IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT Melbourne
CRIMINAL DIVISION	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	
General List

CR-21-00975

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
DAVID WILLIAM PARKINSON		

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE BRIMER	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	22 November 2021	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	15 December 2021	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Parkinson	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2021] VCC 2044		

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:	CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: 	Aggravated burglary – make threat to inflict serious injury – confrontational offending – accused carried tomahawk – victim is disability support who cared for accused – confession made to police – plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity – substantial remorse – Verdins principles – accused self-medicated – state of delirium – impaired state of consciousness – reduced moral culpability – complex medical history – complex psychopharmacological regime – neurological and cardiological conditions – accused grossly ill-equipped to cope with imprisonment – mental health of accused would deteriorate significantly in prison – accused exceptionally well-supported in community – accused on NDIS – family support – regular treating physicians – good prospects of rehabilitation – no previous breaches of court orders – assessed as suitable for community correction order 
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) ss 21, 77; Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) ss 6AAA, 9, 44
Cases Cited:	DPP v Dalgleish (2017) 262 CLR 428; Hogarth v R [2012] VSCA 302; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; Rossi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 296; Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169
Sentence:	Time-served and 18 month community correction order

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr M Roper	OPP	
			
For the Accused	Ms A Sharpley	Stary Norton Halphen	

HER HONOUR:

Introduction
1	David Parkinson, you have pleaded guilty to:
(a)	one charge of aggravated burglary contrary to s77 of the Crimes Act 1958; and
(b)	one charge of make threat to inflict serious injury contrary to s21 of the Crimes Act 1958.
2	The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 25 years' imprisonment.  The maximum penalty for make threat to inflect serious injury is 10 years imprisonment.
Circumstances of the offending
3	I will briefly summarise the circumstances of your offending.  The victims are
Ms Belinda Peyton and Mr Dan Lynch, who lived at an address in Fairfield.
Ms Peyton is a disability support worker who provided care to you for approximately three years.
4	Ms Peyton drove you to medical and other essential appointments about two to three times a week when she started caring for you.  This increased to four to five times a week at the start of 2020.  Ms Peyton never told you her address, but had mentioned to you that she lived south of the Fairfield train line.
5	On Saturday, 23 May 2020, at approximately 6.30 am, you drove your car to the street in Fairfield where Ms Peyton lived.  You recognised her car parked in the driveway.  You walked down the driveway and entered her home through the back door, which was unlocked.  You were wearing a leather jacket and white gardening gloves and carrying a tomahawk.
6	You walked down the hallway and opened Mr Lynch’s bedroom door.  You raised your right arm over Mr Lynch’s head as if you were ready to strike and yelled, 'Where is the bitch?'.  
7	Mr Lynch was taken by surprise as he did not hear you enter the house.  He feared for his life.  He tried to engage in calm conversation with you and in response you said, 'Where is the bitch that owns the Magna out the front?'.
8	Mr Lynch realised you were one of Ms Peyton’s clients, however, he continued a calm conversation with you as he did not want to put Ms Peyton in danger.  You yelled out, 'I'll chop you if you don't tell me where she is'.  
9	Your yelling woke Ms Peyton up.  She opened Mr Lynch’s bedroom door and immediately recognised you.  She saw you speaking with Mr Lynch whilst holding the tomahawk in your right hand.  
10	Ms Peyton feared for her life and for Mr Lynch’s life.  She said 'David, David, David', to get your attention.  She asked you to put the tomahawk down and you threw the tomahawk on the floor.
11	Ms Peyton defused the situation by walking you into the kitchen and making you a cup of coffee.  She asked you if you had any further weapons.  You produced a large sharp knife with green tape wrapped around the blade from your jumper and placed it under the dining table.  You also pulled approximately 10 disposable gloves from your jacket pocket, which fell onto the floor
12	You then said, 'Phew, it was going to be messy'.  This comment put Ms Peyton in extreme fear, however, she kept you calm by talking to you for approximately
30 minutes until 7 am.  Ms Peyton and Mr Lynch suggested that you should leave.  You picked up the tomahawk, knife and gloves and left the house.  
13	Ms Peyton immediately left her home to stay at a friend’s house as she was scared you would return.  She contacted police on Monday, 25 May 2020, to report the incident.
Investigation, arrest and interview
14	On that day, Monday, 25 May 2020, at approximately 10.45 pm, police located you outside the Coles Supermarket on Swan Street, Richmond.  You were arrested and transported to Heidelberg Police Station for interview.
