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

CR 19-00193

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
CORY TURNBULL		

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE LYON	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	18 August 2020	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	20 August 2020	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Turnbull	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VCC 1299	

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited: 	DPP v Jesse Nixon [2020] VCC 553; Jaeger v R [2019] VCC 526
Sentence:		Total Effective Sentence 58 months; Non-parole period of 36 months; 
$500 fine; Licence cancelled and disqualified for 44 months
---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms S. Pillai	Office of Public Prosecutions	
			
For the Accused	Ms M. Kozlowski	Ann Valos Criminal Law 	

HIS HONOUR:  
1	Cory Turnbull, you have pleaded guilty to the following offences, which carry the following maximum penalties:
Charge Nos.	Charge	Max Penalty 	
1	False imprisonment	10 years	
2	Intentionally destroying property 	10 years	
3	Conduct endangering life	10 years	
4, 6	Damaging an emergency services vehicle	5 years	
5	Aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving 	20 years 	
7	Resisting an emergency worker on duty 	5 years	
8	Operate a prohibited device 	2 years or 1500 penalty units	
Summary Charge 21	Commit indictable offence whilst on bail	3 months or 30 penalty units	
Summary Charge 37	Fail to stop on police request 	First offence: 6 months or 60 penalty units
Subsequent offence: 12 months or 120 penalty units	
Summary Charge 48	Drive vehicle whilst exceeding prescribed concentration of drug 	First offence: 12 penalty units
Second offence: 60 penalty units
Subsequent offence: 120 penalty units 	
2	Charge 5, the aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving is a category 2 offence.  The Sentencing Act provides that, except in limited circumstances, this offence carries a mandatory period of imprisonment (excluding a combination sentence of imprisonment with a community corrections order).  Mr Kozlowski, who appeared on your behalf, agreed that you faced a period of imprisonment on this charge and that none of the exceptions applied in your case. 
3	Charges 5 and 7 are rolled up charges.  Charge 5 is constituted by four identifiable single instances of offending, that is, against each of the four police officers who were immediately present.  When sentencing on a rolled up charge, I must consider all of the circumstances of the offence, and the totality of the harm described in the charge.  While I may consider all of the relevant circumstances of a rolled up charge, the plea of guilty must still be treated as entered to a single formal charge.  The maximum penalty is therefore limited to the maximum for a single charge.  Accordingly, the maximum penalty for this remains at 20 years.
4	Charge 7 is a rolled up count of resisting each of the three police officers on duty named in the indictment. The same considerations as I have just outlined apply.  The maximum remains at five years.
5	The three charges brought pursuant to ss.317AD and 317AG Crimes Act, being Charges 4, 5, and 6, are required by law to be served cumulatively unless I direct otherwise.
6	Finally in this introductory respect, Charge 5 carries a mandatory minimum licence cancellation for not less than two years, while Summary Charge 37 carries a mandatory period of disqualification of not less than six months.  In addition to that, I have a general discretion to disqualify you from obtaining a licence or driving, arising from the nature of the charges to which you have  pleaded guilty.  
7	You have admitted a number of prior convictions.  I will return to these later in these sentencing remarks.   
8	The Crown tendered the prosecution opening for plea as Exhibit A.  A summary of your offending is as follows.
9	At the time of your offending you were 36 years old.  You had known Jaydin Danskin Howe, the complainant, for around two months.  Jaydin was 21 years of age at the time and she had been living with you for about a month prior to your offending due to financial difficulties. 
10	Prior to the offending, Jaydin described you as being possessive and controlling of her.  By way of background, before the events which constitute the offending in this matter, the prosecution told me about a previous incident on 10 August 2018, so five days prior to the current offending.  I was told that you were assisting Jaydin to move into her father's house and driving her around in a stolen white Toyota Camry to do so.  I was told that while driving Jaydin, you 'picked a big fight', using her words, over her moving out, and began speeding, swerving between lanes and driving over roundabouts and nature strips.  When the car stopped, Jaydin used her phone to send her location to her friend, Elizabeth Sretenovich, at which point you snatched her phone.  Jaydin kicked the interior of the vehicle before unlocking the door and running.  You chased after her, but she hit you, so you gave up chase and returned to your car, telling her she was a bad parent and would not get custody of her children back.  Following this, Jaydin proceeded to lay on train tracks before she was assisted by another person.  Now, I emphasise this information was provided only by way of background.  You are not being sentenced for this and it does not aggravate or increase the sentence on any of the charges you face today
11	Now, on 15 August 2018, Jaydin was with you at your home in Melton.  You had been arguing through the day about her moving to live with her father, and you had suggested she should move out to Sydney with you, as you had family there. 
