IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT Melbourne
CRIMINAL DIVISION	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	
Case No. CR-22-00021

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
SHANE HUICI		

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE TIWANA	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	3 April and 9 May 2024	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	16 May 2024	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Huici	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VCC 662		

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:	Criminal law – Sentence 
Catchwords: 	Aggravated burglary – Attempted rape – Causing injury recklessly – Theft – Victim a 90 year old frail and vulnerable woman residing in an aged care facility – Offending committed by 23-year-old male who removed the fly screen and entered through a window of the home at 4:30am – Offender held victim down on her bed, ignored her protests and tried to place his penis in her mouth – Victim not known to the offender – No relevant criminal history – Stable upbringing and loving family – Pleas of guilty entered shortly before the trial listing – No genuine remorse – High moral culpability –– Limited level of insight – Relevance of youth – Seriousness of the offending demands punitive purposes of sentencing to be given greater weight – Poly-substance dependence – Gambling disorder – Adjustment disorder with anxiety – Alcohol abuse – Moderate-high risk of future sexual offending – Guarded prospects of rehabilitation – Onerous conditions in custody until around March 2023 – Discretionary registration under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1958 (Vic); Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic); Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).
Cases Cited:	Sayer v The Queen [2018] VSCA 177; Bowden v The Queen (2013) 44 VR 229; DPP v Cartwright [2015] VSCA 382;Tuite v The Queen [2020] VSCA 318; R v Pope [2020] VSCA 108; R v Mills (1998) 4 VR 235; Azzopardi v The Queen (2011) 35 VR 43; Huici v The King [2023] VSCA 5. 
Sentence:	Total effective sentence of 9 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 6 years.

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the DPP	Ms A Moran	Office of Public Prosecutions	
			
For the Accused	Ms A Beech with Ms H Baxter
	Doogue & George	

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction
1	On 15 August 2021, you, Shane Huici, in the early hours of the morning, entered an aged care facility where some of our most vulnerable members of the community live. Having gained entry by removing a fly screen and opening a window, you committed a most terrifying and deplorable act of violent sexual abuse upon an elderly and frail resident who was sleeping in her bed. You also stole keys to one of the rooms at the aged care facility.
2	Your offending has resulted in you pleading guilty to the following four charges on Indictment No. M11725749.1:
•	Charge 1 – aggravated burglary, contrary to s 77 of the Crimes Act 1958.
•	Charge 2 – attempted rape, contrary to ss 321M and 38(1) of the Crimes Act.
•	Charge 3 – causing injury recklessly, contrary to s 18 of the Crimes Act. 
•	Charge 4 – theft, contrary to s 74(1) of the Crimes Act.
3	Aggravated burglary carries a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment. Attempted rape carries a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment. Causing injury recklessly carries a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment. Theft carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment. 
Circumstances of the offending
4	An agreed prosecution opening was read aloud in Court.
5	At the time of this offending, you were 23 years old. You lived with your parents and were employed as a forklift driver. 
6	The victim, Edna Page, was born in September 1930 and was aged 90 at the time of your offending. She was suffering from dementia and was a resident at the aged care facility in Geelong. 
7	In the early hours of 15 August 2021, Ms Page was lying in her bed under the blankets in her own room. She was wearing a shirt and pyjama pants. The lights in the room were off and it was dark. The door to her room was slightly ajar. She had a practice of leaving her door slightly open at night as it made her feel more comfortable. 
8	At 3.45am, a nurse at the facility recorded that Ms Page was asleep in her bed. 
9	At about 4.30am, Ms Page woke up and noticed a person enter her room (charge 1 – aggravated burglary). 
10	She initially thought it was a worker at the facility. It was in fact you. You pinned her down in her bed. You were pressing yourself on top of her so that she was unable to move. You told her ‘don’t say anything.’ She did not recognise you. 
