert operative and a sixth was handed into police as part of the gun amnesty. Apparently, a seventh has been recovered in undisclosed circumstances since the last previous hearing in this matter. The five remaining fully automatic Thureon assault rifles imported by you as part of charges 1 and 4, all but one AR 15 assault rifle lower receiver imported by you as part of charge 2[11] and all but one of the 1910 semi-automatic handgun frames imported by you as part of charge 3[12] are still unaccounted for. In total, there remain 39 firearms and firearm parts imported by you that are yet to be recovered, including five fully automatic Thureon assault rifles.
[11] The completed weapon forms part of the demonstration by A/Sgt A Pringle in the DVD tendered as Exhibit P2
[12] The handgun recovered with the Thureon on 20 January 2016
52 I accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that it is ‘highly probable’ that a large number of firearms and firearm parts sold as part of your offending, the whereabouts of which remain unknown, have the potential to seriously jeopardise the future safety of members of the Australian public and law enforcement officers. Indeed, I am satisfied to the criminal standard that this is so. The conclusion that most, if not all, of these firearms and firearm parts have fallen into the hands of criminals is overwhelming, as law abiding citizens would have no need or desire to possess such weapons or firearm parts.
53 I find that you have displayed a callous disregard for the potential consequences of the introduction into this community of such a large number of inherently dangerous firearms. Accordingly, for this and other reasons I assess your moral culpability as being very high.
54 I also accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that you were entirely motivated by greed to commit these crimes. Your expected sale of 15 firearms to the covert operative for $110,000 would in all likelihood have produced a substantial profit for you given the purchase price of those firearms and the other expenses incidental to their importation. You ran this criminal enterprise to support your lifestyle, although I note Ms Matthew’s comments that following the collapse of your Ford 427 Crammer engine project and the sale of your water rights, you were left with significant debts and struggling financially to get by. However, according to intercepted conversations, you told a firearms manufacturer in the United States of America, as well as your co-accused Mr White, that you needed the money because you were building a large new house and you were restoring an expensive Ford Mustang motor vehicle.[13]
[13] Prosecution submissions on sentence (Exhibit P4) p 6 [26]
55 I also accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that the sentences I impose on you must signal to those involved in unlawfully introducing firearms into Australia for profit that the potential substantial financial rewards to be gained from such activities are neutralised by the risk of severe punishment. As with illicit drug importation, features of this offending include: ‘the difficulty of detecting the offence and the great social consequences that follow from its commission. The former suggests that deterrence is to be given chief weight in the sentencing task; the latter, that stern punishment will be warranted in almost every case.’[14]
[14] See Wong v R (2001) 207 CLR 584, 607–8 [64] (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ)
56 So far as the offending constituted by charge 4 is concerned, I accept that this offence is aggravated by the fact you were aware that at least one fully automatic Thureon assault rifle imported by you had been detected by Victoria Police in the course of criminal investigations. Possessed of this knowledge, you not only arranged further shipments of these highly dangerous weapons, but sought to avoid their detection by having the firearms manufactured without the limited identification present on the previous shipment. You also took steps to have wooden crates containing car parts to be made with false bottoms so as to conceal the firearms during their importation.
57 I accept the Commonwealth Director’s description of your role in this offending. You were ‘the principal and the originating and controlling mind in [an] ongoing unlawful importation … of illegal firearms’ into this country. You ‘carried out that role on a commercial scale, using deceptive means and co-ordinating the roles of others.’
58 Your offending was premeditated, highly organised, well planned, relatively sophisticated and sustained over a period of nearly 3½ years. You used innocent agents in your nefarious scheme to bring large numbers of highly dangerous firearms into this country. Your criminal conduct ceased only by reason of your detection and arrest on these charges. As charges 5 and 6 demonstrate, your offending was in fact continuing at the time of your arrest. Accordingly, I have no hesitation in sentencing you on the basis that these are serious examples of these serious offences. Your counsel conceded this was ‘very serious’ offending.
Personal circumstances
59 Your counsel filed written submissions dated 13 July 2017[15] and further written submissions dated 13 December 2017.[16] I have taken all the matters referred to therein into account.
[15] Exhibit D5
[16] Exhibit D6
60 You were born on 29 November 1953 and you are now aged 64 years. The present offending took place over a 3½ year period, when you were aged between 60 and 62 years.
