R v Riley

[2018] NSWDC 515

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Riley [2018] NSWDC 515
Hearing dates:	5 December 2018
Decision date:	05 December 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	King SC DCJ
Decision:	Convicted. Form 1 matters – SEQ 2,3,4 – taken into account on sentence. Special circumstances found – Bugmy & Fernando factors, deprived background, need for longer period on parole to assist the offender to cease using prohibited drugs and return to a law-abiding life within the community. Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 4 years comprising of a NPP of 2 years and 6 months commencing on 31/3/18 and expiring on 30/9/20 and a balance of term of 1 year and 6 months commencing on 1/1020 and expiring on 30/3/22.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL – sentence - reckless wounding – Form 1 matters - offences of intimidation, take and drive conveyance, possess prohibited drug - subjective matters
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 s 10(1) Drugs (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571 Fernando 1992 (76 ACrimR 58)
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Matthew John RIley
Representation:	Counsel: Ms S Oliver Mr J Carty   Solicitors: Crown: Ms M McIvor
File Number(s):	2018/00100547

Judgment

1. In this matter, Matthew Riley appears for sentence in respect of a single offence, being reckless wounding contrary to s 35(4) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty provided is seven years’ imprisonment and there is a standard non parole period in respect of such offences of three years. In addition to being sentenced in respect of that offence, he asks the Court to take into account three further offences, being an offence of intimidation contrary to s 13(1) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, take and drive conveyance contrary to s 154A(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 and lastly, possess prohibited drug contrary to s 10(1) Drugs (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985, being less than 1 gram of marijuana or Indian hemp.

2. The facts have been agreed and are as follows:

3. The offender lived at 12 Seventh Avenue, Stuarts Point with his partner.

Events Leading up to the Offence

4. About 1am on Sunday 31 March 2018, Marian Gehring, a 70 year old, who lives at 14 Seventh Avenue, Stuarts Point with her 74 year old husband, Arthur Gehring, was woken up by noise outside her house. Leaving the house lights off she opened the front door and saw the offender get out of a car and walk towards her house. Gehring quietly closed the front door.

5. The offender knocked on Gehring's front door, which Gehring ignored. The offender then banged on her front lounge room window. Fearing that the offender was going to smash her window, Gehring opened the door and the offender walked straight into the house.

6. The offender was very sweaty and was rambling about people being after him for his money. He asked Gehring for a lift to Macksville and she said she didn't have any petrol. Eventually she rang her granddaughter, Kim, who arrived at the house soon after with her husband, Shane Gehring, who quietly told Kim that the offender had knives. Kim offered to drive the offender to Macksville but the offender said he didn't trust her. The offender used Gehring's phone to call a taxi before walking out and sitting on the veranda. The offender then walked away and Gehring called police. By this time it was 2.10am.

7. At 2.33am the accused banged on the front door of 13 Seventh Avenue, Stuarts Point. Sharelle McMaugh was woken up from her sleep and said, "Who is it?" The offender said, "I am the young guy from across the road. Can you let me in, I want to talk to you?" McMaugh told him to go away and the offender left.

Offence of Reckless Wounding

Form 1 offences: intimidate, take and drive conveyance, possess prohibited drug.

8. Shortly after this, the offender knocked on the front door of 15 Seventh Avenue. The victim, Paul Buckman, a 47 year old bus driver, resided at this address with his 92 year old mother, who he cares for part time.

9. On this night, the victim had relatives visiting, including children who had been asleep in the lounge room near the front door. One of the children woke the victim up and said someone was at the door. The victim opened the door and saw the offender in football shorts with no shirt and sweating profusely. He recognized the offender as he had spoken to him several times before.

10. The offender asked the victim for a lift to Macksville in exchange for $200. The victim refused. The offender was sweaty and acting paranoid. He said he had been to Marion's house but did not trust her and she was "in with it". He held two knives in one hand including a hunting knife with a 20 centimetre blade, and a folding knife. The victim was concerned for his family and agreed to drive the offender in order to get him away from the house.

11. They got into the victim’s silver Holden Commodore. The offender sat in the front passenger seat and said, "Go, don't say nothing, don't ask for directions, just drive". He placed the knives on the back centre armrest. The offender was rambling and acting paranoid, asking the victim if he was, "In on it", constantly checking the knives and ducking when cars passed.