15	You cooperated with police and your interview was confessional.  You made full and frank disclosure, although there were limits on your memory of the incident.
16	You told police you had self-medicated by taking one more anti-depressant tablet than prescribed by your doctor, and that you were in a dream during the incident.
17	You told police you drove your car and spent several minutes searching for
Ms Peyton’s address before locating her car in her driveway.  You said you entered via the rear door of the home.  You said you had been to Ms Peyton’s home once before, approximately 12 months ago.  
18	You admitted to being in possession of the tomahawk and gloves when you entered Ms Peyton’s home and admitted to being a trespasser.  
19	Following the interview, you were remanded in custody.  During your time in custody you swallowed a plastic knife in a reported suicide attempt and required endoscopic surgery.
20	On the 26 May 2020 police attended your home and executed a search warrant.  They found a blue diary on the floor of the lounge room.  An entry two days before the incident reads: 
'I am ugly and stupid, a waste of time, goodbye.  I thought Belinda was nice to me.  What a sad fucking idiot I am.  I wish I was dead.  What have I done wrong?  I don't understand.  I feel so very bad and sick, can't eat or sleep.  I wish I was dead!'.
21	Police also seized an old rusted tomahawk on the floor of the second bedroom.
22	On Friday, 4 September 2020 you were granted bail at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.
Plea of guilty 
23	You pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity at the committal case conference in October 2020.  I accept that by your plea of guilty you have saved the community the time and expense of a trial and shown willingness to facilitate the course of justice.
24	I have had regard to the Court of Appeal’s comments that a plea of guilty entered during the COVID-19 pandemic is worthy of greater weight in mitigation than a similar plea entered at a time when the community and the courts are not impacted by the pandemic.
Remorse
25	Your early plea of guilty also evidences remorse.  Ms Sharpley submitted, and I accept, that you have shown substantial remorse for your actions.  At the scene of the crime, you said:
'I’m so sorry Belinda.  I’m so sorry… Oh god, what have I done?'
26	You also told Mr Lynch that you were, 'terribly sorry [you] behaved poorly'.
27	During your police interview you repeatedly expressed remorse and empathy for Ms Peyton.  You appeared horrified by your own behaviour.  Amongst other things, you told police:
(a)	'I’m just so ashamed of myself and, you know, I’m embarrassed too but - but also really concerned you know about poor Belinda…';
(b)	“I scared this poor lady to death…'; and
(c)	'… I think the world of her and I’m just so sorry…'.
28	Associate Professor Carroll, forensic psychiatrist', reported that you told him you are, 'terribly remorseful', for what you have done.  
Victim Impact Statement
29	Ms Peyton and Mr Lynch have not made victim impact statements, although, as Ms Sharpley acknowledged, the incident would have been a terrifying experience for them, especially given the threat and the presence of the weapon.
Pre-sentence detention
30	Total pre-sentence detention in this matter is 102 days.
Prior convictions
31	You have a criminal history of six court appearances from 2010 onwards.  You have been convicted of the following offences: 
(a)	using and cultivating cannabis;
(b)	possessing cannabis and drugs of dependence; 
(c)	possessing prohibited weapons without exemption or approval; 
(d)	unlawful assault and using threatening words and behaviour in public; and 
(e)	driving whilst suspended.
32	You have previously received fines, adjourned undertakings and community based orders.  You have not breached any court orders.
Personal circumstances
33	You were born in Melbourne and brought up in Glen Waverley.  Your mother worked as a receptionist and accountant.  Your father was a union secretary but passed away in 2012.  You are the eldest of three, with one brother and one sister.  You have not had any intimate relationships and do not have any children.
34	You reported to Associate Professor Carroll that you, 'don't have good memories', of childhood, but were unable to expand on this statement apart from noting that you had, 'undiagnosed attention deficit disorder'.  You also reported that around the age of eight years you were, 'molested in a toilet block by a stranger', which you believe affected you when you were younger.
35	You struggled academically at school and were, 'picked on', by peers and teachers, leading to truancy.  You left school at the age of 14 with, 'no friends at all'.  You completed an apprenticeship in jewellery repair, then went on to work repairing pallets for Peter’s Ice Cream.  After that you returned to work for your old boss in the jewellery industry, working part-time until your boss passed away.  
36	In 2002 you completed a Diploma of Arts (Screen Print Design) as a mature student.  You claim to have become, 'quite prolific in [your] art', including having some exhibitions.