11	Ms Page resisted your attempt to insert your tongue into her mouth.
12	You then tried to place your penis into her mouth. Your penis was close to Ms Page’s lips. She tried to resist, and the act hurt her mouth (charge 2 – attempted rape).
13	You placed your hands underneath Ms Page’s clothing and attempted to pull her pants down. 
14	Ms Page managed to activate her personal duress alarm, which was around her neck, at 4.34am. You had tried, unsuccessfully, to remove it. 
15	A nurse attended Ms Page’s room and heard her crying. She saw you straddling Ms Page with your hands on the bed, and your legs on the bed and the ground. You were wearing a red beanie. 
16	You repeatedly told the nurse to ‘get out’ and she retreated into the corridor. You exited the room and ran across the end of the hallway. Another staff member was alerted to your presence. 
17	The two staff members and the victim walked over to the nursing station and locked themselves inside the room. 
18	Ms Page suffered bruising and bleeding to her forearm. Her lips were very sore. First aid was applied by the two nurses (charge 3 – causing injury recklessly).
19	Police were contacted. One of the staff members telephoned and informed the general manager. While on the telephone, the general manager heard the victim uttering ‘help me, help me, I’ve been raped.’
20	Police and an ambulance attended the facility. The facility was searched, but you were not located. 
21	Senior Constable Dorward activated her body worn camera and had a conversation with Ms Page, who was distressed and injured. Ms Page told the officer that a male stranger wearing a beanie entered her dark room remaining there for about five minutes. He got on top of her and tried to put his tongue and penis into her mouth. He told her to shut up and say nothing and tried to pull her pants down. She said she pressed her duress alarm and described the attack as terribly frightening and awful. 
22	Ms Page telephoned her son at 5:11am and told him what had happened.
23	Ms Page was taken to hospital where she was examined and treated for the injuries she had sustained. Similarly, Ms Page told the medical practitioners that you attempted to penetrate her mouth with your penis, and she tried to push you away causing an injury to her right forearm. The injuries observed included a four-to-five centimetre tear to her right forearm along with bruising and abrasions, bruising and two small lacerations to her lips and bleeding in her mouth. Dr Nambiar stated that Ms Page was mildly confused at the time of the examination but was otherwise alert and aware of her surroundings.
24	Dr Nambiar opined that the injuries were not serious in nature and were consistent with the account provided by Ms Page. 
25	Forensic samples were taken from her, including an oral rinse, and swabs from the lower gum, upper dentures and lips.
26	Ms Page returned to the aged care facility later that same day. Two days later, she complained that her mouth remained very sore. 
Investigation and examination of forensic material
27	On 15 August 2021, a staff member from the aged care facility attended Geelong SOCIT and compiled a FACE image of the offender which was rated as a 60% likeness. The image was released to the media later that day. 
28	Police investigators observed two handprints on the glass window of a nearby room. The flyscreen had been removed from the outside and the flowerbed below had been trampled upon. Grass clippings were observed on the window ledge. This window was your point of entry.
29	A number of latent prints, identified as yours, were lifted from the internal and external sides of the window and the front and back of the victim’s bedhead. 
30	CCTV footage obtained from nearby premises captured you wearing a red beanie and leaving a pub at 11:24pm. 
31	On 16 August 2021, you were at work. You told your production manager that the police wanted to arrest you and that you had done nothing wrong.
32	Police executed a search warrant at your home. In addition to seizing items of clothing, police seized two keys with key tag ‘405’ from your bedside drawer. 
33	You were arrested outside your home upon your return. Police drove you to the aged care facility and asked if you had ever attended there. You replied ‘no comment’ to all questions asked. You were taken to Melbourne West Police Station where you were formally interviewed. You generally exercised your right to silence when asked about the alleged offending. However, you stated that you could not provide any reason as to why your fingerprints were located at the crime scene and denied knowledge of the keys seized from your bedroom. A DNA sample was obtained from you. 
34	The two keys with key tag ‘405’ were identified as belonging to room 405 at the aged care facility (charge 4 – theft).
