IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	

CR-18-02410
CR-18-02409
CR-18-02384
CR-18-02391
CR-18-02386

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
AYSAR FATHO
NGOC HUYNH
JOHN MANSOOR
JAMES VAN
ANDREA VERRINA [deferred]		

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE COHEN	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF PLEA:	13, 14, 15, 16, 17 May 2019, 27 June 2019	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	11 July 2019 & 12 July 2019	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Fatho & Ors	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VCC 1260	

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:						Sentencing
Catchwords:			Trafficking commercial quantity of a drug of dependence; trafficking in a drug of dependence; possessing a drug of dependence; dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime; possessing cartridge ammunition without a permit; conspiracy to traffic in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence; prohibited person possess firearm; burglary; commit indictable offence while on bail
Legislation Cited:		Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981; Sentencing Act 1991 ss 5(2H), 6AAA, 40(1)
Cases Cited:		R v Pidoto & O’Dea [2006] VSCA 185; Bugeja v R [2010] VSCA 32; Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342;	Gregory (a pseudonym) v R [2017] VSCA 151; Sharbell v R [2017] VCC 1918; Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214; DPP v Dalgleish (a Pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; DPP v Bchinnati [2018] VCC 372;; Ellis v R [2018] VSCA 221; DPP v Carron & Gallin [2018] VCC 1469
Sentence:
---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For Accused Fatho	Mr D. Sala (Plea)
Ms N. Giorgianni (Sentence)	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers	
			
For Accused Huynh	Mr J. Dickinson QC (Plea, Further Plea and Sentence)	Melasecca Kelly & Zayler	
			
For Accused Mansoor	Mr B. Johnston (Plea)
Ms N. Giorgianni (Sentence)	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers	
			
For Accused Van	Mr J. Dickinson QC (Plea)
Mr M. Kelly (Sentence)	Melasecca Kelly & Zayler	
			
For Accused Verrina	Mr P. Dunn QC (Plea)
Mr D Cole (Sentence)	Dean Cole & Associates	

For the Prosecution	
Ms A Singh (Plea)
Mr J Saunders (Further Plea and Sentence)	
Vanessa Mellios, Solicitor for the Office of Public prosecutions	

	 
HER HONOUR:
1	Aysar Fatho, John Mansoor, Ngoc Huynh, and James Van, each of you has pleaded guilty to charges including, and relating to, the trafficking of drugs.  I shall set out the specific charges relating to each of you when I deal with each of you individually.  Some of you have also pleaded guilty to some related summary charges.  
2	Aysar Fatho and James Van, you have also admitted your respective prior criminal histories, to which I shall refer in relation to your individual circumstances.
3	The principal charges here are trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, conspiracy to traffic in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, or trafficking in a drug of dependence.  
4	The maximum penalty for trafficking in not less than a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence is 25 years imprisonment, and that is the same maximum penalty for the charge of conspiracy to traffic in a commercial quantity. For trafficking in a drug of dependence, the maximum is 15 years’ imprisonment.  While some of you face other charges as well, these are the highest of the maximum penalties, and are an objective indication of how seriously offending of this nature is regarded by Parliament on behalf of the community, and courts must take that into account when imposing sentences for such offending.
5	Further, for certain charges – here, only the charge where it applies of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence – s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act requires that a term of imprisonment be imposed, not being part of a combination with a Community Correction Order, unless the offender falls within certain exceptions.  That section applies for only two of you being sentenced today – that is Aysar Fatho and John Mansoor – and it has not been suggested that either of you falls within one of the exceptions.
6	The charges against all of you arise out of a police investigation commencing late 2017, into the trafficking in drugs by some of you, which led to the involvement of the others being detected.  One group, which the police call a syndicate, involved you, Aysar Fatho, and your brother Andy Fatho, and John Mansoor.  Also, another brother and one or more other persons are alleged to have been involved, but they are to stand trial on charges arising from these events, and I will not say more about their alleged roles.
7	Some of your dealings were with another group, or syndicate, which included Mr Van, Mr Huynh, and two others allegedly associated with them.  Mr Fatho, you and your group referred to all of them as “the Chinese,” although they were in fact of Vietnamese background.  
8	The circumstances behind these charges involve the intended trafficking in the substance called 1,4-Butanediol, which although it is a chemical which can be used legally as a cleaning agent, is a proscribed drug of dependence where not used legally, and when ingested, it metabolises into the drug known as GHB.
9	The substance 1,4-Butanediol (which I shall mainly abbreviate to “1,4-BD”) is often supplied in bulk in liquid form, but can be reduced to powder, still as part of a mixture. Under the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act, a commercial quantity of that drug is two kilograms or more of a substance containing it.  Unlike for most other drugs of dependence, there is no threshold amount defined for a “large commercial quantity” of that drug.
10	I turn now to some general sentencing principles.  
11	The distribution and use of drugs in our community is well recognised as causing extensive harm to the whole community.  It impacts destructively on the health and lives of individuals, and often their families, and is very costly to the community in medical and other services.  It also undermines the ability of many drug users to perform constructive activities in the community, including employment.
12	I have already said that the maximum penalties for the offences of trafficking in drugs reflect the objective seriousness.  The most important sentencing factors for such charges are almost invariably general deterrence and community denunciation. General deterrence means sending the message to others tempted to engage in such activity, that a stern punishment is likely to result.  In many circumstances, protection of the community is also an important sentencing factor.
13	When sentencing for these offences, as for any others, the court must assess both the objective seriousness of the actual circumstances, and the personal role and culpability of the individual offender.  The amount of the drug involved will be important, especially in relation to objective seriousness, as the legislative regime sets out quantities in respect of each proscribed drug, including as to what constitutes a commercial quantity or, for most drugs, a large commercial quantity.
14	A sentencing court should assess the proportionality of the actual amounts involved to those threshold amounts, rather than focus on the nature of the specific drug.  I will interpolate here that my reasons will have footnotes of the authorities for these propositions, but I am not going to spend time naming them all with citations as I read out my sentence.
15	While the categorisation of the seriousness of drug offences of this nature is to focus on the quantities of the drugs involved and their proportionality to the amounts defined in the thresholds, I note that in many cases involving 1,4-BD, large quantities of liquid containing that drug are not always viewed as being as serious as the same multiples of threshold quantities of some other drugs. Whether that is because there is no threshold for a large commercial quantity, or because the substance is capable of having a lawful use, other than as a drug, or whether because it has been said to have lower margins of profit, or whether because of the large quantities of liquid mixture in which it is often found, is unclear.  I have kept the quantities in mind, and not approached the sentences as if this drug were, of itself, less harmful than others.
16	I have considered the cases to which I was referred by various parties, relating to this particular drug, in considering current sentencing practice.  However, the Court of Appeal in Sharbell made clear that sentences imposed prior to the case which goes under the pseudonym of Gregory, cannot be helpful in this task of considering current sentencing practice, because since the case of Gregory, sentencing practice for trafficking in a commercial quantity of drugs has changed.  Further, other cases cannot be regarded as more than a guide and one of the factors to consider in sentencing, and such practices do not set outer limits for sentences.
17	I turn now to an overview of the circumstances of the offending.  Aysar Fatho, in January 2018, you were looking for a source of 1,4-Butanediol for the purpose of trafficking it.  Mr Verrina learnt of this and offered to provide, or arrange through someone he knew for a supply of it for you.  You purchased from him a quantity of what you thought was 1,4-BD, intending that some of it would be distributed to customers through your network of associates, and that a bulk amount of it would be sold to another group, or syndicate, of drug traffickers, whom as I have already said, you called “the Chinese.”  You knew that they would distribute it to ultimate users.
18	It is not clear on the facts available to me, who was in control or behind that other group, as only the roles of Mr Huynh and Mr Van have been made known for the purposes of this hearing.  Both of them had some conversations with you – that is you, Mr Aysar Fatho.  As far as I can determine, more of those mentioned were with Mr Van then Mr Huynh, but both of them apparently used the same mobile phone number for those conversations with you, and it is not clear to me how many other people may have been party to conversations with you.
19	Police became aware of this intended trafficking through the interception of mobile phone numbers, which they had been monitoring pursuant to warrants from December 2017, and their involvement culminated in their intervention shortly after 5 pm on 28 April 2018.  
1	
20	While discussions about obtaining such substance from Mr Verrina commenced in early 2018, and there was discussion of a supply which fell through, it was not until 20 March 2018 that some hundreds of litres of the product promised as 1,4-BD was delivered.  It had been obtained from or through Mr Verrina, who put it forward to Aysar Fatho as 1,4-Butanediol, but, in fact, it was not.
21	That product was supplied to James Van and Ngoc Huynh. However, they soon had reports that it was of poor quality, and they were receiving complaints from their ultimate users or consumers of it, and requests for refunds.  They then complained to Aysar Fatho, and there were attempts by you, Mr Fatho, to get Mr Verrina to replace the product, or to otherwise solve the problem.  He avoided numerous calls and some proposed meetings.  For a short period, you, Mr Fatho, accepted Mr Verrina's suggestion that it would be possible by mixing in other chemicals to change the product into properly functioning 1,4-Butanediol.
22	When that did not work, or did not stop the complaints from consumers to Van and Huynh and their associates and the forwarding of those complaints to you, you, Aysar Fatho, apparently decided to obtain substitute product.  Overnight, between 26 and 27 April 2018, you, Aysar Fatho, allegedly with a co-offender who is not one of the other co-offenders here, entered a property in Deer Park, where there was storage of a chemical company which had lawful possession of large quantities of 1,4-Butanediol.
23	You took eight 200-litre barrels of it.  You had apparently intended to take ten such barrels, but were almost caught at that activity and left with only eight.  You intended to use some of this product to replace the previously supplied amounts, about which there had been complaint, and an arrangement was reached that two of those barrels, or subsequently referred to as an amount of 525 kilograms, would be provided to Mr Van and Mr Huynh and their associates, in exchange for the initially supplied bad product.
24	This exchange was to occur on 28 April 2018, and there were many calls intercepted by police that day about issues of availability of suitable transportation, and men to load or unload the drug substance, and who was asleep or not available at various times.  Police were also keeping surveillance on various relevant people and premises, including your residence, Aysar Fatho, and also a storage premises of which you at least had some control at 52 Potter Street, Craigieburn.
25	Shortly after 5 pm, police entered the storage premises.  At that time, you, John Mansoor, and Andy and Aymon Fatho, were loading barrels into a trailer attached to a white van.  All three ran away and a foot chase followed, and each of those three men was caught and arrested.  Shortly afterwards, police entered and searched your residence, Aysar Fatho.  Although you initially you ran, you were arrested nearby, and another alleged co-offender was arrested at your residence.
26	Over the following weeks, police successively arrested the others of you – lastly Mr Verrina.  
27	Each of you who are before me, have spent some time in custody after your arrest.  Some of you later obtained bail, but others did not, and I will go through the specifics in relation to each of you.  
28	Even though some of your roles were more limited than others, any participation along the chain of supply or distribution of drugs, enables that process to be achieved, and furthers the potential harm from distribution of quantities of drugs of this nature within the community.
29	Notwithstanding that there was a lack of effective organisation or competence in several aspects of what occurred here, and it is unclear the extent of the profit that would have been made, or by whom, in respect of some of the stages, that does not mean that this was not to be regarded as serious offending.  It was dealing, or the intention to deal, in large quantities of the particular drug of dependence, and to profit from it.
30	I move then to deal with each of you individually.  
31	I start with you, Aysar Fatho, and because of your overall role and the numbers of charges against you, this will occupy quite a degree of time.  I might call a break during that time.  
32	Aysar Fatho, you are alleged to have been the principal organiser of these arrangements, and the leader of your group or syndicate.  You are also facing, as I have said, the most charges arising out of the events, of the men who are before me to be sentenced.  Specifically, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of 1,4-BD, one charge of burglary, one charge of trafficking in methylamphetamine, three charges of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, and two charges of possession of a drug of dependence.  Those relate to some Xanax and some cannabis.
33	You have also agreed to have heard in this court, and have pleaded guilty to, two related summary charges.  One is of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, and one of committing an indictable offence while on bail.  
34	I have already stated the maximum penalties for trafficking charges.  The maximum for burglary, and for each charge of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, is ten years’ imprisonment.  For possession of a drug of dependence, it is five years’ imprisonment, unless the court is satisfied that it is not for other than personal use, in which case it is one year.  For each of the summary offences, the maximum penalty is two years imprisonment.
35	I turn now to discuss your involvement in each of these offences and to assess its seriousness.  
36	Charge 1, of trafficking in a commercial quantity of 1,4-BD, is based on your conduct over the period from 20 January to 28 April 2018.  According to the summary of facts to which you have agreed, you sought out a source, and offered for sale to James Van and Ngoc Huynh, 200 to 500 litres of product alleged to be 1,4-BD.  You negotiated a price for it, discussed a further future supply with Mr Van, and although the initial supply fell through, you continued to try to source the drug. Once some became available through Mr Verrina's source, you prepared it into containers and arranged for its delivery.  When complaints about the quality of what you had supplied were received, you were the one they contacted, and you tried to reach Mr Verrina and arrange a solution, and when Mr Verrina said it could be made good by mixing in other chemicals, you tried that.  
37	Ultimately, you took action to obtain another supply, some of which was intended to be used to replace the poor quality product that had been supplied to the other syndicate, and the rest to be used for other trafficking.  You agreed to, and made at least some of, the arrangements for the exchange on 28 April 2018.  You made the arrangements with Mr Van and Mr Huynh, and for your brothers and Mr Mansoor to load the trailer, and then drive and exchange it, as well as an intended further supply.
38	At 52 Potter Street Craigieburn, the storage yard over which you had at least some control, a large number of containers of various sizes, containing clear liquids were found.  Drug analysis concluded that there were two substances within those containers, barrels, and bottles.  One of those substances was 1,4-Butanediol.  Also found was another substance, which is not a drug of dependence under the schedule.
39	A total of 1,402 kilograms of substance containing 1,4-Butanediol was located at those premises.  The threshold amount that constitutes a commercial quantity of this drug is two kilograms.  This total amount found was therefore some seven hundred times the commercial quantity.  The amount agreed to be supplied to Mr Van and Mr Huynh in the intended exchange on 28 April was 525 kilograms, being some 260 times the commercial quantity.  All of this conduct in combination is the basis of Charge 1.  
40	Charge 2 against you is of burglary.  That arises from your actions overnight between 26 and 27 April 2018, when, with at least one other man, you entered without permission on the property of a company operating a chemical plant in Ballarat Road, Deer Park, and took eight 200 litre barrels of 1,4-BD. The police intercepted conversations on 27 April, in which you told your brother, Andy, that you and another man had stolen eight barrels that were 200 litres each, that your associate security guard friend had assisted you, that you had meant to take ten barrels, but almost got caught, and that two of the barrels were intended to swap over with the people that you called “the Chinese.”  Your entering those premises to steal that product is the basis of Charge 2 against you of burglary.  This was apparently done to obtain replacement drug product, after you were unable to obtain a satisfactory solution or alternative supply through Mr Verrina.  
41	This was apparently done to obtain replacement drug product, after you were unable to obtain a satisfactory solution or alternative supply through Mr Verrina.  
42	I have already described how police intercepted the loading of some of the barrels of stolen product on 28 April, and searched your storage yard.  Some twenty minutes later, police entered your residence at 4 Stockton Street.  You ran and jumped a side fence, but police located you and you were arrested.  
43	Police located a sawn-off shotgun with two spent cartridges in the chamber in the door trim of a van which you had been observed to drive to 52 Potter Street.  This shotgun is the subject of Charge 3 against you, of being a prohibited person possessing a firearm.  You were a prohibited person by virtue of your prior convictions.
44	Upon execution of the search warrant at your home in Stockton Street on 28 April, police also found a total of 114.4 grams of cannabis located in the kitchen pantry, master bedroom, and in four locations in the garage.  That is the subject of Charge 8 against you of possessing a drug of dependence, namely cannabis.  
45	Also located at your residence was a quantity of methylamphetamine, totalling 97.7 grams, located under the coffee table in the garage. Police also found certain accoutrements of trafficking, including a set of digital scales behind the microwave in the kitchen, a quantity of a cutting agent, and two other substances that could be used as a cutting agent.  These matters are the subject and basis of Charge 6 against you, of trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine. 
46	Police also found a quantity of a medication in another person's name.  It was forty-one tablets analysed to be Alprazolam, which is known as Xanax, and this is the basis of Charge 7 on the indictment of possessing that drug of dependence.
