er
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT Melbourne
CRIMINAL DIVISION	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	
Case No CR-19-01356

THE QUEEN		
		
v		
		
KIMBERLEY CASTLES		

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE WRAIGHT 	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	24 November 2020	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	7 December 2020	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Castles	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VCC 1967		

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing.
Catchwords: 	Plea of guilty – Dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity – Failure to comply with condition of recognizance release order – Offender made false representations to Centrelink about her relationship status – Offender received an overpayment of $70,327 in social security benefits over six years – Offending attributed to greed – Egregious example of the deception offending – Relevant prior criminal history – Circumstances surrounding COVID-19 taken into account.
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Code (Cth) s 134.2(1); Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss 16A, 17A(1), 20(1)(b), 20A(1), 20AB; Sentencing Act 1991 s 6AAA. 
Cases Cited:		R v Cameron (1993) 171 LSJS 305.
Sentence:		Imprisonment for a period of 36 months, released after serving a period of 2 years imprisonment upon giving a recognizance of $3000 and to be of good behaviour for a period of 2 years and 6 months.

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the CDPP	Ms A Dearman	Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions	
			
For the Accused	Mr A Sim	Armstrong Legal	

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1	Kimberley Castles, you have pleaded guilty to three charges of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity, contrary to s 134.2(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth), which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment on each charge.  You have also pleaded guilty to a charge of failure to comply with a condition of a recognizance release order, contrary to s 20A(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) which was imposed by the County Court on 20 November 2009.
2	You have admitted your prior criminal history.
Circumstances of the offending
3	A prosecution opening was tendered on the plea and may be summarised as follows:
4	By way of background, you have intermittently been in receipt of social security benefits, namely Newstart Allowance, Disability Support Pension (‘the DSP’), Carer Payment and Parenting Payment Single since 1993. The DSP is payable to eligible persons assessed as having a physical, intellectual or psychiatric condition.  Carer Payment is payment to eligible persons who provide full time care in the home of a person with a severe disability.  Parenting Payment Single is payable to persons with dependent children under the date of the youngest child’s eighth birthday.  The rate of each of these benefits payable is affected by other income received by the person, including income from employment, and by the person’s partner’s income. 
Charge 1
5	In 2009 you were in receipt of the DSP and on 20 November 2009 you were imprisoned in relation to a Centrelink fraud.  On 19 November 2010, whilst you were in custody, you signed a ‘Separation details’ form and declared in that form that the relationship with your partner Gregory Castles ended on 
20 November 2009, that you resided at 6 Eastbourne Court, Frankston, Victoria and that Mr Castles’ permanent address was ‘unknown’ to you. 
6	On 2 December 2010 you were released from custody and contacted Centrelink via telephone to have your DSP payments reinstated. Your payments were reinstated, and you were paid at the single rate as a result of your misrepresentation that you were separated from Mr Castles.  It is these facts that relate to Charge 1, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity.
7	Between 29 August 2011 and 3 October 2012, you received a total of $6638.62 in benefits whilst you were eligible to receive $4016.03 of those benefits.  The total overpayment obtained by you in relation to Charge 1 was $2622.59. 
Charge 2
8	On 14 September 2012 you applied for the Carer Payment in respect of your daughter Stephanie Castles and this claim was granted effective from 
4 October 2012.  You were paid the Carer Payment at the single rate as a result of your ongoing misrepresentation that you were ‘separated’.  It is these facts that relate to Charge 2, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity.
9	On 25 July 2016, your Carer Payment was cancelled as a result of you failing to respond to correspondence from Centrelink.  Between 4 October 2012 and 25 July 2016, you received a total of $62,522.79 in benefits whilst you were eligible to receive $15,310.41 of those benefits.  The total overpayment obtained by you in relation to Charge 2 was $47,212.38. 