12. When they reached the Pacific Highway, the offender said he wanted to go to South West Rocks. The offender was very agitated and by this stage the victim was very afraid for his safety.

13. They drove into South West Rocks where the accused directed the victim to reverse into a driveway. The victim did so and took his hands off the steering wheel. The accused said, "What the fuck are you doing? Are you going to make a run for it?" The victim said he wasn't and put his hands in the air. The offender kept reaching into the back seat where he had put the knives.

14. The offender directed the victim to drive to the Oasis Motel in Nambucca Heads. As they drove, the offender said, "How much did they offer you? Are you in on it?", and continued acting paranoid. The victim drove past the shops in Nambucca Heads. He found a point at the Nambucca Heads Police Station and said, "That is the fucking motel I want to fucking go to".

15. The victim turned onto Ridge Street, then made a U turn and parked near the police station. The offender stood outside the car with the passenger door open and his arms resting on top. The victim decided to try and escape and pressed his foot down hard on the pedal. The car accelerated forward but the offender managed to grab hold of the passenger door and get back into the car and close the door.

16. The victim immediately stopped the car and applied the handbrake. He opened the driver's side door and turned away from the offender to exit the car. The offender grabbed at the victim and the victim was stabbed in the middle of the back with the hunting knife. The victim ran behind a block of units to hide. He felt blood gushing down his back and applied pressure using a towel he found.

17. The offender drove off in the victim's car and parked it a short distance down the road and honked the horn. A police officer, who had been standing on the veranda at the police station, heard the honking and walked down. The offender was rambling about being watched and said he needed help from the police. The offender was escorted to the police station (Form1 - take and drive conveyance).

18. Meanwhile, the victim saw that his car was gone and went to the police station but could not raise anyone. He walked in front of the Golden Sands Hotel and stopped to reapply pressure as he was bleeding heavily. CCTV footage shows the victim in front of the hotel at 3.31am.

19. The victim ran to a nearby house, and police and ambulance were called. By the time the ambulance arrived, the victim was fairly faint from blood loss. He was initially conveyed to Coffs Harbour Hospital and was then flown by helicopter to John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle.

20. The stab caused a 3 centimetre wide laceration with a one to 2 centimetre gap, or gape, in the middle of the victim's back, and the victim's lung was punctured. The victim remained at John Hunter Hospital for four days until he was discharged on 4 April 2018. The wound was closed by three or four stitches.

Arrest

21. While the offender was at the police station, police were alerted to a male having been stabbed. At around 3.50am, the offender was placed under arrest and cautioned. He said people were after him for drugs and cash. He said he had used ice the previous day. He was then in possession of less than 1 gram of cannabis leaf (Form 1: possess prohibited drug).

22. In relation to the offence, he said "There was a wrestle, I don't know how he got stabbed. I went to the police station to make a statement about what has been happening. That is why I was there; I was in the front seat. I had the knife in the middle. He went to grab it. He tried to speed off when I was getting out".

Police Investigation

23. Police located the offender's folding knife in the back of the victim's car with the blade locked open. The hunting knife was located in the middle of the street about 10 metres from where the offence occurred.

24. The facts contain as “Appendix A” a photograph of what is described as a “hunting knife”. [It is, in my view, more accurately described as a “Bowie knife”, a knife which derives its name from Jim Bowie, an American who died at the Alamo, and it is more accurately described as a fighting knife, having a clipped edge, or point. However, nothing turns on how the knife might be appropriately described.]

25. The offending occurred in background circumstances where the offender had attended neighbours, who were 70 and 74 years of age, while carrying knives and demanding to be driven to Macksville. There was no charge in relation to his attendance at the Gehring's residence, but the material contained in the facts is relevant, in general, to the offenders conduct that night.

26. It is common ground between the parties that the offender was at least suffering from a drug induced psychosis at the time. He informed the police that he had used "ice" the previous day and he was then in possession of a gram of cannabis leaf. He has subsequently informed Julie Dombrowski, psychologist, that he had in fact been on an ice bender for five days and had not slept.

27. There is no independent evidence to confirm that assertion. But I have no difficulty in accepting that he was significantly affected by “ice” at the time of the offending and that the result of his use of that substance had resulted in him suffering from a drug induced psychosis. Methyl amphetamine has, in recent years, become notorious for its significant adverse effects on those who use it, and indirectly on those who come into contact with those who use it. Both ice and cannabis are capable of inducing states of psychosis.

