IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA 
AT BAIRNSDALE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	
CR 21-01857

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
TRENT WILSON		

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE DEMPSEY	
WHERE HELD:	Bairnsdale (later sentenced in Melbourne)	
DATE OF HEARING:	24 October 2023, 27 October 2023	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	30 October 2023	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Wilson	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VCC 1988	

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject: 		CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE
Catchwords: 		Confrontational aggravated burglary (intent to assault, whilst armed, person present), recklessly causing injury, strong Crown case, accused spent nearly 4 years after offending on bail without repetition, parity, very late plea following sentencing indication.
Legislation Cited: 	Crimes Act 1958; Criminal Procedure Act 2009 Sentencing Act 1991
Cases Cited: 	Hogarth v The Queen [2012] VSCA 302, Zaia v The Queen [2020] VSCA 9, DPP v Bourke [2020] VSC 130, Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342, Worboyes The Queen [2021] VSCA 169.
Sentence: 		Combination sentence of 4 months imprisonment to be followed by 18 month CCO with conditions. PSD 3 days. Section 6AAA declaration: 2 years 4 months years with a non-parole period of 16 months.

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr D. Cordy
Ms R. Hamnett	Office of Public Prosecutions	
			
For the Accused	Ms S. Wendlandt	Warren Graham & Murphy	

HIS HONOUR: 
Introduction 
1	Trent WILSON, following a sentencing indication hearing on 24 October 2023, you accepted the indication that I gave on 27 October 2023. Today, being 30 October 2023, you were arraigned on a plea indictment and pleaded guilty to:
Charge 1 – aggravated burglary on 6 January 2020. 
Charge 2 – recklessly causing injury on 6 January 2020.
2	The indication that I gave was that you would be sentenced to a combination sentence of four months' imprisonment, followed by an 18 month community correction order (CCO) with conditions.
3	My reasons for passing this sentence follow. 
The offending  
Background 
4	You were born in October 1993 and were 26 years old at the time of offending. Your co-accused, Hughen DUFF, was 25 years of age at the time of the offending. The victim, Kyle BLENCOWE, was 21 years of age at the time of the offending and resided in Paynesville.
5	At the time of the offending, you lived in Paynesville and Duff in Bairnsdale. At the time, Duff was in a relationship with your sister, Jade. The victim Blencowe was known to you and to Duff. He was also known to Jade WILSON as he was friends with Jade Wilson's ex-boyfriend, Michael JONES.
Summary of offences 
6	On 6 January 2020, at about 9.40 pm, the victim was at home in his bedroom.  He heard three loud knocks on the front door. The knocking was loud and aggressive, and he looked out of the front door. He turned on the flash on his phone and held the phone up to the glass of the front door and saw Duff standing there on the other side. He was scared so he picked up a chainsaw from the kitchen table and started it. He then saw you, Mr Wilson, standing outside the kitchen window. You were hitting the window with something that was like a wooden pole with duct tape on it. The victim could see you clearly because the kitchen light was on and your face was right near the window pane. You smashed the kitchen windows.
7	While this was happening, Duff smashed his way through the front glass door.  This was heard by witnesses Lucas and Robert SCULLIN who respectively described the noise as ‘like explosions’.
8	Duff then entered the premises and when doing so sustained an injury to his right forearm, and toe, causing him to bleed extensively. The victim then put the chainsaw down and turned it off as he did not want to get in trouble with the police. The victim yelled, 'just leave me alone, leave me alone'. Lucas Scullin heard the victim saying this as he had jumped the back fence and run to the now broken front windows of the house when he heard the ‘3-4 explosions’.
9	The victim dropped to the ground, curled up in a ball, and put his hands over his head. Duff began punching and kicking the victim while he was on the ground.  You entered the kitchen and began hitting the victim with the wooden pole, which was a paint stirrer depicted in photographs in the brief, that you had used to smash the windows.
10	Duff and Wilson continued to hit the victim at the same time while he was on the floor and Duff stated, 'You’re just a little bitch'.  Lucas Scullin could see into the kitchen where both you and Duff appeared to be hitting something on the floor, although he could not see the floor itself.
11	Duff picked up a chef’s knife from the kitchen table and pointed it at the victim, flicking and waving it around while the victim was still on the ground with his arms over his face.  It was Duff who cut the victim with the knife on his forearm.
