IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT Melbourne
CRIMINAL DIVISION	 Revised
Not Restricted
 Suitable for Publication	
Case No. CR-20-01694

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
STEPHEN KARAZISIS		

---

JUDGE:	His Honour Judge Holding	
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne	
DATE OF HEARING:	2 March 2022	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	23 March 2022	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Karazisis	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2022] VCC 349		

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:	Criminal Law – Sentence. 
Catchwords: 	Plea of guilty – criminal Record – summary offences – theft – handling stolen goods – possession of a drug of dependence – obtaining property by deception – cultivation of a narcotic plant - dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime - possessing a prohibited weapon - possessing a Schedule 4 poison - failing to provide password to a storage device – drug use – dishonesty offences – denunciation – rehabilitation – totality – remorse – general deterrence -criminal enterprise – lost respect for propriety rights of others – brain injury. 
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) – Drugs, poisons and controlled Substances At 1981 (Vic) – Control of Weapons Act 1990 (Vic) – Corrections act 1986 (Vic) – Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). 
Cases Cited:	R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269. 
Sentence:	Total effective sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment. A period of four months to be served before being eligible for parole. 

---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel		Solicitors	
For the DPP	Mr D. Smith		Office of Public Prosecutions	
				
For the Accused	Mr J. Mitchell		McNally & Gleeson Lawyers 	

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction
1	Stephen Karazisis, you have pleaded guilty to the following offences:
I.	Four charges of theft (contrary to s 74(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic));
II.	One charge of handling stolen goods (contrary to s 88 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic));
III.	One charge of obtaining property by deception goods (contrary to s 81(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic));
IV.	Two charges of possessing a drug of dependence (contrary to s 73(1) of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic)); and
V.	One charge of cultivation of a narcotic plant (contrary to s 72B of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic)).
2	You have also pleaded guilty to the related summary offences:
I.	Two charges (summary offences 14 and 16) of dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime (contrary to s 195 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic));
II.	One charge (summary offence 18) of possessing a prohibited weapon (contrary to s 5AA of the Control of Weapons Act 1990 (Vic)); 
III.	One charge (summary offence 19) of possessing a Schedule 4 poison (contrary to s 36B(2) of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic)); and
IV.	One charge (summary offence 21) of failing to provide password to a storage device (contrary to s 465AAA(2) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)).
3	The circumstances of your offending are set out in detail in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea. I act upon the facts as outlined in that opening which (apart from one aspect that I will refer to subsequently) were not disputed by you . 
Circumstances of the offending
4	On 16 August 2018, you attended Chadstone Shopping Centre. You entered the Bottega Veneta store, walked around, and selected a mobile phone cover valued at $600.00. You then walked out without paying. This constitutes charge 1 – theft.
5	On 27 September 2018, you again attended Chadstone Shopping Centre. You entered the Christian Louboutin store, walked around, and selected a keychain valued at $355.00. You then again walked out without paying. This constitutes charge 2 – theft. 
6	On 6 January 2019, your co-offender (and girlfriend at the time) Meghan Young stole a suitcase and a bag from the lobby of her former Brighton apartment building. These bags contained various property, which was then retained by you and Ms Young. This constitutes charge 3 – handling stolen goods.
7	On 15 February 2019, you and Ms Young went to the New Bay Hotel in Brighton. You played the poker machines, including one which was faulty. You placed your hands through the coin hopper and stole $30.00 in coins This constitutes charge 4 – theft.
8	On 14 March 2019, you drove to the Southland Shopping Centre with a co-offender, Simon Grenness. You provided a driver’s licence in the name of Fiona Hossack, that was stolen on 6 January 2019, to Ms Grenness. Sorry that might be a Simone Grenness, but in any event it matters little whether it is a male or female.  The licence was modified to show Grenness’ photograph. Grenness used the altered licence to obtain two iPhones, which she set up on 24 month plans in the name of Ms Hossack. This constitutes charge 5 – obtain property by deception.
9	Police executed a search warrant on a Brighton East address on 4 April 2019. They found you asleep in the master bedroom. No-one else was present.