Charge 3
10	On 22 February 2017 you submitted a claim to the Department of Human Services (‘the Department’) for the Parenting Payment Single, declaring that: 
•	Your relationship status was ‘separated’;
•	You had been separated since 2 December 2010;
•	Your former partner was Greg Castles; and
•	You had two children in your care: Stephanie Castles (DOB 6 July 2007) and Nellie Castles (DOB 19 July 2016).
11	As a result of the declarations contained in your claim, you were granted the Parenting Payment Single.  It is these facts that relate to Charge 3, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity.  Between 22 February 2017 and 12 March 2018, you received a total of $20,492.94 in benefits, whilst you were not eligible to receive any of those benefits.  The total overpayment obtained by you in relation to Charge 3 was $20,492.94.
12	During the periods of offending, payments for all three social security benefits were deposited by the Department into a National Australia Bank (‘NAB’) account held in the name of Kimberley Castles (aka Camille Pennell). 
13	You were not required to regularly report in order to continue to receive any of these benefits from the Department, however, you remained subject to an ongoing legal obligation to report an event or change in circumstance, such as changes to your relationship status or income, including if you or your partner commenced earning income or if you or your partner’s income varied.  You did not report any such event or change in circumstance.
Relationship with Mr Castles 
14	Between 12 July 2004 and 2 March 2012, you reported your residential address to Centrelink as 6 Eastbourne Court, Frankston, Victoria.  Mr Castles’ address according to employment records held by Chandler Macleod, who employed him from 28 January 2010 to 6 May 2012, was the same Eastbourne Court address.  Mr Castles’ address, according to employment records held by Programmed Workforce who employed him from 14 June 2011 to 5 August 2011, was also the same Eastbourne Court address. 
15	From 2 March 2012, you recorded your home address to Centrelink as 
17 Colbert Court, Frankston South, Victoria.  Mr Castles’ address according to employment records held by Wagner Spraytech who employed him from 
7 May 2012 to at least 28 February 2018, was the same Colbert Court address.
16	You and Mr Castles regularly travelled together, using Wyndham Vacation Resorts vacation credits for holidays at Ballarat, Phillip Island, Golden Beach, Surfers’ Paradise and Torquay between at least March 2014 and June 2018.  You also attended two Christmas parties with Mr Castles when he was working at Wagner Spraytech and he introduced you as Camille Pennell at these events. 
Financial matters 
17	Over the periods of offending, three NAB home loan accounts were jointly held in the names of Kimberley and Gregory Castles.  All three accounts were opened on 12 June 2015 and the Offset Home Loan account was closed on 23 May 2016.
18	During the periods of the offending you had access to a NAB account in the name of your daughter Stephanie Castles and you and Mr Castles were signatories on that account.  You also had access to a NAB account in the name of Mr Castles and were a signatory on that account.
19	Four Commonwealth Bank of Australia (‘CBA’) accounts were jointly held in the names of you and Mr Castles: 
•	Everyday Offset opened on 27 January 2015 and closed on 5 April 2016;
•	Complete Access opened on 10 November 2014 and closed on 5 April 2016;
•	Investment Home Loan opened 10 November 2014 and closed on 
21 July 2015; and
•	Investment Home Loan opened 15 December 2014 and closed on 
22 July 2015. 
20	An ANZ account was jointly held in the name of you and Mr Castles, opened on 24 November 2014.
21	You and Mr Castles jointly financed two personal loans with Wyndham Vacation Resorts Finance.  The applications for finance for vacation credits were in the amount of $23,359.10 and $20,528 jointly lodged in your names and signed by you both on 14 December 2013 and 29 March 2014 respectively.
22	Youi Insurance Pty Ltd (‘Youi’) recorded your address as 17 Colbert Court, Frankston South, Victoria, effective from 16 March 2012.  Records show that you held a home insurance policy with Youi for the Colbert Court address which commenced on 16 March 2012 and was still active as at April 2018.  You were listed as the owner, contact person and policy holder.  You also held a comprehensive motor vehicle cover insurance policy with Youi for your vehicle which was recorded as being garaged at the Colbert Court address.  This policy commenced on 16 March 2012 and was still active as at April 2018.  Mr Castles was an authorised person on both policies and was listed as an additional driver in relation to the comprehensive motor vehicle cover.