12	Duff and yourself left through the front door, saying, 'We’ve got the keys' in reference to taking the victim’s keys from inside the property.  You left behind the paint stirrer used to smash the window.
13	While the incident was occurring, a number of witnesses contacted Triple 0.  Robert Scullin, who owned the victim’s house and lived in the house behind his, heard an explosion, locked himself in his bedroom and stayed there, calling the police no less than four times. 
14	Another neighbour, Marion DAY, also called Triple 0 at around 9.43 pm.  Ms Day reported hearing 'yelling, screaming, bashing and thumping' at the victim’s address.
15	The victim himself called Triple 0 at 9.46 pm.  He said, 'My house has been broken into, the windows smashed. I’ve been beaten in my house with a baseball bat … just now'.  When asked by the Operator how they got in, he stated, 'They smashed the windows and doors'.  He told the Operator he knew them and their names were Hughen Duff and Trent Wilson.
16	Both you and Duff walked to the public toilets on the foreshore at Paynesville where Duff attempted to clean himself up. Duff contacted his girlfriend, that is, your sister Jade, to collect you both and take Duff to the hospital because he was bleeding. 
17	She met you at the public toilets at about 10.10 pm. You asked your sister to drive you to your brother Nathan WILSON’s house on Main Road, a couple of houses from where the victim lives, to collect your phone.
18	First Constable PALMER and Constable JONES attended the victim’s address.  Robert Scullin, who was outside by this time, pointed at Jade Wilson’s vehicle, a Mazda 6 sedan, which was parked about 100 metres south of the property on Main Road. Scullin informed police that both offenders were in the vehicle.  Palmer and Jones then followed the vehicle, intercepting it outside Langford Parade, Paynesville.  You and Duff were still in the back seat.
19	Palmer conducted a search of Duff and located the victim’s house keys on him.  Paramedics attended the address and transported Duff to the Bairnsdale Regional Health Service (BRHS) where he received medical treatment. Duff’s bloodstained clothing was seized.
20	Palmer arrested you, and after giving a false account of your movements to him (telling police that it was the victim who attacked you and Duff in the street by throwing a bottle) you were transported to Bairnsdale police station by Jones.  At the police station, your clothing was seized.  Small fragments of what appeared to be glass were located in your shoes, and there was blood on the side of them.  The victim was also transported to hospital where he received medical treatment.  His clothing was seized, and blood was observed on his clothing.
21	Senior Constable Amy FROST and Constable Palmer attended the public toilets at Paynesville and located a blood trail along Langford Parade, to the entry of the male toilets. Sergeant TANNER and Detective Senior Constable CAMPBELL attended there and examined the victim’s address.  All five of the front windows and door were smashed.  There was blood inside the premises on top of a pile of broken glass inside the front door.  There was an item consistent with the paint stirrer pole the victim described in a box in the kitchen.  A blood trail on the road outside Main Road led north.
22	You effectively declined to comment to the allegations when you were formally interviewed by police, save for making generally the following remarks:
(a)	you knew Duff as you coached him at footy and he was with your sister Jade;
(b)	you had been drinking beer with Duff and your brother, Nathan, at your brother’s house on Main Road, Paynesville since earlier in the day and between them, you and Duff drank a 30 pack of full-strength Great Northerns;
(c)	you went to the Paynesville Hotel about 5 pm with Nathan and Duff and met up with a big group including Jade Wilson and her friend Quinn ARNOLD.  You had dinner at the pub and drank five or six jugs of Carlton Draught between yourself, Duff and Nathan and that you were at the pub for a few hours;
(d)	the clothes that were seized when you were arrested were the clothes that you had been wearing all afternoon;
(e)	you did not know the victim, Blencowe, but had seen him around town a few times. You alleged that he had taken Jade Wilson’s car once along with her ex-boyfriend Jones;
(f)	the victim had come past your house a few times, yelling stuff, throwing stuff and having a go at your sister;
(g)	when asked 'Did you see him [the victim] tonight at all?', you responded 'Nuh, nuh, he wasn’t at the pub'.  When asked the follow up question 'So he – so you haven’t seen him?”, you answered, 'Yeah, yeah, I’ve just got no comment so ---"; and
(h)	your phone was in the back seat of Jade’s car.  It had probably been there all day and you said, 'Well, Jade drove us up there' but gave a ‘no comment’ response at Q173 question to the proposition or enquiry, 'Drove you up where?'
