R v Shehade

[2025] NSWDC 366

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

R v Shehade [2025] NSWDC 366

Hearing dates:

22 August 2025

Date of orders:

15 September 2025

Decision date:

15 September 2025

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Before:

Scotting DCJ

Decision:

1   Karim Shehade is convicted.

2   I impose an aggregate term of imprisonment of 5 years with a non-parole period of 3 years to date from 7 August 2025. The non-parole period will expire on 6 August 2028 and the head sentence will expire on 6 August 2030.

3   The offender will be eligible to be released on parole on 6 August 2028.

Catchwords:

CRIME — Violent offences — Armed robbery — Offensive weapon

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:

Attorney General’s Application No 1 of 2022 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147

Legge v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 244

R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346

R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270

R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353

Category:

Sentence

Parties:

Rex (Crown)
Karim Shehade (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel:
G Stanton (Offender)

Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Prosecutor)
Macquarie Law Group (Offender)

File Number(s):

2023/342663

Publication restriction:

None

Judgment

1. Karim Shehade (the offender) appears for sentence after pleading guilty in the Local Court to two counts of robbery armed with an offensive weapon contrary to s 97(1) Crimes Act 1900.

2. The maximum penalty for the offence is 20 years imprisonment.

3. The offender also asks the Court to take into account a further count of the same charge when dealing with sequence 1 on a Form 1.

Approach to Sentencing

4. I have taken into account the purposes of sentencing set out in s 3A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and the matters in s 21A of that Act.

5. The offender entered pleas of guilty in the Local Court and is entitled to a 25% discount on sentence: s 25D(2)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

6. To the extent that I make findings of fact adverse to the offender, I am satisfied of that fact beyond reasonable doubt. To the extent that I make findings of fact favourable to the offender I am satisfied of that fact on the balance of probabilities: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 at [27] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Hayne and Callinan JJ).

7. I have taken into account the principles outlined in the guideline judgment relating to the Form 1 offences: Attorney General’s Application No 1 of 2022 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147.

Facts

8. The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts. I have taken the entirety of the document into account in coming to an appropriate sentence. What follows is a brief summary of the facts relevant to the offender to permit an understanding of the sentence imposed.

9. The offender is presently 20 years of age and was 18 at the time of the offences.

Sequence 1 and sequence 2 (Form 1)

10. At about 10.00pm on Saturday 14 October 2023, Abdul Qadir and Abdul Haadi were looking for a second-hand vehicle on Facebook Marketplace and found a white 2018 Toyota Corolla advertised for $12,500. The offender represented himself as the owner of the vehicle in the advertisement. Mr Qadir checked the Service NSW information available on the internet and confirmed that the vehicle was registered. Mr Qadir sent a message on Facebook messenger indicating that he was interested in purchasing the vehicle.

11. The offender messaged Mr Qadir asking for his telephone number, which was provided. The offender then called Mr Qadir and introduced himself as “Kareem”. He told Mr Qadir that other people were interested in the vehicle and that he wanted to be paid in cash. Mr Qadir told the offender that he had almost $10,000 in cash and could pay the rest by bank transfer.

12. At 10.14pm the offender used Facebook Messenger using the name “Kayz Chehade” to send Mr Qadir an address in Yagoona. Mr Qadir and Mr Haadi arrived at the address at 11.10pm and got out of their vehicle.

13. The offender approached the men from the other side of the street. He was described as much larger than Mr Haadi and wearing a black hoodie, tracksuit pants and a black mask covering his nose and mouth.

14. The offender grabbed Mr Qadir’s shirt with one hand and held a knife in close proximity to Mr Qadir’s body with the other. The offender said, “Give me the cash”. Mr Qadir said that he did not have it on him. The offender said, “Give me the cash - honest, I will kill you”. He repeated this phrase a further two times.