12	Jaydin refused the plan to move to Sydney, however eventually told you she would go to Sydney.  She asked if she could see her friend, Ms Sretenovich, first and you agreed.  You started driving her to Ms Sretenovich's house in the stolen Toyota Camry; however, when you were around two doors away, you said, 'Fuck it, let's go', and sped off.  Jaydin describes you as driving as fast as 160 kph in an erratic manner.  From that, I simply take it that you were driving very fast.  I do not rely on any of the speed estimates given by Ms Danskin Howe.
13	On 16 August 2018, at 12.05 am, Ms Danskin Howe messaged Ms Sretenovich, asking if she was home and she confirmed she was.  She said to Ms Sretenovich that had just driven past but was 'not allowed in' as '[you] said no'.   Jaydin then sent her location to Ms Sretenovich, indicating she was at the end of Ms Sretenovich's street in Taylors Lakes.  Ms Sretenovich believed something to be wrong.  She went outside but she could not see either of you around.
14	Ms Sretenovich then messaged Jaydin, saying she was going to the 'cop shop'.  She received a reply from Jaydin, stating, 'Driving to Sydney', followed by further texts stating, 'He's trying to kill me', and, 'He stabbed me'. 
15	You drove away from Ms Sretenovich's house and onto the Western Freeway.  When she realised that you were driving to Sydney, Jaydin said she did not want to go and asked you to let her out.  You yelled back at her, 'No, we're going'.  When she asked you to pull over or to slow down, you replied, 'How dumb do you think I am?  They'll catch me as soon as I pull over'. 
16	At 12.25 am the police observed the white Toyota Camry you were driving travelling east along the Melton Highway in Taylors Lakes.  A speed detector showed you to be travelling at 122 kph in the 80 kph zone.  Police activated their lights and followed you; however, you accelerated and drove away.  Jaydin was described as waving her hands out of the front passenger window (Part of Charge 3 – Reckless Conduct Endangering Life).  Police did not continue to follow you, however they notified communications of the position of the Camry. 
17	Jaydin asked what you were doing, you said you were not having her change her mind.  She then sent a text to Ms Sretenovich, saying, 'Please help me'.  At 12.50 am, Ms Sretenovich went to the Keilor Downs Police Station, showing police the location sent by Jaydin, which allowed them to track her.  
18	Jaydin was then unable to get out of the car due to the high speed and your erratic driving.  She stated that she asked you multiple times to let her go, however she says you did everything you could to make it so she could not get out (Charge 1 – False Imprisonment).
19	At 1.52 am, whilst with the police, Ms Sretenovich received a message from Jaydin saying 'jammer'.  This was understood to mean you had a mobile phone jammer in the car (Charge 8 – Operate prohibited device).
20	At 2.03 am, Jaydin called Ms Sretenovich, who was still with police.  Police recorded the call.  During the call, you and Jaydin were arguing regarding your refusal to take her to Ms Sretenovich's house and instead planning to drive her to Sydney.  Jaydin was heard to be screaming and the conversation became inaudible. 
21	Upon realising Jaydin was using her phone, you grabbed it and threw it out the window (Charge 2 – Intentionally destroying property).  The call remained connected until 2.44 am, but there was no further audio. 
22	After throwing the phone out the window, you pulled over the car on Mickleham Road on the ramp to the Tullamarine Freeway in order to retrieve the phone.  Jaydin got out of the car and ran, and attempted to jump the concrete barrier.  You grabbed her from behind, dropped her after a struggle and managed to grab her again and put her back in the car.  She received a cut to her leg when you grabbed her off the barrier and put her in the car. 
23	Whilst you were standing outside of the car, the police Critical Incident Response Team saw the Camry and pulled up 10 to 15 metres in front of the car.  Four officers got out of the van, and you got back into your stolen Camry.  Senior Constable Jaguar aimed a pistol at you in the driver's seat. Senior Constable Roper also pointed a pistol at you, identifying himself as police and telling you to get out of the vehicle. 