Incriminating conduct 
23	On 8 January 2020, Ruth WILSON contacted her close friend Marion Day on the phone to say thank you for calling police last night because her grandson Wilson, namely you, were involved. 
24	On 8 January 2020, Ruth Wilson and you attended Ms Day’s house. Ruth Wilson said words to the effect that, 'Trent wants to talk to you'.  You said words to the effect, 'I’m sorry for causing all that stress last night, I’m glad that you called Triple 0 because it was getting out of control/out of hand'.  You and Ruth Wilson then left in their car.
Injury 
25	As a result of the attack your victim was in pain and suffered the following injuries:
(a)	soft tissue injury to his right face with bruising over his upper right eye;
(b)	soft tissue injury to the lower left back; 
(c)	soft tissue injury on both forearms;
(d)	a laceration to his right knee, a small laceration on his right elbow;  and
(e)	a displaced fracture of the fifth phalanx of his right foot.   
26	Issue was taken with the apportionment of the injuries suffered, principally inflicted by Duff before you entered the house. Whilst this is true, the injury charge is put on a complicity basis. It is concerning to me that you involved yourself in an assault when a man was already being beaten and not resisting by Duff.  
Procedural history 
27	Having been spoken to by police twice on the evening of the offending and denying your criminal activity, you were charged and remanded for three days.  You were then bailed on strict conditions, which were gradually relaxed over time. 
28	After having two committal hearings adjourned, first in February 2021 and then June 2021, a contested committal was finally held over two days in August 2021 where the complainant, the neighbour Luke Scullin and the informant were all cross examined. The idea that the victim was responsible somehow for the offending against you was floated without nearly as much conviction as your conversation with police at the time of your initial apprehension I must say.  You were committed for trial on the home invasion charge and recklessly cause injury and you pleaded not guilty.
29	Once the matter was in the County Court, you continued to deny the offending.  Your counsel filed a defence response denying the offending and objecting to the eliciting of the apparent confession and acknowledgement to Ms Day that things had truly gotten out of hand.  She too was cross–examined, as was your sister at a s198B Criminal Procedure Act hearing before Judge Lyon in April 2022. 
30	This matter had been listed for trial twice, once in July 2022 and again in March 2023.  Neither were reached because of no fault of yours, but rather the state of the list was blighted by the pandemic. 
31	On 30 March of this year, you sought a sentencing indication from Judge Smallwood, who indicated that should you plead guilty, he would sentence to you to six months' imprisonment, followed by a therapeutic only community correction order.  You declined to plead guilty then, as was your right.
32	The matter was once again listed for trial in the circuit commencing October 2023 before me.  On the morning pre-trial argument was due to commence, having received detailed written submissions regarding an application to exclude the conversation with Ms Day as incriminating conduct and/or hearsay, the entirety of your record of interview and the entirety of the body worn camera footage at time of arrest, you then sought a further sentencing indication.
33	This indication was sought on the basis that you accompanied Duff, but entered the complainant’s house after Mr Duff had already struck Blencowe on the ground.  By the time you entered the assault was mostly over, support it is said for the proposition that Duff was the primary offender. The facts included that you kicked or struck the complainant on the ground. The reckless cause injury is, as I said, laid on a complicity basis. There is no way to establish which injuries may have been caused by Wilson, I pause to say, save for the knife wound, but nor does there need to.
Offence gravity and considerations
Context 
34	I am told the context of the offending is as follows – which comes through your account to counsel, not by way of any actual evidence available to me in the depositions.
(a)	you and Duff were at a social event with others at the Paynesville pub on 6 January 2020 and, I infer, you were both very intoxicated;
(b)	Duff had a longstanding grievance with the victim;
(c)	Duff was in a relationship with your sister Jade;
(d)	Jade Wilson and Kyle Blencowe share grievances themselves. The period 2019 to 2021 is marked by seemingly gratuitous conflict between the pair, recorded in various police incident reports. Some of these events include Duff. Some of the incidents recorded occurred after the present offending.  The grievances largely appear mutual. None of them had led to the laying of criminal charges; and
(e)	by 20 January 2020 Duff went to the victim’s house with you, harbouring an intention to assault him. The precise cause and reason for his attendance is unknown. Duff told police in an interview that the complainant had thrown a bottle at him after he left the pub and, I add, so did you.  In part it seems to explain his injuries. This is something that you also said to police. There is simply no evidence that this is true.