15. The offender demanded that Mr Qadir go back to his vehicle to get the cash and walked back with Mr Qadir to the vehicle. The offender tried to open the door but it was locked and Mr Qadir complied with the offender’s demand to open the door. Mr Qadir retrieved a black pouch from the glove box containing the cash. The offender then told Mr Qadir to hand over his watch and his mobile telephone and Mr Qadir complied.

16. Mr Haadi heard the threats made to Mr Qadir and saw the knife being held at Mr Qadir’s abdomen. The offender demanded Mr Haadi’s mobile telephone and Mr Haadi complied.

17. The offender told Mr Qadir and Mr Haadi not to go to the police. They drove down the street before performing a U-turn but did not see the offender. Mr Haadi called the police and they attended the scene. The advertisement had been removed from Facebook Marketplace when Mr Qadir tried to show the police.

Sequence 3

18. At about 6.00pm on Saturday 21 October 2023, Ali Abotorabli was searching Facebook Marketplace for a second-hand vehicle and found a white 2017 Toyota Corolla for sale for $14,000. The post included several photographs of the vehicle including the registration plate and the odometer. Mr Abotorabli used the Service NSW website to confirm that the vehicle was genuine.

19. Mr Abotorabli sent a message on Facebook Messenger to the offender who was using the name “Zakk Figg”. The offender provided an address, the condition of the vehicle and told Mr Abotorabli to bring cash.

20. Mr Abotorabli put $1,000 in cash in his wallet and $10,000 in cash into a white plastic bag which he put in the centre console of his vehicle and then drove to the address he had been given.

21. Mr Abotorabli arrived at the address at about 9.35pm. He saw two Toyota Corollas parked in two neighbouring driveways. He took a torch out of his vehicle and looked at the first Toyota, which he thought was not the vehicle for sale. As he was moving towards the second Toyota he was approached by the offender from the other side of the street.

22. The offender was wearing dark long pants, a dark jacket and had a scarf pulled up over his nose and mouth so that only his eyes could be seen.

23. As he approached Mr Abotorabli, the offender pulled a knife from his waist, holding it at chest height and facing up. He quietly said to Mr Abotorabli “give me the money, give me the money”. Mr Abotorabli took a step towards the offender and the offender said, “No, no, no”.

24. Mr Abotorabli ran down the street for about 5 or 6 metres and the offender followed him. The offender then walked towards Mr Abotorabli’s vehicle. Mr Abotorabli said, “the money’s here”, patting his front pockets. Mr Abotorabli then tried to lock his vehicle but he did not have the keys to it. The offender opened the driver’s door and removed the bag of cash from the centre console and then walked away.

25. Mr Abotorabli called out for help. A neighbour came out to ask him what was wrong but did not return after Mr Abotorabli told him.

26. Mr Abotorabli got the keys from his vehicle and drove in the direction of where the offender headed, but Mr Abotorabli did not see him. Mr Abotorabli then called the police. Mr Abotorabli tried to show the police the Facebook post but it had been removed.

27. The offender was arrested on 28 October 2023. He was remanded in custody until he was granted Supreme Court bail on 6 December 2023.

Sentencing Assessment Report

28. The Court received a Sentencing Assessment Report (SAR) dated 5 May 2025, that can be summarised as follows.

29. The offender told the author of the SAR that he lives in stable accommodation with his parents and younger siblings. At the time of the offences, his relationship with his parents was strained due to his drug use. He reported being in full-time employment as an apprentice plumber and that he had been in that employment for nine months.

30. The author of the SAR stated that the offender took full responsibility for the offences and did not seek to minimise his behaviour. The offender stated that he had drug and gambling addiction issues that contributed to his offending conduct. He said what he did was “disgusting” and took responsibility for not seeking help earlier.

31. The offender reported associating with a negative peer group at the time of the offences and that he was taking a cocktail of drugs on a daily basis. He said that he sought to self-medicate as a way of avoiding dealing with his emotions. He reported being sober for over 12 months.