10	The police located a snap-lock bag containing 21.4 grams of cannabis (constituting charge 6 – possess cannabis), 6 Alprazolam tablets and 02.6 of Oxycodone (constituting charge 7 – possess drug of dependence), and 2 g of Sildenafil, 0.8 g of Tadafil, 0.2 g of Citalopram, and 2 Metronidazole tablets (related summary offence 19 – possess schedule 4 poison).
11	Various items (such as sunglasses, credit cards, licences, mail, and Medicare cards)  were seized which you concede by your plea were in your possession and which were reasonably suspected to be the proceeds of crime.  This constitutes related summary offence 14 – dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime. The police also located a set of Kincrome Tools which you stolen from your employer (charge 8 – theft), and a taser (related summary offence 18 – possess prohibited weapon).
12	You were then lawfully requested by  Police, pursuant to a warrant, to provide PIN code which would access the iPhone located in the premises, but refused to do so. This constitutes summary charge 21 – failing to provide password to a storage device. 
13	The Police then attended and searched your home in Bentleigh East. They located 17 bottles of aftershave and 5 watches that  were reasonably suspected to be proceeds of crime. This constitutes related summary offence 16 – dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime.
14	On 4 April 2019, police also  executed a search warrant at  a Berwick address. No-one was present at the time of the search. Police located two rooms containing mature cannabis plants. There were a total of 21 cannabis plants, with a total weight of 50.76 kg.
15	The plants were being grown hydroponically in individual pots, with multiple high wattage lamps and suction vents. All windows and doors had been taped up to seal in heat, and prevent light escaping. An electrical bypass had been installed, along with lamps, switchboard timers, and fans. This was a relatively sophisticated set-up. 
16	The activities described in paragraphs 14 and 15 constitute charge 9 – cultivation of a narcotic plant.
17	The Police seized a blue glove from the recycling bin at the Berwick address. Subsequent analysis of the glove indicated the DNA profiles of both you and 
Ms Young on the inside of the glove.
18	You were interviewed on 4 April 2019 and gave a no comment record of interview. However, in June 2020, the Police intercepted telephone calls between you and two unknown men. In these telephone calls, you made various admissions to cultivating the cannabis relating to charge 9. For example you were recorded as telling an associate: 
“.. No-one knew about the house. I was there by myself.” 
In response to the associate asking whether you had carbon filters you said: 

“Yeah, fuck yeah, bro . It’s essential . I was fuckin’ using fuckin like, 14 inch fans, bro.’ In comments relation to the setup of the house you told the associate, ‘No-one can be fucked because it’s so hard to do it like that... ours is proper man…. we’re talking 340 …. carbon filters . You don’t smell nothin’.” 
Personal circumstances
19	Your personal circumstances are partly outlined in the psychological report prepared by Patrick Newton dated 15 March 2021, that was tendered on your plea. That history was expanded upon by your Counsel Mr Richter during the plea. It is apparent that this psychological report was prepared for a County Court plea that was conducted in March 2021 about which I will refer to in more detail later in these reasons.
20	You are currently 31 years of age, and were 27 and 28 at the time of your offending. You were born in Adelaide, and were the second of three children to parents of Greek background. Your parents worked long hours in order to support your family. Your parents’ relationship was fractious, and their conflicts often escalated to physical violence. Your father was described by you as being a strict disciplinarian who used corporal punishment upon you throughout your childhood.  However, as an adult, you say you now enjoy a positive relationship with your family.
21	You have experienced significant difficulties with your concentration and attention from a young age. While this was not the subject of investigation as a child, you have recently been assessed as having a neuropsychological profile consistent with ‘adult ADHD’.
22	You attended schools in the local Bentleigh area and describe your own behaviour at primary school as ‘playing the clown’. You described generally being an average student but you had difficulty with concentration. These difficulties continued when you were in secondary school where you were suspended several times and ultimately expelled by the school shortly before your Year 12 exams. Your parents persuaded the school to let you sit your Year 12 exams and you received a very average score.
23	After finishing school you briefly attended a TAFE College where you studied Information Technology. You left before obtaining any formal qualifications and you have had a patchy work history working mainly in retail.
