R v Whittall

[2019] NSWDC 606

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Whittall [2019] NSWDC 606
Hearing dates:	2 August 2019, 16 May 2019, 29 March 2019
Date of orders:	20 September 2019
Decision date:	20 September 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge W Hunt
Decision:	11 months imprisonment with Recognisance Release Order 5 months after serving 6 months
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – proceeds of crime – money laundering
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	Xiao v R [2018] NSWCCA 4
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Crown Charles Anthony Whittall
Representation:	Counsel: Ms T Berbarian - Crown Mr M Robinson SC - Offender Solicitors: Daniel Wakim Lawyers Director of Public Prosecutions - Cth
File Number(s):	2013/385407

Judgment

1. Charles Anthony Whittall, whose date of birth is 14 January 1976, is before the Court for sentence in relation to two offences. Both of those offences are in breach of s 4.9 (1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

2. Across both charges, Mr Whittall is to be dealt with on the basis that he dealt with, namely, possessed and disposed of a total of $2,675,673 and it is reasonable to suspect that such sum is the proceeds of crime. In sum, the dealings comprise a series of payments and purchases between 30 December 2008 and 23 December 2013. Those dealings included the purchase of a house, furnishings, jewellery, travel, various luxury cars, payments for a sandstone wall and cash transfers via Western Union. They also included providing his partner Reagan Boxall with money for the purposes of making payments towards the house and towards travel.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENCE, FOR PURPOSES OF S 16A (2)(A) OF THE CRIMES ACT.

3. The agreed facts set out that the value of the money involved in the dealings was out of proportion with Mr Whittall’s income or any legitimate source of funds. The reason that there are two charges is because the legislation in relation to this class of offence was amended. Accordingly, the first charge relates to dealings between 30 December 2008 and 18 March 2010 and involved an amount of $1,551,368.36 at a time that the maximum penalty was a period of two years imprisonment and/or a fine of $8,500. The operative change in the legislation means that, from 19 March 2010, the maximum penalty for the same offence is provided a maximum period of three years imprisonment and/or a fine of $19,800. The increase in the punishment represents the view of the legislature about the seriousness of such matters. In the case of each offence I will take into account the maximum penalty as a benchmark or a guide stick in the way that is contemplated by the authorities.

4. In relation to that second charge the amount that was dealt with between 19 March 2010 and 23 December 2013 is an amount of $1,179,595.72. The agreed facts between the parties enumerate a number of dealings in relation to the particularised events of dealing. I do not see the utility where there is…