R v Najdoski

[2025] NSWDC 129

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

R v Najdoski [2025] NSWDC 129

Hearing dates:

3 December 2024; 11 February 2025

Date of orders:

11 February 2025

Decision date:

11 February 2025

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Before:

Berman SC ADCJ

Decision:

The offender is sentenced to an overall term of imprisonment of 2 years and 3 months.

To be released on a Recognizance Release Order after serving 15 months.

Confiscation Order

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Postal worker - Significant breach of trust – Need for general deterrence - Dishonest misappropriation – Proceeds of crime – Possess border controlled drug –– Money laundering - Previous good character – Exaggerated claim of hardship to others.

Legislation Cited:

Commonwealth Crimes Act

NSW Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.

Cases Cited:

Vamadevan v The King [2024] NSWCCA 223

Category:

Sentence

Parties:

The Crown
Atanas Najdoski

Representation:

Counsel:
G Stanton - Offender

Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecution Cth – The Crown
Millenium Lawyers – The offender

File Number(s):

2023/00448567

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: Not many letters get sent these days, most people email instead. But as the number of letters delivered by Australia Post has reduced, the rise in online shopping has meant that the number of parcels delivered has increased. Unfortunately, this has created opportunities for dishonest employees of Australia Post to misappropriate items, sometimes valuable items, which are then sent through the post. The offender appearing before me for sentence today is or, at least was, one such person.

2. Australia Post was alerted by the Danish and then the German consulates about a number of complaints they have received from those to whom passports had been sent. Quite a few passports were received in a damaged condition, were not received at all, or had been delayed in arriving. Australia Post began an investigation. They determined that this offender was the main person of interest. CCTV footage showed him rummaging through incoming cages of mail, removing small packets of similar size and appearance to envelopes containing passports, and concealing them under a mail bag, taking that into his Australia Post vehicle before driving away. The theft of passports is clearly associated with identity theft which is one of the reasons that Australia Post got the police involved.

3. I note that he faces no specific charges in relation to this misconduct and I will not punish him for it. It does, however, explain why police would ultimately execute a search warrant at his home. Other CCTV footage revealed that on 11 different dates, the offender removed items of mail from mail cages and placed them in his van.

4. And so it came about that on Friday 26 May 2023 police executed a search warrant at the offender’s home. They discovered a number of items, foreign currency, designer luxury goods, watches, ingots, diamonds and jewellery, commemorative coins and stamps, lottery and instant scratch cards, gift cards, alcoholic beverages, mobile phones, passports and letters not addressed to the offender, and a small quantity of border-controlled drugs

5. The offender made admissions. He told police that he had taken the property they had found, in the course of his employment with Australia Post, and had been doing similar things for about a year and a half. The value of the property discovered by police is in total approximately $239,882. This is clearly, even if we look only at the monetary value of the property found by police, very serious offending.

6. On top of that is the circumstance that the offender dishonestly misappropriated even more than was found by police, he having earlier sold some of the things he stole.

7. The offender is thus to be sentenced for one offence of dishonestly appropriating an article in the course of the post. That is an offence carrying a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment.

8. He is also to be sentenced for dealing with money or property believed to be the proceeds of crime. That relates to some cash found in his premises, almost $40,000 in fact which was the proceeds of the offender’s sale of tobacco which had been dishonestly appropriated by the offender in the past. The maximum penalty for that offence is also ten years imprisonment.

9. Finally, he is to be sentenced for possessing relatively small quantities of border-controlled drugs which the offender also dishonestly misappropriated in the course of his employment.

10. The offender has no prior convictions. He was born in Macedonia and raised in a small village. His father came to Australia for work, travelling back and forth to Macedonia, although he did not financially support his family, his mother being the breadwinner.

11. In 1991 one of his brothers moved to Australia and three years later, the offender followed him. He was 13 years of age at the time. He hadn’t seen his father for about nine years. He lived with his parents and was exposed to frequent verbal arguments within the home. His father would use family funds to support his addictions to both alcohol and gambling.

12. The offender moved out of home, bought his own home and lived independently for a while until his father became unwell and his parents moved in with him. He supported his father until he died in 2019. One of his brothers later moved in with him so that living in his unit now are the offender, his mother and one of his brothers. His mother has a number of concerns regarding her health and the offender receives a carer’s pension.

13. The offender has a history of hard work and was employed by Australia Post for 16 years before being terminated after his offending was revealed. He does not abuse drugs or have a problem with gambling. He is unemployed at the moment, due it would seem to the uncertainty as to the outcome of these proceedings.