47	Located in a black case on the couch in the garage at your residence were two further unregistered firearms; namely, a handgun and a 1911 model semi-automatic handgun.  Those are respectively the subject of Charges 4 and 5 on the indictment, of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm.
48	Police also identified three stolen vehicles in your storage yard; a Jeep Cherokee Wagon which had been stolen from the front of a residential address in Craigieburn in late December 2107; a grey box trailer stolen from outside a Craigieburn address in November 2017, that being a registered vehicle; and a blue Ford XR6 which had been stolen from outside a Pascoe Vale Road, Glenroy address in August 2017.  Those vehicles, together with a Panther ring found at your house, are the subject of a summary charge against you of dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime.
49	There can be no doubt that you are to be sentenced for some very serious offending.  Just because it was not particularly sophisticated or competently carried out, does not detract from the seriousness of this offending.  
50	The trafficking in the 1,4-BD appears to have been initiated by you and, overall, under your control.  You sought out a supply of the drug for the purpose of making profit from its distribution, in various ways, some of it to be sold to another syndicate or group of drug traffickers, for them to distribute to the ultimate users.
51	You clearly did this for profit, and although you were duped by Mr Verrina, in that the product he obtained for you was not what he told you it would be, you pursued attempts through him, until they proved unlikely to succeed, to obtain replacement or information that would enable the product to be made into what you wanted it to be.  You then carried out a burglary to obtain genuine product in order to use it for further trafficking purposes.  As I have said, some to replace the previous poor supply, and the rest to be trafficked through your own other channels.
52	This disregard for the consequences of using such chemicals as a drug of dependence is very clear and as I have said, even though you did not achieve what you were aiming to achieve, your purpose was objectively very serious.  The fact that you were prepared to involve your younger brother in this offending also shows your disregard for any responsibility within that family network, and particularly for a younger sibling.  I make no comment in relation to your older brother, who apparently denies the charges against him.
53	Your counsel submitted that even though the aim of the trafficking was for profit, the purpose for it should be taken to somewhat reduce your overall culpability, in that this was ultimately said to be for the purpose of gaining enough money to support your own drug habit, rather than to accumulate ultimate wealth.
54	I accept that motivation of supporting your own drug use is less objectively serious in itself than pure greed, or self-aggrandisement.  But offending to support your own drug habit cannot be an excuse for engaging in what was objectively, very serious offending. 
55	There is nothing to indicate that the burglary in itself caused damage to the property involved, but the fact that it was targeted with knowledge that a large supply of the specific substance you were seeking was present, reflects that it was not spontaneous or random and must have been planned. These features make it objectively, in my view, quite a serious instance of burglary, as does your personal motivation, which was to obtain a large quantity of the substance, to traffic it as a drug of dependence, including using some to exchange, to solve the issue that had arisen with complaints about the previous supply’s quality.
56	In relation to the firearms found at your residence, you were a prohibited person because of prior convictions.  I am told that they may have been left by other people in your premises.  There is no evidence on which I could decide whether or not that was likely, but I note that one of the firearms, in which there were spent cartridges, was in a vehicle that you had taken to your storage premises.  The presence of these firearms at your premises, and therefore within your possession, is an objectively serious prospect, although there is no evidence of you actually using them at any stage for any purpose.  
57	Possession of the Xanax and cannabis, I am told, was for personal use, consistent with the extensive list of drugs you have instructed that you were using or abusing at the time.  The maximum penalty is five years, or only one year if I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that those drugs were not possessed for a purpose of trafficking in those drugs.  As compared with the other offences, I consider these much less serious, and further I am prepared to find on the balance of probabilities that they were for personal use and not for the purpose of trafficking.
58	The charge of trafficking in methylamphetamine, however, is more serious.  The amount was significant, although not as much as a commercial quantity, and the accoutrements for trafficking, such as the scales and the presence of cutting agent, was an indication that it was not solely for personal use.  Even if you did also use this drug, you have pleaded to the charge of trafficking, and thereby acknowledged that. The maximum penalty of fifteen years’ imprisonment is well beyond what you will be receiving on that charge in these circumstances.  However, it reflects the objective seriousness.  
59	Whether or not hampered in your thinking or planning through the effects of your own drug addiction, you were prepared to engage over this period in whatever activities could to gain you money. Even if that was primarily to feed your own habit, it involved also under this charge the extending of the supply of the drug methylamphetamine to others.  I do not regard this charge, however, as nearly as serious in its objective or subjective details as Charge 1 of trafficking in a commercial quantity of 1,4-BD.  
60	Finally, there are the summary charges, which you have consented to have heard with these matters.  In particular, Summary Charge 12 of dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, relates to what police found at premises occupied by you.  There were three stolen vehicles, each worth several thousand dollars.  You are not charged with the theft of those, and I note that each of those vehicles was stolen on a different date.  There is no evidence as to when any of them came into your possession.  There is also the ring found in your possession which is also said, at least if it were genuine, to have some value. I am not clear as to whether that ring came into your possession through you having bought it from Mr Verrina, as he had apparently sold you a ring, purportedly a genuine one of noted value, whereas it was not in fact genuine.  
61	Nevertheless, I take from this charge that you were prepared to engage in criminal activity by possessing these items, reasonably suspected of being proceeds of crime.  They are the subject of a single charge, and it is brought as a summary charge invoking a lower maximum penalty than would have been applied had an equivalent indictable charge been placed.  I am dealing here with the summary charge.
62	The fact that you were found in possession of stolen vehicles, in possession of guns for which you were a prohibited person, and also in possession of some cannabis and Xanax, and methylamphetamine with signs of trafficking it, indicates that you were prepared to possess and engage in a variety of different illegal activities, whether or not they were connected, and I infer that most of this offending was for some type of profit for you.  To be specific, I have not found that to be the aim, the purpose, of the possession of the cannabis or Xanax.
63	I take into account that you have pleaded guilty to all of these charges, and you are entitled to some considerable leniency for doing so.  Although the pleas were not entered for you until day three of the listed committal hearing, the prosecution conceded, and I accept, that in the circumstances, this is to be regarded as a reasonably early plea of guilty, given the complexity of the factual allegations, and the number of charges, and also taking into account that you, and indeed the others falling to be sentenced by me, who have pleaded guilty, had not required any witnesses to be cross-examined, and were proceeding by way of a straight hand-up brief.
64	The extensive number of charges, and their factual basis, and the several months over which your offending is alleged to have occurred, mean that there was very considerable utilitarian value – by that I mean, the saving of time and cost of disputed hearings and the calling of many witnesses – as well as your acknowledgement of responsibility for your offending. In your case, I also accept that your pleas of guilty do stand as a reflection of remorse on your part.  I have read, and will refer to later, a letter you have written to the court, and also read what you told Mr Cummins, which also contains expressions and signs of you expressing your remorse.  
65	I shall tell you when I have imposed sentence on you, what the sentence would have been, had you not pleaded guilty but been found guilty of these charges after disputed hearings.
66	I am about to turn to your personal circumstances.  I will just enquire, does anyone need a break and, in particular, any of the offenders need a break at this stage?  Yes, all right. I will stand the court down for - I will say ten minutes because with the numbers of people having to come and go, it will not be less than ten minutes.  But I will stand the court down for ten minutes.  The bail of Mr Huynh and as I have said Mr Verrina, is extended in the meantime.  The others are to be removed from the court first.  Thank you.  
67	Yes, Mr Mansoor and Mr Fatho are to be removed from the court first.  Sorry and - who have I forgotten?  Mr Van.  I beg your pardon, Mr Van also.  
68		(Short adjournment.)
69	HER HONOUR:  All right, I am sorry, that was much longer than the ten minutes I had hoped.  I am still dealing with your circumstances, Mr Aysar Fatho. I was about to turn to your personal circumstances.
70	You were aged 23 at the time of this offending and turned 25 last week.  I am told that you were born in Iraq, one of six siblings, and that you arrived in Australia as a refugee with your family at about the age of eight.  I am told that you had difficulties during your schooling here, and were ultimately expelled from a number of schools and educated only until Year 9.  You have some work history, but it has been limited.
71	You married at age 20 and have four children, ranging from a few months old to the eldest, aged four.  
72	I am told that you have a lengthy history of drug use, commencing with marijuana at age 13, and then ice at age 15.  Eventually, at age about 20, you also started using Xanax and GHB and cocaine.  
73	You have a criminal history, commencing in February 2014, when before Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court for several offences, including recklessly causing injury, and trafficking and use of cannabis, and possession of methylamphetamine, you were placed on a Community Correction Order with a number of treatment and rehabilitation conditions.
74	Further Court appearances over the next two years included dishonesty offences – noting, in particular here, dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime – and for breach of the original Community Correction Order.  You received a further Community Correction Order in August 2015, with similar rehabilitative and treatment conditions.  You were before courts again for which you were fined in late 2015 and early 2016.  
75	While your prior criminal offences cover a variety of types of offending, some are clearly related to your own use of drugs, although they include trafficking cannabis, and others of those offences are of dishonesty, with one of violence.  Others relate to driving offences.  Overall, these do you no credit, but I accept that they are consistent with a person who had dropped out of school early, was mixing in bad company and using drugs.  They do not reflect nearly as serious charges as most of those before me now.
76	One of the summary charges brought before me is of you committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.  I am informed that you were placed on bail in September 2017, and that was in relation to matters of a similar nature to those with which I am dealing here, but for which you are due to go before a Magistrates’ Court, and to plead guilty.  That information is relevant to indicate that between the last of the formal prior offences, which was dealt with by a Magistrates’ Court in January 2016, and the offences that occurred for which I sentence you which occurred in the first four months of 2018, there had been some further offending in between. That is also consistent with the submission of your counsel that you had continued to abuse drugs yourself and engage in associated illegal activity.
77	It is clear that being on bail did not prevent you from embarking on the principal offending for which I sentence you, that is, your organisational and principal role in the trafficking of a commercial quantity of 1,4-BD.  
78	The further aspect of relevance from your prior history is that previous orders, such as Community Correction Orders, have not been sufficient to deter you from further offending, nor to resolve the underlying causes of that offending and in particular, your drug abuse. For that reason, what the courts call “specific deterrence” is a relevant sentencing factor for you.  That means that the sentence must be stern enough to send the message to you not to repeat such offending.
79	I take into account that at the time of the offending for which I sentence you, you were still relatively young at 23 years of age, and you are still only just 25.  This was far from your first offending, with not only your formal prior criminal record, but also an entrenched history of using numerous illegal drugs. Nevertheless, at your age, I do not disregard that your potential for rehabilitation is relevant, although with your history and in your circumstances and in light of the seriousness of your role in the offending, rehabilitation will not be the dominant or even one of several important sentencing factors.  I have not, however, disregarded it entirely.
80	Despite your relative youthfulness at the time of this offending, you were married with three children, and your wife was then pregnant with a fourth child who has since been born.  That you did not regard family responsibilities as taking priority over this wide range of offending in which you were engaged, is probably consistent with your perceptions being effected, detrimentally, by the drugs you took.  However, it was both dangerous and highly irresponsible, given your family circumstances.
81	I am told that due to understanding that realistically you are facing a sentence of imprisonment of some considerable length, you have discussed with your wife that you will not be able to provide support for her or the children for some years to come, and that she should not feel bound to the marriage.  This reflects that you have now realised the consequences to your wife and very young children, of your removal from the family circle, as well, of course, as your inability to engage actively in the upbringing of your very young children. I am told that they are brought to visit you in prison regularly, and have been throughout the period since your remand.  You are right to expect a considerable further time in prison.  Whether you eventually re-join your wife and children as a family, or the extent that you eventually can participate in their lives, will have to be determined in the future, and I cannot make any assessment of that.  I do take into account that it is of some concern to you, and one of the worries you have whilst you are serving a prison sentence.
82	Since your arrest on 28 April last year, you have remained in custody.  I am told that over the course of your time in custody, you have undergone considerable change.  First, your incarceration forced detoxification on you from the multiple drugs you had been using. I am told that you detoxified over a fourteen day period, and that you have remained abstinent from such drugs ever since.  Drug screens taken since May 2018 confirm all negative results.
83	Further, I am told that with the benefit of your thought processes no longer being effected by drugs, and that you are facing the harsh reality of a long prison sentence, you have shown considerable insight into the stupidity and wrongfulness of the conduct and lifestyle in which you were engaging.  I have seen certificates of programs you have completed whilst in custody, which address some vocational pathways, but also issues of respectful relationships, self-awareness, and an AOD six hour program.
84	I have read a report from Mr Jeffrey Cummins, clinical and forensic psychologist, who assessed you through two video conference interviews in April of this year.  Mr Cummins sets out details of what you told him of your memory of your childhood, including leaving Iraq when you were aged about five, some memory of night time bombings, and hearing bullet sounds during the day, and that you and your siblings were sent by taxi to Turkey where you stayed for about six months. You also remembered some attempts to flee Turkey by walking towards the border, but being intercepted, and on each occasion your parents having to pay money to obtain your freedom.  The third time, the family was successful in crossing into Greece, where your mother's brothers were already living.  
85	You said that the six months of living in Turkey was in one bedroom accommodation, and there was no opportunity to attend any schooling. In Greece, there was some schooling available, but because the family was living in very cramped quarters with your mother's brothers, it was not really possible to engage with any schooling.  You recall the family having almost nothing in the way of possessions whilst in Greece, and indeed being robbed there.  
86	From being told of these matters, Mr Cummins thought that you might be suffering some underlying post-traumatic stress disorder, although you said that you had tried to put memories of the times in Iraq, Turkey, and Greece behind you.  However, he noted that you told him that you now feel that some of that background is what caused you to start using drugs.
87	Mr Cummins did not find you to be suffering any psychotic illness, nor antisocial or other personality disorder.  He considered that at the time of the offending, you were suffering poly-substance dependency.  He did not diagnose any reactive mental health disorder, such as an adjustment disorder or a major depressive disorder, in response to your arrest or incarceration.
88	Mr Cummins said that you did disclose some mild anxiety and depression symptoms.  You told him that you had not undertaken any mental health treatment, either in the community before your arrest or whilst in custody.  I note that this is notwithstanding that two Community Correction Orders in the past had conditions for mental health treatment, as well as drug treatment, but I cannot resolve whether any was attempted.  I understand that some drug treatment was undergone by you on those occasions.  Whether you need formal mental health treatment independent of your drug dependency is not clear.  There is no evidence of a mental health disorder diagnosed which contributed to your offending.  
89	Overall, Mr Cummins' opinion was that your offending was probably entirely related to your poly-substance abuse that had developed during your teenage years.  He notes how much you describe using over those years, and that you describe that in the twelve months leading up to your arrest, as well as methamphetamine and cannabis, using cocaine, Xanax and GHB. You told him that you had undergone a ten day residential detoxification at Moreland Hall.  You thought that was probably when you were aged about 18, although when discharged, you immediately returned to using illicit drugs.  You told him that you now think back on that as a lost opportunity, and regret reverting to drug use
1	
90	Mr Cummins noted your expressions of remorse, and described you speaking in an apologetic, contrite, regretful and remorseful manner concerning your offending, and that you were highly motivated to make positive use of your time in custody.  He felt that whilst that motivation continues, your chances of changing your lifestyle were guardedly favourable. It was clear to him, as indeed it is to me and no doubt everybody else hearing your circumstances, that your future prospects depend very heavily upon you being able to refrain from relapse into substance abuse on your release from prison.  If you can be assisted whilst in prison with further programs to give you further insight and relapse prevention techniques, they would, in my view, be of great assistance.
91	I have read references from your wife, and from an uncle who has known you all your life.  Both describe you as being a happy and outgoing person, supportive of your family members, including siblings, your mother, and your wife and children.
92	I find it hard to believe your wife that you were not in trouble back when you were young, because that is not in line with what I am told about the reasons you left school, nor of course in line with your prior criminal history, although not so extensive as to indicate that it occupied your whole life. However, your wife says that you have been part of each other's lives for the last 10 years since high school.  It is a sad common feature of cases heard in all courts, that the consequences of an offender's wrongdoing impact very considerably on their families, and that can include, as in your case, a wife and four young children, all under the age of five.
93	Both of these references reflect a willingness to continue to support you, and to be part of your life when you are eventually released from prison.