28. Although there was no admission by the offender that he was also using cannabis at the time, it is highly likely that he had been, since he had some on him at the time of his arrest. Whether he was or not using cannabis in addition to ice, his conduct is entirely consistent with a drug induced psychotic episode, with a high degree of paranoia. That of course is not an excuse for the offending. s 21A (5AA) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, provides that the voluntary ingestion of methylamphetamine does not mitigate the objective seriousness of the offence.

29. It has been submitted on behalf of the offender by Mr Carty, barrister, that the offending conduct falls below the midrange of objective seriousness. The Crown's submissions argue that the objective seriousness is "well in the midrange". In particular, the Crown relies on the nature of the wound, requiring hospitalization for four days and some three or four stitches, and being 3 centimetres wide, with a one to 2 centimetre gape in the middle of the victim's back, of such depth as to in fact puncture the victim’s lung, and requiring transfer from Coffs Harbour Hospital by helicopter to John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle to deal with what was clearly a serious wound.

30. He remained in hospital for four days. The weapon used was one of two knives n the possession of the offender, described in the facts as a hunting knife with a 20 centimetre blade. The victim was stabbed as he endeavoured to escape from the motor vehicle. He was stabbed in the back. The offender at the time must have been on the passenger side, in the front of the vehicle, which would have prevented him from initially pursuing the victim who managed, despite the wound, to get away and initially hide behind a block of units. It was fortunate that the victim was not more seriously injured, but that appears to have been more the result of the offender's action being restricted by the fact that he was stabbing him from the passenger's side of the vehicle, as the victim tried to alight from the driver’s side.

31. The victim had been complying with the offender's request to drive him elsewhere, only because of his fear of the offender and his knives and because of his obvious intention to remove the offender from an area where he might threaten or cause injury to the victim at his home or the persons then otherwise present, being his 92 year old mother and a number of relatives, including children. The victim at the time he was wounded, was not endeavouring to attack the offender but clearly endeavouring to escape. In my view, the objective seriousness of the offence, being reckless wounding, falls at the absolute minimum at the high end of the midrange.

32. The intimidation of the victim commenced from the time that he attended at his home, possessed with the knives, and throughout the course of their journey until such time as the victim managed to flee from the car.

33. The intimidation of the victim was not only in respect of the offender's bizarre behaviour and the possession of knives, while wearing only a pair of shorts in the middle of the night, but also occasioned by his attendance at the victim's home where there were then a number of other persons present, including children. There is no evidence before the Court of any significant sequelae to the victim as a result of the injury. Nonetheless, it is clear that in the circumstances the victim must have felt a great degree of fear and concern for the safety and security of himself and of his various relatives who had been present at the house before they departed.

34. The taking of the motor vehicle was for only a short distance before the offender stopped and honked the horn, which fortunately alerted the police to his presence and eventually brought to their notice that he had stabbed the victim. At no time did he endeavour to assist the victim to obtain medical attention. In fact the offender attended the police station, but only informed them of his paranoid psychotic belief that he was being pursued by people for drugs and cash, although I note that he may well have had some view, as indicated to the psychologist, that he was being generally pursued by others for drugs and/or cash, but clearly not but any of the neighbours or the victim.

Subjective matters

35. Before the Court is the report that I have previously referred to from the psychologist, Julie Dombrowski, and the evidence of the offender's then de facto partner, Stacey Donovan, being an employee of the Aboriginal Health Service in Kempsey, being a sexual health worker with that service. In addition, of course, is the offender's criminal history. Subjective matters are taken from that material, and limited to that material, as the offender has not given evidence on sentence.

36. He was 27 years of age at the time, and is now 28 years of age and identifies as being a person of indigenous descent. He grew up in Wellington, living with his parents; he has a sister who is 14 years his senior but has had little contact with her throughout his life.

37. His mother worked as an Aboriginal Education Assistant at the local school, being of both European and Aboriginal descent. His father was a Wiradjuri man who grew up on a mission in Wellington, and is described in the psychological report as being a heavy user of heroin, cannabis and amphetamine, as well as being involved in drug dealing to fund his personal use. He is described as being frequently violent at home, physically assaulting the offender on most days, on one occasion beating him so severely that he could not walk for ten days. He also on occasion assaulted the offender's mother, which was witnessed by the offender.