The offending itself – gravity and role 
35	You and Duff went to Blencowe's home motivated by some petty grudge, you were armed with a makeshift weapon. You forced your way into his home in the most forceful and aggressive way in the middle of the night. Neighbours described it as like hearing 'explosions'. It was a frightening mode of entry and, I repeat, that you are not charged with criminal damage nor do I sentence you on the basis that you committed such an offence. 
36	You deliberately entered in company, whilst armed, for the purpose of assaulting the occupant. The victim was outnumbered by you and Duff.  He did not offer any meaningful resistance and he was viciously and violently assaulted by both of you.  Duff, as I said, has found a knife in the victim’s home and he alone decided to use that on him, but not satisfied with the beating you gave him, his keys were taken, a fact that you were well aware of when one views the body worn camera footage, once Scullin intervened it seems. Duff threatened to return to the home of the victim with others to do him further violence. 
37	To say that things ‘got out of hand’ is a grave understatement. 
38	The prosecution position is that you and the co-accused went to the complainant’s house with the intent of physical confrontation and physically forced entry to his home late at night. You were armed with a modified weapon in the form of a paint stirrer with which you hit the complainant. This was found inside the premises. I find it had been used against the complainant by you. At no stage did the complainant try to fight back. He was understandably petrified and curled up into a ball, yelling 'just leave me alone, just leave me alone'.  
39	I consider this to be a serious example of the offence of aggravated burglary.  The effect on your victim was serious, as I will come to now. 
Victim Impact 
40	As to your victim, in his victim impact statement made back in 2020, he writes, amongst other things:  
'I thought I was going to die.  I chose to do as I was told in fear of my life.  I was alone in my house and trapped. When I realised that Hughen Duff and Trent Wilson had a baseball bat and knife, I was feeling as though I couldn't defend myself and just wanted them both to leave me alone.  
I felt I was not going to get out and away from Hughen Duff. I was scared.  I couldn’t stop thinking of my family and when Hughen Duff pulled a knife out to cut my arm, I was terrified.  My home had all the windows smashed and blood everywhere.  
I wasn't able to live my life as I did prior to this crime being committed against me.  I lost my rental property, my feeling of being safe in the community, and my ability to go out and seek employment as I feared being hurt again. I have numerous sleepless nights as I am always in fear of someone breaking in.  I will no longer go out on my own.'
41	He continued:
'I was taken to hospital via ambulance.  I sustained a broken foot/toe, knife wounds, etc.  
I was not able to walk on my feet for about six weeks.  I still have problems with aches and pains in my foot.  I have a scar on my right forearm from the knife wound.  I had bruises all over my body from the baseball bat that was used on me.'
42	And later he says:
'I used to enjoy boating, fishing, and camping.  I don't want to go out and do these activities anymore.  I feel as though I'm a different person, I've lost confidence, trust and feel degraded.'
Matters personal to the accused
Biographical details 
43	You are now 30 years old. You grew up in the Gippsland region where you have lived most of your life. You and three siblings were raised by your paternal grandmother, Ruth Wilson OA, mostly in Bairnsdale. 
44	Your parents, both members of the stolen generation, were incapable of raising children. Their lives were beset and blighted by alcohol abuse, mental health issues and the effects of institutional care. Your life was not one of opportunity or stability and I take this disadvantage and your resilience in largely overcoming it into account in your favour.
45	Your mother’s father was a Walmajarri man from Fitzroy Crossing, Western Australia. His mum had grown up in institutional care in Gippsland. You identify as a Walmajarri and Gunaikurnai (Gippsland) man.  
46	As the children were at risk of being placed in state care, Ruth Wilson, your tenacious grandmother, fought hard to get custody of you and of them. She was successful and raised you all. You had limited contact with your mother growing up.
47	Your grandmother was awarded the Order of Australia for her dedication to community work, and you yourself attribute your heavy involvement in community sport and activities to her. 
48	Since you were 18 you participated in various committees and coached the Paynesville Football Club, Lindenow Netball and Football Club and attended the Speedway. 