94	I have read a letter from you to the court.  In it, you state that you are sorry for your actions. You state that, at the time, you were “not in a good place,” were drug affected, hanging around that negative lifestyle.  You say you had a gambling addiction, and were under financial stress owing someone a lot of money. You say that you have now realised that you were making bad decisions, and in doing so were putting people at risk.  You say that since being in custody you have reflected on and realised that your actions were appalling, and how significantly that has impacted on you being able to see your wife and children, and even missing the birth of your youngest daughter last December as well as your other daughter's first birthday. You expressed yourself as deeply remorseful for all of your actions, and say that you take full responsibility for what you did.  You also say that, when released, you want to open a restaurant and be there for your children to make up for the times that will have been lost.  You state you know that you can and want to change.
95	You were aged 23 at the time of this offending, which is beyond the age regarded as a young offender, although you would still fall into the category of a youthful offender.  You have prior Court appearances and apparently were engaging beyond what has been charged in extensive drug abuse.
96	I accept that having been in prison for more than a year now, you have been drug free since a couple of weeks after that, and also that you have come to think differently about your life and your responsibilities.  Separation from a young family is salutary punishment, but it seems to me that if you were as deeply engaged as it has been described in taking a cocktail of different illegal drugs, and in gambling, owing significant money, your participation in family events, especially concerning your own very young children, probably posed risks to them, of which you were not thinking at the time. It is to be hoped that you will not revert to that way of life again, but only time, and a lot of effort by you to turn your life around, will tell.
97	Owing to the seriousness of this offending and your extensive and principal role in it, your relatively young age and prospects for rehabilitation cannot be the most important sentencing purpose when compared, as I have said previously, with general deterrence, community denunciation, and protection of the public.
98	However, I have not disregarded that it is ultimately in the community's best interests, as well as in the interest of you and your immediate family, that your potential for rehabilitation not be crushed, and that on your eventual release from custody, you be encouraged to build a stable and constructive life. With that in mind, I have moderated, to a modest degree, the minimum term I will set before you can become eligible for parole.  It will be for you to show the Parole Board that your present expressions of a desire and ability to change can be maintained.
99	I have already described the sentencing factors I take into account.  In light of those, and of course of s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act, it is clear that no sentence other than one of imprisonment is appropriate in your case.
100	I will provide the details of that after I have addressed the situations and circumstances and offending of each of the others I am sentencing today.  That means it will be this afternoon.
101	I turn now to Mr John Mansoor.
102	John Mansoor, you have pleaded guilty to a single charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of the drug of dependence 1,4-Butanediol.  I have already said that the maximum penalty is 25 years' imprisonment and that s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act makes a sentence of imprisonment mandatory unless an exception is established, and it has not been submitted that an exception applies in your case.
103	The charge against you is confined to your involvement in the activities on 28 April 2018, which was the day on which there was planned to be an exchange to replace previously supplied poor quality product with proper 1,4-Butanediol. That exchange was to be between the group or syndicate you were assisting, and the one involving Mr Van and Mr Huynh.  You were associated with Aysar Fatho and his group or syndicate.
104	By 28 April 2018, you knew that Aysar Fatho was in dispute with those who had purchased product from him in the preceding month or so.  That dispute involved the quality of the product, as consumers were complaining.  You also knew that Aysar Fatho had obtained eight barrels of genuine or proper quality 1,4-BD, and there was to be an exchange in which 500 litres of the newly obtained genuine substance was to be delivered, and the poor product collected by Aysar Fatho's associates.
105	In relation to the activities on 28 April, as far as I can see from the summary of facts in the prosecution opening, your involvement is first mentioned on that day shortly before 4 pm.  In that, Mr Huynh told you that what he called his “boys” were going to be there in 25 minutes, and you asked him to give you an hour because Aysar Fatho was having a sleep. A little after 4 pm, you talked again with Mr Huynh on Aysar Fatho's phone, and he talked of buying an extra 400 litres.  Shortly afterwards, you talked with Mr Huynh about needing to bring a van to Aysar's house, and there was talk of it being loaded for Mr Huynh and his people.
106	Under police surveillance, shortly after 5 pm, you, together with Aymon and Andy Fatho, were observed loading barrels onto a trailer attached to a van at the storage premises at 52 Potter Street, Craigieburn.  Each of the three of you ran from police.  You personally commenced climbing a fence, but you were caught and arrested at that point.
107	A total of 1,402 kilograms of substance containing of 1,4-Butanediol was located in various sizes and types of containers at 52 Potter Street.  It does not appear to me that the Crown alleges that you were involved with trafficking that entire quantity; rather, it is alleged that 525 kilograms was to be exchanged that day, and you were participating in that exchange as one of those loading barrels onto a trailer for that exchange.  You had also, as I have already said, been part of some conversations that related to that proposed exchange in the hour or more preceding it.
108	As a commercial quantity of 1,4-Butanediol is constituted by 2 kilograms of substance containing that chemical, if not for lawful use, it is clear that you were involved in trafficking a large quantity, and taking the 525 kilograms with which it is certainly alleged you were involved, that was more than 260 times the threshold for a commercial quantity, making it a very large quantity indeed.
109	I must assess the objective seriousness of the offending and your culpability for your personal role in it.  As I have already said, the maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment is an objective sign of how very seriously offences of this nature are to be regarded.
110	The high quantity, being some hundreds of times the threshold for a commercial quantity, is particularly relevant.  However, I take into account that you were clearly not the organiser of the acquisition of this substance, nor of the arrangement for the exchange that day, although you had known enough to engage in some conversation about delivery methods in the preceding hour or so. The charge against you does not cover any involvement with earlier supply or sale of what turned out to be poor quality product.  I accept that you were not standing to share in any ultimate profit from these dealings, although it is conceded that you were engaging in this activity for money gain, wanting that money in order to support your own drug addiction.
111	I also regard as relevant, although to a much lesser degree, that the arrangement for the exchange, which is the limit of your alleged offending, was not in itself likely to produce any substantial profit.  It was to remedy the problem and dispute which had arisen because the product supplied in late March and earlier in April, from which at least Aysar Fatho was intending to profit, had been the subject of complaints, and this was an attempt to remedy that.
112	It was conceded by your counsel that the nature of this offence is serious, and that the quantity of the drug involved makes it very serious.  I accept that your own role was quite limited in that you were participating only that afternoon, although aware of what had preceded the arrangement, and your role was to assist in the physical loading for delivery of this quantity of the drug in order to fulfil the arrangement that had been reached by others. You were doing this with knowledge of some of the wider aspects of the trafficking of this drug, which had occurred, or been attempted, and in association with others with whom you presumably had some ongoing association.
113	I have already said you stood to gain in that you were seeking to earn money to support your own drug habit.  That is no excuse, but it is in contrast to a motive of pure greed.
114	While this is serious offending, I regard your role as relatively limited and at a relatively low level of personal culpability.
115	You pleaded guilty to this charge at what is to be regarded as an early stage.  Like the others who are before me here, that was after some negotiations at the committal hearing, and without requiring any witnesses to be cross-examined. You, as do the others here, receive considerable leniency for that, taking into account the utilitarian value of the saving of time and cost and inconvenience of witnesses, your acceptance of responsibility for your involvement, and I take your plea of guilty as a reflection of remorse, particularly as there are other signs of remorse to which I shall refer shortly.
116	I shall tell you what your sentence would have been had you not pleaded guilty after I have imposed sentence.
117	I turn now to your personal circumstances.
118	You are now aged 26, and were 25 at the time of this offending.  You were born in Iraq, from where you and your family fled when you were aged about 13. You were one of five children, having two older sisters and two younger brothers.  I am told that, generally, you regard your childhood up to about age 10 as being a good and stable one, in which both of your parents were employed in a family business.  However, following the commencement of another war situation in Iraq from 2003, the situation for your family changed dramatically. You and your family were exposed to the horrors of that conflict, including witnessing executions, seeing corpses in the street, and you yourself suffered an injury to your ears through being close to a bomb explosion.  That has resulted in long term significant loss of hearing for you – in both ears, but more so on one side than the other.  Also, your family lost its business, and movements were heavily restricted by safety considerations.  
119	Your family fled Iraq to Turkey in 2006, where you as the eldest son went with your father often to look for and perform what jobs you could obtain, to try to support the family, often finding yourselves cheated, or even not paid at all.  I accept that this was a time of considerable hardship, and that you were not able to engage in proper schooling during that period. Eventually, the family was able to come to Australia in 2009, when you were aged 16.  In 2014, you became an Australian citizen.
120	Although you commenced schooling in Iraq, your education was significantly disrupted by, first, the instability there, and then the subsequent moves made by you with your family.  You had no formal schooling for many years, and when you arrived in Australia, were unable to speak English, although I am told that you could speak at least three other languages fluently.  As I have said, you were aged 16 on arrival in Australia. You were apparently considered too old to be placed at an appropriate level grade at school.  Instead, you attended six months of VCAL studies.  You then undertook an apprenticeship course at TAFE, but were unable to obtain an apprenticeship.  I am told that you have had several periods of employment in low skilled positions, including working at a carwash, and at one or more caravan companies.  Your last employment was about a year prior to your arrest.
121	I am told that you were introduced to drug use – MDMA, cocaine and cannabis – at around the age of 21, and that your use of cannabis quickly escalated to daily.  At the time of this offending, you were also using cocaine regularly, and that is an expensive drug to use regularly.  I note that the commencement of that drug abuse was a few years later than for many others who come before the courts, and for several of the others with whom you are being sentenced.  However, it appears that once started, it became entrenched quickly, and that by the time of this offending, when you were aged 25, you were not working, were not spending much time at home, had at that stage separated from your partner, and that the seeking of money to purchase drugs and mixing with people involved with those activities had become central in your life.
122	Drug addiction, as I have already said, is generally no excuse for offending, whether or not that offending is drug related.  It can put the offending conduct into some context, in that you were likely to have been acting under the influence of drug associates as your peers, and your judgment generally may have been hindered by the effects of your drug taking.  However, in this case, it is submitted that your traumatic background circumstances, and circumstances of hardship throughout your teens, rendered you particularly vulnerable to being introduced to drugs, and that your use of drugs should be a mitigating factor. Viewed that way, your background also rendered you vulnerable to being swept up into the activities of drug using associates.  I will return to this issue after discussing the psychological evidence about you.  
123	You come before the court with no prior criminal history, although I am told that you had been using illegal drugs for some years, and therefore it cannot be said that this was your first and only lapse into illegal conduct.  You did not come to police attention for your drug use until these matters, and you are entitled to the benefit in sentencing of being treated as a first time offender, and having, especially at your age, rehabilitation considered as a sentencing factor.
124	Unfortunately for you, your arrest for these matters, notwithstanding a lack of any prior criminal history, has resulted in immediate imprisonment, as you have been remanded since your arrest on 28 April last year.  That is because of the seriousness of the offending involved, and it has been conceded that that seriousness and the application of s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act requires a term of imprisonment to be imposed, notwithstanding the mitigatory factors in your circumstances.
125	I accept that you have spent the period you have been in custody constructively.  First, incarceration forced detoxification on you, and I am told that you have remained drug free, which is now for more than a year, and that you intend to remain so.  You have not had the benefit of the type of intensive drug rehabilitation program, including personal counselling, that two of your co-offenders have undergone, as they obtained bail to do so.  However, I accept that you have done as much as has been available to you in the prisons where you have been held.
126	You have undertaken a considerable number of courses and programs while in custody, of which I have seen certificates.  Those include programs relating to drug abuse, and also occupation orientated or vocational courses.  I am also told that you are currently the yard billet, which I accept reflects that you are engaging in work, and have been for some time, and that you have been placed in the billet position as you are regarded as having been behaving responsibly and have been appropriate to take some responsibility for other prisoners.
127	I have been told, and accept, that the hearing loss from which you still suffer, as a result of a car bomb explosion when you were in Iraq, has led to certain instances of difficulty for you while in prison, because your inability to hear has been misinterpreted.  I accept that that could cause real difficulty on occasions, depending on the people with whom you are interacting, whether they are prison officers or fellow prisoners.  I accept that to this extent, this physical impairment is likely to have made, and to continue throughout your imprisonment to make, the experience of imprisonment more onerous for you. I have taken that as a factor requiring some modest moderation of your sentence.  
128	I am told that you are visited regularly by your family, and you are also visited by the partner with whom you had broken up in the period before this offending, but who has resumed contact with you.  I am told that you would like to re-establish a long term relationship with her on your release.  The prospects of that of course remain to be worked out with her.  
129	You were interviewed for a psychological assessment by Mr Warren Simmonds in April of this year, while you were at Ravenhall Correctional Centre. Mr Simmonds took a personal history from you, noting that your experiences in Iraq, once war conditions started, and your exposure to deaths, traumatic scenes, and indeed suffering the hearing loss from your proximity to an explosion, had caused you to experience intrusive memories of those experiences, with episodes of hyper-arousal and hyper-vigilance.  His view was that you were clearly experiencing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder when living in Iraq, noting, however, that you felt they had become less of an issue in time, especially since being in Australia and you have looked forward in your life here. However, he noted that you reported a return of those intrusive memories over the few months before he saw you, which you felt had been triggered by a suicide in the unit where you were in prison.    
130	He considered that the symptoms you described as experiencing were consistent with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder while living in Iraq, potentially for some time afterwards, and given that what you have reported to him, he considered that while you would not always meet the criteria for that disorder on an ongoing basis, particular stressors in your life may lead to some reactivation or aggravation of that condition, at least temporarily.
131	Mr Simmonds took a history of you being introduced to drugs upon going to nightclubs, from about the age of 21.  I will not repeat the details of those I have already mentioned.  You told him that after a few months, you tired of the drugs such as ecstasy and MDMA and at one stage Lyrica, but you commenced using cocaine, at first intermittently, but it became more regular, and you found you needed more to have a good time.  You estimated you were using at 30 per cent of the time.  You had also been introduced to smoking cannabis, which you apparently did daily from the start, becoming dependent on it, which you did not realise until about a year later.  You did notice that you started to become aggressive if you did not have that drug.  You were smoking it daily in company with other people, who, like you, had dropped out of employment, and, in addition, you were using cocaine primarily on weekends.
132	You told Mr Simmonds you were not a big drinker of alcohol in the period leading up to this offending, and apparently had recognised earlier that you did stupid things when you were drinking. Your cannabis use had become very considerable, and, with the cocaine, your drug use was very expensive, and you had moved into company where others like you were looking to make money to support the ongoing cost of personal drug use.
133	Mr Simmonds took a more extensive history of employment by you than I had been given, including how you worked with your father during the period before leaving Iraq, and in Turkey.  I accept that those times, together with your attempts to get work in Australia, and being prepared to undertake various unskilled jobs to do so, as well as your current experience as a billet, show that you have the capacity to work hard, if not undermined by drug use.
134	Mr Simmonds considers that you would have met the criteria for cannabis use disorder, and that experiences in your childhood left you vulnerable to substance use, which was then influenced further by peers, and that you drifted into what you perceived as normal behaviour in the Australian culture.  You have, he notes, undertaken drug courses available to you in prison and were awaiting entry into a more intensive one when he saw you. He notes that you would benefit from referral for drug and alcohol counselling, with a focus on increasing self-efficacy, harm minimisation, and relapse prevention strategies.  
135	Mr Simmonds found no clear evidence of a major psychiatric disorder when he assessed you, but he noted that you may have found it difficult to disclose the issues from a cultural point of view.  He did not find signs of antisocial personality traits, and thought you had a strong ethos of work and faith modelled by your parents. His view was that, provided you stay clear of further drug abuse, the likelihood of further offending would be reduced. 
136	You wrote a letter, addressed to me, which also addresses your various family members, expressing your understanding of the impact on each of them of your drug abuse, and of you now being in prison for this offending. You expressed sincere apology to the court, and the community, and to each of these family members. On reading this, I am satisfied that you have some real insight now into the harm done by drugs to the community in general and to many individuals in it. I accept that you have come to this realisation yourself, and on seeing others while you have been in custody, and you acknowledge that your involvement in the offence for which you face sentence was the result of stupid decisions which had the potential to do harm and damage to the community.
137	You also express your hopes and resolve to lead a responsible life, and set about righting what you have done to family members on your release from prison.  I accept that what you have written to this court, and how you described yourself and your actions to Mr Simmonds, demonstrates genuine insight into what brought you to the position you are in, and the harm you were doing yourself and your family and potentially to the community.