24	You made no attempt to get out of the car and began screaming loudly.  You presented to the police with wide eyes, waving arms and appeared aggressive.  Jaydin said that she screamed out the window for help, but you told her to 'shut the fuck up'. 
25	Senior Constable Roper continued to shout at you to get out of the car (Summary Charge 37 – Fail to stop on police request).  Senior Constable Jaguar holstered his pistol and moved towards the driver's window of the car. 
26	At this time another Critical Incident Response Team van pulled up behind your car, containing three officers.  You proceeded to reverse the Camry, ramming the vehicle, which was approximately 2.5 metres behind your car.  Senior Constables Healy, Porter and Harris were in the vehicle at the time.  The collision completely smashed the front of the van, ripping the front of it off (Charge 4 – Damaging emergency services vehicle) (Part of Charge 3 – Reckless Conduct Endangering Life).
27	The Camry moved forward slightly and was momentarily stationary.  Senior Constable Jaguar observed you in the driver's seat, screaming with your hands up.  He moved to the driver's side window, and because he could not see the keys in the ignition, he attempted to shift the car into park. 
28	Very quickly after pausing, however, you accelerated the car forward.  Senior Constable Jaguar pushed himself backwards in fear for his life as you did this.  Senior Constable Ralston was standing to the side of the Camry and states that you drove directly at him, forcing him to jump out of the way.  Senior Constable Roper saw Senior Constable Ralston jump out of the way of the Camry as it drove forward, and as you then drove towards him, he was forced to squash himself against the barrier on the side of the road to get out of the way.  You passed within 20 centimetres of the police officer before you rammed into the police van in front of you.  Senior Constable West was also forced to move out of your way as you drove forward (Charge 5 – Aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving).
29	Your car collided with the front of the police van, causing significant damage (Charge 4 – Damaging emergency services vehicle) (Part of Charge 3 – Reckless Conduct Endangering Life).  You forced the car between the police van and the concrete barrier.  You then continued southbound on the Tullamarine Freeway at significant speed.  None of the officers at the scene were able to follow you due to the damage to the police vans. 
30	Jaydin continued to ask you to let her out of the car, and you continued to yell at her to shut up.  You crossed the Bolte Bridge and the Westgate Bridge, continuing onto the Western Freeway.  Three members of the public made 000 calls during this time, observing your driving and the state of your car.  They described you as driving over 100 kph, and up to 150 kph. 
31	Police deployed a tyre deflation device on the Leakes Road overpass on the Western Freeway.  That worked; you drove over the device, you deflated the front two tyres, your wheels began to shred, and you stopped the car on Panamax Road and ran away.
32	You were chased by three police officers. They restrained you, you kicked at them, continued to attempted to get up, and held your arms under your body whilst they continued to demand you stop resisting being handcuffed (Charge 7 – Resisting an emergency worker on duty).  You were eventually overpowered and taken into custody. 
33	You were on bail at the time of this offending (Summary Charge 21 – Commit indictable offence whilst on bail).
34	Paramedics arrived at the scene and you were examined. You did not require emergency care.  You were taken to Sunshine Hospital, where a sample of your blood was taken and found to contain methylamphetamine (Summary Charge 48 – Drive whilst exceeding prescribed concentration).