49	You lost your Working With Children Check in part due to the case before the court which meant you were no longer able to participate at committee or coaching level in the community. 
50	After completing primary school, you attended high school to Year 10. You then trained as a fisherman and went to work in Tasmania on a shark boat, a natural choice, as you came from a long line of fisherman, fifth generation in fact on your father’s side. You then returned to Paynesville, obtained your driver’s licence and met your mother for the first time in your adult life. 
51	It was pretty articulately put by your counsel that this was a complicated and vexed reunion.  You did not have any real connection to culture until you properly met your mum, learning about your Indigenous family and her experience in institutional care and as a member of the stolen generation. You also got to know of the three further half siblings that share the same mother but have a different father. You do not have a meaningful relationship with them. Two have been involved in the criminal justice system and are in custody. Unfortunately, the reunification was short lived, and your mother has since moved to Townsville. 
52	You started working for yourself as a fisherman and got into the live export of eels market in Stratford. You did this until late 2019 when new restrictions to local fishing licences meant that this work became unfeasible. Your sister is a full-time carer for your grandmother and your brother is a cabinet maker here in Melbourne. 
53	You are the father of two children. The eldest is six years old and has a Koori mother with whom you are longer together. You share equal custody with your ex-partner.  To connect your son, and yourself, to culture, you have participated in a lot of Indigenous activities for children in the area, including football and the Koori carnival.  Your son has a diagnosis of ADHD which requires special care and attention at school and at home. You contribute financially to cater for his needs. 
54	I acknowledge that even a relatively brief period of imprisonment will be difficult for both you and them. I have tempered the sentence I have imposed because of this fact. 
55	Your second child is a daughter now aged three. You live with Roxanne Musgrave-Evans Kenny and your daughter, as well as your older child, every second week. Ms Musgrave–Evans Kenny has returned to work as a local primary school teacher and is an enormous and important support for you. 
56	You have been on bail for nearly four years. Your conditions have been restrictive, and you have complied with them.  You were subjected to a curfew 10 pm to 6am for about 18 months and you have been subjected to a condition that you cannot consume alcohol for close to four years. Insofar as excessive drinking in part caused this offence (and it seems it is relevant to your prior criminal history too) I consider this a very positive step forward.  I am not going to impose an alcohol exclusion condition on you as part of your CCO, but rather will direct that you undergo counselling and treatment for problem drinking with those best equipped to assist you in the long term.  
57	In October 2022 you commenced hospitality management training at The Main Hotel in Bairnsdale for a few months, which sadly ended when it was not possible for you to obtain a liquor licence. 
58	More recently, you have purchased a boat from which you can fish to sell to local businesses.  You are able to control your own hours and have one employee.  You have been fishing now for several months and it is gradually providing a steady income.  You can return to this work upon your release. 
59	You have two health issues. One is a back complaint dating back to at least 2019 that needs to be managed by strengthening. You cannot sit for extended periods of time without pain. You also suffer from sleep apnoea.  I am satisfied that this will not impose additional burdens on you in custody, but I will make sure that the custody management orders I am entitled to make will reflect these ailments.
Forensic history 
60	You have a prior history that is relevant, if not now somewhat dated. You have never been imprisoned before, save for the three days of pre–sentence detention you served in relation to this matter.
61	In 2016, and as I understand it in Koori Court, you were dealt with for aggravated burglary (person present), burglary, theft and offences of violence, but I understand that that matter is of a different character and nature to the matter I am dealing with and involved entry into premises to steal alcohol. People were, as I understand it, rather unexpectedly sleeping in those premises and, as I understand it, you were reckless as to their presence. You received a two year CCO which was breached due to your inability to complete community work at that time, it seems for want of a motor vehicle.  That will not be a difficulty I am told on the community correction order I am about to impose. You were breached in 2018 on that order, and the order was confirmed with you completing it.
62	In November 2018 you were dealt with for assault by kicking for which you were fined, but by January 2020, you had offended in the way presently before me, a severe escalation in criminality. 
Matters of sentencing principle  
Aggravated burglary 
63	In Hogarth v The Queen, the Court of Appeal held that current sentencing practices for what are known as 'confrontational aggravated burglaries' were inadequate and needed to be uplifted. Offences of the kind described in Hogarth were subsequently included in the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) as the offences of home invasion and aggravated home invasion. The Court subsequently expanded the Hogarth ruling to include all the ‘more serious forms’ of aggravated burglary, and discouraged a rigid application of the categories of aggravated burglary. Terms of imprisonment in the range of five to seven years are regularly imposed in these cases.