14. He has taken a number of steps to rehabilitate himself. These include engaging with a financial counsellor and planning to complete a positive lifestyle program once these proceedings are completed. He sees a psychologist when appointments are available and has expressed improvement in his mental health.

15. A psychological report was tendered which refers to a number of adverse life events which the offender reports as having impacted his mental wellbeing, childhood poverty, his father’s absence for lengthy periods, frequent parental conflict and a lack of communication and guidance from his father. Testing reveals that he suffers from severe anxiety and major depression. Other testing also revealed the need for caution before accepting what the offender told the psychologist, the offender scoring either above average or significantly above average for impression management and self-deception. There is a further matter which I will discuss later which also suggests a lack of truthfulness in these proceedings.

16. With that constraint on accepting what the offender said to the psychologist, he expressed his remorse to her and explained the effect that Covid had on his hours of work, leading to significant financial hardship, which in turn lead to his offending. However, if this really was a case where the offending occurred because of need rather than greed, one might have expected the offender to have not held onto the cash, the subject of the proceeds of the crime offence, and to have sold or used at least some of the property the subject of the appropriation offence, for example the gift cards.

17. The psychological report draws no specific connection between his mental state at the time of his offending and his decision to commit these offences. Indeed, as the prosecutor pointed out, the diagnosis of depression and anxiety were made at the time of the report and there is no diagnosis of him suffering from such conditions at the time of his offences.

18. The offender wrote a letter of apology to me. He says:

“I am extremely disappointed in myself for giving into the stress and pressure that I was under at the time which in the end led me to commit the act which I have been charged for”.

He says that his mental health was deteriorating while he was caring for a sick mother, his father died and he was in isolation due to Covid lockdown. He said he chose the stupid, easy way out instead of talking to people and seeking help. The offender relied on a letter from his mother who described him as a very loving and supportive son who looks after her and acts as her carer. Character references also came from friends, his parish priest, his accountant and his doctors. They all speak positively of the offender’s underlying character. Further evidence of that is to be found in the fact that he is a man with no previous convictions.

19. In assessing the objective gravity of the offender’s wrongdoing, it is important to note a number of features of the misappropriation offence. First, as I have already mentioned, the value of the goods discovered by police is significant indeed. Secondly, his offending extended over a substantial period, something in the order of a year and a half. Third, he only stopped offending when he was caught. There is no suggestion that he would have voluntarily given up his illegal activities in the absence of police intervention. Fourthly, his criminal actions involved many separate criminal acts. Fifthly and perhaps most importantly, there is the breach of trust involved. His offending breached the trust which his employer placed in him and which members of the public place in Australia Post employees to deliver their sometimes valuable parcels.

20. General deterrence is of prime importance in this matter. The integrity of the mail system needs to be protected. Many of those who deliver parcels work alone and could easily act in the way this offender has. The money laundering offence is serious too, with the amount of money involved, being about four times the $10,000 threshold for this offence. This resulted from the offender’s sale of tobacco which had in turn been dishonestly appropriated through the offender’s work with Australia Post. That said, there is a significant overlap between the appropriation offence and the money laundering offence, in the sense that the money was the proceeds of some of the goods he had dishonestly appropriated, I will thus impose partially concurrent sentences for that reason.

21. It is accepted by the prosecution that the drugs possession offence is not a terribly serious matter, involving as it does only relatively small quantities. It also involves some overlap with the misappropriation offences in that the drugs came into his possession as a result of him misappropriating articles sent through the post. The sentence I impose for the drug possession matter will be wholly concurrent with other sentences.

22. The offender pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and was committed for sentence to this Court. Accordingly, the sentence I impose upon him will be about 25% less than it would otherwise have been.

23. In assessing the prospects for the offender’s rehabilitation, I take into account the positive sentiments expressed in the pre-sentence report which referred to the steps the offender himself has taken. It is unlikely that he will be in the position to commit offences of this type in the future and when account is taken of the sentence I will ultimately impose upon him, the offender will understand that further offending of any type is likely to lead to significant punishment. For those reasons, I am of the opinion that the offender has good prospects of rehabilitation.

24. I am required to take into account the effect on the offender’s family, in particular in his case, on his mother. I mentioned before a couple of times that he is her carer, taking her to medical appointments, cooking for her, looking after her medication, amongst other matters. She clearly depends to some extent, if not a significant extent, on the care the offender provides for her.