38. When the offender was some eight years of age, his father was in prison for a number of years, which was probably a blessing for his family. The offender recalls experiencing periods of hunger throughout his childhood, despite his mother's fulltime employment. He believed that this was because his father often spent the family finances, buying prohibited drugs for his own use. The offender's father became ill and died when the offender was 13 years old. Despite his past treatment by his father, and his witnessing of his father's conduct towards his mother, the offender experienced mixed feelings at the death of his father, being grief, love and anger, which is not difficult to understand.

39. It was shortly after this that the offender's offending commenced as a juvenile, at the age of 14. He spent much of his adolescence being supervised by Juvenile Justice and nine months in a boy's home. He described the boy’s home as abusive and said that he experienced physical abuse at the hands of staff. He attended a Catholic primary and secondary school until Year 8, when he was expelled from school as a result of assaulting a teacher, in relation to which he was convicted. He had been apparently repeatedly suspended for threatening teachers and generally abusive behaviour. He later continued his schooling at a local neighbourhood Education Centre and managed to complete Year 10 with support from his mother and staff at the neighbourhood Education Centre. He apparently received grades of between 50% and 70% in his final exams in Year 10. Since leaving school he has obtained certificates in welding, floor and wall tiling, and as a roustabout.

40. He participated in a community development education program for 18 months. He has worked as a welder and a builder's labourer, although he has not been able to hold a position of employment for more than six months. He was terminated from his position as a builder's labourer after he became involved in an altercation with a co worker. He has, at this time, not worked for a number of years. As an adolescent, he was typically associated with other children from the boys' home where he was in care for nine months. He is currently in a relationship with Stacey Donovan; he has been in that relationship since August 2014. There is one child of the relationship, being Jada, who was born on 10 March 2018, approximately 20 days before the date of these offences.

41. His partner does not use prohibited drugs nor condone their use and I accept that for a period of time his relationship with her has assisted him in ceasing use of prohibited drugs. At some time in 2016, while in the current relationship, he relapsed to using prohibited drugs. Ms Donovan become aware of it and an argument resulted and they split up for a couple of weeks before she accepted his return in the absence of him using prohibited drugs. After Ms Donovan was released from hospital, after the birth of their child, they were not getting on, and she "kicked him out" a couple of weeks before his arrest for this offending.

42. He had had a previous relationship, and there is nine year old child to his first partner. That relationship had ended when he was convicted of domestic violence-related offences and an AVO was put in place, although he does continue to have ongoing contact with his oldest child. I note that in respect of Ms Donovan, there have been some difficulties in relation to intimidation and that he has at least spent one month in gaol in the past for harassing her and breach of an AVO order made in her favour. While in a relationship with her, he has had a one year ICO order, and also participated in the “Get Smart” program in respect of drugs.

35. He started smoking methylamphetamine at the age of 14, and progressed to intravenously administering it and using up to 3 grams per day. He has in the past also used, as previously referred to, cannabis, and in addition, alcohol and heroin, heavily from a similar age. He has continued to use substances while in custody, although it is not clear from the psychological report whether that is a reference to his current period of custody, or to a past period of custody. I will take it as referring to a past period rather than the present period. He claimed not to have used drugs except for cannabis in the two years prior to the subject offences.

Psychological report

44. Firstly, he has had number of previous injuries, but there is nothing that is relevant to the sentencing process for the current offending. In the two years after his father's death, he was using, as previously referred to, a number of prohibited drugs and experienced flashbacks and nightmares relating to his father's physical abuse of him. At the age of 15 he was prescribed Seroquel, an antipsychotic, and he has in the past received other antipsychotics, ie Neulactil and the antidepressant, Avanza.

45. The Neulactil and Avanza have been prescribed for him while he has been incarcerated since his arrest in relation to this matter. He reported experiencing paranoia throughout much of his adulthood, and has in the past recognised that his feelings of paranoia were often worsened by his cannabis and methylamphetamine use.

46. The psychologist in her report opines, "His medication, a possible mood or psychotic disorder, or cultural factors, may all be contributors to this restricted effect observed during the interview". At the time of this offending he was unemployed, and with a newborn baby. The psychological reports suggest that for the previous two years, while not using methylamphetamine, he had been smoking 1 gram of cannabis per day. That, of course, is during the period that he was residing with his partner, Stacey Donovan.