37	In 2010, you were the victim of a hit and run accident.  You were hit by a truck as a pedestrian on Springvale Road, resulting in brief loss of consciousness and head injuries.  You report that after the accident you, 'couldn't remember things any more'.  You have been on a disability support pension ever since.
38	In 2018 you suffered from a subarachnoid brain haemorrhage due to an aneurysm, followed by a stroke due to vasospasm (temporary narrowing of the blood flow to an area of your brain).  This incident was life-threatening and caused damage to the right front lobe of your brain.  You had surgical intervention in 2018 and 19, including the insertion of a coil to reduce the risk of further haemorrhages.
39	In July 2020, while in custody, you had a cardiac pacemaker inserted to treat sick sinus syndrome, which is a slow heartbeat.
40	You live in a one bedroom Ministry of Housing flat in Richmond.  You have a support worker under the NDIS and have been assisted by the NDIS since its program began several years ago.  Your support worker visits three times a week to help you with shopping, cleaning and attending appointments.  You drive and are able to use public transport.
Medical issues
41	You have complex medical problems in both the neurological and cardiological domains.  Associate Professor Carroll gave evidence that you are diagnoseable with a major neurocognitive disorder due to multiple aetiologies (traumatic brain injury and vascular disease).  You see a neurology specialist four times a year and a cardiology specialist four times a year.  You also have a complex medication regime.
42	You told Associate Professor Carroll that you have been seeing psychiatrists all your life because of difficulties with fitting in.  You were eventually diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and bipolar affective disorder.
43	You have been receiving treatment from Dr James Lees since February 2011.  Your treatment consists of pharmacotherapy and supportive psychotherapy conducted with 45 minute appointments approximately every fortnight.  The objectives of treatment are to enhance your personal and social competence so as to enable greater participation in community life, progressively ameliorating the degree of marginalisation you have experienced throughout most of your childhood and adult life.
44	Dr Lees notes you have, 'chronic mental health issues dating back to childhood'.  These consist of complex post-traumatic stress disorder, ADHD, a mood disorder, paranoid personality disorder and an acquired brain injury (ABI).
45	You have also been diagnosed with:
(a)	narcolepsy, a neurological disorder that affects your ability to wake and sleep;
(b)	cardiac arrhythmia;
(c)	emphysema, a lung condition that causes shortness of breath;
(d)	Hepatitis C;
(e)	lower back scoliosis; and
(f)	chronic pain.
46	You have a history of addictive behaviours as noted by Dr Lees.  You have a history of nicotine addiction and, 'alcoholism'.  You also have a history of, 'opioid addiction', secondary to treatment for back pain, as well as some usage of stimulants.  You overcame your opioid addiction by participating in a rehabilitation program, which you attended diligently.  You used cannabis excessively as a teen.  Pre-existing abusive use of street acquired amphetamines has been successfully resolved.  Dr Lees reported that in the last two to three years you have made significant progress in being able to change socially unacceptable behaviours.  Your engagement in treatment has been regular, diligent and uninterrupted save for some occasions early on, when you forgot appointments because of memory problems.  You arranged for a telephone call to be made to remind you of your appointments.
47	Dr Lees is of the opinion that ongoing treatment will be needed at the current frequency, with supportive psychotherapy and the current pharmacological intervention, as it has taken a long time to find a combination of medications that have been responsible for the stability you have achieved in the last two to three years.  
Objective gravity of the offences
48	Aggravated burglary and make threat to inflict serious injury are serious offences.  This is reflected in their maximum penalties. 
49	General deterrence is an important sentencing consideration when dealing with the offence of aggravated burglary, especially of the; 'confrontational variety'. However, as I will set out in more detail, your offending is explicable by reference to a temporary delusional state triggered by particular circumstances and, accordingly, ought be sensibly moderated.
Moral culpability
50	At the time of your offending, you were in the midst of a short-lived, temporary state of delirium due to a well-meaning, but ill-advised, decision to take an extra dosage of an anti-depressant.  This occurred against the background of your complex psychopharmacological regime and vulnerable brain due to your acquired brain injury.
51	You reported to Associate Professor Carroll that for approximately 10 days leading up to the day of the offence you knew something was wrong.  When the police went to your apartment they found the diary note from 21 May 2020, two days before the offending.  You did not recall writing this diary note.
52	You had taken an extra dose of your antidepressant medication in an attempt to reduce escalating pain.  In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of your medical appointments were cancelled.  It was difficult for you to get an appointment.  You reported that your GP had left you with the impression an increased dose would help.  You took an increased dose for about 10 days.  