35	Examination of the swabs taken from the victim’s mouth, lips and oral rinse confirmed the presence of a sperm fraction which matched your DNA.
36	You have remained in custody since your arrest on 16 August 2021. 
Victim impact
37	I have taken into account the contents of a victim impact statement prepared by the victim’s son dated 2 April 2024. He and the rest of the family hoped that their mother and grandmother would enjoy her last years of life safely and in peace. Your offending has significantly interfered with that hope. 
38	Ms Page’s son described her as being very distressed, quivering and crying on the morning following the incident. Over the ensuing months, she spoke of continually reliving the incident. She has been prescribed medication to assist with her heightened anxiety. For an extended period of time, she experienced interrupted sleep and would wake up at night feeling anxious. Initially a staff member would stay with her in her room. Up until recently, she did not want to leave the facility. She would cry and refuse to attend medical appointments. She withdrew even more from social events and became isolated. 
39	I hope you are able to comprehend the impact of your heinous offending upon one of our most vulnerable members of the community. 
Criminal History
40	You have a limited criminal history consisting of two appearances in the Magistrates Court. In respect of both these appearances you were placed on an adjourned undertaking without conviction. The first appearance on 1 March 2018, was for an offence of throwing a missile injuring, damaging or endangering property. The second appearance was for two offences of possessing a drug of dependence and two offences of possessing a controlled weapon without excuse. 
Personal circumstances
41	Mr Newton’s psychological assessment report dated 22 March 2024 sets out your background. 
42	You grew up in Geelong in a loving family environment with your parents and two older sisters. Your father is employed in the security field, and your mother as a factory supervisor. You are close with your parents and siblings. They remain supportive of you and you have regular personal and telephone contact with them. 
43	You describe yourself as being an average student. Your interests at school lay in sports rather than academia. You were passionate about outdoor activities, including motor bike riding. You played football for some six years up until your mid-teens.
44	You transferred to TAFE partway through Year 10 and completed Year 11 via a VCAL program. You then undertook a pre-apprenticeship Certificate II in carpentry. You have worked in a range of manual and semi-skilled roles including as a factory worker, a forklift driver and a labourer.
45	You have a significant history of drug and alcohol abuse.
46	You commenced using cannabis around the age of 14 or 15. It began in social settings on weekends but increased over time. You used cannabis regularly throughout your teenage years and early twenties. You have used a number of other illicit substances. You began using amphetamines at the age of 17. By the time you were 18 or 19, you were sometimes using amphetamines throughout the week and the weekends. You have also used methamphetamine, commonly referred to as ‘ice’ on and off throughout your teenage years and into your twenties. In addition, you have used ecstasy, cocaine, ketamine, Xanax, GHB, psychedelic mushrooms and LSD.
47	You began drinking alcohol around the age of 12. Like cannabis, you initially drank on weekends, however, it steadily became a regular weekly routine. You have regularly mixed alcohol with other drugs. Your alcohol consumption increased during periods when you attempted to decrease the use of other drugs. At the time of this offending, you were drinking some six drinks each weekday and considerably more on weekends. 
48	Unsurprisingly, your substance use adversely impacted your work. You were dismissed from one job due to repeated unreliability.
49	You were introduced to gambling at the age of 11 when your father placed bets on horses that you would have chosen together. Your gambling diversified and increased over time in order to relieve your boredom and loneliness. You gambled on poker machines and online sports betting and describe your gambling as ‘an addiction.’ Sometimes you would spend your entire pay packet on gambling. 
50	Despite maintaining a positive outward persona, you have grappled with many issues. You have struggled with anxiety which is particularly intense in the social domain. Although you have pursued a number of short-term liaisons with similarly aged females, you have struggled to maintain intimacy and have never been in a settled romantic relationship.
51	You have abused illicit drugs and alcohol to deal with your anxiety and bolster your self-esteem and confidence. The gambling addiction has provided a solitary source of recreational activity that is not reliant on social engagement.