23	You held a building insurance policy with Youi for a property at 76 Cordeaux Crescent, Redbank Plains, Queensland, which commenced on 16 April 2015 and was still active as at April 2018.  You were listed as the owner, contact person and policy holder. 
24	Mr Castles held a building insurance policy with Youi for a property at 
53 Ningi Waters Drive, Ningi, Queensland, which commenced on 5 June 2015 and was still active as at April 2018.  Mr Castles was listed as the owner, contact person and policy holder and you were recorded as an authorised person on the policy. 
Medical records
25	You were first registered as a patient with Melbourne IVF Clinic in 2008 under the name of Camille Pennell.  Records show that Mr Castles was your partner and that you both resided at the Eastbourne Court and then the Colbert Court address.  Records also show that you and Mr Castles both signed consent forms in relation to the IVF treatment on 9 September 2015 and 14 October 2015.  Your daughter Nellie Castles was conceived through an egg donor and born on 19 July 2016.
26	You commenced being cared for by Peninsula Health Hospital on 1 April 2016 for pregnancy care.  Hospital records list your address as the Colbert Court address and record Mr Castles as your next of kin and partner who you live with.  
Media publications
27	You and Mr Castles appeared in an episode of Channel 9’s ‘60 minutes’ in September 2016, where you discussed the birth of your daughter and how she was conceived with Mr Castles through an egg donor.  You received $5000 in your NAB account on 21 September 2016 as payment for your participation on the show. 
28	You were also interviewed by Woman’s Day and an article was published on 14 November 2016 about how a ‘stranger gave a grandma a baby at the age of 51’.  The article discusses ‘Kim and her partner Greg’ and how they met later in life.  You received $4,600 on 17 November 2016 in your NAB account as payment for your participation. 
Detection and interview
29	On 5 December 2016 your offending was detected by way of a tip off.  On 
11 July 2018 the matter was referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for prosecution.
30	As part of the investigation the Department wrote to you on 23 February 2018 inviting you to participate in a formal interview.  You agreed to attend a formal interview on 16 March 2018 however on 13 March 2018 you contacted the Department and declined to attend the formal interview after seeking legal advice.  A formal interview did not take place.
Failure to comply with Recognizance Release Order
31	On 20 November 2009 you were sentenced to a period of 3 years imprisonment by His Honour Judge Gamble in relation to three Commonwealth Indictments relating to defrauding the Commonwealth.  You were released on a recognizance release order in the sum of $1000 after serving 18 months imprisonment.  The condition of the order was to be of good behaviour for 24 months.
32	On 2 December 2010 you were released on home detention to serve the balance of your custodial sentence.  Accordingly, the operational period of the recognizance release order was from 20 May 2011 to 19 May 2013.  The conduct in relation to Charges 1 and 2 on the indictment breaches the condition of the order in that you have failed to be of good behaviour by committing the further offences.
Nature and gravity of the offending
33	The offending to which you have pleaded guilty extends over a period of approximately six years resulting in you receiving the amount of $70,327 to which you were not entitled.
34	While acknowledging that the offending itself was relatively unsophisticated as you did not use false identities, Ms Dearman who appeared on behalf of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, submitted that, when consideration is given to the surrounding circumstances, your offending can only be viewed as very serious.
35	Your offending in relation to Charges 1 and 2, occurred in circumstances where you were subject to a recognizance release order to be of good behaviour as a result of being sentenced for very similar offending.  That offending involved a number of charges of dishonestly obtaining a benefit to which you were not entitled. The total amount on that occasion was $140,000, obtained over approximately 20 years.  You were sentenced on 20 November 2009 to 3 years imprisonment to be released after serving 18 months, to then be of good behaviour for 2 years.  This offending breaches that order and is subject to a separate charge to which you have also pleaded guilty.