61 You were born in Melbourne and grew up in Nunawading living with your parents, brother and grandparents. Your father was a toolmaker and your mother was a homemaker. Your grandfather was a Gallipoli veteran who suffered PTSD. It was your grandfather who introduced you to firearms.
62 You described having a positive childhood free of interfamilial conflict, abuse, bullying, or conduct problems. You mother died in 2003 and your father passed away in 2007.
63 You began your schooling at Forrest Hill Primary School and completed year 11 at Nunawading High School. You found school to be ‘easy’.
64 A friend of yours was struck by lightning and killed when you were 8 or 9 years old, and I was told that this seriously affected you.
65 Whilst at school, you began your first job delivering newspapers. Upon leaving school, you worked as a mail clerk and began studying accounting and business. You then completed an apprenticeship as a motor mechanic with Stilwell Ford. You have maintained an excellent employment history, having worked in the motor industry in New South Wales and Victoria since the late 1960s.
66 In a report tendered on the plea by your counsel, Ms Pamela Matthews, a forensic psychologist, noted that:
Mr Munro seems to have led a law-abiding life other than as the law relates to guns. He learned to shoot as eight-year-old (sic) taught by his grandfather and shooting and guns have been big part (sic) of his life since; he bought his own gun with the help of his grandfather with his first earnings at age 13 years. Mr Munro was buying selling and collecting guns well before the 1990-gun laws were introduced. Mr Munro seems to have continued his gun buying, selling and collecting in the same manner regardless of the gun laws introduced in the 1990’s and has consciously found means to evade these laws.
These comments must have been derived from the history you gave her.
67 After the birth of your children, you established a piggery and you also grew grapes, however, this business proved unsuccessful. In 1982, you began a business specialising in American car engines and transmissions which led to you importing cars and transmissions from the United States of America.
68 You married in 1976, and in the following year your first child was born stillborn. You have since had two daughters, with whom you remain in contact, and who provided written character references.[17] You are in contact with them by mail and telephone in prison, particularly your elder daughter who resides in Swan Hill. Your younger daughter resides in Minden in Queensland and has not been able to visit you since your arrest. Your brother and some friends also visit you in prison and provide support. You appear to be coping reasonably well on remand and you are not socially isolated.
[17] Exhibit D10
69 In 1990, your wife left you for a neighbour and you became the sole parent for your children. During this time, you worked from home fixing cars and grew a large tomato crop. Despite your efforts, the tomato crop failed and you accrued a $100,000 debt, which you worked to repay.
70 In the 1990s, you started to travel to the United States of America on a regular basis, continuing to import motor vehicle parts to Australia. You then completed a course in business management at Duke University and embarked on a ‘novel’ engine project, where you hoped to replicate production of a Ford 427 Cammer V8 engine. Unfortunately, this proved to be commercially unviable. At this time, you found yourself to be at a low point in your life, whereupon you resumed drinking alcohol.
71 In 2012, you were involved in a motor vehicle accident and you were charged with non-compliance with the proper storage and record keeping of firearms, being a licensed firearm dealer in New South Wales. I have more to say about this shortly.
Mitigating circumstances
72 I accept that your pleas of guilty were entered at an early stage in the proceedings. You pleaded guilty to the present charges a few weeks after the committal mention in the Magistrates’ Court. I sentence you on the basis that your early pleas have utilitarian benefit and are indicative of an acceptance of responsibility by you for your crimes and a willingness to facilitate the course of justice.
73 However, I am unable to find, in your case, that your pleas of guilty are indicative of true contrition and remorse. As the Court of Appeal observed in Barbaro v The Queen:[18] ‘The sentencing process must be informed by intellectual rigour. That, of course, applies when considering the weight to be given to remorse as an important sentencing consideration.’ Applying the principles and approach elaborated in that case, I cannot find that you are truly remorseful.[19] Your counsel on the plea ultimately accepted that this was so.
[18] (2012) 226 A Crim R 354, 364 [33] (Maxwell P, Harper JA and T Forrest AJA) (citations omitted)
[19] Ibid 364–365 [32]–[38]
74 While you were not particularly cooperative with police, I have taken into account in your favour, in a significant way, other mitigating factors known to the parties.[20] I also accept that you are now demonstrating some insight regarding the serious nature of your offences and their possible consequences. This is relevant to the weight I give to specific deterrence and protection of the community and to my assessment of your prospects for rehabilitation, which I find are good.