53	You began to develop, 'bad dreams'.  You did not connect these changes to the increased dose of anti-depressants.  Things got worse: you stayed up a couple of nights, you were overtired and falling asleep.  As a consequence of your acquired brain injury you are more vulnerable to the likelihood of developing delirium in the context of your acute medical problems.  This anti-depressant at higher doses has been noted as a possible cause of delirium.
54	You did not recall driving to the victims’ place but said you, 'must have done' so.  There is no issue that you had a good relationship with the victim.
55	Associate Professor Carroll reported and gave evidence that you had an impaired state of consciousness at the time of the offences, with reduced ability to differentiate between internal and external worlds.  The way you described your behaviour and your shifts of emotion is consistent with his opinion that you were in a delirious state.  Associate Professor Carroll said you appeared open and honest: he did not get the sense you were trying to cover things up.  You were mortified during the assessment.  The delirium meant that the memory traces for many of your actions and your motivations for driving to Ms Peyton's house had simply not been laid down.
56	Your state of mind appears to have changed very abruptly after Ms Peyton called out your name.  You were immediately remorseful and compliant.  You:
(a)	put the tomahawk down when Ms Peyton asked you to;
(b)	you produced a knife and put it under the table when Ms Peyton asked if you had further weapons;
(c)	you said to Ms Peyton ‘I’m so sorry Belinda.  I’m so sorry…Oh god, what have I done?';
(d)	left the premises when Ms Peyton and Mr Lynch asked you to;
(e)	and told Mr Lynch you were terribly sorry you behaved so badly.
57	You told Associate Professor Carrol that you miss the support of the victim.
58	In Associate Professor Carrol’s opinion, it is clear that you were in an impaired state of consciousness.  You would not have been able to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure as to the wrongfulness of your actions, although you likely did know the nature and quality of your actions.
59	Dr Lees reported that based on your description of your state of mind before and during the event, it appears clinically as if you were in a state of somnambulism.
60	In my view, the first limb of Verdins is satisfied by cogent evidence. Both the objective gravity of the offending and your moral culpability are significantly reduced.  As Associate Professor Carroll stated, 'There is a powerful and realistic connection between [your] temporary impairment and the offending'.
Relevant sentencing principles
Specific deterrence
61	Specific deterrence is of limited relevance given the circumstances of the offending.  The nature and severity of your symptoms and their effect on you at the time of the offending calls for considerable moderation of this principle.  Your criminal history is limited and commenced only at age 49.  You have not breached previous court orders.
Prospects of rehabilitation
62	Ms Sharpley submitted that the risk of your reoffending in a similar manner is very low, as you are exceptionally well-supported in the community.  This is evidenced by the letters of support from your treating psychiatrist, general practitioner, occupational therapist, physiotherapist and the support coordinator for your NDIS plan.
63	Ms Asperling, support coordinator, detailed the supports you receive in the community and your reliance on them.  She confirmed you will continue to receive ongoing collaborative support and assistance from your current care team providers.
64	A letter of support from Mr Justin Read, customer relationship manager at Nextt, noted that the care team has seen progressive positive changes regarding your ability to manage your emotions and wellbeing, although you still require significant assistance with memory and cognitive function.  You have worked hard at increasing your independence and reducing your anxiety.  You have made significant progress in creating relationships with Nextt support staff.
65	Your sister, Ms Louise Parkinson, and brother-in-law, Mr Wain, also provided letters of support.  You used to have lunch with Mr Wain most weeks before the pandemic.  Since you were bailed, Mr Wain has visited you every day to bring you your medication.  He wrote about your keen sense of humour and determination to make the most of your situation.  You regularly attend Scots Church in the Melbourne CBD.  The COVID-19 lockdown decimated your support network and left you confused and lonely.  Mr Wain considers that if your normal supports had been available, the offences would not have occurred.
66	Your sister wrote about the time she spent with you before COVID-19 restrictions and the financial support she and her husband provide.  She was very proud when you completed your fine arts certificate.  Before the pandemic you had surrounded yourself with a network of medical and community support.  Once restrictions were imposed, apart from phone contact with family, you were pretty much left alone, feeling isolated, lonely and confused.
67	That you are well supported in the community again is consistent with Associate Professor Carroll’s view that your rehabilitation needs are currently being met.
68	Although Mr Roper submitted that your prospects of rehabilitation are somewhat guarded, in my view, I accept that they are good; considering the available supports and your lack of extensive criminal history.  I note you have been on bail for 12 to 15 months and have been compliant with no further offending.