36	As outlined in the prosecution opening, the primary deception in this instance was providing false information as to your relationship status.  In a very detailed analysis, the prosecution opening clearly demonstrates that throughout the relevant period, you were in a close relationship with 
Mr Castles.  You shared addresses, you had joint bank accounts, joint loans, joint insurance policies and went on joint holidays.  You, together with 
Mr Castles, have joint financial interest in four properties.  There was also a public aspect to the relationship as you appeared together on public television in relation to your IVF treatment and were featured in a magazine article.  In relation to your involvement in those media events, you received payment totalling almost $10,000. 
37	Therefore, while you made no secret of your financial activities or your relationship with Mr Castles, you continued with your deception in a brazen and audacious manner for approximately six years.  Your offending is a clear example of greed, not need.  In all the circumstances, in my view, your offending represents an egregious example of obtaining financial advantage by deception from a Commonwealth entity.
Personal circumstances
38	You are 55 years of age and were aged between 46 to 53 during the period of the offending.
39	You are the youngest of a sibship of three, although, you have a younger adopted brother.  You were raised in the Frankston area and report a problematic relationship with your father who was a heavy drinker.  You report that he was frequently physically and emotionally abusive towards you, your siblings and your mother.  Your relationship with your mother was also strained in that you were of the view that she favoured your older sister who herself was very dominant and abusive towards you.  You state that the abuse from your father and your older sister continued through your teenage years.  When you were aged 14, your mother took you and your siblings to New Zealand for a period of three months to escape the toxic relationship with your father.
40	When you were in your late twenties your father died of a heart attack.  Your mother is currently in a nursing home and suffers from dementia.  In recent years you have been involved in a dispute with your older sister in relation to your mother’s estate.
41	You attended local schools in the Frankston area and did not experience any learning difficulties.  Your school life, however, was impacted by your inability to maintain friendships.  When in high school, as result of your father controlling your contact with friends, you had limited friendships and consequently you were unable to be involved in extra-curricular activities.  You left school at the end of year 11, aged 16.  You then completed a diploma in secretarial studies and worked as a receptionist at law firms and real estate offices.
42	You ceased work after the birth of your first child when you were aged 18.  You ran your own courier company and ultimately returned to working in office administration roles.  Following your release from prison in late 2010, you were unable to find paid employment.  You attempted to commence a number of businesses, including childminding and a laundry business, however, both were unsuccessful.  In recent times, you have completed a Diploma in Counselling through a TAFE college that you undertook between 2014 and 2019.  Upon completion of the diploma, you made enquiries about working as a counsellor and as such, you have enrolled in a Bachelor of Social Science at Eastern College Australia in order to obtain a degree to allow you to undertake that work.
43	Your relationship history is somewhat complex.  At age 14 you met your first partner, Kevin Pennell who is two years your senior.  You married when you were just 16 and at age 18 gave birth to your first child, who is now aged 37.  The relationship with Mr Pennell was violent and abusive which you have described to your psychologist as including financial abuse.  The abuse extended to your daughter which ultimately led to the involvement of Victoria Police and the Department of Human Services who removed your daughter from the family home for a period of time.  You formally separated from 
Mr Pennell in 2000.
44	Your next relationship was with Gregory Castles and you report that the relationship was positive at the beginning.  You had a child together in 
July 2007 and then attempted, with Mr Castles, to have another child through IVF.  Upon your release from prison, the relationship became dysfunctional.  You report that Mr Castles was verbally abusive towards you and occasionally violent.  You state that the violence extended to you and your daughter and more recently, your younger daughter, who is now aged four.  As outlined in the prosecution opening, your younger daughter was born following an IVF procedure.