24	You told Patrick Newton that at the age of 20 you were introduced to the drug, ice, used by your then girlfriend.
25	You had a number of tumultuous relationships of short term duration. Mr Newton’s report refers to your relationship with Megan Young in terms of that relationship being a positive influence upon you. You told Mr Newton that Ms Young does not approve of your drug use and tendered on your plea before me is a letter from 
Ms Young, dated 1 March 22, where she indicates she has made the decision to remain in the relationship with you whilst you serve a period of custody and she continues to be supportive. 
26	During the plea I queried with Counsel how I should regard Ms Young’s letter, given that the Prosecution Opening referred to Ms Young as having committed a theft where you were subsequently charged with using items that were alleged to have been stolen by her. Mr Richter indicated that it was not accepted by your plea that you accepted Ms Young had stolen the particular item.  He submitted that 
Ms Young had never been charged with this offence and was a person with no prior convictions. He submitted that for the  purposes of sentencing you I could act upon the basis that the item in question was  stolen by someone other than yourself and you took advantage of that situation.  In his submission it was not necessary that I make any finding that Ms Young stole the item.  I am prepared to sentence you on that basis and to regard Ms Young’s ongoing support of you as being to your benefit. 
27	Your personal history as outlined in the psychological report indicates that you became severely addicted by the age of 20 to the use of methamphetamine. As your use continued you became embroiled in criminal offending.
28	In 2014, you experienced an episode of hypoxia after inhaling contaminated methamphetamine. You were admitted to hospital and required extensive rehabilitation. Notwithstanding this event you continued to use methamphetamine. Mr Newton finds your continued use after having suffered this event as demonstrative of the severity of your addiction.  You have been diagnosed as a result of the episode of hypoxia as having a significant brain injury. 
29	You also told Mr Newton that in 2019 you suffered a significant injury to your lumbar spine, rupturing your L4 and L5 vertebrae. That caused you to suffer chronic back pain and imposed limitations upon your mobility. The injury resulted in you using a walking stick, after receiving medical advice that spinal surgery may assist with your recovery but that such surgery would be costly. You told 
Mr Newton that part of your criminality was motivated by a desire to obtain funds for surgery that you believed would assist in your physical recovery.
30	The effects of the brain injury caused by the episode of hypoxia are more thoroughly addressed in a neuropsychological assessment by consultant neuropsychologist, Dougal Phillips. This report is dated 5 February 2017 and it is apparent that it was prepared in relation to court proceedings that appear on your criminal history. That report indicates that you continue to show difficulties with attention, memory, and executive function, particularly  impulsivity. Such difficulties are attributed by Mr Phillips to the ongoing impact of the episode of hypoxia, the impact from continued amphetamine abuse and a diagnosis of attentional deficit hyperactivity disorder persisting into adulthood. Mr Phillips did regard your brain injury as ‘a very mild hypoxic brain injury’ which by the time he had assessed you had shown a marked improvement in comparison to assessments conducted in 2015 to which he was able to refer. It was not suggested by your Counsel during this plea hearing that your neuropsychological condition engaged any of the principles of sentencing referred to in Verdins or were in any way causative of the offending before me, such that it would reduce your moral culpability.
Prior and subsequent Criminal History 
31	Your prior criminal history commenced in 2012 when you were before the Moorabbin Magistrates’ Court for a charge of recklessly causing injury. You were placed on a bond. You subsequently had a number of hearings in the Magistrates’ Court for offences of dishonesty and drug related offending. You have received Community Correction Orders in the past and in 2015, you  received such an order in respect of an offence of trafficking methylamphetamine. In 2017 you received another Community Correction Order for a charge of burglary and theft. That order was breached, but on the breach proceeding on 6 August 2018 the order was confirmed to run for a period of 15 months from 16 November 2017. It is apparent that some of the offending before me would be in breach of that Community Correction order. 
32	As of the dates  of committing the  offences before me you had not previously been sentenced to a period of imprisonment. You were arrested in respect of some of the charges before me on 5 April 2019 and not granted bail until 17 May 2019. This means you have served 43 days of pre-sentence detention. 