138	In light of the hardships and traumatic experiences you had through your teens, and of your insight since detoxifying which I find to be genuine into the causes and impact of your drug taking and the offending itself, and taking into account Mr Simmonds' views, I am prepared to find that your unusually difficult background throughout your teens, coupled with your drug associated peers, did render you more vulnerable to succumb to use of drugs than for someone growing up without those particular hardships and experiences.
139	I do not regard your drug taking as strongly mitigatory, but I have modified to a modest degree your sentence to take into account that finding.
140	You are, as I have said already, still relatively youthful, aged 26, and your prospects of rehabilitation are relevant to sentencing principles.  With no prior convictions, and the responsible attitude you have taken whilst in prison, from addressing your drug addiction, undertaking various programs both vocational and for the drug abuse, and becoming a yard billet, I am satisfied that your prospects of rehabilitation are reasonably good.
141	There are no intractable underlying psychiatric conditions diagnosed.  The key to you being able to build a stable and responsible, and hopefully happy, life for yourself in the future is that you continue to address your drug abuse issues, and remain firm in your resolve to stay drug free on your release from prison.
142	Another positive factor in assessing your rehabilitation prospects is the ongoing support of your parents and your siblings, as expressed in letters which I have read, albeit those were written in English by your younger brother so using English expressions which I do not think would have been used by your parents in English.  That does not reduce what I take to have been genuinely felt sentiments that were expressed in those letters.
143	It was not submitted that any sentence other than one of imprisonment with a non-parole period would be appropriate to meet sentencing requirements in your situation.  It is the length of that sentence and the non-parole period to be set which is the subject of submissions for leniency.
144	In considering that, I have also taken into account some other sentences which were drawn to my attention.  As I have said, they have to be taken in light of the impact of Court of Appeal decisions to the effect that sentences for the trafficking of a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence are to be viewed as higher now than they were before the case of Gregory.
145	Of the cases drawn to my attention, the closest for comparative purposes does seem to be that of Bchinnati, a decision of another judge in this court.  I note that that offender was older than you and had extensive prior convictions, but his role was regarded as limited to the loading on two occasions on the one day of containers of the same drug as you were involved with here, 1,4-Butenediol. The overall amount there was more than the total amount found here, and more than the amount were engaging in loading for an exchange.  His sentence was 14 months' imprisonment.
146	I have, as I have said, taken into account the sentencing factors of general deterrence, community denunciation, and, to a lesser extent in light of your involvement, protection of the public.  Without a prior criminal record, specific deterrence is not as higher a requirement in this case, although clearly a sentence must discourage you from resuming drug use, which might lead you into similar offending.

147	I have explained the other ways I have modified the sentence involved.  I will tell you the details of your sentence after I have explained my reasons for sentencing the others today and that will be this afternoon.
148	Now, given the time, I was going to move next to Mr Huynh.  I think it might be desirable that - there is a lot to listen to and there are a lot of people sitting having to listen to all of this.  What I think I will do is call on the lunch break earlier and resume at 2 o'clock with the next two of the offenders.
149	That being so, I extend the bail of Mr Huynh and Mr Verrina till 2 pm and ask that the other three be taken from the courtroom at this stage please.
LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT
150	HER HONOUR:  All right before I proceed, I have reached the conclusion in the last few minutes that I am not going to be able to even complete the other two matters today.  I will proceed with the next one Mr Huynh, but if I proceed with Mr Van, it is going to be after 5 o'clock before I am actually imposing the individual sentences.  For some of them, that means transportation issues back into custody, and the day is a very long and detailed day.  I am sorry.  
151	This is not ideal, but I had realised that the fifth one would not fit, and I am sorry to put it as bluntly as that, but all of these offenders have complicated situations that have to be explained.  I know there is a lot of repetition in what I have had to say, but I have to go through the process of the various considerations for each of them individually and I think in the circumstances - what I will do is continue with the next one and then impose the sentences on - it will be Aysar Fatho, John Mansoor and Ngoc Huynh today, and I have tomorrow available to proceed with the other two then, unless there is a particular difficulty.  I think I asked you earlier Mr Cole and there is no particular difficulty.
152	MR COLE:  No.  Although I might - if I might ask now Your Honour just because I don't want to ask later when Your Honour's doing sentencing (indistinct words).
153	HER HONOUR:  yes.
154	MR COLE:  Just in terms of tomorrow, does Your Honour have a reasonable estimate of how long the two will take?  I've just had to organise something else.  I can be here, I just wanted to - safely after lunch I'm guessing.  Put the other thing until after lunch, but we might be right for ‑ ‑ ‑
155	HER HONOUR:  I think that would - that should be safe, barring ‑ ‑ ‑
156	MR COLE:  As I said, Your Honour, ‑ ‑ ‑
157	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ other problems ‑ ‑ ‑
158	MR COLE:  That's just the best guess in terms of the morning.
159	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ I have.  It's my best estimate.  They vary a bit in length.
160	MR COLE:  Yes.
161	HER HONOUR:  I don't think your client's one is quite as long as some of the others, but to go through all the considerations - I think it will comfortably finish in the morning. 
162	MR COLE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  As I said, I prefer to ask now even though ‑ ‑ ‑
163	HER HONOUR:  That's the best I can do now.  All right, now Mr Kelly in respect ‑ ‑ ‑
164	MR COLE:  ‑ ‑ ‑ I'm interrupting now, but (indistinct words).
165	HER HONOUR:  That's just been announced for your client and I realise you haven't had time to talk to him.  I'm also very aware that he has family members who reside in Queensland.
166	MR KELLY:  Queensland that have come down and ‑ ‑ ‑
167	HER HONOUR:  And they may be here rather - well I'm not sure.  I have a courtroom full of people and I'm not ‑ ‑ ‑
168	MR KELLY:  Yes.
169	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ aware who's here for whom.  
170	MR KELLY:  No his family are here from Queensland.  He would of course - he's in custody.  Would of course prefer to have his matter dealt with if it's at all possible.  
171	HER HONOUR:  I don't think it is.  I think I've just got to be realistic as to where I stand with them and it will be first thing tomorrow morning, unless that's not possible for you or someone to be here on his behalf.
172	MR KELLY:  No we will certainly be able to accommodate that.
173	HER HONOUR:  All right, I do apologise for it and particularly I was aware that he has family from Queensland, but ‑ ‑ ‑
174	MR KELLY:  Yes.
175	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ if I start interposing his now it gets - well I'm not going to do it.  
176	MR KELLY:  No.
177	HER HONOUR:  I really think I have to proceed as I'd planned to go.
178	MR KELLY:  It's a matter for Your Honour.
179	HER HONOUR:  All right.  Do you want a couple of minutes to explain that to your - to talk to your client about that or to talk to any of his family before I proceed?
180	MR KELLY:  We did discuss this possibility earlier in the day and I got his instructions then, but now that it's become a concrete or nearly a concrete thing, maybe I ‑ ‑ ‑
181	HER HONOUR:  I'm afraid - what I've worked out is that I'd have to take a break after Mr Huynh, even keeping that confined to the ten minutes that is the minimum necessary and there are some twitches I inevitably end up making, but it's going to be well after 5 before I'm imposing the sentences on your client or others, and that will take time and time to enter, and I just think it becomes too difficult and too problematic at that stage of the day.  So, I do apologise to all concerned, but I could only make the best efforts, and I was aware yesterday that it was really looking as if they couldn't all be completed today.  At one stage, I had Ms Dwyer ask - still urging me to fit her client ‑ ‑ ‑
182	MR KELLY:  As well.
183	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ in today too.  But his matter has been adjourned off till August, and I am not suggesting that these others be adjourned off till then.  But I have to keep all the parity issues in mind, and have been doing so all the way along, or trying to.  All right.
184	MR KELLY:  As Your Honour pleases.
185	HER HONOUR:  I will call a break after I have done the reasons for Mr Huynh and then everybody has that break before I impose the actual three sentences that I will today.  All right, I am up to you Mr Huynh.
186	You have pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence, both relating to 1,4-BD.  I am just going to pause.  I am echoing back at myself.  Has the sound system changed?  Can you hear that?  All right, I will have to persevere.  I am not quite sure whether it is the recording or what, but I am hearing myself in my left ear which is a bit distracting.  If I talk like this - I think it is an area out - the far side of that bit of equipment.  Is it coming out of somewhere there?  Those speakers?  All right, I will return to where I was and ignore myself in my left ear throughout.  I am sorry Mr Huynh, I will start again in respect of you.
187	Ngoc Huynh, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence, both relating to 1,4-Butanediol, and one charge of conspiring with Aysar Fatho and others to traffic in not less than a commercial quantity of that drug of dependence.  You have also pleaded guilty to related summary charges, which you agreed to have heard in this court.  Those are a charge of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, and one of possessing cartridge ammunition without a permit.  
188	The maximum penalty for each charge of trafficking is 15 years imprisonment, and for conspiracy to traffic in a commercial quantity, it is 25 years imprisonment.  Those maximum penalties as I have been saying in respect of each of the other offenders, reflect how objectively very seriously offences of this nature are regarded by Parliament on behalf of the community.  The maximum penalty for each summary charge is two years imprisonment.
189	However, as none of the charges against you is a Category 2 charge, for the purposes of s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act, you do not fall within that provision which would otherwise require a sentence of imprisonment, not being a combination sentence with a Community Correction Order, unless an exception is established.  That means that I shall be applying general sentencing considerations to your case without that constraint.  I note that the prosecution's submission was that general sentencing principles should lead to the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment on you, not being a combination sentence, and notwithstanding that s.5(2H) does not apply.
190	The charges against you are confined to specific periods of your involvement in April 2018.  Charge 1 is based on you purchasing and taking possession, between 7 and 9 April 2018, of an unknown quantity of 1,4-BD from Aysar Fatho.  In the preceding two days, you had conversations with Aysar Fatho, in which he told you he had another supply of this drug, and you said you wanted it frozen to guarantee its quality, and the next day told him you wanted a refund for the bad quality 1,4-BD, but would prefer the product itself.
191	On 7 April, Aysar Fatho rang and you met him, the arrangement being for the product to be delivered at a particular place.  However, following that, you told him that this supply was again of poor quality, as people had tried it and said it was of poor quality – the effect was not strong enough, it was said.  You asked him again to get a frozen one. It turns out that Mr Fatho tried to contact Mr Verrina, without success.  Charge 1 is limited to the period of 7 to 9 April, but it is clear, by implication, that you had knowledge of the preceding supply between Aysar Fatho and your associates, which had been of poor quality.    
192	Charge 2 against you is based on your involvement between 11 and 17 April 2018, when you purchased 300 litres of product alleged to be 1,4-BD from Aysar Fatho. On 11 April, he told you that he had a new supply of 300 litres available and tried to reassure you that it was the proper one.  He asked you to pay, but you said the suppliers were in the wrong.  Sometime between 11 and 17 April, 300 litres of a new supply of product, alleged to be 1,4-BD, was supplied to you and your associates, and, on 17 April, you told Aysar Fatho that a 30 litre barrel that was part of the delivery had leaked and you had only saved 9.5 litres from that barrel.
193	Charge 3 against you is based on your involvement with the attempt to have the poor quality product, that had been previously supplied to you and your associates, exchanged for proper product.  It is alleged that between 23 March and 28 April, you conspired with Aysar Fatho and others to obtain that exchange or supply, and that that was of an amount not less than a commercial quantity of 1,4-Butanediol. An arrangement was reached for you and your syndicate members, including James Van, to return the bad quality product and receive at least 525 kilograms of actual 1,4-Butanediol from Aysar Fatho and his syndicate members.  On the day, those members included Andy Fatho and John Mansoor, who were present and assisted in loading the product intended to be provided.  This exchange was to occur on 28 April, but was frustrated by police intervention.  
194	Your involvement for this charge, apart from knowledge that such arrangements were being made, was taking part in some phone conversations. On 28 April, a little before 1 pm, you told Aysar Fatho, while he was at the Excelsior Hotel with Mr Verrina, that you would load up the 500 litres being returned to be exchanged, bring it to Aysar, and get the replacement 500 litres. There was a shortage of vans, and you were intending, when someone got back, to get the additional litres that were discussed as being purchased.  That was because there was an issue in getting the money, and you were going to need more manpower to move the barrels.  Just before 1 pm, you told Aysar Fatho that you were aiming to get there before 5 pm and that your cousin had the money. About forty minutes later, Aysar Fatho asked you if you had the van, and you said you had to wait for the keys, and once it was there, you would have to load it up and go.  
195	Police were conducting surveillance and listening to intercepted calls throughout this day, and you were monitored talking with John Mansoor, who was using Aysar Fatho's phone.  In that conversation, you were organising to buy an extra 400 litres.
1	
196	I must assess the objective seriousness of this offending, and your personal role and culpability for it.  I have said, in relation to the others, and say in relation to you also, that the maximum penalties reflect how objectively serious these offences are.  I also add here that so far as the third charge is concerned, the 525 kilograms constitutes some 260 times the prescribed threshold amount for a commercial quantity of that drug.
197	It is not alleged that you were the instigator of any of the arrangements for trafficking in this drug, nor a principal, nor that you stood to share in substantial profits from it. However, objectively, and I have said this in general about all, any role along the path of distribution is of significance in furtherance of other people's overall plans for distribution of illegal drugs, and means that even confined roles are part of what is very serious offending.
198	In respect of Charge 3, I find relevant, although to a lesser degree than the quantity involved, that what was in fact to occur was an exchange.  Although that meets the definition of trafficking, it was intended to replace previous supplies of product which were not of proper quality – in fact not that drug of dependence at all. So, although it was intended to be putting fresh product into the distribution chain, it was not for profit beyond what had previously been paid, and, indeed, it was probably not going to earn much profit for anyone in the circumstances. I regard that circumstance as moderating, to a limited degree, the objective seriousness of that offence, but it by no means makes it an innocent or harmless transaction.
199	Your role under these charges was for limited or confined periods, although, as I have said, you had some knowledge of what had occurred previously and in between.  You actively negotiated with Aysar Fatho for a supply of the drug that is under the first charge, and asserted that there should be a refund when it came to the second charge, or that no further payment should be necessary. These conversations reflect not only that you had some business acumen, but also that your role was not so subordinate that you were not exercising any personal input or initiative in these conversations.  You clearly had knowledge of the purpose of the arrangements, and were willing to act in furtherance of the overall plans of your associates for the trafficking of this drug.
200	Your motivation was money, although not to share in profits or for greed. I am told, in relation to you as for the others I have already described, it was in order to gain money to support your own drug use, and you were a heavy and addicted user at the time, of at least cocaine.
201	It is not possible for me to determine how your level of involvement compares with that of others in the group of which you were part, and with whom you were acting, apart from that of Mr Van.  It is not put by the prosecution that either you or Mr Van was the head or principal actor in that group or syndicate, but each of you clearly had access to a phone that was being used for the negotiations with Mr Fatho on behalf of your group.
202	In relation to the summary charges, when you were arrested on 16 May 2018, police searched your home and found quantities of cash totalling a little over $15,000, as well as a Rolex watch, a gold ring and two Mont Blanc pens.  These are the subject of the charge of dealing in property suspected of being proceeds of crime which you have admitted.
203	The other summary charge, which you have also admitted, relates to 25 rounds of cartridge ammunition which police found in the wardrobe of the second bedroom of your home.  I do not have any information or explanation in relation to those items.  It is not alleged that there was any firearm present to which the ammunition related.
204	You have pleaded guilty to all of these charges, and are entitled to some leniency for doing so.  I have described that in relation to the previous members of your co-accused group. Like them, your charges were resolved without requiring cross-examination of witnesses at the committal hearing, which had significant utilitarian value and has saved the community the time and cost of extended disputed hearings, including a trial.
205	I accept that your pleas of guilty reflect your acceptance of responsibility for your conduct.  I also accept, in your case, that it is a sign of remorse or guilt.  I note, and will mention later, that other evidence confirms that you have been feeling guilt as well as remorse for your involvement in the offending conduct.
206	After imposing your sentence, I shall tell you what it would have been had you not pleaded guilty.
207	I turn now to your personal circumstances.
208	You are now aged almost 27, and were 25 at the time of the offending.  You were born in Australia to Vietnamese parents.  You grew up in financially strained circumstances, living in a housing commission flat with siblings sharing shoes and clothes, and I am told that the family's financial situation worsened when your father, who apparently had a gambling problem, left the family when you were aged five or six.