45	You state that Mr Castles has a significant gambling problem and would regularly steal money from you.  However, the prosecution in their sentencing submissions takes issue with this, given there is no evidence in any of the financial records demonstrating a gambling problem and I was not provided with any independent evidence to support your claim.
46	Ultimately, the relationship with Mr Castles deteriorated and you claim that you have not been in a relationship with him since 2018.  You report that 
Mr Castles has a poor relationship with your eldest daughter Stephanie and they do not have contact.
47	Following the plea hearing, you made a telephone call to Centrelink on 
1 December 2020.  In that call, which was recorded, you make enquiries as to your current benefit.  It is self evident from the conversation that you and the operator refer to a combined income of you and your partner.  On one occasion you refer to the possibility of going to gaol and ask how to transfer your benefit to your ‘partner’.  I will return to this later in my reasons.
48	You have a significant and relevant prior criminal history which commenced with an appearance in the Magistrates Court in 1984.  The majority of your past criminal activity is dishonesty related offending and includes convictions for perjury, making false documents, theft and the very serious and relevant prior conviction for defrauding the Commonwealth for which you were sentenced to a term of imprisonment in 2009.
49	A report was prepared by Dr Matthew Barth, psychologist, and tendered on the plea.  Dr Barth provides detailed background history and conducted some psychometric testing.  Dr Barth ultimately formed the view that your thought processes are lucid and coherent, that your moral reasoning is not impaired and that your intelligence is estimated to be in the normal range.  As a result of testing, he found that you meet the criteria of suffering a dependent personality disorder with borderline features.  He is also the view that your current psychological condition meets the criteria of major depressive disorder which has intensified as a result of your legal situation.  I have taken the contents of Dr Barth’s report into account.
50	Dr Barth also gave evidence on the plea and essentially confirmed the findings in his report.  Dr Barth clarified his findings by stating that none of the diagnoses revealed as a result of his assessment have a causative link to the offending.  He did confirm however that there is a likely risk of your conditions deteriorating in custody.
51	A number of other documents were tendered, including a report from the Department of Human Services in relation to the family violence issues that have arisen in relation to Mr Castles.  Two letters were also tendered from Penny Powys, psychologist, who has been involved in counselling with you since May 2019 in relation to family violence issues which seems to reference both relationships you have been involved in.  A letter was also tendered prepared by Rachel Rogers of South Eastern CASA, which I have also taken into account.
52	Three letters were tendered from Dr Robert Kruk, consultant psychiatrist.  
Dr Kruk has had contact with both you and your daughter Stephanie as part of a shared care referral from your general practitioner.
53	In the first of those letters dated 1 May 2019, Dr Kruk simply confirms you were suffering depression, which on that occasion seemed to be as a result of an injury received while on a cruise ship in December 2014.  As confirmed by Dr Kruk in evidence, the letter was prepared also for the purposes of stating that you are unfit for work and, as I understand it, was used to then assist you in obtaining a benefit.
54	The second letter dated 6 October 2020, states that your mental state has deteriorated as a result of facing court proceedings, the fear you have of going to gaol and the consequences for your children if that occurs.
55	The third letter from Dr Kruk is dated 4 November 2020 and reports on an assessment of your daughter conducted in April 2020 when he prescribed medication for ADHD.  On that occasion, he states that Stephanie was not suffering any overt depressive symptoms or suicidal thoughts.  On a second assessment which occurred over the telephone on 4 November 2020, Dr Kruk reports that she was suffering anxiety and depression as result of your upcoming court case and the fear that you may go to gaol.  Dr Kruk reports that Stephanie was exhibiting suicidal thoughts and he considered the need to report these matters, which was the motivation for writing the letter.  Dr Kruk gave evidence on the plea and essentially confirmed the matters in the letters provided.