32. The offender stated that he was motivated by money to recoup what he had lost gambling. He reported that he was dealing with anger issues, homelessness, gambling and drug use and in combination with those things led him to act aggressively.

33. The offender reported that he has been previously diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder and that he was unmedicated. He reported that he was currently engaged with a psychologist.

34. The offender was willing to participate in interventions and to perform community service, if required. He was assessed as suitable for supervision.

The Offender’s Case on Sentence

35. The offender tendered the following documents:

1. letter of apology from the offender (undated);

2. character reference by Melissa Humphries, the offender’s mother dated 15 August 2025;

3. character reference by Armani Moussa dated 10 August 2025;

4. character reference by Ali Chehade dated 18 August 2025;

5. character reference by D’Mor Heidi Chehade dated 30 June 2025;

6. character reference by Hussam Bassam Chehade (undated);

7. character reference by Jalal Bazzaz (undated);

8. character reference by Bassam Chahade (undated);

9. character reference by Hadia Issa (undated);

10. report of Sam Albassit, psychologist, dated 19 August 2025;

11. report of Chafik Awit, psychologist, dated 21 August 2025.

Report of Sam Albassit, psychologist

36. Mr Albassit saw the offender once for two hours for the purpose of preparing his report.

History

37. The offender gave a history to the psychologist that he currently lives with his father and grandfather. His parents separated when he was six years of age. He has three younger siblings who live with his mother.

38. The offender reported an erratic and troubled childhood. He recalled from as early as four years of age that his parents’ relationship was strained leading to emotional and physical assaults. He would retreat to his room to avoid them yelling at each other. He described his parents as present but not emotionally available to him.

39. Following the separation, he went to live with his mother and siblings. She prevented him from seeing his father despite his requests to do so. At age 12 he went to live with his father at his own insistence.

40. The offender gave a history of attending a number of schools. He moved to the south coast in about Year 6, before returning to Sydney mid-way through Year 8.

41. The offender reported that he struggled at school academically and socially. He was a loner and did not have many friends. He had difficulty concentrating, got into trouble and fights and was suspended on a number of occasions. He reported engaging in disruptive behaviours including setting grass fires at home and setting off fireworks at school.

42. At about age 10 he was referred to a paediatrician and was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). He took Ritalin for about two years. The offender reported being bullied over his diagnosis and he was assigned a Teacher’s Aide. He engaged with school counsellors in Year 5, Year 7 and Year 8 on a regular basis.

43. The offender told the psychologist that at about age 13 that he distanced himself from his family and stopped going home because “he could not see the point”. He associated with a negative peer group and began using cannabis at age 14. At about age 15 he began to use cannabis daily and excessively. He reported living his life recklessly, using drugs and getting into physical altercations with groups of men. He stated that between the ages of 15 and 17 that he was assaulted and robbed on three occasions.

44. At age 16 the offender began to gamble in licensed venues. He told the psychologist that on one of the first occasions that he and a friend won over $80,000 and that he gambled away his half of the winnings within a three day period.

45. By the age of 18 the offender reported that he was using MDMA and a prescription drug, Tramadol. He would engage in three to four day benders in which he would go without sleep and consume large amounts of drugs and gamble excessively.

46. The offender told the psychologist that he owed $30,000 to his family, in particular his cousins, as a result of his gambling addiction. At the time of the offences, the offender described himself as in a cycle of addiction, desperate to pay off his debts and to continue to support his habits. He reported being in a dark place and having irrational thoughts.

47. On leaving school, the offender enrolled in a Certificate III in Air Conditioning but found it hard to focus and coupled with his illicit drug use, he could not complete the course.

Psychometric testing and diagnosis

48. The psychologist administered a number of psychometric tests to assess the level of the offender’s symptomatology relating to depression, anxiety and stress (DASS 21), his diagnosed ADHD (the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale) and problem gambling (the Problem Gambling Severity Index).