33	Upon your arrest you were originally charged with cultivating a commercial quantity of cannabis and as a result of your intention to plead not guilty to that charge, and delays caused by the pandemic in running jury trials, your case was unable to be heard for a considerable period of time. 
34	In the period of that delay you reoffended. You committed serious drug related offending between 3 April 2020 and 23 June 2020 and pleaded guilty to those offences before Judge David Sexton in this Court in March of 2021. Judge Sexton  sentenced you on 4 May 2021 to a total effective sentence of 3 years and 3 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months. You had been in custody in respect of that offending for a period of 315 days which was declared as pre-sentence detention. 
35	The details of your offending and relevant personal matters relating to sentence are extensively detailed in the sentencing reasons delivered by Judge Sexton  and I have read those sentencing remarks carefully. It is not necessary for me to repeat those details here, suffice to say that your offending involved trafficking over twenty thousand dollars’ worth of methylamphetamine over a 12 week period and also committing various firearms, weapons, and dishonesty offences. 
36	You have now been in custody since you were arrested in respect  of that offending on 23 June 2020 and would normally, according to the sentence imposed by Judge Sexton, have been eligible for parole in September of this year with your sentence being completed in September of 2023. However, during your plea hearing your Counsel tendered an email from Corrections Victoria that stated that your earliest eligible date for parole had been adjusted to 15 December 2021. The head sentence had also been adjusted  to be completed on 16 December 2022.  
37	No information was placed before me as to why your sentence had been reduced in this manner, but there was agreement between the parties that it was likely to be as a result of you receiving executive deductions in your period of custody  pursuant to the Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) for the additional restrictions imposed as a result of the Covid pandemic. The Prosecutor, Mr Crouch, submitted that I should act upon the dates as expressed in the email as being the relevant dates that you were eligible to apply for parole and the date that you will complete serving the sentence previously imposed.
38	It is obviously important that I have regard to  these dates as it is necessary for me to consider the principle of totality in determining the appropriate sentence that I impose upon you. In order for me to apply that principle I must take account of the totality of your criminal offending and how the sentence that I impose will affect the sentence you are currently undergoing.  
Submissions of the Parties  
39	The defence have pointed to the following factors in mitigation.
40	First, they rely upon a number of character references submitted on your behalf that indicate that you have ongoing family support. 
41	Second, you offered to plead guilty to the charge of cultivation simpliciter in September 2020. At that time the Crown did not accept this plea offer. The offer was made before your committal proceeding took place, and it is accepted that it was a plea offer made at an early stage. The Crown has ultimately accepted that plea as appropriate and this has resulted in your pleading guilty before me during the period of the pandemic. It is accepted that such a plea attracts an additional utilitarian benefit as a result of  relieving the backlog of trials listed in this court due to the suspension of jury trials.  It also attracts additional mitigation of sentence due to the fact  that periods of custody served during the pandemic are likely to be more harsh as a result of authorities imposing restrictions in custody in order to combat the pandemic. This affects you both in terms of the period of custody already served and any additional period that I impose upon you .  Your counsel has also relied upon particular physical vulnerabilities as a result of your previous episode of hypoxia that I accept cause you to have a heightened sense of anxiety concerning the prospects of contracting the Covid virus whilst in custody.
42	Your psychological assessment by Patrick Newton and your neurological assessment by Mr Phillips were carefully considered by Judge Sexton in his sentencing reasons in relation to the offending before him. Judge Sexton  considered that it was possible that you used methamphetamine in part to relieve pre-existing ADHD symptoms. Whilst Patrick Newton diagnosed your symptoms as being sufficient to constitute an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, it was not submitted at that time that any of these conditions reduced your moral culpability for your offending.
43	However at the time Judge Sexton sentenced you there was material before him that indicated that your physical and mental frailties caused your initial period of imprisonment to be extremely difficult such that both the fifth and sixth principles of Verdins were applicable to your situation. It appears that since the time that sentence was imposed you, you have in many ways adjusted to life in custody and I have had placed before me a number of certificates indicating that you have successfully completed a number of courses offered by the Kangan Institute whilst in custody. There is also a letter, dated 16 February 2022  tendered on your behalf from the Peer Supervision and Training Coordinator that indicates that you have completed training and become an active participant in the peer education program within prison. You have also undertaken drug and alcohol programs offered within the Metropolitan Remand Centre and a letter was tendered on your behalf that you commenced individual counselling on 3 August 2020. You have also completed a course in relationship counselling. 