35	You were taken to Sunshine police station, where you were interviewed at approximately 12.20 pm.  During the interview you stated:
•	that Jaydin was your girlfriend, that you had known her for two and a half months and she lived with you for about a month.  You said she has anxiety and other issues, that she takes medication, but you did not know what.  You enquired about her welfare; 
•	you said you did not know how things had happened, but you had been driving 'in a manner that (you) shouldn't have been'; 
•	it was Jaydin's idea to go, in order to get away, which you believed referred to getting away from drugs, and before getting in the car that day she had seemed fine;
•	you said you had been waiting with her in the car up the road from her friend's house before heading to Sydney, and Jaydin kept throwing her phone onto the side of the road;
•	Jaydin changed her mind about driving, but you state you didn't know why.  She asked to be let out, but you did not want to put her in harm's way by letting her out on the side of the freeway in the dark;
•	you pulled the car over because you had thrown her phone out the window because it was 'causing problems' and she was 'contacting people for drugs whatever'.  When police asked why you had not thrown the phone out in the days beforehand, you stated you did not know why; 
•	you said Jaydin knew how to get out of the car, although the doors were locked, they were not child locked, so she was able to leave if she wanted when you had stopped to get petrol; 
•	you turned the car around and started heading back home because Jaydin wanted to go to her Dad's house;
•	you said when Jaydin got out of the car on the freeway, you tried to put her back in.  When asked why she got out, you said you were not sure, but you did not want to leave her there.  You said she kept saying she needed to go to the hospital, but you did not know why, and she had a sore foot; 
•	Jaydin leant on the concrete barrier, but you were not sure if she tried to jump it, and you were not sure how she was acting when you grabbed her and took her back to the car;
•	you told police you were driving 'pretty quick'.  You believed police may have been following you.  Instead of stopping when the police flashed their lights at you, you panicked because you had an ice pipe in your car, and you did not have a licence;
•	you said you hit the police cars because you panicked and accelerated.  You could not recall reversing into the other police car, but agreed it must have happened upon being shown photographs.  When you drove forward, you state the police officers were to the sides of the car and none were in front of you; 
•	you said you recall an officer yelling at you to get out of the car; 
•	when you were told of your driving over roundabouts and nature strips, you said there was 'no chance' of that happening, but you also said you could not remember the manner of your driving; 
•	after your tyres were shredded, you said Jaydin told you to get out and run, and you did; 
•	you said you always had the phone jammer in your car, you did not know it was illegal;
•	you accused Jaydin of making up lies about you, you did not know why she would text Ms Sretenovich for help or what made her so upset that she was throwing her phone from the car; 
•	you said, in relation to Jaydin moving to live with her Dad, you were upset but you ultimately wanted what was best for her; and 
•	finally, from these aspects that been picked from the record of interview, you said Jaydin had a history of problems and you would never harm her or be violent with her. 
36	After your arrest you were remanded in custody, and you have now been in prison for just over two years.  Ten months of the time on remand was attributed to another sentence.  You have now spent 386 days (excluding today) on remand by way of presentence detention attributable to this matter.  I shall reckon that period as already served.
Objective gravity of your offending and your moral culpability
37	The statement of Senior Constable Ralston describes the severe and profound impact of your offending has had on his life and on his work.  The frightening experience of your car, deliberately driven, travelling at speed and under considerable acceleration, passing within the smallest of distances of him is likely to stay with him for many years, if not for the rest of his life.
38	Similarly, the statement of Senior Constable Jaguar speaks of the negative impact of your offending on his work, his enjoyment of life and his relationships.  It is easy to understand that he and Senior Constable Ralston both keep going back to the moment where, but for their quick reflexes, you would have certainly hit them with severe impact.
39	Overall, your offending was extremely serious.  This can be determined by the maximum penalties for each of the principal offences to which you have pleaded guilty.  It is, however, necessary to say something more about the seriousness of your conduct in respect to principal offences.
40	The offence of false imprisonment involved the deprivation of the young woman's liberty.  Although your conduct did not involve the use of, for example, a weapon, your drug-fuelled anger and history of controlling behaviour compelled your young victim (some 15 years your junior) to submit to your conduct.
41	In this instance, the false imprisonment was combined with other offending; particularly the offence of reckless conduct endangering her life.  As a result of her captivity, your young victim was subjected to your terrifying conduct, where you put her life at considerable risk by your reckless driving.
42	Although the offence of false imprisonment is separate to the offence of reckless conduct endangering life, I am mindful of the fact that there is a degree of overlap between the two, in that you held your young victim captive in the car whilst you drove recklessly and put her in danger.  I will be careful to ensure that the aggravation of one does not lead to double punishment.
43	You drove on roads and freeways at breathtaking, frightening speeds.  Your decision-making was marred by your anger and probably by the presence of methylamphetamine in your bloodstream.  You could have made the decision to stop driving at any time.  Instead, you chose to drive in a manner that put the life of your passenger at risk and caused fear and concern to other road users.
44	Beyond that, the police tried to stop you from putting further lives at risk.  They were just doing their job.  In this case, your rage and your anger were driven by nothing.  In fact, when interviewed, you could remember nothing of your driving and not much of the incident itself.