49. The psychologist reported that at the date of the report that the offender scored in the moderate category for each of depression, anxiety and stress. He opined that his overall assessment of the offender was that he had symptomatology consistent with a Major Depressive Disorder.

50. The psychologist noted the offender’s childhood diagnosis of ADHD.

51. The psychologist opined that the offender has symptoms consistent with a Gambling Disorder but did not set out the results of the relevant psychometric testing.

52. The psychologist opined that the offender was experiencing symptoms of Substance Use Disorder and Gambling Disorder at the time of the offences and that those conditions contributed to his offending behaviour, but each of those conditions were now in remission.

Opinion

53. The psychologist stated that individuals with ADHD often experience impulsivity and a lack of consequential thinking. He opined that the offender’s history was consistent with recurring episodes of manic/hypomanic symptoms, erratic behaviour and poor social functioning and that his repeated cyclical feelings of agitation led to volatile changes in his mood and self-destructive behaviours.

54. The psychologist opined that the offender has always struggled with emotional regulation in his life and found it hard to develop relationships. He accepted that the offender used “copious amounts of cannabis and MDMA” as a maladaptive way of coping with emotional and physical disturbance.

55. The psychologist noted that substance use and gambling lead to chemical changes in the brain. He opined that the offender turned to substances to deal with his emotional disturbance and the anxiety and depression that accompanied them. The psychologist stated at [24]-[25]:

Once an addiction occurred, experienced dramatic mood swings that caused buried feelings to rise to the surface, often with overwhelming intensity. He was experiencing significant disturbances with his mental health to which he self-medicated on a regular basis with drugs and gambling to placate his significant emotional disturbance.

56. The psychologist opined that the offender suffered from impulsivity, erratic behaviour and poor emotional regulation from a young age when he was diagnosed with ADHD. By 16 years of age, he was using drugs heavily and gambling excessively. He progressed to going on “benders” which demonstrated a progression of his condition and led to “financial desperation”.

57. The psychologist opined that at the time of the offences the offender was trapped and could see no legitimate way to solve his financial needs and acute financial desperation led to him committing the armed robberies. The psychologist opined that the offender’s impulsivity, ongoing addictions, limited capacity for self-regulation and poor decision-making were causal factors in the offending.

58. The psychologist opined that the offender’s judgement was significantly impaired at the time of the offences.

59. The psychologist opined that the offender now has insight into his behaviour and that his expressions of remorse represent him taking responsibility and wanting to make significant changes.

60. The psychologist noted that the offender had been engaging with treatment with Mr Awit for the past six months and that he reported being abstinent for 22 months. He opined that the offender would be assisted by further psychological treatment for impulsivity, fluctuating moods and to prevent relapse.

Report of Chafic Awit

61. The offender commenced seeing Chafic Awit, psychologist, in December 2023 as a condition of his bail for treatment of his drug and gambling addiction. This treatment continued until April 2024 when it was discontinued. The offender sought treatment again from Mr Awit in late 2024, but it could not be recommenced until February 2025 because Mr Awit was on extended leave.

62. Mr Awit has proposed a treatment plan to be supervised by him, in the event that the offender was given a non-custodial penalty.

Letter of apology

63. The offender relied on an undated letter of apology to the Court.

64. The offender stated that he understood the seriousness of his offences and that he regretted the choices he made leading up to them. He stated that the Court proceedings have had a significant impact on his mental health.

65. He described his childhood as difficult, stating that he lived with his grandmother and experienced separation from his siblings. He felt that his ADHD was a burden on his family.

66. He stated that at the time of the offences that he was under immense pressure, not thinking clearly and that he owed $30,000 to family members, including his cousins, which left him feeling desperate and overwhelmed.

67. He stated that he became involved in gambling from a young age. He now realises that his life was reckless and unstable.

68. The offender stated that he witnessed another inmate slash his own throat in custody with a “box-cutter” and that caused him significant trauma.

69. He stated that since being released on bail that the offender has tried to commit to a consistent routine of working for his uncle and attending appointments with Mr Awit.