44	Your adjustment over time to  prison life has led your Counsel to concede that whilst principles five and six of Verdins  may have had application at the time you were sentenced before Judge Sexton, they no longer have application to the sentence that I impose upon you today. Instead, your Counsel submitted that whilst the material before Judge Sexton suggested that you were developing some initial insight into the problems that caused you to be drug addicted, you have  now served a substantial portion of your first significant period of custody and it has had a salutary effect upon you.
45	Your Counsel conceded  that the dishonesty offence and summary offences before me were ‘by no means trivial’, and that the cultivation of cannabis charge is a ‘substantial example’ of this offence. The weight of the cannabis was in fact beyond the commercial quantity. However, the Crown accepts by virtue of the plea that it  could not be proved that you intended to grow this amount of cannabis. You are not charged with the theft of electricity, and it is likely that others were involved in this cultivation. 
46	It is conceded by your counsel that the level of sophistication and the seriousness of the cultivation charge warrants a period of imprisonment a portion of which must be cumulative upon the sentence you are currently serving. There is no dispute between the Defence and the Prosecution in relation to this determination. 
47	Your counsel however, relies upon the unusual chronology that this offence was committed prior to other offending for which you have been sentenced and in respect of which you have served a substantial portion of the sentence imposed. Your counsel submits that the predominant sentencing consideration in your case is the application of the principle of totality. He points to the  fact  that in December 2021 you completed serving the non-parole period of the sentence imposed by Judge Sexton. The fact that you still had these matters outstanding, effectively prevented you from applying for parole. In those circumstances you were never likely to be granted parole.  Not only has that fact prevented you from successfully applying for parole, but had the charges before me been dealt with at an earlier point in time there would have been an  opportunity for the sentence that I impose to run at least partially concurrently with the sentence imposed by Judge Sexton. As the non-parole period of Judge Sexton’s sentence has now been completed  any non-parole period that  I impose upon you will necessarily be totally cumulative upon the non-parole period already served. 
48	Your Counsel submitted during the plea hearing that whilst a portion of the sentence that I impose would justifiably have the effect of extending the total effective sentence you are currently undergoing, a lower than normal non-parole period  should be considered in order to take account of the fact that such a period will necessarily be served entirely cumulatively upon the non-parole period already served under your previous sentence.  
49	The Crown submitted that the seriousness of the cultivation charge in particular warranted a sentence with a non-parole period. The Prosecutor pointed to the amount that was cultivated, the sophistication of the set-up, and the obvious commerciality of the enterprise. The Crown did not take issue with the generalised submissions of the Defence in terms of the applicability and relevance of the principles of totality in sentence that I impose. 
Analysis
50	The offences that are before me both on the indictment and the related summary offences reveal an offender who is deeply entrenched in the drug world. The number and type of dishonesty offences are clearly indicative of a person who has lost respect for the proprietary rights of others and who is trying to obtain goods for themselves by whatever opportunistic means  that might arise.
51	The cultivation charge is a serious example of this offence. Although the commercial quantity allegation has been withdrawn a residential property appears to have been used entirely for the purpose of growing cannabis in a sophisticated manner that involved considerable effort to ensure the plants would mature successfully without detection. Although you are not charged with the theft of electricity, clearly there was planning, expense, and considerable effort put into this scheme. These types of cultivations are often the subject of charges before this Court and general deterrence is a significant sentencing  factor. The Court has to denounce this type of concerted and planned illegal activity which undoubtably reaps considerable financial gain for those who successfully commit this crime. The telephone intercepts clearly indicate that you played a significant role in this offending and regarded the cultivation as your criminal venture. 
52	In relation to the dishonesty offences you have a number of relevant prior convictions no doubt as a result of your long-standing addiction.