45	Your conduct in respect to the police represents very serious examples of the offences of failing to stop on a police request, the aggravated offence of intentionally exposing emergency workers to risk, damaging police vehicles and also resisting arrest.
46	As I have already said, the police were simply there to prevent you from putting your life, that of your passenger, and the other road users at further risk.  In your efforts to evade the police, you showed absolutely no regard for the safety or lives of those officers.  You missed hitting police officers by mere centimetres from behind the wheel of a car, whilst in a drug affected state.  Nor did you miss them because of your skill behind the wheel.  You have pleaded guilty to intentionally exposing them to risk.  It was their actions, not yours, which ensured the risk was not realised.  It is blindingly obvious that when you drive a car directly at, or even as close as you came to those officers, at speed and under heavy acceleration, the risk of injury or even death is high.  You used the car as a weapon and as a battering ram to make good your escape. 
47	Your actions must attract the principles of deterrence, denunciation and a measure of protection of the community.  Such conduct must be utterly condemned, and you face severe punishment for your actions.
48	Likewise, your moral culpability is high.  There is no mitigation in your angry, jealous, drug fuelled conduct.  I can discern absolutely no reason whatsoever for your conduct on this night.  The fact that you could not remember parts of it the following day is of no consequence or mitigation.  You must bear full responsibility for everything you did on that night.
49	I turn now to consider your personal circumstances. 
50	You are 38 years old and were born on 11 May 1982. 
51	You grew up in Sydney with your twin sister and a younger brother.  I was told that your childhood was stable, with a caring and supportive family.  You completed primary school without issue. 
52	After starting secondary school you experienced behavioural problems and became involved in several fights.  These issues led to you attending three different high schools.  Part way through Year 11 you left school and commenced a plumbing apprenticeship.  You worked as a plumber for 12 years, becoming the manager of Bampton Plumbing. 
53	When you were in about your mid 20s or so you initially came to Melbourne to purchase an car engine, and then you met your partner, Sarah.  You quickly developed a relationship with Sarah, and soon after relocated to Melbourne to be with her, leaving behind your job in Sydney. 
54	Your relationship with Sarah lasted some eight or so years, however deteriorated when you went to prison in 2017.  At this time, Sarah lost the house you were living in together and sold your possessions, and then herself became uncontactable.  Following this, you met Jaydin and began a brief relationship with her (if it can properly be called that) prior to this offending. 
55	You have one prior appearance at the Sunshine Magistrates Court on 22 August 2017 for offences of burglary, commit indictable offence on bail, theft, deception, speeding and failing an oral fluid test.  You spent 137 days in custody leading up to that appearance and you were sentenced to a combination sentence of imprisonment with an 18 month CCO.  This offending occurred 12 months into that CCO.  One of the conditions of your CCO was that you attend for assessment and treatment for your drug use.
56	Whilst in custody on this occasion, you were assessed by psychologist, Alison Maynard, on 29 July 2020.  Her report of 3 August 2020 states that although you used cannabis on a daily basis from about age 14 until about three years ago, you were only introduced to methylamphetamines when you moved from Sydney to Melbourne.  You lost your job in Melbourne through your drug-related offending and the imprisonment in 2017.  After you were released from custody on that occasion, you spiralled into further uncontrolled drug use. Prior to this offending, you were using methylamphetamine, and a large amount of the drug GHB each day for about three months.
57	You have now been on remand, as I say, for two years, the anniversary of the offending just passing earlier this week.  Ms Maynard reports that as a result of this long abstinence from drugs, your judgement appears to be more intact.  Moreover, you spoke to Ms Maynard about your insight into your drug use, how it has, using your words, 'ruined your life' and that you have let many good opportunities go.
58	On assessment, Ms Maynard concludes that you suffer from a generalised anxiety disorder and a stimulant use disorder (currently in remission in a controlled environment).
59	Before your remand for this offending in 2018, you had only limited counselling to address your drug abuse.  Since you have been in custody, you have undertaken a large number of vocational courses, a number of drug addiction courses, and you have returned consistent clean urine screens.
60	Ms Maynard considers that you will require considerable psychological therapy to address your drug, emotional and behavioural issues.
61	I have read the character references provided by your cousin, Karen Sirolli, and your mother, Christina Turnbull.  Both share the observation that you lived a relatively normal, stable and productive life, engaging in full-time employment until you moved away from your family and down to Melbourne.  It is apparent that they are fully alive to your problems, but nevertheless continue to offer their full support.  Like you, they share the hope that you will be able to return to Sydney and to your stable family environment once released from prison on parole.