64	Violent offences such as the one you committed here are serious as they invariably involve a terrifying experience for the victim and threaten the wider community’s sense of security, and this offending is no exception. 
65	General deterrence is of obvious importance, as alluded to above, as are the notions of denunciation and punishment. The community will not tolerate the furtherance of petty grievances (or any grievances for that matter) by confrontational violence achieved by force within a victim’s home. There is nothing about your history that suggests you are not a suitable vehicle by which I should deter others, though I can moderate that sentencing purpose somewhat.
66	Your offending is worthy of condemnation. It was planned, cowardly and purposive. I understand it was not your grievance with Mr Blencowe, but I consider you to be a willing and enthusiastic participant in the violence visited upon him.
67	Specific deterrence has some work to do, given your past criminal episodes of violence and aggravated burglary, and I do note that you failed to complete the previous CCO offered to you at first instance.
68	Specific deterrence though is allied to your prospects to be reclaimed. You have done much in the past four years to demonstrate that you can reform. You have been on restrictive bail conditions which have limited your freedom, a curfew has been imposed, no alcohol, limiting contact with others. While bail conditions are imposed to reduce risk of reoffending and flight, it consequently has had a punitive effect on you already. It certainly tells me you found the three days in prison aversive and that you are capable of, and amenable to, court imposed conditions by which you must lead your life. 
69	You have built a family since the offending. You are the father of two children and you are not only actively involved in supporting them financially and emotionally, but moreover are making every effort in the local community to make it a better place. 
70	I consider your prospects for reform now at the age of 30, under the right conditions, to be very positive. The Crown say your prospects are moderate, which in my view understates it.
Current Sentencing Practices
71	The Court must have regard current sentencing practices in accordance with s5(2)(b) of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). 
72	At risk of repetition, in Hogarth, the Court of Appeal concluded that the sentences generally imposed for ‘confrontational aggravated burglary’ were too low, and needed to be increased to properly reflect the objective gravity of the offending.
73	The Sentencing Snapshot for aggravated burglary, shows between 2016-17 to 2020-21, 90.7 per cent of people were given a principle sentence of imprisonment.  Total effective sentences ranged from three days to 12 years.  It is evidence of the proposition that your counsel contends for, that is imprisonment almost invariably follows offending of this kind, though noting that there are some exceptions to this. 
Parity 
74	Judge Stuart sentenced the co-offender Duff on 2 August 2021 (i.e. more than two years ago). His was truly an early plea. He pleaded guilty to charges of home invasion (carries a maximum penalty of 25 years) and recklessly causing injury (carries a maximum penalty of five years) while the Court was still crippled by the effects of the COVID pandemic. 
75	Mr Duff had a limited criminal history, having had some relatively minor matters in his recent prior history but by and large had received (and completed) community-based dispositions. 
76	He was 25 at the time of the offending (not significantly different from you) and 26 at the time of sentence. It was his first time in custody, again not significantly different from you. 
77	He had a terribly dysfunctional background and despite that adversity presented as a young man with promise, the capacity to work and exhibited prosocial aspects to his personality and real remorse to those he spoke to, and this aspect of remorse is not something you can draw on very heavily.
78	He had a very supportive prosocial network to be released to upon completion of the custodial proportion of his sentence, and he was able to draw on the full force of the Worboyes discount, coming as it did at the height of the pandemic which is in contrast to this plea. 
79	He was sentenced to four and a half years on the charge of home invasions, and 15 months for the charge of recklessly causing injury. On the latter sentence, six months was served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on Charge 1. This brought a total effective sentence of five years, with a non‑parole period of three years set.  But for his plea of guilty he would have been sentenced to six years and nine months and set a non-parole period of four years and three months. It was a stern sentence. 
80	A term of imprisonment is mandatory for home invasion, it being a Category 2 offence under the Sentencing Act 1991.  Section 5(2H) of that Act does not allow for a Category 2 offence to receive a combination sentence unless one of the exceptions is enlivened, and no exception was relied upon by Duff. It has the same maximum penalty as aggravated burglary charge, with the key difference being home invasion by necessity involves invading a home, whilst aggravated burglary can involve any premises at all. The intent in both instances is the same.  In your case you did enter a home. Mr Duff pleaded guilty to an offence that does not allow for a combination sentence to be imposed where you are not. 