Prior criminal history and character
[20] See Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 16A(2)(h); Ungureanu v The Queen (2012) 272 FLR 84
75 You have a number of findings of guilt recorded in the Balranald Local Court in NSW on 5 December 2012. They arise out of you operating a business as a licenced firearms dealer and comprise a significant departure by you of your statutory obligation to properly store firearms in your shop. On six counts you were effectively released on a bond to be of good behaviour for 2 years.[21] I was told by your counsel that this business closed in November 2012 as a result of you being charged with those offences, whereupon your firearm dealer’s licence was cancelled.
[21] Pursuant to Crimes (Sentence Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 10
76 While your previous offending is of a much lesser magnitude than the offences which are before me, it is relevant to note that your present offending commenced on 15 March 2013; a little over three months into your good behaviour bond, imposed for serious enough firearms related offences. Accordingly, you do not fall to be sentenced as a person of otherwise good character. Moreover, the serious escalation in your breaches of laws intended to control the scourge of illicit firearms circulating in this community, is very concerning.
77 Nonetheless, I accept the general tenor of the five character references tendered on your behalf,[22] including those from your two daughters, and I take those matters into account in your favour. You are apparently a ‘community minded person’ who ‘will go out of [your] way to help others’. You are reportedly ‘courteous’, ‘likeable’, ‘good humoured’ and you ‘mix well with others’. You are ‘genuine’ and ‘reliable’ and you have a ‘strong work ethic’. Your referees speak of your ‘honesty’, ‘trustworthiness’ and ‘scruples’; but, of course, they were unaware that you were committing the present very serious offences on an ongoing basis until your offending was eventually discovered. They describe your criminal conduct over the period covered by the present charges as being ‘out of character’. I accept that up until 2012, this was so.
[22] Exhibits D2, D3 and D4
78 Whilst in custody you have participated in a three day KARIOS 18 short course, studying Christian beliefs and values.[23] I was told by your counsel that you have also been attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings weekly whilst on remand. This augers well for your prospects of rehabilitation.
Physical health issues
[23] Exhibit D6
79 Your counsel submitted that you have ongoing significant medical issues, which is consistent with what was reported to Forensicare. At the plea hearing it was indicated that you suffer from venous insufficiency in both of your lower limbs, obesity, multiple hernias, respiratory problems, urinary tract and prostate ailments, osteoarthritis, eyesight difficulties, recurrent ear soreness and depression. You also suffer from high blood pressure, although that is now well managed with medication.
80 Consequently, I called for a report from Justice Health regarding your health situation while in custody. I received a report from Dr Charles Roth of St Vincent’s Hospital dated 10 August 2017.[24] In it he states you have ‘a history of hypertension, venous insufficiency of the lower limbs associated with cellulitis, obstructive sleep apnoea and morbid obesity.’ On reception into custody you weighed 186kgs and your BMI was 53.7. I note that you told Dr Shea that you have lost 12 kg while in custody.
[24] Exhibit C2
81 You were admitted most recently to St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne from 15 to 19 July 2017 with left lower leg cellulitis (skin infection) on a background of chronic venous and peripheral vascular disease. The cellulitis improved with intravenous antibiotics, followed by oral antibiotics.
82 At the time of that report, you were an inpatient of the St John's Hospital unit at Port Phillip Prison, where the condition of your lower limbs has been monitored. On 9 August 2017, you were medically cleared to be discharged from St John's and deemed fit to be moved to an accommodation unit.
83 With regard to your current treatment, you are prescribed antihypertensive and diuretic medications, as well as creams to treat the lower limb skin disease. You have previously been prescribed a CPAP machine for obstructive sleep apnoea, but this apparently had been misplaced. You were scheduled to attend the respiratory outpatient’s clinic to further investigate and treat this condition. At the time of Dr Roth’s report, there were no further investigations or treatments planned.