47. Apparently on being kicked out he relapsed into using methylamphetamine again and claimed to have used over an ounce of the drug over the five days preceding the offence. He also informed the psychologist that he was in fact being threatened in relation to drugs that had been supplied to him on credit.

48. He claimed that he had little memory of the offence:

"He recalled asking neighbours for assistance to get out of Kempsey to avoid being located by suppliers. He was in possession of a knife to defend him against the suppliers. He was uncertain as to how the victim sustained a stab wound to his back".

49. In my view that is somewhat contrary to his communications to the police when he was arrested. Paragraph 20 of the facts states that he informed police:

"There was a wrestle, I don't know how he got stabbed, I went to the police station to make a statement about what has been happening. That is why I was there. I was in the front seat. I had the knife in the middle. He went to grab it. He tried to speed off when I was getting out."

50. That is inconsistent with the victim's version of the events, and in my view inconsistent with his assertion that he had little memory of the offence. It is unfortunately the case that often offenders, when faced with the prospect of a sentence, believe that if they inform the Court, a psychologist or psychiatrist, that they have little memory of the event it somehow diminishes their moral culpability for the offending. In my view, the offender's assertions as to having little memory of the offence are unlikely to be true, particularly when he gave a false version of the victim going to grab the knife.

51. As to remorse and contrition, there is no acceptable evidence before the Court of remorse or contrition. I accept that the offender entered a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity, having been committed for sentence on 11 September 2018 from the Coffs Harbour Local Court, and that as a result he, is entitled to a discount of 25% for an early plea as referred to in Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383. However, an early plea of itself does not necessarily reflect remorse or contrition. Ms Donovan, who has maintained contact with the offender while he has been in custody, gave no evidence that the offender expressed any remorse or contrition to her at any time.

52. The only other possible source is a psychological report which contains the following in relation to remorse and contrition:

"He reported no significant mood disturbance but showed limited effect throughout the assessment which made it difficult to build a rapport and gauge his authenticity when he was articulating remorse. He appeared to be of normal intelligence and demonstrated limited awareness and insight into his behaviour",

and further at para 16,

"Mr Riley expressed regret and remorse for his offending but it was difficult to gauge his sincerity with his restricted effect. “I didn't mean to hurt him, I feel sorry for him."

53. He expressed disappointment with his offending and acceptance of his incarceration. "I am spewing, I'm going to miss out" (on spending time with his child and partner).

54. In my view, even the psychologist had difficulty in determining whether any remorse or contrition expressed was sincere and it appears that he was more concerned with his own position in relation to missing out on spending time with his child and partner than having any genuine awareness or insight into his behaviour and the serious effect that it must have had on the victim, both physically and emotionally, and indeed also on those other persons who he had disturbed that night.

55. There is one further reference to remorse and contrition in the psychologist’s report:

"He expressed regret and remorse for his offending behaviour, but it was difficult to gauge his sincerity with his limited effect"…

56. The psychologist opined,

"Mr Riley has a history of behavioural and emotional disregulation (including school misconduct, juvenile offending and substance use) that commenced in childhood. The persistence of his poorly controlled behaviour and emotional volatility into adulthood suggests that disturbance of personality development, consistent with a Cluster B (dramatic/erratic) personality disorder with antisocial features (although much of his behaviour could be explained by an underlying mental illness which requires further investigation).

The substance use operates as both a cause and a consequence of his dramatic and erratic behaviour and is, in large part, a form of self edification to manage negative feelings and emotions (including trauma symptoms such as flashbacks) while he otherwise has difficulty controlling. His personal dysfunction makes him vulnerable to depression and anxiety.”

57. The psychologist stated that further assessment would be required to determine whether the offender's experience of paranoia and his demonstration of restricted effects was the consequence of an underlying mental illness.

58. There is no further information before the Court in that regard. I note that the psychologist opines that management of the substance use will be vitally important to his rehabilitation and for his psychological wellbeing more generally. There is a requirement for long term treatment and management over several years to be effective, and that a high level of structure and support would be required to achieve any long term drug abstinence and to assist him to function adaptably within the community.

