R v Ok

[2016] ACTSC 132

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Ok

Citation:

[2016] ACTSC 132

Hearing Date:

2 June 2016

DecisionDate:

9 June 2016

Before:

Burns J

Decision:

See [20]–[22].

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – property offences – obtaining property by deception – monies obtained through thousands of separate transactions – offender was an employee – no causal connection between offender’s mental health and offending – guilty plea – good prospects of rehabilitation – general deterrence – imprisonment imposed.

Cases Cited:

R v Griffiths [2015] ACTSC 341

R v Riordan [2015] ACTSC 26

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Leng Ok (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

Mr T Hickey (Crown)

Mr J Papas (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Prosecutions (Crown)

Ben Aulich & Associates (Offender)

File Numbers:

SCC 195 of 2015; SCC 200 of 2015

BURNS J:

1. Leng Ok, you have entered a plea of guilty to one charge of obtaining property by deception in the amount of $60,000. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years imprisonment. An Agreed Statement of Facts was tendered at your sentence hearing. I will not now recite those facts. It is sufficient to say that between May 2010 and July 2014, through thousands of separate transactions, you stole $60,000 from your employer, Canberra Fresh Group Pty Ltd which traded as Ziggy’s Market Fresh in Belconnen. You used your knowledge of the way in which the cash registers worked to void transactions and to take money from the till without the till being out of balance at the end of the day. The method you adopted was not sophisticated but it was easy to implement and relatively difficult to detect.

1. After your misappropriation of these monies was discovered by your employer they confronted you and you made partial admissions and offered to repay the money you had taken. You told your employers that you used the money to feed your family. I note that there is no evidence that your family was in financial difficulty throughout this period and it appears that both you and your husband were in employment. I am satisfied that your motive was one of greed. You saw an easy opportunity to steal the money and you took that opportunity.

1. I am satisfied that at the time you misappropriated these monies you knew that the business in which you were employed was in financial difficulty. You knew that it was a family business. You also knew that the family home of one or more of the owners had been sold in order to try to keep the business afloat. You knew that this was particularly distressing and stressful to your employers but you nevertheless chose to continue stealing from the business. On occasions you told your employers when you said that you had seen other employees taking stock without paying for it. This was conduct calculated to make your employers trust you and to deflect any suspicion of wrong doing away…