Other Verdins principles
69	Ms Sharpley submitted that imprisonment would have a deleterious effect on your mental and physical health, and your ability to live independently would be reduced following a remand period.  A custodial sentence would weigh more heavily upon you than it would on a person with unimpaired mental health.
70	Associate Professor Carroll’s opinion is that you are, 'grossly ill-equipped to cope with the stress of imprisonment due to [your] various conditions, especially your ABI, which renders [you] unable to cope with high levels of stress in a safe way'.  This is demonstrated during your period on remand in 2020 when you attempted to end your life.  Associate Professor Carroll considers mental health would deteriorate very significantly if you were to be imprisoned.  Your mood would be likely to abruptly and seriously deteriorate and you would be at risk of suicide.
71	Associate Professor Carroll considers your complex needs would be difficult to meet in prison.  He is concerned that your already fragile hold on independent living in the community may be permanently lost after further incarceration.
72	Ms Asperling is concerned that if you were incarcerated, then you would be at extreme high risk of losing your property due to limited and reduced housing availability.  Your apartment is your only form of safety and security where you have established a well-grounded network of mental health and allied health support within the community.
73	Mr Read considers it would be significantly detrimental should a prison sentence be imposed.  It would be disappointing to halt the wonderful progress you have made, given it seems to have been very out of character for you.
74	I am satisfied that imprisonment would create a significant risk to your mental and physical health.  I accept Professor Carroll’s view that your, 'Mental health would deteriorate very significantly in the event of another period of imprisonment'.  You would also be at risk of suicide and at risk of losing what independence you have achieved in the community.  Prison would have a deskilling and demoralising impact on your capacity for daily living.
75	Your time on remand was made more onerous by your complex needs and the COVID-19 pandemic.  There were frequent periods of isolation which made your experience exceptionally difficult.  You coped very poorly.  You were suicidal and in an isolation cell.  Challenges coping with custody are expected with someone with your level of disability, according to Associate Professor Carroll.
Current Sentencing Practices
76	I am obliged to have regard to current sentencing practices in determining the sentence, though I note the guidance of the High Court in DPP v Dalgleish that current sentencing practices are one of the many factors that must be taken into account in sentencing. 
77	The Sentencing Advisory Council’s Sentencing Snapshot No. 237 shows that
79.1 per cent of persons sentenced in the County and Supreme Courts of Victoria for aggravated burglary between 2014 and 2019 received a sentence of imprisonment.  A further 16.6 per cent received a sentence of imprisonment combined with a community correction order.
78	With respect to make threat to inflict serious injury, 82.3 per cent of persons sentenced in the County and Supreme Courts between 2015 and 2020 received a sentence of imprisonment.  14.4 per cent received a community correction order.
79	Every case is different and the Court must have regard to the individual circumstances of each case, which is what I have done.
Sentencing submissions
80	Mr Roper submitted that a sentence of imprisonment combined with a community correction order is within the available range.
81	Ms Sharpley submitted that having regard to all the features of your case, particularly the application of Verdins principles, the appropriate sentence is one that does not involve further confinement.  A community correction order would provide an additional level of oversight and monitoring of the extensive support system already in place to ensure your ongoing rehabilitation.
Assessments
82	The Court received a Community Correction Order Assessment Report on
24 November 2021.  You have been assessed as a suitable candidate for a community correction order.  Although you denied the use of drugs and alcohol at present, drug and alcohol conditions were recommended.  In addition, supervision and mental health conditions were recommended.
83	The Court also received Mental Health Advice and Response Service Report on
2 December 2021.  In the report the clinician described you as, 'polite and cooperative'.  The clinician described the severity of your mental health concerns as, 'moderate to high', noting you have a, 'substantial mental health history'.  However, you are already, 'well serviced', and it is sufficient for you to continue engaging with your GP, psychiatrist, psychologist and NDIS workers.  You have been referred to Odyssey House for counselling and should engage with this service.
84	On the further plea Ms Sharpley noted that you have attended an appointment at Odyssey House on 10 December 2021 and you have a follow-up appointment booked in for 7 January 2022.
Consideration
85	I have had regard to s44(1) of the Sentencing Act 1991, which allows the Court to make a combined term of imprisonment and community correction order if the term of imprisonment to be served, after deduction of any pre-sentence detention, is one year or less.
86	Having carefully considered, balanced and weighed all of the matters referred to during the course of the plea, in particular, your mental state at the time of the offending, I consider that a combination sentence achieves the right balance.  