Character references

70. The offender presented a large bundle of character references from family members. I have taken the entirety of that material into account in coming to an appropriate sentence.

71. Overall his referees reported that the actions of the offender were out of character and that they have had a salutary impact on him. They provided general support for the impact his family breakdown and ADHD had on him. He was universally described as a good family member and a kind and considerate person.

Findings on the offender’s subjective case

72. The offender did not give evidence in the sentence proceedings and relied on what he told Mr Albassit and his letter of apology as evidence of the facts of his subjective circumstances. It is well settled that a court should exercise very considerable caution in relying on those statements, where the offender does not give evidence: R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353 at [58]-[59] (Smart AJ) and [79] (Spigelman CJ).

73. The report of Mr Albassit was entirely based on the offender’s self-report. Mr Albassit did not have any independent evidence available to him that supported the history given by the offender.

72. The character evidence relied on by the offender provided only limited support to the history given to Mr Albassit. Not one of his family members directly supported the offender’s history to Mr Albassit in three major respects - that at the time of the offences:

1. he had a serious drug problem;

2. he had a serious gambling problem; or

3. he owed any of his family members a significant sum of money.

75. There are a number of internal inconsistencies in the various statements made by the offender, and there are a number of inconsistencies between the offender’s statements and the statements of his family members.

76. I do not accept that the history given by the offender to Mr Albassit was reliable. None of the offender’s family members describe any observation of the offender as consistent with a person suffering a mental condition of the severity supported by Mr Albassit. I have considered the possibility that the offender masked his symptoms from those close to him, but I do not think that was likely.

77. Further, Mr Albassit’s report contains references to a different offender and this leaves me with some concern over the reliability of his opinion.

78. It follows that I do not accept the opinions of Mr Albassit based on that history.

79. I accept that the offender suffered the hardship of his parents’ relationship breaking down and that he was cared for by different family members as a child and he was separated from his siblings at various times. I accept that he suffered low self-esteem growing up and had to rely on family members other than his parents for support.

80. I accept that the offender was diagnosed with ADHD and that his schooling was disrupted and he had a poor educational outcome. I accept that he acted out at school. I accept that his offending behaviour demonstrated a serious lack of consequential thinking, which was probably related to a combination of his age, a lack of maturity and his ADHD. I cannot be satisfied of the extent of his mental condition at the time of the offences and I am not satisfied that his moral culpability is reduced by reference to it.

81. To the limited extent that the offender had a deprived upbringing, I am not satisfied that it exposed him to crime, violence or drug use. I am not satisfied that the circumstances of his upbringing reduce his moral culpability for the crimes he committed. If he did have a substance use disorder or a gambling disorder at some point in time, I am not satisfied either of those conditions was a significant cause of his offending behaviour.

82. I accept that in relation to his mental health he has struggled to cope with the anxiety and stress of being charged with the offences, going to prison and having to face the sentence proceedings. I accept his present mental state requires treatment and that will make his time in custody more onerous.

83. I do not accept that the offender witnessed the event described by him in custody. I find it very unlikely that a prisoner of a similar classification to the offender, who was on remand, had access to a box cutter. I accept that the offender suffers from Type 1 Diabetes and that will make his time in custody more onerous.

Consideration

Objective seriousness

84. Sequence 1 involves considerable objective gravity. The offence involved significant planning including placing a false advertisement and making false representations to Mr Qadir in order to lure him to a location late at night carrying a significant sum of cash. The offender took steps to disguise his appearance and to take the knife with him to use it in the commission of the robbery. The offender relied on the anonymity of the internet to conceal his identity. Notwithstanding the level of planning involved, the method employed by the offender was not sophisticated and he was likely to be detected. The offender grabbed Mr Qadir by the shirt and held the knife towards him. The use of the knife was accompanied with a very serious and repeated threats of violence, that he would kill Mr Qadir. The knife was capable of inflicting death or serious injury. The value of the property taken was significant. The offence would have been terrifying for Mr Qadir. The offence was motivated by financial gain.