62	You have spent much of your time on remand at the Hopkins facility. Until the COVID-19 pandemic locked down Victorian prisons, you received monthly visits from your family in Sydney.  There have been no in-person visits for months, since lockdown in March.  Moreover, your movement around the prison has been restricted and courses available to you have become limited (if they exist at all).  I consider that all of these factors should be used to mitigate the sentence that I impose upon you. 
63	Mr Kozlowski submitted on your behalf that the sentence I impose upon you should be mitigated by the following factors; first, you pleaded guilty after committal.  The plea has some utilitarian benefit, although it is apparent that the police were cross-examined at the committal proceedings.  The plea was not entered at the earliest time, but nevertheless does still represent some saving of resources and further reliving of events for the witnesses involved.  So, you will get the utilitarian benefit of your plea.  
64	Secondly, Mr Kozlowski submitted that your plea further demonstrates remorse on your behalf.  In my view, as I said at the plea hearing, remorse is often hard to discern from a plea of guilty alone.  It may be that your observations to Ms Maynard show the beginning of some insight into the deleterious effect that drugs have had on your life.  None of what you said to her, though, contained a single word of empathy towards the four police officers, whose lives and safety were put in danger.  You enquired after the welfare of Ms Danskin Howe at the police interview, but Ms Maynard did not report any empathetic comments in her report. I am prepared to find that you have made a start in the process of developing insight and that it is implicit, in that there is at least a sense of some regret for your actions, but I am not going to go as far as saying that you have demonstrated real remorse by the plea of guilty.
65	Third, Mr Kozlowski submitted that you have positive prospects for your rehabilitation.  He points out your solid work history, your lack of real prior convictions, apart from the matter in 2017, a solid family background and the strong expression of family support from your mother and aunt.  Mr Kozlowski also points to your willingness to undertake drug and vocational courses whilst in prison.  He submits that your prospects of employment as a plumber will not be held back by the fact that you have served a period of imprisonment. 
66	In all, both you and your family have a sense that your rehabilitation will be more readily achieved once you can return home to New South Wales.
67	In my view, your prospects for rehabilitation very much depend upon your resolve and your ability to remain drug free.  And bear in mind: drugs do not respect borders.  You will find them just as easily obtainable wherever you go as you did here, if you seek them out.  And with the negative peers that you have built up, sometimes they will seek you out.  Returning to your family may assist in your rehabilitation, but it is not necessarily the whole answer.
68	Nevertheless, it seems you have worked hard during this long period of abstinence to consider your relationship with drugs, and particularly that with methylamphetamines.  If you are serious in your attempts to overcome your drug use, then the community may have some real confidence in your prospects for your rehabilitation.
69	Ms Pillai, on behalf of the Crown, submitted that your plea of guilty has utilitarian value and that you have fair prospects for your rehabilitation.  The Crown recognises that the coronavirus pandemic increases the burden of your imprisonment.  However, the Crown submits that you have not exhibited particular remorse.
70	Overall, the Crown submits that the dominant sentencing factors in this case remain general deterrence, protection of the community, denunciation and punishment.
71	Ms Pillai provided me with two comparative cases in relation to the relatively new provision of the aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency work to risk by driving.  I was provided with the sentencing remarks of his Honour Judge Tinney in DPP v Jesse Nixon, and the sentencing remarks of her Honour Judge Hannan in DPP v Jaeger (and also the Court of Appeal decision) from those sentencing remarks.  It is necessary to say something about both of these cases.
72	The offender in Jaeger was sentenced to a term of five years' imprisonment on the charge of aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving.  In that case, after a high-speed police chase, the offender stopped his vehicle on the Western Freeway, causing the pursuing police car to brake heavily and stop 30 metres behind him.  He then reversed the stolen car he was driving at speed and under acceleration into the stationary police car and rammed it with enough force to cause the airbags to deploy.  The two police officers in the car suffered injuries as a result of that ramming.
73	Now, in addition to being a category 2 offence, s.10AE(1) of the Sentencing Act provides a mandatory non-parole period of not less than two years, where an emergency worker was injured in the commission of the offence.