56	Four references were tendered.  The first of those was from George Hodge, an elderly man whom you were supporting in the community.  The carer’s pension you received was linked to your care of Mr Hodge.  He speaks positively of your care of him and his observations of the care of your children.  The second reference was from Stephen Snow your brother, who confirms the family violence experienced in your early years and the abusive relationships that you have been involved in.  The third reference was prepared by Dylan Smith who was a teacher of yours when you were undertaking the TAFE course.  He reports that you are extremely competent, that your work is of a high standard, and that you are organised and possess excellent communication skills.  The fourth letter was prepared by Julie Morsillo, a lecturer in the course you are currently undertaking.  Ms Morsillo reports that you are a caring and kind person who is diligent in your work and caring of the other students.
57	Following the plea hearing, you sent further material directly to the Court which consisted of a letter written by you dated 30 November 2020, together with a number of pages of biographical material in relation to your children, other family members and friends.  I have read this material and have taken it into account.
Relevant sentencing considerations
58	As the charges to which you have pleaded guilty are Commonwealth offences, I am required to take into account a number of matters pursuant to s 16A of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).  In written sentencing submissions, both Ms Dearman and Mr Sim, who appeared on your behalf, have highlighted those matters in s 16A(2), they submit should be given weight in this instance.  I have taken those submissions into account.  At the outset, Mr Sim sensibly conceded that deterrence, both general and specific, denunciation of your conduct and just punishment are prominent sentencing considerations.
59	I take into account your plea of guilty.  As was conceded by Mr Sim, the plea is not a plea at the earliest opportunity.  You conducted a contested committal; however, I was told that at that stage some aspects of the evidence had not been clarified and the committal was only of short duration.  Your plea still has utilitarian benefit.  It has saved court time and expense and a trial of this nature would have been lengthy.  Further, in light of the suspension of trials due to the pandemic, any trial would have been significantly delayed, which has also been avoided by your plea.
60	As to genuine remorse, there is little evidence.  It was submitted that your comments to Dr Barth and Dr Kruk demonstrate a degree of remorse.  However, the comments you made seemed to be linked to the consequences of your conduct on yourself and your children.  While I accept that you are regretful for your conduct and have taken responsibility by pleading guilty, there is no evidence of your appreciation of the impact your conduct has on the community and the pressure it places on the social security system which is designed for people in need.
61	General deterrence is the primary sentencing consideration in cases such as this.  As is well established, social security frauds are not victimless crimes and the integrity of the system is undermined by conduct such as yours as was noted by King CJ in R v Cameron:
The social security system is the method by which society provides an income to those of its members who, due to misfortune, are not able to provide an income for themselves.
Parliament determines the conditions and the level of benefits, and no doubt, in doing so, determines not only what is necessary to meet the needs of welfare beneficiaries but also what society, through the taxpayer, can sustain in that regard.  Abuse of the social security system jeopardises the system itself and therefore the welfare of all those who depend for their livelihood upon the system.  It is the duty of the court to protect the Social Security system against this type of abuse by making orders which operate as an effective deterrence.
62	In your case specific deterrence must also feature prominently.  Your prior history consists largely of dishonesty offences and, as already noted, your offending on this occasion occurred while you were subject to a recognizance release order with a condition that you be of good behaviour for very similar offending.  Your offending occurred over a significant period and can only be attributed to greed.
63	Mr Sim submitted that family hardship is able to be taken into account as a result of the impact your imprisonment may have on your daughter Stephanie.   Concern was also raised in relation to the care of your younger daughter.  It was pointed out that both girls would most likely have to live with Mr Castles.  Given the history of your relationship with Mr Castles, this causes you significant anxiety.  Further, as a result of the evidence of Dr Kruk that Stephanie may be at risk of self-harm if you were to be imprisoned, that this fact adds to your hardship and, as such, it was submitted that the hardship would be exceptional.  