Gravity of the offending
52	You are to be sentenced for grave offending. The maximum legislated penalties of 25 years for aggravated burglary, and 20 years for attempted rape, make it abundantly clear the inherent seriousness with which these offences are viewed.
53	The aggravated burglary targeted an aged care facility. You have pleaded guilty to entering this facility as a trespasser with intent to commit an assault on a person inside. You entered by removing a fly screen and opening a window. This occurred in the dead of night when you would have known that the elderly residents were sleeping. 
54	The attempted rape represents an appallingly reprehensible act of utmost gravity. 
55	Your targeted a particularly frail and vulnerable member of our community. Your victim was 90 years old and suffering from dementia. She, her family, and the wider community, would have expected her remaining years to be led in relative comfort within a safe and secure environment of an aged care facility. You targeted her at an hour when she was particularly vulnerable, lying in her bed alone in her dark room. You pinned her down by placing your weight upon her so that she was unable to move. You ignored her resistance and protest and told the nurse to leave the room. Your conduct in attempting to penetrate her mouth with your penis was particularly humiliating and degrading. In committing the attempted rape, you inflicted injuries to the victim’s arm and lips. I have seen the photographs of the injuries. They depict an elderly frail lady with a nasty tear to her forearm. 
56	Having to use her duress alarm in these shockingly confronting circumstances, would not have crossed her mind one bit. Thankfully, she had access to it. 
57	I regard your moral culpability for the offending as high. 
58	I must bear in mind not to double punish you in respect of the injury charge.
Prosecution submissions
59	On behalf of the prosecution, Ms Moran filed brief written submissions dated 3 April 2024. Ms Moran emphasised the seriousness of the offending, particularly in respect of the attempted rape committed against a 90-year-old extremely vulnerable woman. She highlighted the terrifying nature of your offending and the profound impact upon the victim. Ms Moran submitted that despite it being a late plea, the utilitarian benefit remained important. However, she submitted there was no evidence of any real contrition. 
60	Ms Moran submitted that the gravity of the offending required less weight to be given to your relative youth. General and specific deterrence, just punishment, denunciation and protection of the community were important sentencing purposes. 
61	In terms of the table of comparative sentencing cases provided by the defence, Ms Moran submitted that the first two on the table were the most helpful as comparators. 
62	Following the plea hearing, the prosecution made application for registration under the Sex Offender Registration Act 2004 (‘SORA’) and filed short submissions in support of the application on 17 April 2024. 
63	As the application for registration was opposed by the defence, it was addressed at a further hearing on 9 May 2024.
Defence submissions
64	Ms Beech, appearing with Ms Baxter on your behalf, presented a thorough plea in mitigation. 
65	I have had regard to the following material tendered on your plea:
(i)	Outline of Plea Submissions dated 27 March 2024.
(ii)	Submissions dated 23 April 2024, relating to registration under the SORA.
(iii)	Psychological assessment report prepared by Mr Patrick Newton dated 22 March 2024. 
(iv)	A bundle of five character references. 
66	In brief compass, Ms Beech conceded that your offending was grave and that a term of imprisonment consisting of a head sentence and a non-parole period was inevitable. She emphasised amongst other matters, your relative youth, pleas of guilty and limited criminal history. She took me through your background and the fact that you enjoy the continued support of your family who speak highly of you. Ms Beech took me through Mr Newton’s findings and the myriad of issues you have privately grappled with for which you require intensive treatment. 
67	She submitted that I should consider imposing a lower non-parole period to give you, at least the opportunity, of an earlier release and treatment in a more conducive environment. 
68	Ms Beech also referred me to a number of comparable cases.
Youth
69	At the time of the offending, you were 23 years old and are now aged 26. I accept that your relative youth, although at the upper end of youthfulness, remains important. I have had regard to the well-known propositions articulated by the Court of Appeal in Mills and Azzopardi. While youth and rehabilitation remain important, it is not a primary consideration in this case. The objective gravity of your offending requires that I give prominence to the punitive purposes of general deterrence, specific deterrence, just punishment and denunciation. Protection of the community is also an important consideration.  