85. Sequence 3 involves some objective gravity. The offence involved significant planning including placing a false advertisement and making false representations to Mr Abotorabli in order to lure him to a location late at night carrying a significant sum of cash. The offender took steps to disguise his appearance and to take the knife with him to use it in the commission of the robbery. The offender relied on the anonymity of the internet to conceal his identity. Notwithstanding the level of planning involved, the method employed by the offender was not sophisticated and he was likely to be detected. The offender pointed the knife towards the victim but there was no physical contact between them. The value of the property taken was significant. The offence was motivated by financial gain.

86. The Henry guideline is applicable in these sentence proceedings: R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346. The guideline provides that where the offence is characterised by certain features, the head sentence imposed should fall between four to five years imprisonment. It should be noted that a s 97(1) offence is more serious than the offences considered in Henry, but also the guideline judgment related to late pleas of guilty where the appropriate discount was in the order of 10%. The guideline judgment is not prescriptive but rather operates as a check or a sounding board for the imposition of an appropriate penalty: Legge v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 244 at [40] and [48]–[59].

87. I have taken into account the maximum penalty for the offences.

Deterrence

88. General deterrence is of significance to the offences before the Court. The penalty imposed for the offences must signal to others contemplating committing these types of offences, that they will be met with significant punishment.

89. This case involved the criminal use of a website used by the public to trade second hand goods. Individuals using those types of resources are entitled to expect that they can do so safely, and without the risk of being exposed to significant threats of violence and serious dishonesty.

90. There is also a need for specific deterrence. Whist the offender has expressed remorse to the extent of disgust in his actions, in my view he lacks insight into how serious his offending was. He was given an opportunity to engage in treatment and work on bail, but his efforts in those endeavours faded. He ceased treatment with Mr Awit and stopped working for his uncle. This leads me to question how dedicated he is to progressing his rehabilitation in the community.

Aggravating factors

91. There are no relevant aggravating factors.

Mitigating factors

92. The offender did not have a significant record of prior convictions: s 21A(3)(e) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW). The offender had some driving convictions that are irrelevant to this sentencing exercise.

93. The offender has good prospects of rehabilitation: s 21A(3)(h) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender has good family support. This has included provision of employment and spiritual guidance. He has demonstrated some capacity to meaningfully engage in treatment and employment, but his commitment to his rehabilitation has waned. He is still young and that increases his prospects of rehabilitation.

94. The offender has expressed remorse: s 21A(3)(i) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender has expressed remorse to the psychologist, the author of the SAR, his referees and the Court. I am satisfied that he has accepted responsibility for his actions. His pleas of guilty also indicate remorse.

95. The offender was in custody from 28 October 2023 to 6 December 2023, a period of 39 days. I will backdate the sentence imposed to commence on 7 August 2025 to take into account that period of presentence custody.

96. I have considered s 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and I am satisfied having considered all possible alternatives, that no penalty other than imprisonment is appropriate.

Penalty

97. Karim Shehade is convicted.

98. I will impose an aggregate sentence: s 53A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The terms of imprisonment I would have imposed if separate sentences were to be imposed after taking into account the discount for the plea of guilty are:

• Sequence 1 – taking into account the matter on the Form 1 – 4 years and 6 months;

• Sequence 3 – 3 years and 6 months.

99. I make a finding of special circumstances. This is the offender’s first time in custody. He is a young man and I accept that he has good prospects of rehabilitation by reference to his age. He has some mental health issues that justify an extended parole period.

100. I impose an aggregate term of imprisonment of 5 years with a non-parole period of 3 years to date from 7 August 2025. The non-parole period will expire on 6 August 2028 and the head sentence will expire on 6 August 2030.

101. The offender will be eligible to be released on parole on 6 August 2028.

**********

Decision last updated: 17 September 2025