209	You and your three siblings were effectively brought up by your mother, who worked very hard and set high standards and expectations for you.  I am told that, in particular, she put very high value on education as a way out of the situation that she found herself in, and she set education as the priority for you and your siblings, to the extent that when you suggested that you get a part-time job while at school to help support the family, she would not allow that.
210	You and your siblings have all gone on to tertiary education, but both you and your older brother have been frustrated and disillusioned by being unable to obtain jobs in the fields for which you qualified.  Your two younger sisters are still both university students, and hopefully on completion of their courses they will move into their chosen fields.
211	Your father was not often present to support you or your siblings, or to give the support that sons might expect of their fathers.  However, I was told he was present in court to support you during the plea hearing, as were your mother and your siblings on the days they could come.
212	You followed the path set for you through your mother's insistence, but were already using stimulants to get through school and to deal with low self-esteem.  Although you ultimately achieved a Bachelor's Degree in Business after Diplomas in Financial Services, you did not manage to acquire much understanding or insight into how to set your own priorities in life, adjust to setbacks, or self-analyse your decisions about your life.
213	I am told that after completing your business course, you became frustrated and despondent as a result of being unable to obtain employment in that field.  Unfortunately, recent graduates in many professional fields nowadays face this disappointment, at least for much longer than they would expect after immersing themselves in study. However, it seems that you did not know how to deal with your disappointment, nor how to focus on alternative ways of achieving a start in a working life, and you were also discouraged to an extent by your mother from choosing unskilled job alternatives to tide you over.
214	It seems that it was at this stage that you drastically increased your resort to various substances as a means just to cope with your emotions and stress about seeking employment. While you had already indulged in binge drinking while at school, this apparently increased, and although you had tried drugs such as cannabis, ecstasy and GHB, that had been infrequently in the past. However, from the age of 21, you took up cocaine use, and in the months leading up to this offending, that use was daily and, of course, expensive.  Also, when you drank heavily, which you continued to do, you craved cocaine.
215	In the throes of alcohol and drug use, you not only rendered yourself less capable of obtaining employment and clouded your judgment, but, as you have expressed more recently, you now realise that you lost contact with the peers you had made at university, and increased your involvement with people in the drug using world, who had criminal associations.
216	With an addiction as expensive as cocaine being used as often as you did, and with no employment, you agreed with your drug associates to participate in these trafficking offences to earn money to support your drug addiction.  I have already said that that addiction does not form an excuse to offending of this nature, but it does put it into some context, and is less blameworthy than a motive of pure greed.
217	Although police intervention frustrated the intended exchange for the proper drug product on 28 April, it was not until 16 May that you were arrested.  When interviewed by police, you answered, 'No comment', throughout, quite possibly on legal advice, as was your legal right. You were charged and remanded in custody that day.  An application for bail by you in August was adjourned.
218	Whilst in custody, you were assessed by a psychologist, Luke Armstrong, who assessed you on testing as being of average intelligence, and he considered you qualified for a diagnosis of a stimulant use disorder.  He also felt there was no evidence of you suffering a mood or personality disorder, although you had described to him being very depressed during this, your first time in custody, until others persuaded you to come out of your cell and engage in activities each day. Mr Armstrong supported your suitability for a residential drug rehabilitation program.  On 1 October, you were granted bail to enable you to enter a residential rehabilitation program, being one run by Refocus, that had been arranged to accept you. You had spent 139 days in custody (being more than 4 ½ months) by then, and I expect that as a first encounter with the legal system, that would have been a very salutary experience for you.
219	It is what you have done since being released on bail which is the central focus of the plea submissions on your behalf, as you have used the time since being granted bail to seriously address your drug addiction, which was the underlying cause of your offending, and have shown very considerable success in doing so. In the course of drug rehabilitation, you have also undergone psychological counselling as to the other underlying issues that have shaped your life, and have made strong progress in that regard also, gaining insight into the causes and how to alleviate or address them.
220	I have read two reports from clinicians at Refocus who have been engaged in your programs there.  I shall not repeat the details of their descriptions of the actual program and its curriculum, but I am satisfied that it addresses, on many levels, bringing someone in your type of position to the realisation of the causes of your substance abuse, and how to address those and turn around your life for the future.
221	You undertook the initial 3 month intensive stage, and have continued in the transitional, but still residential, treatment program since.
222	Ms McDonald, as an addiction treatment clinician and manager of Refocus, gives the opinion that you have made exceptional progress in the program on many of the markers of healthy recovery, and that you have outgrown your pattern of chronic addiction-driven behaviour, and are already moving forward in your life. She says you have grasped the opportunity and that your dedication and commitment to changing your life for the better has been truly commendable, and that you have been a pleasure to work with.
223	Consultant psychologist at Refocus, Peter Harvey, confirms your progress through 20 individual counselling sessions with him, as well as group sessions.  He says that when you commenced, you appeared reserved, shy, and unsure of yourself, and he was struck by your lack of self-awareness, having never undergone counselling, nor stopped to think about how you felt about yourself and your life. You seemed to have very little understanding about how your past, including family issues, had shaped you.  You also had difficulty expressing your emotions.  He describes you as having applied yourself with courage to address those matters, and that you have made significant progress while a client at Refocus, both in counselling and in your recovery outside of that.  He also says you have made genuine friendships there, and have been a valued support to others going through similar experiences.  He found your expressions of remorse for your actions genuine.
224	Mr Armstrong also assessed you again at the beginning of May, before the plea hearing.  In that assessment, he noted that you presented then with an advanced understanding of your experience and triggers, and your wider problematic history with addiction.  You acknowledge that cravings continue, but, in contrast to when he had assessed you when you were on remand – when you said that if drugs were offered, you would probably use them – now, you are able to think of the consequences and not act impulsively, and have good insight into your triggers for both alcohol and cocaine use.
225	Mr Armstrong noted how you describe your remorse, and that he regards it as genuine.  He says you not only feel embarrassment and regret for the impact of your offending on your family, but that you have been surrounded by addicts at Refocus, and recognise that your conduct contributed to the misery of many addicts who are now in treatment.
226	He also gave oral evidence before me, in which he noted that yours was an uncommon expression of remorse and that you were visibly effected by this perception.  I accept that that description does reflect genuine remorse, and unusual insight into the harm caused by the offending of the type in which you engaged.  
227	Mr Armstrong gave oral evidence, as I have said, confirming the content of the reports, including that when he assessed you while on remand, he considered that a disadvantaged background had contributed to your turning to drugs, and that you had been vulnerable to addiction as a result – turning to it to feel normal, rather than to obtain “a high.”  He also noted that cocaine is known to be highly addictive. He considered that you genuinely were willing to engage in treatment.  He thought that when you were granted bail, and confirms the significant progress that you have made.  He notes that you are in the transitional stage, currently presenting with advanced understanding of your experience of triggers, and that you could demonstrate that you know what to do to resist the cravings.  He describes you as technically being in early remission from substance abuse disorder, and being in what he calls the action and maintenance stage of rehabilitation.  He expected you to continue to do well, and his impression was that your motivation for ongoing treatment was quite high, which would be useful. You talked a lot about your current peers in Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous, which you are still attending daily.  He thought those meetings were not as good in prison as outside, and that it would be harder for you in a prison environment to find such suitable peers.  I took that to be a reference to willing and motivated peers, as I understand that such meetings do occur, although their regularity at different prisons would vary.  
228	I also read a report and heard oral evidence from Ms Amanda Brown of Lamberti Associates, an experienced drug and alcohol counsellor.  She had apparently first assessed you by video link in July 2018, no doubt in preparation for the bail application that did not proceed in August.  You were on remand at that stage, and she recommended a residential rehabilitation program would be appropriate. She described to me how Refocus is very careful about whom they will accept; only being willing to take those serious about their rehabilitation, and who will be able to tolerate its intensity and the confronting nature of discussion groups.  There are also very limited numbers allowed into the full residential and transitional programs.  
229	Ms Brown describes you as having thrived through this program, and being looked upon highly amongst your peers.  She agreed with many of Mr Harvey's comments.  The expectation is that you will continue, even after leaving the transitional accommodation of Refocus, to continue to attend her at the Millswyn Clinic, attend Narcotics Anonymous meetings, and, if needed, she can supervise ongoing drug screens.  I note you have been clear throughout the period of your bail so far on those screens.
230	She regards you now as in the maintenance stage of your treatment, and thinks your progress is better than most, particularly as you did not start abusing drugs young enough to have brain damage from your drug use.  She can continue counselling you if you are on a Community Correction Order, or generally in the community.  
231	I have taken into account your time in this intensive residential rehabilitation, not only for its very considerable benefits for your rehabilitation, as I have just outlined, but also because it has been an extended period of time during which you have lived in a confined and supervised environment. Although not actual imprisonment, and not able to be counted strictly as pre-sentence detention, the initial twelve week intensive period I regard as restrictive of your movements to a similar degree as would have been imprisonment, and requiring very intensive application by you.  Further, as described, the time since then, that is since last December, in the transitional program, now about seven months, has also been highly structured, required you to live in that accommodation which is supervised and, according to Ms Brown, leaves little free time. As I have said, although this does not count formally as pre-sentence detention, I have moderated your sentence, although not by the exact equivalent number of days, to take into account that you have now spent over nine months living under considerable constraints on your everyday activities and subject to disciplines and supervision.  The case authority for doing that is Akoka.
232	You come before this court with no prior convictions, and that is to your credit.  As you too were apparently obtaining and using illegal drugs for several years, you cannot claim to have led a totally law abiding life, nor that the offending that brings you before this court was a sudden lapse by you.  Nevertheless, your lack of prior criminal history is relevant to your prospects of rehabilitation, especially combined with the very significant steps you have taken to address the drug use which led to your offending. As this is the first occasion when you are being sentenced by a court, it is your first opportunity to show that you can reform and establish yourself in a responsible future, and the steps you have been taking in the meantime signal a very serious attempt to do that.  
233	I have read personal references from three long-time friends who knew you through studies at school or university, and from your two younger sisters. They all describe you as supportive to them at various times and in various ways, and attest to your personal qualities.  They describe very considerable changes that they have noticed in your outlook and emotions over the period since you have been doing the Refocus Program.  I accept these as genuinely supportive views about you.  
234	I also note the content of the pre-sentence report that I requested, and on which I heard submissions last week. You were found suitable for a Community Correction Order.  That would apply whether imposed immediately, or to follow a term of imprisonment.  I note comments that you articulated clearly that there was more you could have done to prevent yourself from participating in problematic drug use.  Your ongoing rehabilitation was discussed in the context of reports on you from recent assessments, and the Refocus Program.  I note that you stated that since being in this program, you had built stronger relationships with your family, specifically, with your mother and sisters; having family dinners regularly on Sundays which had not been part of the prior arrangements or practice.  
235	I was urged by your counsel to sentence you to a Community Correction Order, and, in particular, not to impose sentences which would require you to return to prison.  The prosecution conceded that there is material indicating strong steps towards your rehabilitation, but nevertheless submitted that a combination sentence, that being a term of no more than twelve months imprisonment followed by a Community Correction Order, would not be within range.
236	I have already said that offences involving trafficking of drugs, particularly commercial quantity of drugs, makes your offending both objectively and subjectively very serious, and the need to deter others, that is general deterrence, and community denunciation, and community protection are dominant sentencing factors.  With no prior convictions and strong signs of rehabilitation, I do not regard specific deterrence as of great weight in your sentence – that is, that the sentence does not need to be so stern as to send the message to you not to reoffend.  It is my impression that you have learnt a very salutary lesson and have very real and genuine insight into how you came to this offending and why it should not occur again.
237	At your age, you are still to be regarded as youthful, and, as such, your rehabilitation is a significant sentencing factor, as it is in the community's interest that you proceed to reform and build a responsible life for yourself.  
238	I was referred to some cases in which other Judges of this court have found that the circumstances of offenders before them, fall into exceptional instances where, despite there having been serious offending, which would usually warrant substantial terms of imprisonment, they decided to impose less severe sentences, even non-custodial ones, and in particular where exceptionally strong rehabilitation is underway.
239	I take into account that you served approximately four and a half months in custody before obtaining bail. During that time, you detoxified from drugs, and after initial severe symptoms of depression, you learnt to cope with incarceration and began to look at your own behaviours to the extent that when first assessed by Mr Armstrong, you were already realising and expressing that your offending would have caused harm to people such as the prisoners you saw around you with drug problems.
240	While I do not find that there has been unusual or undue delay in your case reaching this stage for sentence, I am satisfied that you have spent the time since your arrest, and in now more than nine months on bail, doing all that you possibly could to rehabilitate yourself through an intense and confronting program, facing underlying causes of your drug and also alcohol abuse, recognising your triggers, and learning strategies to avoid relapse and to build a positive future life for yourself. It is in the community’s interests that this has occurred and such progress should be encouraged.
241	From the very strong evidence I have heard about your success so far through the Refocus Program, I am prepared to find that the nine months spent in it has been more constructive than I expect would have been that same nine months if remaining on remand in a prison environment.  That is not to be critical as such of prisons, but it is clear that the type of program and its individual application and intensity as provided through Refocus is simply not possible, nor available to someone in the prison system.
242	I am also satisfied that the time and expense that has been invested in you doing that program over the last nine months would be put at risk of being either lost,  or seriously diminished, if your rehabilitation were interrupted by returning you to prison at this stage.  You have not only progressed well and acquired insight into many factors that led to your drug use and, from that, your offending, and strategies to recognise triggers and avoid them in future, but you have also addressed personal issues of low self-esteem, family issues, and how to approach your own future more positively. I am satisfied that that progress is likely to be diminished if you were returned to prison at this stage. I also take into account that you have confidence in your current treating counsellors – a trust that took time to develop – and that you have established positive and supportive friendships amongst peers in your program, and re-established relationships with family and friends.
243	I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that were those current relationships and interactions all interrupted by your being returned to prison, there is a real risk that you will again find yourself associating with people with strong criminal connections, and be separated long term if not from family then from most of the other present positive peers, and return to the company you meet in prison.
244	Ultimately, although I recognise that the trafficking offences you committed would usually call for a longer term of imprisonment, I have decided not to interrupt your current rehabilitation, but to impose a quite lengthy Community Correction Order from here on, recognising the 4 ½ months you spent on remand. You will be required to perform unpaid community work and to undergo supervision and treatment conditions, which can be arranged to continue through your current therapists if thought suitable by community corrections assessors.
245	Viewed in its details, and as explained by the Court of Appeal in Boulton's case, such a sentence, that is, a substantial Community Correction Order following a shorter term of imprisonment, should be recognised as imposing serious punishment, which is sufficient, in addition to that period you have already served in prison, in my view, to fulfil the sentencing factors of general deterrence and community denunciation as well as rehabilitation and reintegration of you into the community.
246	I shall explain the details of your sentence specifically shortly.
247	What I will do now is call a break for everyone's convenience and comfort and then resume and give the details of the three offenders whose sentences I am going to complete today.  I will ask for the three who are in custody to be - sorry, just before I do that, do you want the chance to talk to Mr Van?
248	MR KELLY:  If I might have a quick moment, Your Honour.
249	HER HONOUR:  I will ask that Mr Van be kept in the courtroom so that his counsel or solicitor can talk to him because of what has developed.
250	Could Mr Fatho and Mr Mansoor be taken from the courtroom before the court is stood down?  It will be a 10-minute break and I extend the bail of Mr Huynh and Mr Verrina, in the meantime.  Yes.  Yes.  Have I covered everybody?  With Mr Van staying here for the moment.
251		(Short adjournment.)
252	HER HONOUR:  All right, it looks like there is some complication in relation to some of the ancillary orders, but I am going to leave that to deal with after I have announced the body of the sentences which is what no doubt each individual offender's most interested in.
253	I am going to start with you Aysar Fatho, will you stand please.  I have already explained at length this morning the reasons for the decisions I have reached in relation to your sentence.  On each of the charges on the indictment, you are convicted and sentenced as follows.  
254	On Charge 1 of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, four and a half years’ imprisonment.  On Charge 2 of burglary, twelve months’ imprisonment.  On Charges 3, 4 and 5, each being a charge of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, I impose an aggregate sentence of two years’ imprisonment.  On Charge 6 of trafficking methylamphetamine, I impose eighteen months’ imprisonment.  On Charges 7 and 8, each being a charge of possession of a drug of dependence, that is the Xanax and cannabis, I impose an aggregate sentence of three months’ imprisonment.