Pleas of guilty
70	I have had regard to the helpful chronology set out by Ms Beech in her written submissions.
71	Prior to the special hearing scheduled for 18 May 2022, it became clear that Ms Page was no longer competent to give evidence. Accordingly, the prosecution filed a hearsay notice intending to adduce representations made by Ms Page to various people following the incident, including her VARE interview. The application was resisted and pre-trial argument took place on 13 and 14 September 2022. On 25 November 2022, a judge of this court ruled that Ms Page’s representations were admissible. Your lawyers initiated an interlocutory hearing against the decision that was heard by the Court of Appeal on 19 January 2023. On 3 February 2023, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision to admit the hearsay representations.
72	The matter was given a trial date to proceed before me as a judge alone trial on 20 November 2023. 
73	In May 2023, prosecution engaged an expert, Dr Duncan Taylor. The initial report was provided to the informant in July 2023 as well as a further updated report on 4 September 2023.
74	There was no dispute that swabs taken from the victim’s mouth contained DNA, including a sperm fraction attributable to you. The question explored by Dr Taylor was how your sperm got there. Dr Taylor found the prosecution proposition to be preferable, namely, you climbed in through the window, got on top of your victim and attempted to penetrate her mouth and ejaculated.
75	Through an oversight, Dr Taylor’s reports were not served on the defence until 1 November 2023. Upon receipt of these reports and further discussion between the parties the matter resolved. Although the trial indictment had a charge of the completed offence, a plea to attempted rape was accepted.
76	You were arraigned on the plea indictment on 17 November 2023 and the matter was adjourned for a plea hearing on 3 April 2024. A further hearing took place on 9 May 2024 in respect of the prosecution’s application under the SORA.
77	I have set out some of the chronology in order to explain the progress of this matter since your arrest on 16 August 2021 and the fact that your pleas were entered shortly before the scheduled trial.
78	It is clear that your pleas of guilty cannot be described as being entered at an early stage. I note that while the prosecution may have indicated that a plea to rape was necessary in order to consider resolution, this did not preclude any offer to attempted rape being made. There was an understandable basis for accepting a plea to the attempt. 
79	Nevertheless, a trial was ultimately avoided, and court time and expense associated with a trial that would have involved some complex scientific evidence was saved. While this was clearly a strong prosecution case, it does not interfere with the utilitarian benefit that you are entitled to. 
Remorse
80	While you are entitled to the utilitarian benefit, I am unable to conclude that your pleas are indicative of great insight or genuine remorse. In reaching that conclusion, I bear in mind the history of this matter and the fact that you did not seek to resolve this case on a sensible basis at an earlier stage. Despite pleading guilty, you continue to maintain your innocence in respect of the attempted rape. In respect of the aggravated burglary, you told Mr Newton that at the time of entering the facility, your intent was to steal as opposed to assault as particularised in the charge you have pleaded guilty to. 
81	Ms Beech referred me to paragraph 41 of Mr Newton’s report where you appeared to express some remorse. She also referred me to the remorse you expressed to your family as described in their references. 
82	In respect of paragraph 41 of Mr Newton’s report, despite expressing some remorse, you immediately qualify that by minimising your offending, saying you went into the facility having seen an open window. The expressions of remorse in the references from your loved ones, must be seen in the light of your own contrary observations to Mr Newton.
Custody and onerous conditions 
83	Given this is your first time in custody, I accept it will have a greater deterrent impact upon you. 
84	I also bear in mind that until around March 2023, as a young man, you have faced an onerous custodial environment as a result of the pandemic and for your own protection. Upon entry into the prison system, you underwent two weeks of quarantine. Between 2 September 2021 and 8 November 2021, you were placed under almost 24-hour lockdown for your own protection through no fault of yours. On 8 November 2021, you were transferred to the Melbourne Assessment Prison and again underwent a period of two weeks in isolation. Thereafter followed further periods of lockdown brought about by the pandemic and staff shortages. This impacted upon visits and the availability of courses. Since March 2023, normality has returned. You have enjoyed a single cell and time out from 8.30am until 5pm. 
