R v Scott John Magr-Hampton
[2013] ACTSC 285
•19 December 2013
R v SCOTT JOHN MAGR-HAMPTON
[2013] ACTSC 285 (19 December 2013)
CRIMINAL LAW – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – Theft – Imprisonment for two months – No matter of principle
Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), s 308
R v Oliver (1982) 7 A Crim R 174
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
No. SCC 165 of 2013
Judge: Refshauge J
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 19 December 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SCC 165 of 2013
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
R
V
SCOTT JOHN MAGR-HAMPTON
ORDER
Judge: Refshauge J
Date: 19 December 2013
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
Scott John Magr-Hampton be convicted of theft on 7 July 2013.
Scott John Magr-Hampton be sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment to commence on 6 June 2014.
A non-parole period be set to commence on 8 January 2009 and to end on 7 June 2014.
Theft may be seen as an offence that is not serious, but it is. Not only is it disturbing and undermines the society and people of the community, but it affects us all by increasing the price of goods.
Scott John Magr-Hampton has pleaded guilty to one count of theft. Theft is an offence under s 308 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) and is punishable by a maximum penalty of 1,000 penalty units (that is, a fine of $110,000), or ten years’ imprisonment, or both.
THE OFFENCE
Mr Magr-Hampton went into a Myer store in Belconnen on 7 July 2013, while on parole, and took a large number of jeans from the store. The total value of the jeans was $2,399. No property has been recovered.
SUBJECTIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
Education, employment and relationship history
Mr Magr-Hampton was born in Canberra, the eldest child of his parents. His parents divorced when he was approximately seven years old due to excessive use of alcohol and disputes between them. His childhood was spent, rather unhappily, between both his parents and with friends and the only stability in his life was his grandparents. He recently has re-established a relationship with his mother, who has re-partnered, but he has no contact with his father.
He was educated in Canberra but left high school in Year 9. He disliked school but subsequently completed Year 10 while in detention. He has also undertaken and completed other educational courses while in custody. He left home when he was fifteen and spent time in refuges and on the streets. He worked for his mother and his stepfather in the family business, which was apparently a tree surgery business, for approximately one year.
He commenced using alcohol and cannabis when he was ten. That is a remarkably young age and an age well before he was in a position to make an informed choice about that.
It is said that, when he is in the community legally, he may use up to half a gram of heroin a day, half a gram of cannabis a day and half a gram of methamphetamine a week. When he is on the run he uses up to three and a half grams of heroin a day, injecting, three and a half grams of ice a day and up to seven grams of cannabis.
He has, however, been able to abstain from illicit substances for periods of time and did so while he was working and living with his mother and stepfather. He says that his abstinence was in part through having stopped associating with a peer group who had a negative effect on him.
He has had an opportunity to enter a number of residential rehabilitation facilities in the past but has only attended at Peppers, and then remaining only for three weeks before discharging himself prematurely.
During his term of imprisonment at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in 2010, he was found suitable to undertake alcohol and other drug programs and did complete six sessions. He has expressed an interest in attending the Solaris Therapeutic Community whilst in custody. He has, however, a perhaps unrealistic attitude to his drug use and, while he may be able to cease using drugs at appropriate times, there is not a lot of evidence to suggest that that is actually going to happen in the very near future.
Physical and mental health
Mr Magr-Hampton appears to be in physically good health but reports being diagnosed with depression at age sixteen and has a history of supervision by ACT Mental Health. In 2006 he was placed on anti-psychotic medication due to a propensity to experience psychotic symptoms, mainly from drug use and personality issues. Currently, however, there is no evidence of any mental health issues and ACT Mental Health are not currently taking a particular interest in his care.
Criminal history
He has a very depressing record. He has fifty-one offences on his record. Many of them are traffic offences, but they include eleven burglary offences, eight theft offences and three aggravated robbery offences, as well as a number of breaches of court orders, including bail matters. He has a lengthy history of contact with ACT Corrective Services. Most recently, he was supervised in relation to a good behaviour order and on parole. It is said that his compliance with that supervision has been unsatisfactory and he breached that supervision a number of times.
More recently, his parole has been breached and he has been returned to custody. It is expected that his period of current custody will end on 6 September 2014. He has indicated that he proposes to spend the full term of his time in imprisonment as he does not relish being supervised and therefore will not apply for parole. That is problematic to some extent, because ACT Corrective Services have indicated that he has encountered problems adjusting to release in the community. Mr Magr-Hampton was returned to custody on 7 July 2013, as I indicated. His behaviour in custody has been satisfactory and he has incurred no disciplinary action. However, he has been offered some programs but failed to attend for assessment and therefore has not completed those programs.
CONSIDERATION
Mr Magr-Hampton has an understanding of the connection between substance abuse and the commission of the current offence, but if he is to not going to continue offending and thereby finding himself continually in custody, it is necessary for him to address his substance abuse. It is said by the author of the Pre-Sentence Report that was tendered by consent before me:
He has struggled to overcome his dependence. He does not consider his dependence to currently be problematic and believes he has the ability to remain drug free when he is released from custody, but unfortunately for Mr Magr Hampton, he has been unable to maintain significant sobriety periods whilst in the community, placing himself in risky situations.
As a result, he has been assessed as at a high risk of further offending. The particular factors that tend to that assessment include drug addiction, unemployment, associates and finances. He needs to address these if he is to remain crime free.
Mr Magr-Hampton appeared for himself in the sentencing proceedings.
The offence is, as I have said, a serious one. The maximum penalties that the legislature provides show that the court should treat it as such. See R v Oliver (1982) 7 A Crim R 174 at 176.
The sentencing of Mr Magr-Hampton is somewhat difficult. There is a plea of guilty and he is entitled to the benefit of that plea of guilty, which was made at a relatively early stage. He has a long history of dishonesty offences and it is difficult to accept that it is not necessary to increase the sentences to bring home to him the need to comply with the obligations of the community.
Nevertheless, there are considerations of totality that are important. It is not appropriate for the Court to impose a sentence that is wholly crushing, and it is important to impose one that leaves Mr Magr-Hampton with some prospect of contribution to the community when he ultimately leaves custody. The sentencing is also complicated because of the fact that he is serving prior sentences and the arrangements in relation to non-parole periods that I am required to follow make it somewhat difficult.
Mr Magr Hampton, please stand:
1. I convict you of theft on 7 July 2013.
2. I sentence you to twelve months’ imprisonment to commence on 6 June 2014. That is to be partly concurrent on the current sentence that you are serving. Had you not pleaded guilty I would have sentenced you to eighteen months’ imprisonment.
3. I set a non-parole period to commence on 8 January 2009 and to end on 7 June 2014.
[His Honour then spoke directly to Mr Magr-Hampton]
It is a matter for you whether you wish to take advantage of that. I think if you do commit yourself to some programs in the Alexander Maconochie Centre, if you do test yourself out, I mean, it may be that you can stop if you want to.
Help has never hurt anyone, and if you can then you will not be in custody for as long as you are likely to be. It is just an ongoing, rolling exercise which does you no good, does the community no good, quite frankly, and I have given you an opportunity for parole and a relatively long, although not massive non-parole period, so that while the supervision should not be too burdensome, there may be some positive options for you there if that will work for you.
I certify that the preceding twenty-three (23) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Refshauge.
Associate:
Date: 27 March 2014
Counsel for the prosecutions: Ms K James
Solicitor for the prosecution: ACT Director of Public Prosecutions
Counsel for the defendant In person
Date of hearing: 26 November 2013
Date of judgment: 19 December 2013
0