255	I direct that six months of the sentence imposed on Charge 2, six months of the sentence imposed on Charges 3, 4 and 5 and four months of the sentence imposed on Charge 6, be served cumulatively on each other and on the sentence imposed on Charge 1.  That makes a total effective sentence on the charges on the indictment of five years and ten months imprisonment.  
256	On Summary Charge 12 of dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment.  On the Summary Charge 18 of committing an indictable offence, namely trafficking a drug of dependence whilst on bail, I impose three months’ imprisonment.  I direct that five months of the sentence imposed on Summary Charge 12, that is the dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, be served cumulatively on the other sentences imposed today, on indictment number J11098636. The sentence on the other summary charge will be totally concurrent.  
257	That makes a total overall sentence imposed today of six years’ and three months’ imprisonment.  I set a period of four years, minimum term, before you can be eligible for parole.  I declare 439 days of pre-sentence detention reckoned served, and direct that that be noted in court records.  It will be deducted administratively from the total sentence and from the non-parole period.  On my calculation, you will have a little over two years and nine and a half months, from now, before becoming eligible for parole.  It will be, of course, a decision for the Parole Board as to when you may be released on parole.
258	I state for the purposes of s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act, that but for your pleas of guilty and had all other circumstances been the same, I would have imposed overall total effective sentences of eight and a half years, with a non-parole period of six years.  
259	Now, I was asked to make a disposal order, a firearm forfeiture order and a forfeiture order in respect of you.  I have not managed to check those and which charges they relate to, but they were not opposed and I will be making the orders, if not this afternoon, in due course.  You can take a seat now.
260	John Mansoor, would you stand please.  For you too, I have already explained the reasons I have reached the decision I have.  
261	John Mansoor, on the charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence - can you hear me?  
262	ACCUSED MANSOOR:  Yes.
263	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  On the charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment.  I set a minimum period before you can be eligible for parole of sixteen months.  I declare 439 days of pre-sentence detention reckoned served, and direct that that be noted in court records.  It will be deducted administratively from both the head sentence and the non-parole period.  Whilst it is a decision for the Parole Board as to when you might be paroled, on my calculation you have less than two more months to serve before being eligible for parole.
264	I state for the purpose of s.6AAA, that had you not pleaded guilty, but been found guilty of this charge, and all other factors being the same, I would have imposed a sentence of four and a half years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of three years.  
265	Now, finally, in relation to you, the prosecution applied for an order for the taking of a forensic sample from you.  That is to enable your DNA to be placed on the national database.  Owing to the nature of this offending, and as it was not opposed, I am satisfied that that order should be made.  I limit it to what is called a scraping from the mouth, and I do not include, as a default, the taking of a blood sample.  The sample will be taken by rubbing a swab against the inside of your mouth and that is not painful, and, unless you resist, it should not feel too intrusive.  But I warn you, as I must, that if you resist the taking of that sample, authorised officers can use reasonable force to take it.  
266	Now, is that the end of the ancillary orders sought for Mr Mansoor or was there a forfeiture one of some sort?
267	MR SAUNDERS:  There's a forfeiture order, Your Honour.
268	HER HONOUR:  This is for - what's sought to be forfeited?
269	MR SAUNDERS:  A phone.
270	HER HONOUR:  Used in connection with the trafficking?
271	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes.
272	HER HONOUR:  All right well I will sign that order when I have checked the order and seen it.  There is a lot of logistic difficulty putting this altogether at the moment.  All right, Mr Mansoor – you can take a seat.  
273	Mr Huynh, will you stand please.  I have explained the reasons for your sentence also.  Ngoc Huynh, on each of the charges before me, you are convicted.  On Charge 3, you are sentenced to imprisonment for 139 days, to be followed by a Community Correction Order, which will commence today, and last for three years.  I declare 139 days of pre-sentence detention as reckoned served, and direct that that be noted in court records.  That effectively is time served, so as I say, the Community Correction Order commences today.
274	The conditions on that Community Correction Order are the following.  Three hundred hours of unpaid community work to be performed over the three year period of the order.  I direct that up to 120 hours of that work can be credited from your attendances under treatment and rehabilitative programs.  I impose a condition for supervision.  Condition for assessment and treatment as directed for both drug and alcohol issues, including testing as required. I impose a condition that you attend as directed for assessment and treatment for mental health disorders.  As I have already said, I expect that working with community corrections officers, those conditions will work in with the treatment and counsellors you are already seeing, but that will have to be put in place by the Corrections officers.  
275	I also impose the condition for judicial monitoring.  I will set a date for the first monitoring session at 9.45 am on Friday 25 October of this year. The means that on that date, you come to the court, you look up which courtroom I am sitting in, and you come before me.  I will have a report on how you are going on the Community Correction Order, and you do not need to be represented by a lawyer, or you can if you choose on that day.  It is usually no more than ten or fifteen minutes, but I am updated on how you have been going. I have set it at a time which I think gives an appropriate time for you to get started and start engaging with the Community Corrections officers and show what you are doing in the way of ongoing rehabilitation. Now, if at that stage you were to have employment which you could not easily leave to attend court that morning, that timing or date can be changed, but you must give notice of that to the Community Corrections officers and to the court by notifying my associate, or my associate's chambers inbox, of that.  
276	Now, in addition to those conditions, all usual terms of a Community Correction Order apply.  I know they have been explained to you, I will summarise them again briefly to you shortly, but I want to go on with the sentencing on the other charges now.
277	On each of Charges 1 and 2 on the indictment, each being of trafficking in a drug of dependence, you are convicted, and I impose, the same Community Correction Order that I am imposing in respect of Charge 3.  I do that pursuant to s.40(1) of the Sentencing Act, as I am satisfied that the charges arise from the same series of offences and are of a similar character, that is, the charges under Charges 1, 2 and 3.
278	Now, I move on then to the summary charges.  On Summary Charge 16, which is dealing in property suspected of being proceeds of crime, with conviction, I impose a Community Correction Order to last for eight months, commencing today.  The sole condition on that order will be that you perform fifty hours of unpaid community work.  I want to make clear that is in addition to the community work condition that I have imposed on the other Community Correction Order. As community work is the only condition I am imposing on this shorter Community Correction Order, once that work is completed, the order is completed. You have got eight months in which to do that work, but if you complete it earlier, the order is over.  I am not imposing on that order the supervision or the rehabilitative conditions.  But it is to mark that as a separate, in my view, quite serious offence that needs a separate punishment.  
279	Now, on Summary Charge 17, there will be a conviction recorded, but no further order.  That is the possession of the cartridge ammunition and I had absolutely no information allowing me to assess what that was for. 
280	Now, I come back to speak about both of the Community Correction Orders I have imposed.  First of all, the one that is imposed on Charges 1, 2 and 3, is not an aggregate sentence I put as a footnote.  It is under s.40(1) of the Sentencing Act.  On that Community Correction Order, and also on the shorter eight month one on the summary charge, all usual terms of a Community Correction Order apply.  
281	Those are that within two working days of today, that means by Monday at 4 o'clock, Monday of next week at 4 o'clock, you have to report to the nearest Community Corrections Office to where you are living. We have to clarify which that is.  I believe you are still in the transitional accommodation in Brunswick, so I am assuming there is a Brunswick Community Corrections Office, but I do not think that was detailed in the report.  We will have to check that. But that has to be - you will have to report by 4 o'clock, Monday.  
1	
282	During the whole of the Community Correction Orders’ duration, you will have to keep community corrections officers informed of any change of address of where you are living or of where you are working, and you are to give them notice of that within two clear working days of a change of address occurring. Of course, if you first obtain employment and what that address is.  That is to allow them to be able to contact you. You will have to, throughout the Orders, obey all lawful directions and instructions of community corrections officers.  You have to submit to the visits they impose.  You are not allowed to leave the State of Victoria without prior permission from community corrections officers and, most importantly, you are not to commit any other offence that could be punished by imprisonment during the course of the Community Correction Order.
283	Now, of course, you are facing punishment here for very serious charges.  Anything like that, you know, you have heard already from me, carry terms of imprisonment, but so do a number of other, what may seem lesser offences, including possession of drugs in most circumstances. Now, you will have to be aware that if you commit any such offence, or if you fail to comply with the directions of doing the programs that have been ordered, including the unpaid community work, you could be brought back before me for what is called a “contravention” proceeding for breaching the Community Correction Orders. Depending on all the circumstances that have arisen and how much you have completed of the orders, what your personal circumstances are and also depending on whether the breach consists of further offending, there are options available for me to either confirm the order or to vary it, including by extending its terms, or to cancel the order and to resentence you on the charges for which it was imposed.
284	I have to ask, do you understand all the conditions and terms of those two Community Correction Orders?
285	ACCUSED HUYNH:  Yes.
286	HER HONOUR:  Do you agree to comply?
287	ACCUSED HUYNH:  Yes.
288	HER HONOUR:  All right.  I will shortly have these orders produced and you will have to sign and I will sign.
289	I note that in relation to you, there was an application for a forensic sample to be taken.  As I have just explained to Mr Mansoor, that means that a sample is sought to be taken to place your DNA on the national database.
290	Owing to the nature of the offences, and it was not opposed on your behalf, I consider that that order should be made.  I limit it to a scraping from the mouth, which is actually the rubbing of a swab on the inside of the cheek, and, unless you resist, that is not intrusive and not painful. I warn you, as I must, that if you do resist, an authorised officer can use reasonable force to take it.
291	Now, the order I make in respect of that, because you are going to be in the community and not in custody, sets out what you have to do which is a complicated direction. You wait 28 days from now, then you have got a 28-day period in which to visit the appropriate police station to have that sample taken.  There is, it is put into this order, a police station at 630 Sydney Road, Brunswick, which presumably is the closest if you are still in that accommodation in 28 days' time. So, you wait four weeks, and then you have got four weeks in which to go and have the sample taken.  You will be given a copy of this order to take away with you and I am sure your lawyers will remind you.
292	Now, was there a further order in relation to Mr Huynh?
293	MR SAUNDERS:  Your Honour, firearms forfeiture in respect to the ammunition.
294	HER HONOUR:  Yes.
295	MR SAUNDERS:  And there is a general forfeiture order in respect of cash, rings, watches, phones, various ‑ ‑ ‑
296	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  Well, the cash and the rings or the watches were part of the summary charge.
297	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes.
298	HER HONOUR:  So they relate to that.
299	MR SAUNDERS:  It is actually the summary charge.
300	HER HONOUR:  And his phone may well relate to the trafficking charges or is it ‑ ‑ ‑
301	MR SAUNDERS:  There may be a laptop but my instructor will sort that out with Your Honour's associate.
302	HER HONOUR:  All right.
303	MR SAUNDERS:  But, yes, in general terms, they relate in that manner.
304	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  Well, I gather they are not opposed and depending on what they relate to, I will make the orders but ‑ ‑ ‑
305	MR SAUNDERS:  If Your Honour pleases.
306	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ the problem is a lot of this has to be filled in on the actual form.
307	Mr Huynh, you can take a seat and you have to wait to sign the Community Correction Orders.
308	Yes.
309	MR SAUNDERS:  Sorry, Your Honour.  When Your Honour is finished, there is a matter I need to raise.
310	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  All right, but in the technical part, I think that is all I have to say on each of those three sentences.  Have I overlooked any charges or does the arithmetic not add up or something else is wrong?
311	MR SAUNDERS:  No, but in relation to Mr Huynh, Your Honour, I do not know that it is compulsory but I think it is preferable and regarded as appropriate that Your Honour puts a 6AAA statement in respect of him.  I do not believe that has been done.
312	HER HONOUR:  Absolutely.  Sorry, I had it set out and - sorry.  Yes, of course.
313	Yes.  I have muddled up pieces of paper here but, Mr Huynh, you will need to stand again for this.
314	I need to state what your sentence would have been had you been found guilty of the same charges not having pleaded guilty.  It is a particularly artificial statement in your circumstances, because, first of all, there is the inclusion of the summary charges, but in particular, I have put greatest weight on matters that probably would not have happened, that is, your serious application in this drug rehabilitation program with Refocus and the insight you have shown as a result of that, that convinces me that there are stronger prospects for your rehabilitation and you not reoffending.
315	Now, as I say, they would not necessarily have proceeded in that way had you been disputing the charges but, nevertheless, I must state on the assumption you would have gone to trial on those charges and all other personal matters being the same, I would have imposed a total effective sentence of four years and six months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.
316	You can take a seat again now.
317	I am sorry, I did have it on one of the pieces of paper.  Is there anything else I have overlooked in the formal orders?
318	MR SAUNDERS:  Not that I am aware of, Your Honour.  Thank you.
319	HER HONOUR:  All right.  Now, there remain the logistic arrangements from here on.  Mr Huynh has to stay to sign his Community Correction Orders which will be produced by the computerised system and they have to be signed in front of me.
320	I am aware there are a large number of people in court.  After a sentencing such as this, I would normally allow no direct contact but close family members to approach the dock and speak but it is logistically hard if they all do that together and I do not want to create a difficult arrangement.
321	What I will do is give in turn, a brief time. If there are family members for Mr Aysar Fatho. There is to be no physical contact but you can approach and talk to him in the dock before I have him removed from the court.  No one is moving so I am assuming ‑ ‑ ‑
322	MR DICKINSON:  May I approach Mr Huynh just to find out about the corrections office.
323	HER HONOUR:  Yes.
324	MR DICKINSON:  I think it might be Carlton.
325	HER HONOUR:  The others are not to be approached until we have cleared one at a time – other than by their lawyers.
326	I am now in a position to - I am going to deal with Mr Fatho first to try to keep some order in the matters.  I am signing that order now and I - I am in a position to have that order finalised.  I ask that Mr Fatho be removed from the courtroom at this stage please.
327	Mr Fatho, your counsel will speak to you downstairs.  The total overall is six years and three months' imprisonment, four years’ non-parole period. And 439 days (1 year, 2 months in round terms) has been declared reckoned served.
328	Would you remove Mr Fatho from the courtroom now please?
329	I am signing the order now for Mr Van adjourning the matter till 10.30 tomorrow morning.
330	MR KELLY:  10.30, Your Honour?
331	HER HONOUR:  10.30 and remanding him until then.
332	MR KELLY:  As Your Honour pleases.
333	HER HONOUR:  Is anyone needing to speak to him before then?
334	MR KELLY:  I have spoken with Mr Van, Your Honour.
335	HER HONOUR:  You have.  I apologise again to family members who have come from interstate but I will give them a chance to talk to him in the morning.
336	MR KELLY:  As Your Honour pleases.
337	HER HONOUR:  All right.  Could Mr Van be removed from the courtroom please?
338	Now, that leaves in custody or to stay in custody Mr Mansoor.  While I am checking the formal orders, if there are close family members who want to approach but not have physical contact with him, I will let that occur and if his lawyer wishes to approach.
1	
339	Mr Dickinson?
340	MR DICKINSON:  Your Honour, I am told that the nearest corrections office is at the Melbourne Justice Service Centre at 50 Franklin Street in Melbourne.
341	HER HONOUR:  Well, we will put that into the order.  I will explain this to Mr Huynh and after the first attendance, if there is a more convenient place for him to attend, they can arrange to have him transferred.
342	MR DICKINSON:  Certainly, Your Honour.
343	HER HONOUR:  Sorry Ms Giorgianni I didn't realise - I'd forgotten you're acting for both ‑ ‑ ‑
344	MS GIORGIANNI:  That's all right.
345	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ Mr Fatho and Mr Mansoor.  All right, I have signed the order for Mr Mansoor.  Mr Mansoor, the sentence for you is three years imprisonment with a non-parole period of sixteen months, and given the time you have already spent in custody, that leaves less than two months, although it is of course up to the Parole Board to decide on the time of granting parole.  Could Mr Mansoor be removed from the courtroom now please.
346	All right, notwithstanding that at the foot it says it is p.2 of 1, I am going to have my associate to bring to counsel to - both prosecutor and you Mr Dickinson – to check that that Community Correction Orders reflect what I have said.  I just have to check that it - all right.  Well it should also have Charges 1 and 2.  No but this, that is the whole problem.  This is the same Community Correction Order – it has to mention Charges 1 and 2 and 3.  Sorry it is not ready.
347	At least the shorter Community Correction Order that goes on the summary charge does seem straight forward and that could be shown to both - just to Mr Dickinson and Mr Saunders to check that Community Correction Order before it is to be signed.  That is not the final version yet, but it will not be changed.  