Character
85	Your prior history is limited and not particularly relevant. Having said that I note that you told Mr Newton that you broke into houses on at least two occasions to steal items to support your drug habit. Therefore, it cannot be said that the aggravated burglary and theft charges are wholly out of character. 
86	I have had regard to the five character references tendered on your behalf from your two sisters, one of your sister’s partner, your mother and a first cousin. The references are conspicuous by the complete absence of any acknowledgement of the myriad of issues you have been grappling with. Your family members appear to be oblivious to your deep-rooted issues with alcohol abuse, substance abuse, gambling addiction, stealing in order to fund your addiction, your immaturity and social anxiety. Ms Beech on your behalf submitted that you are someone who has been able to mask your issues and lead a double life.
87	Of course, I take into account what the referees say, and the fact that they regard you in a positive vain. You are fortunate to have their complete ongoing support. However, the references clearly do not paint a complete picture of who you are. 
Psychological assessment
88	I have been greatly assisted by Mr Newton’s detailed psychological assessment report. 
89	I note that the report raises no issues that enliven any Verdins or Bugmy principles. 
90	You grew up in unremarkable circumstances without any trauma, developmental problems or significant adverse childhood experiences. 
91	Mr Newton states:
 In general, he impressed as an immature man for his age with a limited understanding of emotional and interpersonal matters.
92	You reported a significant history of anxiety, informing Mr Newton that you had been ‘a really scared, shy [and] anxious kid growing up.’ You experienced significant separation anxiety in the early years of primary school. Your anxiety has been most intense in the social domain. In 2020, your anxiety was exacerbated following the suicide of a friend and the death of another by an overdose.
93	You have resorted to alcohol and cannabis to reduce your anxiety as well as stimulants to boost your self-esteem.
94	In terms of anxiety, Mr Newton opines:
 This combines both reactive elements (related to his impending plea hearing) and more chronic components related to social interaction and interpersonal functioning. Each causes him noteworthy distress in its own right; in combination, they result in a noteworthy level of anxiety for Mr Huici. 
95	Mr Newton has made the following diagnosis:
(i)	poly-substance dependence, described as being of moderate level of severity at its peak, in remission in a controlled environment. 
(ii)	gambling disorder, moderate level of intensity at its peak, in remission in a controlled environment.
(iii)	adjustment disorder with anxiety, the adjustment disorder precipitated by the stressors associated with your incarceration. 
Risk assessment and prospects of rehabilitation
96	Mr Newton conducted a detailed risk assessment utilising two instruments, the STATIC-99R and the more comprehensive RSVP-V2 (Risk for sexual violence protocol - second edition). The results of the risk assessment provided by both instruments were in substantial agreement. Mr Newton concludes that you present a moderate-high risk of recidivism in respect of further sexual offending. This means that your risk of offending is above average relative to other sex offenders undergoing sentence.
97	In terms of risk, Mr Newton further states:
 I was concerned by the rudimentary level of Mr Huici’s insight into his drug use and gambling. That is, he remains at elevated risk for returning to such behaviours after his eventual release into the community. In turn, such active behavioural disturbance would act as a strong risk factor for further general criminal offending in his case and would also contribute to the risk of further sexual offending as well.
98	In terms of your offending conduct, Mr Newton opines:
 The offending committed by Mr Huici exemplifies each maladaptive component of his personality. Thus, lacking satisfying intimate connection and experiencing frustration after attending social activities where this was highlighted, in his offending conduct he ‘acted out’ his frustration through attempted sexual violence aimed (expediently) at a vulnerable victim whom he believed would be unable to resist him and perpetrated in a context where he believed the risk of detection was therefore limited.