84 I also received on your plea a large number of documents subpoenaed from the Department of Justice and Regulation – Justice Health Unit.[25] Subsequent to the further plea hearing on 14 December 2017, your counsel provided me with an analysis these records.[26] He incorporated by reference three further documents, being a list of your medications as at 12 January 2018, a document headed ‘Health Issues’ signed by Dr G Rayo from Sale Public Hospital and a statutory declaration declared by you at Fulham Prison on 30 December 2017 attaching the document signed by Dr Rayo.[27]
[25] Exhibit D9
[26] Exhibit D11
[27] Together the three documents are Exhibit D12
85 I have had regard to all this material. It is clear that you are a very unwell man. Your hypertension has been an ongoing problem, together with your peripheral vascular disease, leading to leg and foot ulcers. You are also extremely overweight. These conditions, in particular, make it difficult for you to exercise, due to poor circulation and swelling in your legs and they must cause you a great deal of discomfit and pain.
86 So far as I can establish, your various conditions are currently being treated appropriately. Indeed, it may well be that you are receiving better care whilst in custody than would be the case if you were at large in the community.
87 Nonetheless, I accept that the more serious of these conditions will make imprisonment more burdensome on you than a prisoner of normal health. The Commonwealth Director accepted that this was so. I also accept that while your conditions are being appropriately treated whilst you are in custody, there is a risk your medical condition could deteriorate whilst you are in custody. However, there is insufficient evidence for me to make a finding that the custodial environment itself will contribute to any such deterioration.
88 Accordingly, I will moderate the sentences I would otherwise have imposed on account of custodian hardship occasioned by your physical health problems. However, yours are very serious offences and significant terms of imprisonment are necessary to achieve the purposes for which these sentences are imposed. I understood your counsel to accept that this was so.
Mental health
89 So far as you mental health is concerned, during the plea your counsel relied on a report of Ms Pamela Matthews dated 5 September 2017.[28] Ms Matthews assessed your full-scale IQ in the average range as being 95. Applying the NUCOG test, Ms Matthews placed your score at 82, just above the cut-off for a neurological disorder. On the administration of the DASS test, you scored in the mild-range for depression, normal range for anxiety and normal range for stress. Ms Matthew made a DSM-5 diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depressed mood, but not of a level of a major depressive disorder.
[28] Exhibit D8
90 While Ms Matthews assessed your intelligence as being in the ‘average to high average’ range, she raised the possibility that you may have an ‘acquired brain injury or other form of cognitive deterioration.’ She opined that ‘[o]verall the body of psychometric test results would suggest Mr Munro suffers from frontal lobe impairments of unknown origin.’ Ms Matthews opined that:
[H]is illegal gun/gun parts importation business suggest a significant level of faulty thinking that may have been have been (sic) depressive related but are also likely in the writer’s view to have been related to Mr Munro’s cognitive deficits.
…
It is the writer’s view impaired cognition is likely to have played a significant part in Mr Munro’s faulty reasoning and therefore his offending in that his capacity to examine alternative financial or other solutions to hid (sic) financial problems is likely to have been quite constrained and his insight into both his deficits and coping strategies quite poor. Progressive or static frontal lobe deterioration/damage in the writer’s view would also have impacted significantly upon reasoned judgment, particularly in relation to carelessness, impulsivity, and a capacity to shift focus; for example, limiting the exploration of or acceptance of alterative or lesser options and accounting for Mr Munro’s rigidity of focus in problem solving.
…
Mr Munro’s access to alternative solutions to his financial problems would have been constrained by his cognitive limitations and associated behavioural expressions of frontal disorders.
91 In my opinion these observations were largely unsupported by rigorous psychological or psychometric testing, depended much on your self-report and appear to be quite speculative in many respects. They also appeared to me to be somewhat partisan observations. Accordingly, I ordered a pre-sentence psychological report from Forensicare. As a result, I received a report from Dr Daniel Shea, clinical and forensic psychologist, dated 11 October 2017.[29]
[29] Exhibit C1
92 Dr Shea opined that because you did not have your glasses with you during Ms Matthews’ testing, your results ‘represented an underestimate of his true functioning.’
93 Dr Shea administered a Personality Assessment Inventory and noted that you reported ‘mild depressive symptoms’. On this testing Dr Shea concluded:
Overall, Mr Munro's presentation on interview and patterns of responses on standardised assessment are consistent with a less severe clinical picture than that described in Ms Matthews' report a month ago. In contrast to Ms Matthews' report, Mr Munro reported only mild depressive symptomatology, and no clear symptoms of significant cognitive impairment were elicited or reported.