64	In my view, having considered the evidence, while I accept that you will suffer hardship if imprisoned, I do not except that any hardship would amount to exceptional hardship.  The family has had recent involvement from CASA, Peninsular Health and the Department of Health and Human Services, each of which have an understanding of the family history and any associated risks to the children.  In the letter from the Department of Human Services, the writer is well aware of the fact that you may be imprisoned and has considered the risk to the children.  Nonetheless, I do accept that your imprisonment will be burdensome, give the concerns you will have for your children’s welfare, in particular Stephanie.  For similar reasons, I also accept that Verdins limbs 5 and 6 have application in relation to your disorders that Dr Barth has identified.
65	As to you prospects of rehabilitation, given your criminal history and the views of Dr Barth that your insight is at a ‘formative level’, it is difficult to assess your prospects positively.  Judge Gamble, when sentencing you in 2009 for similar offending, assessed your prospects as ‘at best fair’.  Self evidently, that was an optimistic prediction.  Mr Sim submitted, however, that recent changes in your life provide a more positive picture.  He submitted that you have not been with Mr Castles for some two years and thus do not have the influence of a dysfunctional relationship which you have endured for many years.  Further, you are now some way through a Bachelor of Social Science Degree that will enable you to begin new career path and provide better stability for you and your children.
66	The call to Centrelink in recent days is not relied on as an aggravating feature.  However, I accept the submission of the prosecution that it is inconsistent with some of the submissions made on your behalf in relation to your relationship with Mr Castles.  In my view, while the positive steps you are taking to improve yourself may also improve your prospects of rehabilitation, you clearly have some way to go to improve your insight, and your prospects, in my view, can only be approached with caution.
67	In dealing with the breach of the recognizance release order, it was submitted on your behalf that the Court could revoke the order and, pursuant to s 20A(5)(c)(ic), place you on a community correction order pursuant to s 20AB.  Ms Dearman submitted that the breach is especially egregious as it involved almost identical offending and commenced three months into the recognizance release period.  As such, she submitted that the only appropriate option is to revoke the order and order that you serve the outstanding 18 months imprisonment pursuant to s 20A(5)(c)(i).  In my view, a community correction order is not an appropriate way to deal with the breach in the circumstances and I accept the submission of the prosecution as to the seriousness of the breach and the proposed order.
68	I take into account the circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. While circumstances have improved as corrections authorities adjust to the risk factors associated with the pandemic, there are still added burdens to prisoners and their families.  In person visits have still not commenced and there are restrictions on programs.  In your particular circumstances, as you will be entering the prison system today, you will be subject to a quarantine period which is an added burden.  I take these matters into account.
69	Finally, in my view, in relation to each charge on the indictment, having weighed the applicable sentencing considerations pursuant to s 17A(1) of the Crimes Act 1914, I am satisfied that no other sentence is appropriate other than a term of imprisonment.
Sentence
70	Ms Castles, will you please stand.
71	Kimberley Castles, on the charge of failing to comply with the conditions of a recognizance release order, you are convicted and ordered to be imprisoned for the outstanding 18 months of the original sentence.  That sentence will begin today.
72	On Charge 1, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment.  On Charge 2, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.  On Charge 3, dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 
12 months imprisonment. 
73	The sentences on Charges 1 and Charge 2 will commence 12 months after the commencement of the sentence on the breach charge.  The sentence on Charge 3 will commence 12 months after the sentences commence on Charges 1 and 2.  That makes for a total effective sentence of 36 months imprisonment.  Pursuant to s 20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1914, I direct that you be released after serving a period of 2 years, upon giving a recognizance in the amount of $3000 and to then be of good behaviour for a period of 2 years and 6 months.
74	I am required to explain to you that, while you have received sentence of 
3 years imprisonment, you will be released after serving 2 years of that sentence.  When released, you must be of good behaviour for a period of 2 years and 6 months.  That means that if you commit another offence during that period of good behaviour, you may be brought back to court to be dealt with for a breach of that order and you may forfeit the $3000.  Do you understand, Ms Castles?
75	Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, if not for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a period of imprisonment of 4 years with a 
non-parole period of 3 years.   
- - -