99	Mr Newton describes your prospects for rehabilitation to be guarded. Mr Newton states:
 This is because of the limited level of insight he has into his problems, his maladaptive personality traits and limited intellect, the broad range of problems he faces, and his prevarication and denial of aspects of his offending. 
100	I have no reason to disagree with any of Mr Newton’s findings. 
Registration under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 
101	Having discussed Mr Newton’s findings in respect of risk, this is an opportune juncture to deal with the prosecution’s application for registration under the SORA. 
102	The prosecution make application pursuant to s 11(1) of the SORA for an order that you comply with reporting obligations. In your case, an order for registration under the SORA is discretionary. 
103	Relevantly, s 11 of the SORA provides:
(1) If a court finds a person guilty of an offence committed as an adult that is not a Class 1 or Class 2 offence (including an offence that is a Class 3 or Class 4 offence), it may order that the person comply with the reporting obligations of this Act.
…
(3) The court may only make an order under this section if, after taking into account any matter that it considers appropriate, it is satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that the person poses a risk to the sexual safety of one or more persons or of the community. 
(4) For the purposes of subsection (3), it is not necessary that the court be able to identify a risk to particular people, or a particular class of people.
104	In considering the risk posed in accordance with s 11(3) of the SORA, it is important to note that the primary purpose of the SORA is to enhance community protection by reducing the likelihood of re-offending, to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of any future offences that the person may commit, and to protect potential victims, particularly children. Bearing in mind the primary purposes of the SORA, the evaluation of risk is directed to the risk upon release into the community. 
105	In making a registration order, I am required to undertake a two-stage process. In Sayer v The Queen, following an analysis of Bowden v The Queen, the Court of Appeal helpfully set out the following steps involved in considering a discretionary application: 
(a)	The enquiry whether to make a registration order involves a two-stage process.
(b)	The first question is whether the court is satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt that the person poses a risk to sexual safety as defined.
(c)	For the court to be so satisfied, the risk must be real rather than fanciful.
(d)	The evaluation of risk is directed to the risk upon the offender’s release into the community, assessed by what is presently known.
(e)	The second question, which only arises if the court is satisfied that the requisite risk exists, is whether the order should be made in all the relevant circumstances.
(f)	The second stage involves balancing the identified risk, having regard to the purpose of the Act, with the restrictions imposed on the offender’s right to enjoy freedom and autonomy of action.
(g)	The balancing exercise involves considering the magnitude and nature of the risk, including the degree of likelihood of the risk eventuating and the gravity of the harm, to be balanced against the serious consequences for the offender.
106	In considering the first stage, I have taken into account the gravity of the sexual offending and the matters set out in Mr Newton’s psychological report. 
107	Out of the blue, in circumstances that your own family find hard to fathom, while walking home, you broke into an aged care facility and committed an offence of attempted rape. As already emphasised, the attempted rape is a very serious example of the offence. 
108	In addition to the deeply concerning details of your offending, I have the benefit of a thorough psychological assessment prepared by a highly respected practitioner. I have gone through Mr Newton’s findings. I will repeat and highlight a number of further matters here.
109	In respect of the offending, Mr Newton opines that it was borne out of each maladaptive component of your personality. Frustration over a lack of a satisfying intimate connection resulted in you acting out this frustration by committing the attempted rape. 
110	Your personality traits exacerbate your anxiety and are a key risk factor for continued behavioural problems including further offending.  
111	Your insight into both your gambling and drug use is very limited. There are no relapse-prevention plans in place and you lack sufficient awareness to ensure that you do not continue these activities following your release from custody. Accordingly, Mr Newton assessed you as being at an elevated risk of relapse in respect of each of these behaviours. Such a relapse would constitute a strong risk factor not only for general offending, but also elevate your risk of sexual offending.
112	You have failed to acknowledge your offending in an open and candid manner. Quite the contrary, in respect of the attempted rape, you told Mr Newton that you pleaded guilty on advice but deny any sexual motive. Hence, Mr Newton was unable to explore the issues which led to the attempted rape.