94 Dr Shea also administered a Structured Risk Assessment which showed your overall score placed you in the ‘Low’ range, with 95.3% of inmates in the normative sample scoring higher. Despite you overall low level of risk, the assessment identified relative needs in the areas of leisure or recreation and problems with alcohol or drugs. He assessed you as posing a low risk of reoffending over the medium to long-term.
95 Dr Shea concluded by expressing the opinion that your present offending
occurred in the context of financial stressors and chronic alcohol abuse. Mr Munro's index offending may thus be best understood as a misguided attempt to gain money to resolve several outstanding financial debts, through illegal trade in a commodity (firearms) with which he was familiar.
96 From a mental health standpoint, Dr Shea concluded that:
Mr Munro presented with mild depressive symptoms, including lowered mood and fatigue, but these were considered to fall within the normal range for someone in his circumstances and with his recent substance use history. While he reported some physical symptoms that might be associated with depression (e.g., poor sleep), it was difficult to identify causation, given his manifold health difficulties. He specifically attributed his sleep difficulties to sleep apnoea related to his weight. He also expressed hopeful themes, denied any history of suicidal ideation, and was able to articulate realistic, qualified positive plans for the future. Accordingly, it was deemed that he did not currently meet formal DSM-V criteria for diagnosis with a mood or adjustment disorder.
Based on Mr Munro's self-reported usage patterns and experiences, it was apparent that, prior to his current incarceration, he met DSM-V criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder of Moderate severity, in partial remission due to his abstinence since his incarceration late last year. …
Mr Munro's self-reported difficulties, longstanding patterns of heavy drinking and recent testing performance by Ms Mathews suggested the possibility of cognitive impairment. However, as previously noted, testing conditions at the time of that assessment were non-optimal. No new evidence of significant cognitive impairment was detected during the current assessment, and it seemed that some of the difficulties noted in Ms Matthews' report were either attenuated or no longer present (e.g., problems with memory). Nevertheless, comprehensive testing was not conducted. … and the possibility of cognitive impairment may warrant further investigation.
While the possibility remains that Mr Munro has exaggerated his current level of coping, he described a good adjustment to the prison environment, securing appropriate employment where feasible and denying problems with fellow inmates or correctional staff. He has apparently responded well to the structured environment, and remained abstinent from substance use. He reports regular, positive contact with his daughters, brother and several friends, and said that he got along with his fellow prisoners and corrections staff.
Considering the degree to which a custodial sentence would weigh especially heavily on Mr Munro, it appears that the key issues relate more to his physical than mental health.
97 I have also had regard to the contents of a letter dated 4 November 2017 from Ms Pamela Matthews addressed to your lawyers.[30]
[30] Exhibit D13
98 For the reasons previously stated, I prefer the opinion of Dr Shea over that of Ms Matthews and I find that Verdins principles[31] 1 to 4 are not engaged in your case. I accept the Commonwealth Director’s submission that the findings of the Forensicare report are ‘consistent with Mr Munro’s conduct in the offending which was highly organised, sustained and motivated by profit.’ I also find that there is insufficient evidence for me to find that Verdins principles31 5 and 6 are engaged in your case, at least insofar as your mental health is concerned.
Other mitigating circumstances
[31] R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
99 By reason of your low-risk of reoffending, I will give less weight to specific deterrence and protection of the community in sentencing you than I otherwise would have. As I earlier said, I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as being good.
100 There has been a reasonably lengthy delay in this case, which is not of your making. You were arrested and charged with these offences on 30 August 2016, over 20 months ago. You have been on remand since then and have had these matters hanging over your head. The psychological reports demonstrate that this has been unsettling for you. I take these considerations into account in your favour.