25. In a letter addressed to me and tendered by Mr Stanton, the offender says that his “only brother is married with two children and works full time”. He goes on to explain why his “only” brother cannot take over the care for their mother. It is surprising in such circumstances, and it certainly surprised me, to read that the offender in fact has two brothers, one of whom lives in the same residence as the offender and their mother. That information is to be found in both the pre-sentence report and the psychological report.

26. Mr Stanton suggested that the discrepancy may be due to the fact that English was not the offender’s first language. That might be easier to accept if the true situation was that the offender had only one brother and there had been some miscommunication between those taking the history and the offender. But as Mr Stanton made clear, the truth is that the offender has two brothers, so the error in the letter he wrote to me is not so easily explained. While there is evidence as to why one of the offender’s brothers would have difficulty taking of the care of their mother, there is no similar evidence, regarding the other brother. He lives in the same household and there has been no suggestion that he will be unable to take over the care of their mother. I accept that there is at least a risk that the offender’s mother would experience some hardship and that the offender’s brother will too, as he does for his mother what his brother used to do. Thus this brother too, will be affected by the offender’s incarceration because as I have just mentioned, he will have to take over the care of their mother from the offender.

27. In assessing what sentence to impose, I have to consider the purposes of sentencing. The ultimate goal is of course to protect the community from harm caused by the commission of offences. Sometimes, in pursuit of that goal, sentences are imposed which focus on an individual offender’s rehabilitation. Sometimes, individual offenders are inappropriate vehicles for a sentence designed to deter others from committing crimes. And sometimes, the goal of protecting community is best achieved by imposing a sentence which reflects the gravity of an offender’s conduct and which will deter others in his position from committing similar offences. This is one such case.

28. As I began these remarks on sentence, the members of our community place their trust in people like the offender to deliver their sometimes valuable mail. The offender’s employer placed its trust in the offender to do what he was employed to do. Modern day life and commerce depends on parcels being delivered through the post. The opportunities for offences like these committed by the offender area considerable and it is incumbent on the Courts to respond appropriately when offenders such as these are detected.

29. Mr Stanton accepted that a sentence of imprisonment is appropriate. I agree. However, he submitted that such a sentence could be served by way of an intensive corrections order. I have decided on the length of sentence of imprisonment and turn to consider how that sentence should be served. As these matters are Commonwealth offences in looking to see whether the sentence of imprisonment should be served as an ICO, I looked at s 16A of the Commonwealth Crimes Act, see Vamadevan v The King [2024] NSWCCA 223 rather than the matters to be found in s 66 of the NSW Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act. In particular, there is no paramount consideration of community safety to be taken into account.

30. I have addressed the relevant matters already. Particularly important in this case is the need to reflect the nature and circumstances of the offending and the deterrent effect of the sentence to be imposed on others who, like the offender, have access to all manner of parcels sent through the post. As I have mentioned already, there is a huge growth in online shopping, accelerated by the Covid pandemic which has led to large quantities of sometimes valuable items being posted. These days, life is such that it is important that those parcels are delivered, not stolen. It is all too easy for dishonest postal workers, such as the offender, to steal things they have been entrusted to deliver. General deterrence looms large in this sentencing exercise. Even taking into account the offender’s previous good character, his current mental state, his efforts at rehabilitation and the likely effects of a full time sentence of imprisonment on his mother and brother, I am satisfied that it would be inappropriate for the offender to serve his sentence by means of an Intensive Corrections Order.

31.    I sentence the offender as follows. For the offence of dishonestly appropriating articles in the post, he is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years to date from today 11 February 2025.

32. For the offence of dealing in money to be the proceeds of crime, he is sentenced to imprisonment for nine months to date from 11 August 2026.

33. For the offence of possessing controlled drugs, he is sentenced to imprisonment for two months from 11 February 2025.

34. Thus the overall sentence is one of two years and three months to date from today. It will expire on 10 May 2027.

35. The offender is to be released on a Recognizance Release Order after serving 15 months in custody so he is to be released from custody on 10 May 2026. The conditions of his Recognizance Release Order are that he enter into a good behaviour bond himself I the sum of $1,000 without security.

36. Mr Najdoski, I’ve got to explain the sentence to you. I sentenced you to imprisonment for all three offences, that they run concurrently. So the total sentence is two years and three months to start from today. You don’t have to do two years and three months in custody. You must do 15 months in custody. Once you are released, you will be on a good behaviour bond which will last for two years, in the sense that if you commit any offences in that period, you can be returned to custody. If you have any further questions, Mr Stanton will no doubt be able to answer them for you. Thank you sir, have a seat. I also sign the short minutes of order.

**********

Decision last updated: 15 April 2025