348	The challenge is the other Community Correction Order, to get it to relate to the right charges.  The computer does not like my idea. This is the larger Community Correction Order and the one that is on the three charges on the indictment and although it produced a p.2 of 1, p.1 of 1 seems to be enough.  Assuming there is no problem with that?
349	MR DICKINSON:  I'm just looking for the judicial monitoring.
350	HER HONOUR:  It should be down the bottom somewhere I think.
351	ASSOCIATE:  It might not ‑ ‑ ‑
352	HER HONOUR:  It might not have come through.
353	ASSOCIATE:  Apologies, I think that was - I have to (indistinct words).
354	HER HONOUR:  All right.  Thank you for noticing that.  The first draft I saw that was p.2 of 1 had it.  Thank you Mr Dickinson.
355	MR DICKINSON:  Probably why it got to p.2, Your Honour.
356	HER HONOUR:  Very well, we'll put that one aside.  That is the forensic sample order for Mr Huynh.  One copy to the prosecution and one copy Mr Dickinson.  The forensic sample order for Mansoor, one copy to the prosecution and one to Ms Giorgianni.  
357	Mr Huynh there are two Community Correction Orders for you to sign.  One of your lawyers might approach and check if you understand it.  My associate will bring it to you to sign where it says 'Signature of offender' and I want you to take the time to read it and make sure you understand them.  Once you have signed, I will sign and you will get a copy to take home.  I will sign those two Community Correction Orders.
358	Now a copy of these has to be made for the prosecution and for Mr Huynh to take away with him, so that is those.  All right, on having those copied Mr Huynh, when you receive your copy, you are then free to leave the dock and to go and I will see you again on 25 October.  As I say, if you happen to be employed or there is a real reason why you cannot come then, you can notify in advance, but make sure Community Corrections know and the court knows. Otherwise you are to report by 4 pm next Monday at the Franklin Street office of Community Corrections, in Melbourne and if that proves to be an unsuitable address, they will arrange in due course to change to a different office where you will be required to report wherever is closest to where you can make it on time.
359	All right, Mr Verrina, I did extend your bail earlier in the day till 10.30 tomorrow morning and your matter is adjourned till 10.30 tomorrow morning.  
360	MR COLE:  As Your Honour pleases.
361	HER HONOUR:  I will sign the rest of those forfeiture orders and ancillary orders in chambers and have copies forwarded.  There is just ‑ ‑ ‑
362	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes.
363	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ -so much paper at the moment.
364	MR SAUNDERS:  Thank you, Your Honour, that'll be fine.
365	HER HONOUR:  They've been put on the ‑ ‑ ‑ 
366	MR SAUNDERS:  System.
367	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ court records and the system, but the actual signing of the orders, I've just got piles of individual pages and don't know which attaches to which at the moment.  All right ‑ ‑ ‑
368	MR SAUNDERS:  No, thank you Your Honour.
369	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ otherwise this matter will be adjourned part-heard for the other two people to be sentenced, commencing 10.30 tomorrow morning.
1	
370	MR SAUNDERS:  If Your Honour pleases.
371	MS GIORGIANNI:  As Your Honour pleases.
372	ADJOURNED UNTIL FRIDAY 12 JULY 2019

12 JULY 2019
HER HONOUR:
373	James Van, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence on 20 March 2018, and one charge of conspiring with Aysar Fatho and others, to traffic in a commercial quantity of 1,4-Butanediol between 23 March and 28 April 2018.  You have also pleaded guilty to a summary charge of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.
374	The maximum penalty for the charge of trafficking is 15 years’ imprisonment, and for conspiracy to traffic in a commercial quantity, it is 25 years’ imprisonment.  Despite the charge of conspiring to traffic in a commercial quantity having the same maximum penalty as trafficking in a commercial quantity, s.5(2H) of the Sentencing Act does not apply, as the conspiracy charge is not a Category 2 offence.  The maximum penalty for the summary charge is two years imprisonment.
375	You were involved with a group or syndicate, including Mr Huynh and allegedly at least two other people, that had agreed to purchase amounts of the drug 1,4-Butanediol (which I will abbreviate to 1,4-BD) from Aysar Fatho and the group or syndicate led by him. 
376	Charge 1 against you is of trafficking a drug of dependence.  It is put on the basis that on 20 March 2018, you purchased 600 litres of the product, which Aysar Fatho was putting forward as being 1,4-BD. You arranged with Aysar Fatho that people you called your “boys,” would pick up the product on 20 March 2018.  Apparently, when your so called “boys” arrived to collect the product, they had not brought a van to transport it, and borrowed Aysar Fatho's van.  You and Aysar Fatho then discussed, by telephone, the supply of a further 1,000 litres of 1,4-BD.  Aysar Fatho later confirmed that your “boys” had collected 200 litres (which I take to be one barrel of the liquid) so far and then confirmed delivery of it, and receipt of half of the cash from your “boys,” with the other half of the cash to be paid when they had completed the delivery. This charge is based on your involvement in that transaction that day, and it is not alleged to have involved a commercial quantity, although clearly there was a substantial amount of the substance – as I understand it, three barrels each of 200 litres – requiring a van to transport it.  
377	Charge 2 against you is based on your involvement between 23 March and 28 April 2018, in seeking to have Aysar Fatho replace the bad quality product he had supplied with proper quality (or actual) 1,4-BD. The conduct under this charge followed from the transaction with you on 20 March, and the prosecution accepts that it flows from it, so that a sentence on Charge 1 should be wholly concurrent with the sentence on Charge 2.  Your conduct involves the complaints from your group about the quality of the substance already supplied, which unknown to you and to Mr Fatho, was not in fact 1,4-BD at all, although you all were intending to be dealing in that drug of dependence.  As I understand it, some of the supply had also been to Mr Huynh on 7 April and 17 April, which were the subject of specific charges against him.    
378	You and Mr Huynh, and other associates, were to return the bad quality product and receive 525 kilograms of better (in fact actual) 1,4-BD in exchange.  That exchange was to occur on 28 April 2018, but was never completed because police intervened at the point when the Fatho group was loading it onto a trailer, shortly after 5 pm.  The amount intended to be received by you and your associates was 525 kilograms, which constitutes some 260 times the threshold amount for a commercial quantity of the mixture or substance containing this drug.
379	I must assess the objective seriousness of your offending, and your personal role and culpability for it.  As I said yesterday in relation to your co-offenders, the maximum penalties reflect how seriously offending of this nature is regarded, and that is a sign of its objective seriousness.  I also referred to the general approach of courts as to the undoubtedly harmful impact on the community of drug trafficking, and of the role of individuals who may only take a limited part along the way, still facilitating the overall distribution and supply of drugs.
380	It is not alleged that you were head of your syndicate or group.  Indeed, the prosecution concedes that there is no evidence on the factual summary to enable any conclusion to be drawn as to your or Mr Huynh's relative positions or seniority in the group, or syndicate of which you were both part.  The prosecution points out that you used the expression “my boys” when arranging for people to come to collect a delivery, or make a payment.  Whether that meant associates, or people actually answering to you, is not possible for me to determine.  But I do conclude that you were not subordinate to at least those other people.
381	From the factual summary, it is clear that you conducted some phone calls with Mr Fatho for Charge 1, in ordering product or negotiating price and, further, that you conveyed complaints about quality, and discussed delivery arrangements.  You were well aware of, and participated in, some conversations with Aysar Fatho in relation to arranging the intended exchange on 28 April to receive proper 1,4-Butanediol to replace the poor quality product.  I am unable to find, as I have said, whether or not you were directing the people you call your “boys,” but I am satisfied that your role was not wholly subordinate.
382	I cannot determine as between you and Mr Huynh whether one was more senior in the group than the other, so I have treated you and him as of the same relative seniority amongst your group.  
383	It is not suggested that you stood to share in profits personally from your involvement, but, ultimately, your involvement was for money because you, as with most of your co-offenders, sought to earn money to support your own drug habit.  I have said for others, and repeat for you, that the fact of an offender having their own drug abuse problem, and being motivated into offending to support the expense of that, will not generally be an excuse, and it will only be mitigatory in very limited circumstances.  However, it can place the offending in context, and is not aggravated by the motive being purely for personal greed. Although your personal history includes a traumatic event and some psychiatric instability, which I shall discuss later, I am not satisfied that your drug abuse history can be regarded as mitigatory in your case.    
384	You were arrested on 7 May 2018 and remanded in custody until you obtained bail on 14 June last year.  That was directly to a residential rehabilitation program, to which I will refer shortly, and it was facilitated through a drug and alcohol counsellor, Ms Amanda Brown, with whom you had previously attended some rehabilitation.  I will turn to details of that later.
385	You pleaded guilty to these charges in November 2018 at what is accepted by the prosecution to be a reasonably early opportunity.  That was after negotiations at the committal hearing, which were clearly extensive for you and for your co-offenders, and like the co-offenders here whom I have sentenced, you did not require witnesses to be cross-examined. You are entitled to some leniency for that, that is, for your pleas of guilty.  It has had the utilitarian value of saving the community the time and cost of disputed hearings, and witnesses the inconvenience of having to give evidence.  It also reflects that you, like those of your co-offenders here, have taken responsibility for your offending, and it reflects remorse, which you have also expressed in some other ways.  I shall tell you when I have imposed your sentence, what it would have been had you not pleaded guilty.
386	I turn now to your personal circumstances.  
387	You are now aged 25. You were 24 at the time of the offending.  You were born in Melbourne to Vietnamese parents.  Your parents had each escaped Vietnam, but spent many years in camps in other countries before being able to come to Australia.  You and your two brothers were born here.  You have expressed your appreciation that your parents sought to bring you up well, and that you and your siblings are lucky to have had the opportunity to grow up in Australia.  They all now live in Queensland, where they run a business. I assume a number are still in court today to support you.
388	You lived in the St Albans area until you were about 14, when your parents moved the family because they were concerned about some aspects of the community there.  However, I am told that on that move, you felt uprooted from friends and school and that you did not settle well at the new school or establish a peer group as you had enjoyed previously.  I am told that you were exposed to more people in the new area who used drugs than you had been in the past.  I am also told there was some disruption because the High School you were attending in Year 12 closed halfway through the school year, and you had to move school again.  
389	You moved to a school in Bundoora, which also offered training in automotive mechanics, which you undertook, intending to pursue motor mechanics as your future occupation.  However, that aim was interrupted by a tragic and traumatic incident when you were still aged 17.  Apparently you and some friends visited another friend, all of you doing the same mechanics course.  You found that other friend crushed underneath a car he had been working on.  The experience of finding him, and trying to free and resuscitate him, unsuccessfully, was understandably very traumatic for you, and I accept that that experience put an end to your ambition to become a mechanic, and also caused you ongoing distress or disturbance.
390	Meanwhile, during your Year 9 at school, you had met and become close to another student named Casey Nguyen, who describes herself in a long and fulsome letter to the Court as your partner.  She also describes the history of your relationship over some ten years, being “a lot of breakups and makeups.”  At one stage you travelled together, but it is unclear to me whether that was while you were still at school or subsequently.
1	
391	I gather that while still at school, she became pregnant, but by then you had broken up, and she subsequently suffered a miscarriage.  I am told that you attribute your use of methylamphetamine, or at least its dramatic increase, as being a reaction to your distress that Casey suffered that miscarriage.  
392	You then suffered a severe psychotic episode, such that you were admitted as an inpatient to a psychiatric ward at the Northern Hospital, where you were treated for a number of weeks. That was said, at the time, to be a drug related psychotic episode, and there has been mention that you may have been told there was a diagnosis of bipolar disorder.  However, the hospital records have not been obtained, and Mr Michael Crewdson, who examined you a couple of months ago, has some doubts about that diagnosis, which I will discuss shortly.
393	I am told you were still in your teens at that stage, and that this was towards the end of 2011.  On discharge from that hospital, I am told that you resumed using drugs – cannabis, methylamphetamine, and cocaine – although, I note that a history subsequently taken from you by Ms Amanda Brown was to the effect that you remained drug free for about twelve months after that discharge. I am not in a position to clarify that.  
394	You had been visited while in the Northern Hospital by Casey Nguyen, although the two of you were no longer together.  She wanted to support you through your mental health illness, but it was not until 2013 that you apparently reached out to her to reconnect, and the two of you reunited and reformed your relationship.  That was at first very happy, and you had a daughter together, who is now aged five.
395	Ms Nguyen had started a university course before the birth of your daughter, and returned to and completed that Bachelor of Health Science Degree at Monash University afterwards.  She completed it at the end of 2017, and she says that when you saw how proud her family were of her achieving that, you decided to enrol in tertiary studies to make your family proud of you.  She writes that you enrolled in a Diploma of Business at RMIT in February 2018, and successfully completed the first unit in the first half of that first semester.  I note that this must have been around the time of the offending for which I am to sentence you. I find it difficult to accept that you were really committed to completing this course at that time.  
396	You were arrested and remanded into custody on 7 May 2018, and as I have said, did not obtain bail until mid-June.  Casey says that you had intended after your release from rehabilitation to re-enrol, but decided not to do so awaiting the outcome of this case.  
397	Ms Nguyen and your daughter now live in the same household as your parents and brothers in Queensland, and they are part of your family.  They were all in Queensland at the time you were arrested for these charges, but Casey says they returned to Melbourne after your arrest in May 2018 to support you.  She writes that you and she had been trying to have further children without success, until she became pregnant, presumably when you were on bail late last year, and that baby is due this September.  Your being in prison at this time is clearly an extra strain on her.  She has continued to work to make ends meet, supporting herself and your daughter, who started school this year.  She does have the support of your other family to assist her, for which she is grateful.
398	Apparently Casey herself is not a user of drugs and never has approved of you doing so.  Indeed it is your drug use and involvement in criminal activity that had led to you being in Melbourne alone, while she lived with your daughter in Queensland at the time of this offending.  I am told that you were living with her and your daughter in Melbourne until November 2017.  I take it that by the time of your offending in March and April 2018, you were still in Melbourne, but they were not, or at least not living with you.
399	You obtained bail, as I have said, on 14 June last year, on condition that you enter a residential rehabilitation program at the Hader Clinic.  You had spent 38 or 39 days in custody until then.  You remained in that program until December last year, and after discharge from it, your bail was varied for you to live at your family's Melbourne house.  You continued attending AA and NA meetings at least twice a week, and also were attending counselling with Ms Amanda Brown, a drug and alcohol counsellor at the Millswyn Clinic, and she says you had made considerable progress in addressing your addiction and psychological health.  Your family observed you to be more attentive and focused on rekindling your relationship with your partner.
400	However, you were arrested in late April of this year for matters that you intend to dispute.  You were remanded in custody on those and as a result, I was asked on 1 May of this year to revoke bail on the current matters, which I did.  Your pre-sentence detention being the combination of the period after your initial arrest until you were released on bail, and then from when I revoked bail up to today, totals 111 days, and that will count towards your sentence.
401	You have a criminal history commencing in 2012 before the Children's Court.  The matters were not as serious as those that bring you before the court here, but they commence with driving offences, including reckless conduct endangering serious injury.  For the first offences you received a good behaviour bond.  Some months later, you were before an adult court on further charges including possession of drugs, recklessly causing injury and attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception.  For those you were placed on a Community Correction Order.
402	During 2014, you were dealt with for contravening that Community Correction Order, with further drug related offending, and the order was varied including treatment and rehabilitation conditions.  
403	In 2016, you were dealt with for offences including trafficking methylamphetamine, and possession of firearms and ammunition, and you served a sentence of 200 days imprisonment, followed by another Community Correction Order.  
404	I accept that an ongoing drug habit, together with mental health instability, was most likely connected with this offending, but it would appear that the shock of some months imprisonment in 2016, and the rehabilitative and therapeutic aspects of Community Correction Orders, had not been sufficient to remove you from use of drugs or criminally connected behaviour.  In light of this prior history, specific deterrence must be a factor in your sentencing – that is, to get the message through to you by stern punishment to try to deter you from further offending.  
405	I was presented with evidence as to your considerable attempts to address your drug addiction over the years, and also what mental health problems may have contributed to it.  It seems that in January 2016, when remanded in custody for other matters, quite possibly those I have referred to as having been dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court that April, you were assessed by Ms Amanda Brown, a drug and alcohol counsellor. As a result, you were bailed to undertake a long term rehabilitation program while living in the community with your family. According to Ms Brown, you engaged in that program, and in counselling with her, enthusiastically, and with considerable success.  She says you remained drug free for the eight months of the program and she believed for longer.  