101 Despite the Commonwealth Director’s submissions to the contrary, I am not prepared to sentence you on the basis that these are prevalent offences. Indeed, there appear to be no comparable cases of this magnitude of offending. Accordingly, there is no current sentencing practice to guide me in this case. Nonetheless, I have had regard to the cases to which I have been referred to the extent they assist in establishing a range for significantly less serious offending.[32]
[32] Huynh v The Queen [2017] VSCA 216; R v Khoder El Ali [2017] NSWDC 46; R v Falconer [2017] VCC 1596; DPP v Nguyen [2015] VCC 1772; DPP v Hong [2015] VCC 344
102 The totality principle must be given effect to, given the overlapping nature of the charges and also to avoid imposing a crushing sentence on you, particularly given your age and physical health problems. I will also impose a shorter non-parole period than I would otherwise have imposed, particularly on account of your physical health problems, your low risk of reoffending and your good prospects of rehabilitation.
Application of sentencing principles
103 In sentencing you for these offences, I am required to have regard to the matters set out in Part 1B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), and more specifically to the matters set out in s 16A of that Act. The governing principle under s 16A(1) is the imposition of a sentence which is of a ‘severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence.’ In determining a sentence appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence, I am required to take into account the matters listed in s 16A(2) and any other relevant matters, insofar as they are relevant and known to me.
104 In fixing the non-parole period I will impose on you I have had regard to the matters contained in Division 4 of Part 1B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).
105 The basic purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are just punishment, deterrence, both specific and general, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In sentencing you, I must have regard to a range of factors, such as the seriousness of the offences, your culpability for them and your personal circumstances.
106 I am required to balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interests of the community in seeking to ensure that, as far as possible, you are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.
107 General deterrence and denunciation are important sentencing considerations for these offences. Moreover, whilst just punishment, general deterrence and denunciation must be given primary consideration in the instinctive synthesis, I am of the view that, in your case, specific deterrence and protection of the community are required to be given some weight, in light of your previous offences and general attitude of non-compliance with firearms legislation.
108 It is difficult to make any accurate assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation, but on balance I am of the view they are good. There has also been significant delay in this case, which I also take into account in your favour. You have had this matter hanging over you for some 20 months.
Stand up Mr Munro
Doing the best I can, I sentence you as follows:
On charge 1 — Import Tier 2 goods (6 Thureon brand fully automatic rifles with markings) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 4½ years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence on 9 February 2020.
On charge 2 — Import Tier 2 goods (6 AR15 lower receivers) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 4 years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence on 9 August 2021.
On charge 3 — Import Tier 2 goods (30 1911 semi-automatic handgun frames) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 4 years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence on 9 August 2022.
On charge 4 — Import Tier 2 goods (6 Thureon brand fully automatic rifles – without markings) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 5 years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence today.
On charge 5 — Attempt to import firearms or firearm parts with the intention of trafficking (96 1911 Model 45 calibre handgun frames) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 4 years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence on 9 August 2023.
On charge 6 — Attempt to import firearms or firearm parts with the intention of trafficking (6 Thureon brand fully automatic rifles) you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 4 years.
I declare that this sentence is to commence on 9 August 2024
Mr Munro the effect of those orders and declarations is that the 5 years I have imposed on charge 4 will be the base sentence. I have effectively ordered that 15 months of the sentence imposed on charge 1 and 12 months of the sentences imposed on each of charges 2, 3, 5 and 6 are to be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on charge 4 and on each other — making a total effective sentence of 10 years and 3 months’ imprisonment to commence from today.
I fix a non-parole period of 6 years to commence from today.
Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), as applied by s 16E of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), I declare that you have spent 617 days in pre‑sentence detention, not including this day, and that is to be reckoned as a period of imprisonment already served under this sentence and I direct that that declaration be entered in the records of the Court.
Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), as applied by s 68 and s 79 of the Judiciary Act1903 (Cth), I state that but for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to be imprisoned for 15 years, with a non-parole period of 11 years.
I am required by s 16F of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) to explain, or caused to be explained to you in a language likely to be readily understood by you, the purpose and consequences of fixing that non-parole period.
In particular, an explanation:
(a) That service of the sentence will entail a period of imprisonment of not less than the non-parole period, and if a parole order is made, a period of service in the community, called the parole period, to complete the service of the sentence.
(b) That if a parole order is made, the order will be subject to conditions.
(c) That the parole order may be amended or revoked.
(d) Of the consequences that may follow if you fail without reasonable excuse to fulfil those conditions. Those consequences are that you may be required to serve the full term of 10 years and 3 months’ imprisonment from today.
Remove the prisoner
0
13
0