113	A thorough risk assessment has revealed that you pose a moderate to high risk of recidivism in respect of further sexual offending. 
114	In respect of risk, Mr Newton states:
 In particular, issues with Mr Huici’s social and psychological adjustment, his broader behavioural dysfunction and maladaptive personality traits, his selective denial of offending and the challenges to treatment all elevate the risk of recidivism. 
115	If your risk is to be contained, you must undergo comprehensive offence-specific treatment, including long-term abstinence from alcohol and illicit substances. This would reduce your risk of recidivism gradually over the medium term.  
116	Having said that, I note Mr Newton’s observation that your continued prevarication regarding the sexual nature of your offending is of significance. If you were to maintain your denial into the medium term, it would have a significant impact upon your capacity to engage with offence specific treatment. The effectiveness of such treatment is based upon you being able to acknowledge responsibility for your conduct. Continued denials would compromise efforts to contain and reduce your risk of re-offending.
117	Overall, your prospects of rehabilitation are guarded. 
118	Having considered all relevant matters, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, that you will pose a risk to the sexual safety of one or more persons or to the community upon your release from custody.
119	Having determined risk, I move to the second stage involving balancing the risk posed by you against the onerous consequences of having to register and report.
120	Having regard to the gravity of the offending and the matters I have highlighted in Mr Newton’s assessment report, I regard the magnitude and the nature of the risk posed by you and the consequent gravity of possible harm as outweighing the restrictions that would be placed upon you. The objectives of the SORA, including  protecting the community, must be given precedence.
121	Accordingly, I will make an order requiring you to report in accordance with s 11(1) of the SORA.
122	Upon your release from prison, you must report your personal details to Victoria Police and continue to comply with the reporting obligations. The reporting period is 8 years. I will deal with the formalities at the end of these reasons. 
Sentencing 
123	While I bear in mind your age and the importance of rehabilitation, I must give prominence to other more pressing sentencing purposes. Your offending must attract the strongest of condemnation. Anyone minded to offend in the utterly depraved manner that you did, must understand that it will be met with a significant period of incarceration. The sentence must also seek to deter you specifically from further similar re-offending. You must be justly punished and our community protected. 
124	These sentencing purposes when dealing with such grave offending require the imposition of a significant term of imprisonment. These sentencing purposes must not be undermined by the imposition of a short non-parole period. Having said that, the sentence I am about to impose will at least give you the opportunity of supervision and treatment, not only in custody, but also on parole. 
125	Mr Huici, can you please stand.
126	Having taken into account all relevant circumstances and factors, Mr Huici, you are sentenced as follows:
•	On Charge 1, aggravated burglary, you are convicted and sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment.
•	On Charge 2, attempted rape, you are convicted and sentenced to 6 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.
•	On Charge 3, causing injury recklessly, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.
•	On Charge 4, theft, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment.
127	The sentence on Charge 2 will be the base sentence. I direct that twenty two months of the sentence on Charge 1 and four months of the sentence on Charge 3 be served cumulatively upon each other and on the base sentence on Charge 2. The sentence on charge 4 will be served concurrently. 
128	This makes a total effective sentence of 9 years’ imprisonment.
129	I direct that you serve a non-parole period of 6 years’ imprisonment. 
Pre-sentence detention
130	Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991, the period of 1004 days of pre-sentence detention is declared as having already been served in respect of this sentence, and I order that such declaration and its details be entered in the Court’s records.
Section 6AAA declaration
131	Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I indicate that had you pleaded not guilty and been convicted, I would have sentenced you to a term of 11 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 8 years.
Sex Offender Registration 
132	You will now be provided with a document setting out your reporting obligations upon your release and the consequences of any breach. As I stated earlier, the reporting period is eight years. It is an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with your reporting obligations. I will ask you to sign the acknowledgement form confirming receipt of your reporting requirements.