81	I do not consider them to be vastly more serious offences in his case as opposed to yours.
82	In sentencing, Judge Stuart observed that Duff had reasonable prospects for rehabilitation but considered general and specific deterrence were the primary sentencing considerations. That home invasion carries with it a mandatory gaol term was indicative of the primary role of deterrence in that sentence.
83	Equal justice is a difficult matter to evaluate in this case. There are significant factual differences between you and Duff which can permit legitimate disparity in sentences, aside from the differences in the charge you have pleaded to, and the flexibility of plea to that charge allows me when sentencing that Judge Stuart did not have when dealing with your co-offender.
84	The factual differences include:
(a)	a distinction in role between you and Duff. It was Duff who had the grievance with the complainant and entered the house first and commenced the assault first with you as a willing recruit;
(b)	you now have significant family responsibilities being the father of two young children;
(c)	you are now employed and have had significant ongoing community involvement;
(d)	you are Indigenous and despite a real measure of deprivation in your life, you have appeared to overcome that; and
(e)	there has been some considerable delay in the matter proceeding, in significant part, but not sole part, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and circuit listing constraints. 
Delay
85	The issue of delay is a vexed one too. This matter has had a long journey through the criminal justice system, partly because you were unable to have your case heard in a timely way during the pandemic, a necessary consequence of continuing to defend the matter and deny your own criminality in the face of a strong case against you. 
86	The counterpoint to that is this, I must have regard to how you have used the time between offending and now in order to assess your prospects for reform.  The offending happened just short of four years ago. 
87	You have been on bail, with conditions that have seemed to have gone a long way in assisting your reform. 
Plea of guilty 
88	Your plea, coming as it does on the eve of pre-trial argument and empanelment is the latest of pleas. Still, it has value and significant utilitarian benefit. You have finally accepted responsibility for the offending and have facilitated the course of justice and obviated the need for a criminal trial. That those who suffered in this offending, or witnessed parts of it, do not have to relive it is important. 
89	The utilitarian value of your plea has an additional layer of utility in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.  The disruption to trials has meant longer delays and greater pressure on the already strained resources of the criminal justice system.  In that context, the discount afforded to an offender on a plea ought to be heightened. I accept that the timing and utility of your plea will be reflected in a discount.
90	The caveat to that is, on 9 October 2023, the Chief Judge of this Court sent a notice to the profession indicating that the COVID-19 related backlog had been effectively cleared.  This was not the case back in March 2023 when you sought a sentencing indication, and it certainly was not the case when your co-offender pleaded. 
91	The plea is entered, in my view, in the face of a strong Crown case, irrespective of the outcome of the pre-trial argument.  Remorse was not relied on, save for the conversation had with Ms Day that you sought to exclude, that came with an expression of relief and regret in that she had called the police and things had ‘gotten out of hand’.
Totality 
92	I have considered the inter-relationship of the offences I am dealing with and have fashioned the sentence appropriately to acknowledge the way the counts interact and avoid double punishment. 
Suitability for a CCO
93	It was put on your behalf that a term of imprisonment is common for aggravated burglary but it was submitted that this case was unusual and warranted consideration of non-custodial options, while still meting out general and specific deterrence.
94	A CCO, it was said, addresses rehabilitative needs and can be structured in a way to facilitate deterrence, community protection and just punishment. It can include intensive programs, supervision and treatment, as well as significant community work hours. I have adopted the later recommendation with respect to work hours as a way of ongoing punishment above and beyond the simple fact that you will be on a CCO. 
95	The Crown very fairly acknowledges that a combination sentence disposition is open to me in the particular circumstances in this case, when balancing the objective gravity of the instant offence against the constellation of matters in mitigation that apply here. 
96	Put another way, it was a common ground that the CCO is available to me as part of your sentence, but the Crown indicated that such a mode of supervision in the community must take place after you have served some term of imprisonment and that is, by operation of law, must be under 12 months.