406	In March 2018, she was asked to engage with you again in treatment, as you had relapsed into drug use.  At that time you told her that cannabis was your main drug of choice.  It is not clear to me whether any treatment did occur at that stage, and quite possibly it did not. As the offending for which I sentence you occurred on 20 March and between 23 March and 28 April, if there was treatment underway, it was not deterring you from engaging in the drug trafficking conduct for which I am to sentence you.  
407	You had been arrested in March 2018, and I infer that was when contact was made again with Ms Brown.  You were apparently arrested then in respect of an alleged affray which I am told had occurred in January of that year.  You were bailed on a date in March 2018, and it is your breach of that bail by the offending for which I sentence you that is the subject of the summary charge against you of committing an indictable offence while on bail.
408	It would seem that the offending for which I am sentencing you followed almost immediately after that grant of bail, and continued over the following five weeks or so.  Whether or not you had refrained from drug use during that time, it is clear that you did not refrain from criminal offending which, moreover, was of a nature that facilitated and enabled drug use by others.  
409	Ms Brown was asked to assess you again in May 2018, when you were remanded for the offences that are now before me.  It was her view that you were suitable for a further rehabilitation program, but this time a residential program because the previous non-custodial one had been tried and you had not sustained your abstinence from drugs.
410	As I have already said, you were released on bail on 14 June 2018 into the residential program of the Hader Clinic in Geelong, where you undertook the 90 day primary program of intense highly structured and fully supervised treatment.  Following that, you entered the secondary care program where more independence and personal responsibilities were allowed, but still with daily programs and individual therapy sessions, as well as daily attendance at NA meetings and rostered work assignments, with regular psychiatric and medication review. Apart from cannabinoids being present on a screen taken only six days after your entry to that clinic, all further drug screens were negative.  
411	You were discharged after completing successfully that 180 day rehabilitation program, in mid-December 2018, and your bail was varied to allow you to live in the community.  You then resumed consultations with Ms Brown, and according to her report and the oral evidence she gave before me, you continued regular attendance at NA and AA meetings, weekly or fortnightly attendance at counselling appointments with her, regular drug screens which were clear up to the last one taken under her supervision which was in mid-April this year.
412	She believed you were positive and future focused and had learnt much through the rehabilitation process about your underlying feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem and how to counter those, making you more confident in yourself whilst still acknowledging your mistakes.  She believes you had been brought to realise how you had become self-centred and hurt people, particularly your partner and your family, because of your addiction.
413	Ms Brown acknowledged that you had relapsed in the past, and said that experience shows that those heavily addicted to drugs can take many attempts before they finally succeed in avoiding relapse.  I accept that that is acknowledged experience.  I accept you are still young, with an extensive history with substance abuse, and you have made a concerted effort on this opportunity, and she says you have expressed your gratitude to her for the support and guidance along the way.  She believes that you are honest about your relapses and open to continuing to build on your recovery gains. Ms Brown last saw you in April, before you were arrested on other charges for which you are still remanded.  
414	I also read a report and heard oral evidence from Mr Michael Crewdson, a clinical and forensic psychologist who was asked to provide a psychological assessment and opinion of you.  He had interviewed you twice by video link and once in person, whilst you have been in custody this year.  He also had telephone conversations with your partner and with your mother.  He found you to be pleasant, polite and cooperative.  He said you were finding incarceration difficult and you missed contact with your child and partner.
415	It was his view that you have a somewhat complex psychological condition, for which he has made a tentative diagnosis only.  He calls it “cyclothymic,” that is, ups and downs in mood level where there will be interacting levels of anxiety that can be quite extreme and dysthymic, rather than a depressive component. He distinguishes that from bipolar affective disorder, due to the frequency of the alterations in your mood.  He believes yours is a reactive situation of the relevant cyclothymic disorder.  He says you are quite volatile, have clearly misused drugs, and can become quite angry quite quickly.  
1	
416	He believed it was the context of a peer association that had led you to finance your drug needs and other social needs in an inappropriate criminal way.  When you saw him, the substance abuse was in remission. Mr Crewdson thought that if you got more insight into what actually happens to you, you might understand that drug use will only exacerbate such a problem.
417	He had not seen the Northern Hospital file, but noted that you described presenting there, some two weeks after you said that you had suspended drug use at that stage, so he thought it could not be said to be drug induced presentation.  He also thought you would not have been treated there for as long, had it been a drug-induced psychosis, because once the drugs are removed, the psychotic state goes.  He did not agree with a diagnosis of bipolar affective disorder, which he says you were told had been given at that stage.  His view is that it is slightly different from that, but nonetheless, you do have a psychological vulnerability that needs attention.  There did not appear to have been a psychiatric diagnosis at the Hader Clinic, although formally you were admitted there under the supervision of a psychiatrist.  
418	Mr Crewdson was asked the effect of you self-treating by taking methylamphetamine or cannabis, and said that “[n]obody makes good decisions when their brain's taken over by other substances regardless of the background. Decisions are not well made when people are effected by alcohol or drug abuse.”  He noted that you appeared to have done well after the 180 days at the Hader Clinic, and following that with firm controls in place, including Ms Brown as your counsellor. He regarded as a strong protective factor against your relapsing into criminal behaviour, that you are not unintelligent, so are capable of looking at things. The real protection is the cohesion of your family group – your parents and siblings and the support of your partner and your daughter.  Having interviewed your partner more than once, he felt she was strong and you would be on a pretty short lead when you return to live with her in the community.
419	Mr Crewdson described your symptoms, but agreed that he had not made a formal diagnosis.  He had made a provisional tentative one on the best information he had, that is of cyclothymic disorder, with symptoms of anxiety and depressive or dysthymic mood changes in a rapidly fluctuating cyclical pattern, where the presentation was confounded by substance abuse.  He accepted that the substance abuse is a condition now in remission.
420	I am told that you were arrested in late April this year on new charges, which I am told are irrelevant, as you intend to plead not guilty to them.  They apparently relate to alleged further drug trafficking.  As you intend to plead not guilty to those matters, I make no assumption that there has been any further offending.  However, it seems that your current situation is inevitably complicated by those charges and further, you have not been dealt with for the charge of affray for which you were on bail at the time of the drug trafficking for which I am sentencing you.
421	I have taken into account as mitigating factors that you pleaded guilty to these charges at a reasonably early stage, that you have a supportive and responsible family and partner, and a young child whom you are anxious to keep in touch with and are missing, and an as yet, unborn baby.  I take into account that your absence from that family unit is weighing on you, as it no doubt is on them.  It would appear that were you in the community and unable to leave Victoria, they might well return to live with you in Victoria for a period, although it seems to me that your father's health and the wishes of the rest of the family mean that they intend to live longer term in Queensland.
422	I take into account that at age 25, you are still young enough that your rehabilitation should be a relevant sentencing factor, as ultimately it is in the community's interests that someone in your position reform and establish himself in a stable and responsible lifestyle.  I take into account that you have shown genuine application to your rehabilitation through the intensive residential program you completed in the second half of last year, and ongoing attendance on Ms Brown earlier this year, with positive results until you were taken into custody.
423	There are of course similarities between your circumstances and those of Mr Huynh, both in the extent of your roles in the offending, and in your having through Ms Brown's recommendations, undergone an intensive residential rehabilitation program, and then come under her for ongoing supervision of your rehabilitation.  
424	I have carefully considered parity principles between you and Mr Huynh, as well as between you and all of the others whom I am sentencing for these events, but those with Mr Huynh are obviously the closest.  I have ultimately assessed your role and culpability for the offending in the drug trafficking as to be regarded as equivalent to that of Mr Huynh in its degree of seriousness. In contrast to Mr Huynh, however, there are some matters that put you at a disadvantage compared with mitigating factors in his situation.  You do have a criminal history and further you were on bail at the time of this offending, which is an aggravating factor, although for a different type of offending.    
425	Although you have been taken back into custody, there is nothing to indicate that you have relapsed into drug use, as the last screens before you went into custody were clear.  I therefore accept that you have tried to maintain your abstinence from drugs, and regard the rehabilitation program, so far as it keeps you away from drugs, as having been successful so far. However, you have a history of relapsing in the past after what was seemingly successful rehabilitation, and that is in contrast to Mr Huynh who, without a criminal history, or any other formal attempt to rehabilitate from drug addiction, is on his first opportunity and still continuing in it.  For that reason, you cannot call upon the fact of it being the first time, which was in his favour.  I do not disregard that it does take some people more than one attempt, but in contrast to Mr Huynh, you are at that disadvantage.
426	It seems to be conceded that you must be sentenced to a term of imprisonment and probably because of being back in custody since late April, it was not suggested that a Community Correction Order should be considered in combination with some further imprisonment.  I take that to be acknowledgement of your current situation in reality.  
427	I have taken into account, as I have said, that the residential rehabilitation program you did, appears to have been approached by you with application and some success.  I also take into account that it was of a nature that imposed strict confines on your movements and activities, starting with an initial month without even access to mobile phones, and for the first 90 days highly disciplined and supervised, followed by a further 90 days still in residential environment and still heavily regulated with daily activities and therapy. Whilst not actual imprisonment and not able to be credited directly as pre-sentence detention, I have moderated your sentence to take into account that for that - near six months, you were supervised and restricted from going about your choice of daily activities.
428	You engaged well, as I have said, with apparent firm wish to succeed in that program. Hopefully being a little older and wiser than you were when you tackled a non-residential program in 2016, you will have the motivation and more application to continue to remain abstinent from drugs.  The motivation of returning to your partner and child, although she was born already at the time, but also to the as yet unborn second child, should provide you with further determination to maintain the focus to remain drug free, as you apparently did over the first four months under the supervision of Ms Brown.
429	Taking into account the nature and seriousness of the offending, that you have a prior criminal history and that you have relapsed in the past after rehabilitation efforts, and also that your rehabilitation with Ms Brown has now been interrupted again anyway by your arrest on other matters, I do not give as much weight to your rehabilitation as a sentencing purpose, as I did for Mr Huynh, although for reasons I have already explained, I do regard it as still having some significance in your case.
430	The most important sentencing purpose for offending of this nature must be general deterrence, and the community's denunciation of offending in the nature of drug trafficking.  As I have said, I also take into account specific deterrence as needed in this case, and also have taken account, but to a lesser degree, the value of assisting your rehabilitation.  In all of the circumstances, I am satisfied that no other sentence than further imprisonment would be adequate to meet sentencing requirements in your case.  For the combination of reasons I have already described, I intend to set a head sentence and non-parole period to try to encourage your continued motivation to reform your life, and to avoid making similar mistakes in the future.  Would you stand now please?
431	James Van, I sentence you as follows.  On Charge 1 of trafficking in a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to fifteen months imprisonment.  On Charge 2 of conspiring to traffic in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to thirty months, that is two and a half years imprisonment.  As the prosecution conceded, it is appropriate that Charge 1 be served wholly concurrently with Charge 2.
432	On the summary charge of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, I impose a sentence of three months’ imprisonment.  Because it occurred very shortly after you were bailed, admittedly for an offence of a different nature, I consider that there should be some modest cumulation. I direct that one month of this sentence be served cumulatively on the other sentences I have imposed, that is the sentences on the indictment.    
433	That means that overall, the total sentence is thirty-one months imprisonment.  
434	I set a minimum term before you could be eligible for parole of eighteen months imprisonment. I declare 111 days of pre-sentence detention as reckoned served and direct that that be noted in court records.
435	In your case there is also some artificiality, not as much as in Mr Huynh's case, but some artificiality because had you not pleaded guilty and disputed these charges, I think it is doubtful that you would have undertaken or at least with as much application, the residential program for which I have given you some credit.  However, I state for s.6AAA purposes, that the total effective sentence would have been four years, eight months, with a non-parole period of three years, eight months.  
436	I think there were a disposal order and a forfeiture order which I do not think were opposed?
437	MR SAUNDERS:  No, Your Honour.
438	HER HONOUR:  All right.  I make the forfeiture order which is for a vehicle.  Was it your client's vehicle that conveyed the drugs at some stage or we do not know?
439	MR KELLY:  Your Honour it's unclear.  That application's made in relation to both Mr Huynh and Mr Van.
440	HER HONOUR:  No one knows who owned the car?
441	MR KELLY:  No.
1	
442	HER HONOUR:  All right.  If that is the vehicle that moved the drugs, it should be forfeited.
443	MR KELLY:  It should, correct.
444	HER HONOUR:  And a phone and a box with the phone.  All right, I make that order and the disposal order is for phones and receipts, yes.  All right, I make those orders.  Take a seat Mr Van while I just check whether I have covered everything.
445	MR SAUNDERS:  Your Honour, as I understand the sentence that you've given Mr Van on the summary offence, it's three months and you've accumulated one month.  My instructor noted and I concur that earlier in the - stating the maximum penalties, you said the penalty for committing an indictable offence whilst on bail is twenty-four months.  I think the penalty is three months.
446	HER HONOUR:  Is it?
447	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes.
448	HER HONOUR:  I'm sorry, I thought it was the general summary limit.  All right.
449	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes, so that would mean that you've given Mr Van the maximum penalty here and ‑ ‑ ‑
450	HER HONOUR:  All right I - which I shouldn't do of course.
451	MR SAUNDERS:  You shouldn't do, no.
452	HER HONOUR:  And in particular, he's pleaded guilty.
453	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes.
454	HER HONOUR:  I'm sorry I was under the impression it was two years, but in the throes of what I have been trying to work through ‑ ‑ ‑
455	MR SAUNDERS:  Certainly, but ‑ ‑ ‑
456	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ the jigsaw puzzle I have had with six people, I ‑ ‑ ‑
457	MR SAUNDERS:  It wouldn't necessarily ‑ ‑ ‑
458	HER HONOUR:  I apologise for that.
459	MR SAUNDERS:  Not at all.
460	HER HONOUR:  Thank you for pointing it out.  If the ‑ ‑ ‑
461	MR SAUNDERS:  But it wouldn't necessarily vitiate the total sentence, but Your Honour ought vary the sentence that's been - the head sentence that's been imposed.  It doesn't have to vary the cumulation, but the sentence imposed should not be the maximum, not in this case.
462	HER HONOUR:  It certainly should not be the maximum.
463	MR SAUNDERS:  It cannot be said to be the worst offence.
464	HER HONOUR:  I will vary the sentence to two months to take into account it was committed so shortly after the granting of bail.  I really must address the cumulation again.  I think because of what I had in mind, it is not appropriate to cumulate as much as a month, and I will not cumulate on it because the awkwardness of adding two weeks or three weeks is just too awkward in the calculation.  That is due to my mistake, but Mr Van is entitled to the benefit of it.  I will not cumulate from the summary offence.  So the total effective sentence is thirty months - leaving the non-parole period where it was.  It was always long thought out that one.
465	MR SAUNDERS:  If Your Honour pleases.
466	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  
467	MR KELLY:  Your Honour pleases.
468	HER HONOUR:  All right.  I am sorry for that mistake.  Have I now covered everything?
469	MR SAUNDERS:  Yes, Your Honour.
470	HER HONOUR:  All right.  What I will do, as I did with others, was while the orders are being prepared, allow close family members if they are in court, to approach and speak, with legal representation, but not to have physical contact with Mr Van because he is in custody.  Mr Kelly, do any - if you can facilitate that.
471	MR KELLY:  Yes if I may, Your Honour.
472	HER HONOUR:  If they wish to and if he wishes to.  Now while the order is being prepared - sorry, got to change it for that.  All right, thank you.  
473	MR COLE:  Your Honour, might I - given we're in the interval, might I be excused for about one minute?
474	HER HONOUR:  Absolutely.
475	MR COLE:  Thank you.
476	HER HONOUR:  I can also ‑ ‑ ‑
477	MR COLE:  Just before we continue on, but it'll be a minute.
478	HER HONOUR:  Yes I can stand down shortly, but if you want to be excused ‑ ‑ ‑
479	MR COLE:  No I'll just be a minute, Your Honour.
480	HER HONOUR:  ‑ ‑ ‑ in the meantime, that's all right.
481	MR COLE:  Thank you.
482	MR KELLY:  Thank you for that, Your Honour.
483	HER HONOUR:  All right, the order is about to signed and I will ask that Mr Van be removed from the courtroom please.  Thank you.  All right, now if you want to be excused Mr Kelly, you can be.
484	MR KELLY:  May I Your Honour?
485	HER HONOUR:  Yes.
486	MR KELLY:  Thank you.
- - -