74	Overall, Jaeger was sentenced to five years and four months, with four years and one month to serve.
75	The Court of Appeal considered the sentences and overall sentence and non-parole period imposed by Judge Hannan was appropriate and did not reduce the sentence.
76	In DPP v Nixon, the offender was charged with two charges of aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving, and also to a charge of reckless conduct endangering serious injury.  His Honour Judge Tinney sentenced the offender to 15 months' imprisonment on each of the charges of exposure to risk by driving, and 18 months on the charge of reckless conduct endangering serious injury.  The total effective sentence was three years and 10 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years.
77	In his sentencing remarks, Judge Tinney stated:
A very loud message must be sent to those who may consider engaging in that sort of conduct. Like-minded potential future offenders must understand that there will be sizeable penalties for those who expose police members to the heightened risk by driving a car. So too for those who drive in such a way as to expose other innocent road users to risk of serious injury.
78	I respectfully agree with Judge Tinney's statement. It is appropriate to send the same warning of deterrence about your offending on this occasion. Of course, you have pleaded guilty to reckless conduct endangering life, not serious injury.
79	It will be apparent that there are differences between your case and both that of Nixon and Jaeger.  The sentence imposed on Nixon was mitigated by the fact that he was a young offender; only 19 years of age.  Moreover, his sentence was also mitigated by the application of the fifth limb of the case of Verdins. In other respects, his offending on this charge was similar to yours, involving more than one police officer being exposed to risk.
80	As I have already outlined, the case in Jaeger is different to you as the offender in that case caused actual physical injury to two police officers. Fortunately, your acts caused no physical injuries. Consequently, there is no mandatory non-parole period required by legislation in this case.
81	In the end, I must be careful not to be unduly influenced by sentencing outcomes in other cases. I must impose sentences and an overall sentence which I consider appropriate in your case, taking into account the objective sentencing factors and, to the extent to which I am permitted, the factors personal to you.
82	I must also have regard to the principle of totality. That is, although I must set appropriate sentences across the range of your offending, I must not impose an overall sentence which is crushing.  Given the number of offences to which you have pleaded guilty, and the seriousness of a number of them, I have sought to achieve this by moderating the periods of cumulation substantially.  I will now move to sentence. 
Charge Nos.	Charge	Max Penalty 	Sentence	Cumulation	
1	False imprisonment	10 years	24 months 	2 months	
2	Intentionally destroying property 	10 years	1 month	concurrent 	
3	Conduct endangering life	10 years	36 months	6 months	
4	Damaging an emergency services vehicle	5 years	18 months	2 months	
5	Aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving 	20 years 	42 months	Base 	
	Damaging an emergency services vehicle	5 years	18 months	2 months	
7	Resisting an emergency worker on duty 	5 years	9 months	3 months	
8	Operate a prohibited device 	2 years or 1500 penalty units	3 months	Starts today	
Summary Charge 21	Commit indictable offence whilst on bail	3 months or 30 penalty units	2 months	concurrent	
Summary Charge 37	Fail to stop on police request 	First offence: 6 months or 60 penalty units
Subsequent offence: 12 months or 120 penalty units	3 months	1 month	
Summary Charge 48	Drive vehicle whilst exceeding prescribed concentration of drug 	First offence: 12 penalty units
Second offence: 60 penalty units
Subsequent offence: 120 penalty units 	$500		
TES			58 months		
NPP			36 months		
PSD			386		

83	The total effective sentence should be 58 months, that is 4 years and 10 months.  I order that you serve a non-parole period of 36 months.  I declare the pre-sentence detention of 386 days excluding today reckoned as already served.  
84	I make an order against Mr Turnbull's ability to drive, disqualifying him from driving in respect to Charges 3, 4, 5 and 6, and Summary Charge 37, for 44 months. That period commences today.
85	The 6AAA declaration is but for the plea of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of 75 months with 58 months to serve.  I will make the order forfeiting the jammer.  Mr Kozlowski, are you clear on the total effective sentence and the non-parole period?
86	MR KOZLOWSKI:  Yes, Your Honour.
87	HIS HONOUR:  Is there anything you need to raise?
88	MR KOZLOWSKI:  No, Your Honour.
89	HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.  Ms Pillai?
90	MS PILLAI:  Nothing to raise, Your Honour.
- - -