97	In my view, having balanced and weighed the necessary considerations, the matters in mitigation bring the matter within the range of a combination sentence but do not go so far as to offset other important sentencing considerations such that you would not be required to spend any time in custody at all. You have no experience within the prison system and have worked hard since the offending to be more prosocial and to be a contributor. I am moderating the term I impose so as not to expose you to those who are more entrenched in their criminality in prison. 
98	It appears to me that I can denounce your conduct, punish you, deter others as well as you and foster conditions that assist in your reform by imposing a CCO following a relatively brief period of imprisonment.  
99	It seems that you are consolidating significant stable aspects of your life such as being fully employed and being more engaged in your culture and as a father.  These appear to operate as protective mechanisms for the community. 
100	In this case, the supervisory and ongoing punitive aspect of the sentence I impose will endure until late 2025, a full six years after the offending occurred.
101	The assessment process took place today. You are certainly suitable for a CCO and were assessed as a medium risk of reoffending. Aside from the conditions I proposed, the assessor recommended that you participate in the Forensic Intervention Services Branch (FIS) so that you can undergo programs aimed to reduce your risk of reoffending.  You very sensibly agreed that that would be an appropriate condition. 
102	So I am of the view a combination sentence is the appropriate disposition. A brief term of imprisonment, followed by a CCO provides a more flexible sentencing option, enabling punishment and rehabilitation purposes to be served together.
103	I have formed the view the community is best protected ultimately by your reform. I have also come to the view that despite a truly difficult childhood and adolescence, you have proven to be determined, resilient and demonstrably capable of reform. 
CCO
104	Providing you consent what I intend to do is to convict you of the charges and sentence you in combination to four months' imprisonment, followed by an 18 month CCO. 
105	Every community correction order, including this one, contains certain core conditions, and they are:
a)	you must not commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during the period of the order;
b)	you must comply with any obligation or requirement prescribed by the regulations;
c)	you must report to, or receive visits from, the Secretary during the period of the order;
d)	you must report to Bairnsdale Community Correctional Services within two working days after your release from prison;
e)	you must notify the Secretary of any change of address or employment within two working days after the change;
f)	you must not leave the State of Victoria, except with the permission from the Secretary; and
g)	you must comply with any direction given by the Secretary, that is necessary for the Secretary to give, to ensure that you comply with the order.
106	Those are the core conditions but there are special conditions that I also impose:
a)	that you be the subject of supervision by the Office of Corrections;
b)	you undertake 180 hours unpaid community work over the 18 month lifespan of the order;
c)	you undergo assessment and treatment (including testing) for alcohol abuse or dependency as directed; and
d)	you must participate in programs and/or courses that address factors relating to your offending behaviour. 
107	In order to encourage you on the path that you have commenced, Mr Wilson, I will direct that one third, 60 hours of treatment undertaken by you, will be credited as having completed the community work component of your CCO.
108	I can only impose such an order if you consent.  Do you consent, Mr Wilson?
109	OFFENDER:  Yes.
110	HIS HONOUR:  I will have the paperwork provided to you in a moment.
111	You need to understand that if you were to breach the order in any way, either by committing an offence or not complying with any of the core conditions or special conditions, you could be charged with breaching the order. 
112	That is an offence in itself that carries a maximum penalty of three months' imprisonment.  So if you were to breach the order, you would come back to court to be sentenced for the breach of the order, but what is worse, is that you would be resentenced for these offences before me and the sentence that I impose at that time would be nothing like the one I just imposed. 
Other orders 
113	I declare that you have already served three days in satisfaction of the sentence I have imposed and will cause that fact to be entered into the records of the Court. 
114	Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I declare that but for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of two years and four months years and set a non-parole period of 16 months.
115	I make the disposal order dated 27 October 2023 in the terms sought by the prosecution. 
116	I will make the appropriate notations with respect to the custody management that I alluded to earlier with respect to your client's back problem but also the need for a sleep apnoea machine.
117	MS WENDLANDT:  Your Honour, there is only one further custody management issue and that is that he does take tablets for blood pressure.
118	HIS HONOUR:  All right.  This is directed to the - it will be reflected in the orders - but directed to the custody officers.  He is an indigenous man, first time prisoner and has health issues that will need to be attended to, but they will be formalised.
119	Ms Hamnet, is there anything that I have missed, or needs clarification?
120	MS HAMNETT:  No, no, nothing further, Your Honour.
- - -