87	I consider that a term of imprisonment of, ‘time served’, is appropriate in light of your personal circumstances and reduced moral culpability.  Albeit short, the term of imprisonment signifies that offending of this type is serious and addresses considerations of general deterrence and denunciation.
88	In addition, I consider a community correction order to be appropriate.  The imposition of conditions, directed towards drug and alcohol usage and mental health, address the sentencing considerations of rehabilitation and the attendant reduction in recidivism.  The protection of the community is served by your rehabilitation. The imposition of conditions requiring supervision address compliance.
Sentence
89	On Charge 1, aggravated burglary, and Charge 2, make threat to inflict serious injury, I sentence you to an aggregate term - - -
90	I think we have just lost Mr Roper.
91	ASSOCIATE:  Yes, we have.
92	HER HONOUR:  I will just pause while we try to get Mr Roper back and,
Ms Sharpley, while we pause I will just confirm the 102 days.
93	MS SHARPLEY:  Yes, Your Honour, 102 days.
94	HER HONOUR:  That is correct, yes, thank you.  Yes, Mr Roper seems to be back now.  Yes.
95	MR ROPER:  Yes, Your Honour, sorry, it seemed to freeze and then I could not hear anything.
96	HER HONOUR:  Yes.  I will just start that section again.
97	MR ROPER:  Thank you.
98	On Charge 1, aggravated burglary, and Charge 2, make threat to inflict serious injury, I sentence you to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 102 days.  These offences are founded on the same facts, or form, or are part of a series of offences of the same or similar character in accordance with s9 of the Sentencing Act 1991.  There is both a factual and temporal nexus between the charges.  
99	I declare that there are 102 days of pre-sentence detention to be reckoned as having been served.
100	In addition to the sentence of imprisonment, I make a community correction order of 18 months to commence immediately.
101	Because you have to consent to a community correction order being made, I will tell you what the conditions are.  The core conditions attached to every community correction order are that you must:
(a)	not commit another offence for which you could be imprisoned;
(b)	report to, and receive visits from, Corrections Victoria;  
(c)	notify Corrections Victoria of any change of address or employment; 
(d)	not leave Victoria without permission of Corrections Victoria; and 
(e)	comply with any direction given by Corrections Victoria to ensure compliance with the order.
102	I will also order that you comply with other conditions during that 18 months.
103	You must be under the supervision of a community correction officer.
104	You must undergo assessment and treatment, including testing for alcohol and drug abuse or dependency, as required by the Regional Manager.
105	You must undergo any mental health assessment and treatment that may include psychological, neuropsychological, psychiatric or treatment in a hospital or residential facility as directed by the Regional Manager.
106	If you consent to a community correction order being made, you will need to report to the Neighbourhood Justice Centre in Collingwood by no later than 4pm on
17 December 2021.
107	Mr Parkinson, do you consent to a community correction order being made with the conditions that I have outlined attached?  You do not stand, that is fine.
108	ACCUSED:  Yes, I do, Your Honour.
109	HER HONOUR:  If you do not complete any condition of the community correction order, you will be brought back before me to be re-sentenced and also be dealt with for not doing what you were ordered to do under the community correction order.  Do you understand what will happen if you do not complete any condition of the community correction order?
110	ACCUSED:  Yes, Your Honour.
111	HER HONOUR:  Ms Sharpley, would you like a moment just to speak to
Mr Parkinson and reiterate the conditions of the order?
112	MS SHARPLEY:  Yes, certainly, Your Honour.
113	HER HONOUR:  Yes, thank you.
114	MS SHARPLEY:  Thank you for that opportunity, Your Honour.
115	HER HONOUR:  Yes, thank you, Ms Sharpley.
Section 6AAA declaration
116	Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that had you pleaded not guilty to these charges and been found guilty of them, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 102 days together with a community correction order of three years.
117	Any opposition to the forfeiture order?
118	MS SHARPLEY:  No, Your Honour.
119	HER HONOUR:  I will make that order.  All right, we are just going to print off the order.  If there are no other matters, Ms Sharpley, Mr Roper - - -
120	MS SHARPLEY:  No, Your Honour.
121	HER HONOUR:  - - - I will thank you for your assistance and adjourn the court sine die.
122	MS SHARPLEY:  As Your Honour pleases.
123	MR ROPER:  Yes, there is nothing further.
124	HER HONOUR:  Thank you, Mr Roper.  I will just sign the forfeiture order before I adjourn.
- - -