59. I note that Ms Donovan has offered some support for the offender when released, although she has not done so blindly, indicating that her support would depend on him ceasing the use of prohibited drugs. She indicated that he has promised that he would not do it again and that he would get help. However, I note that on the material contained in the psychological report, it would seem that even while in a relationship with Ms Donovan, he was in fact at least an ongoing user of cannabis. However I accept this ongoing support from her would be a significant factor in assistance in the future.

60. As to the likelihood of rehabilitation, it is necessary to refer to the offender's past criminal history, which commenced as a juvenile and has been effectively summarized by the psychologist, and I will adopt her summary.

61. Mr Riley's criminal history in NSW dates back to 2004 (age 14). His juvenile offending is notable for property damage, assaults (including assaulting a school staff member), breaking and enter, drug possession, driving offences, and weapon possession (ie a knife).

62. Juvenile Justice supervised Mr Riley for the majority of his adolescence. His offending continued into adulthood and is notable for further property damage, driving and violent offences (including stalking/intimidation/harassment and contravention of Apprehended Violence Orders (domestic).

63. As an adult he has received further community based orders and served three terms of imprisonment ranging from one to 18 months in duration (between 2013 and 2015) for domestic violence related offences."

64. I otherwise note in respect of the offender's criminal history, that he was frequently in the past called up for breaching orders that have been made to his benefit, so that there has, in effect, been a failure to comply with sentence orders on a number of occasions.

65. As to custody, he has, while in custody as a result of being arrested in respect to this matter, been in breach of prison regulations in respect of an incident on 17 April 2018 of possessing an offensive weapon/instrument. In the circumstances, I am unable to form the conclusion that there is a good prospect of rehabilitation, but considering his age and the potential assistance from Ms Donovan and despite his record of criminal offending from the age of 14 to date, I find that there is at least a reasonable prospect of rehabilitation, providing of course that the offender ceases all use of prohibited drugs in the future.

66. Absent the cessation of the use of prohibited drugs, it is my view that the offender will not only return to offending conduct both in relation to the use of prohibited drugs, but in relation to his need to obtain them and in the future, should his use of prohibited drugs, such as cannabis and methylamphetamine continue, there is a high likelihood that he will return to committing offences arising from the adverse effects of such drugs, particularly methylamphetamine.

67. From the material before the Court, it should have been obvious to the offender from his past criminal history and his knowledge of the effects of prohibited drugs on him, that it was very unwise for him to use, in particular, methylamphetamine. He must have been aware of the likelihood of it inducing a psychotic state that might result in other criminal behaviour. It is clear that the conduct in this case has passed the s 5 threshold and so much has been appropriately conceded by Mr Carty on behalf of the offender. The Court must have a regard for the purposes of sentencing as provided by s 3A of the Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act. The Court must take into account both specific and general deterrence, and in my view, both specific and general deterrence are important in relation to this offender.

68. I accept in this matter that in relation to the offender's mental illness or condition, and the submissions made by Mr Carty, that there is in fact no evidence on which the Court could rely to conclude on the balance of probability that the psychosis was brought on by mental illness. As the Crown has pointed out in the written submissions, there is in fact no diagnosis for mental illness, simply a history of behaviour which "suggests a disturbance of personality development consistent with Cluster B (dramatic/erratic) personality disorder with antisocial features”. I accept that the considerations referred to in both Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571 and Fernando 1992 (76 ACrimR 58) are relevant to this matter, and that there must be some reduction in moral culpability on the basis of the offender's developmental history.

69. I accept, on the basis of the material I have already referred to, that it is appropriate to find special circumstances allowing the reduction of the statutory relationship between the non parole period and the balance of term to assist the offender in particular relation to ceasing the use of prohibited drugs and returning to a law abiding lifestyle when released on parole.

70. You are convicted in relation to the offence of reckless wounding, contrary to s 35(4) of the Crimes Act 1900, and in sentencing you in respect of that offence, I take into account the offences of intimidate, take and drive conveyance, and possess prohibited drug referred to on the Form 1.

71. You are sentenced to a non parole period of two years and six months, commencing on 31 March 2018, the date when you were arrested. You will be first eligible for parole on 30 September 2020. The balance of term is one year and six months, expiring on 30 March 2022, and, expressed otherwise, that is a total term of imprisonment of four years with a non parole period of two years and six months and balance of one year and six months.

72. I said one year and six months but the calculator tells me it is in fact one year and five months and 30 days.

**********

Decision last updated: 16 September 2019