53	However, I do accept your Counsel’s submissions that since you committed these offences you have been charged and sentenced for other criminal offending and have received your first significant sentence of imprisonment. I find that your prospects of rehabilitation are somewhat uncertain but it is hoped that this first period of imprisonment will have the effect of encouraging your rehabilitation.  It is obvious that that rehabilitation depends on your ability to remain abstinent from illicit drug use.  The chronology of your offending and resulting court proceedings are quite unusual and necessitate my consideration of the totality of your criminal offending and how the sentence that I impose upon you will interact with the sentence you are currently serving.
54	The seriousness of the offences before me in my view warrants a sentence with a new non-parole period. However I must moderate the total effective sentence that I impose upon you in order to give effect to the principle of totality. It is for that reason that the sentence that I impose upon you for the cultivation charge is not as long as it would have been should you not already have served a significant period of imprisonment in relation to other offences. I am also of the view that it is necessary for me to impose a non-parole period that is a lesser proportion of the head sentence, than might normally be the case, in order to reflect the fact that this non-parole period will be served cumulatively upon the non-parole period you have already completed in respect of the sentence imposed by Judge Sexton.  I also had to take into account the unusual chronology where you are being sentenced after having completed your non-parole period on your previous sentence last December.
55	Your sentence will also be moderated in view of your early indication of pleading guilty to the most serious offence, which I do regard in part as a reflection of remorse, and the fact that the plea of guilty has been entered during the period of the pandemic. I have already indicated that I regard general deterrence as a significant sentencing factor.  I also regard specific deterrence as having a role to play in this sentence. The Court must publicly denounce this kind of pre-meditated criminal enterprise. 
Sentence
56	Mr Karazisis  you are sentenced on the charges before me as follows:
I.	On charge nine cultivation of cannabis, you are convicted and sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment. This is the base sentence. 
II.	On charge one, theft, you are convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. 
III.	On charge two, theft, you are convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. 
IV.	On charge three, handling stolen goods, you are convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment.
V.	On charge four, theft you are convicted and sentenced to 7 days’ imprisonment. 
VI.	On charge five, obtaining property by deception, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment. 
VII.	On charge six, possession of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and fined $300.00.
VIII.	On charge seven, possession of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. 
IX.	On charge eight, theft, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment.
Summary Charges
I.	On summary offence 14, dealing with property suspected as proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to 7 days’ imprisonment.
II.	On summary offence 16, dealing with property suspected as proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. 
III.	On summary offence 18, possessing a prohibited weapon, you are convicted and sentenced to 7 days’ imprisonment.
IV.	On charge 19, possessing a prohibited poison, you are convicted and fined $200.00.
V.	On summary offence charge 21, failing to provide a password to a storage device, you are convicted and sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment.
57	That makes a total effective sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment. I order that you serve a period of four months from today before being eligible for parole. 
58	Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) I declare 43 days as pre-sentence detention that has already been served under this sentence and that such a period be entered into the records of the court.
59	Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) I declare that had you not pleaded guilty to these offences before me I would have imposed a total effective sentence of 21 months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 11 months.
60	Mr Karazisis, I will allow your counsel to remain on the link to go through that sentence with you in case you do not understand any aspects of it.  The total effect of it is that your head sentence runs from 15 months from today and your non-parole period runs from four months from today with a deduction of 43 days from both the head sentence and the non-parole period.
61	Is there anything or any other orders I need to make?  Have counsel had the opportunity to record those different sentences?
62	DEFENCE:  I have, Your Honour.
63	PROS:  Your Honour, there's two further orders that the Crown are seeking, that's the forfeiture order and disposal order.
64	HIS HONOUR:  They have been lodged with the court, have they?  
65	PROS:  They have.
66	HIS HONOUR:  And you've seen those, defence counsel?  There is no objection to those orders being made?
67	DEFENCE:  None, Your Honour.
68	HIS HONOUR:  I will further order the forfeiture order and the disposal order in accordance with the terms of the documents already lodged before the court as I understand it.
69	PROS:  Thank you.
70	HIS HONOUR:  I thank the parties for their assistance and for their attendance today.  I will now adjourn the court.
71	COUNSEL:  As Your Honour pleases.
- - -