CDPP v Crawford

Sentence: Total effective sentence of nine years and six months' imprisonment; minimum non-parole period of five years and six months

1. Martin Crawford,[1] you have pleaded guilty to:

(a) one charge of attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border control drug contrary to subsections 11.1(1) and 307.5(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth); and

(b) one charge of pre-trafficking a controlled precursor contrary to subsection 306.4 (1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth).

Circumstances of an alleged offending[2]

1. Authorities intercepted an importation of 117 kg of cocaine,[3] which was hidden in a consignment of eight air purifiers ("the consignment"), which arrived at Melbourne from Hong Kong on 31 May 2021.
2. They had been monitoring messages, on the notorious[4] AN0M platform, between members of an international criminal syndicate operating in Türkiye, Hong Kong and Australia.
3. Between 27 April 2021 and 26 May 2021, the syndicate had imported three "dummies", that is, consignments of goods, which did not contain border control drugs, from Hong Kong by "piggybacking" a legitimate business for their shipment.
4. They "piggybacked" the same business for the importation of the cocaine.
5. Federal police substituted blocks of innocuous powder for the 160 blocks of cocaine and used physical and electronic surveillance to follow the movement of the consignment as syndicate members redirected its delivery from the premises of the legitimate business to other premises under its control.
6. On the afternoon of 2 June 2021, you drove to a Keilor Park warehouse, with a trolley and two duffel bags, where, over a two-hour period, you removed the 160 substituted blocks from the consignment, put them into the bags and then drove to an Keilor East home, then occupied by Nathan Ferrer,[5] where you put the blocks into the garage and left.
7. You had taken photographs of blocks you had removed and sent them to a syndicate member.[6]
8. On the afternoon of 3 June 2021, after the substitution had been discovered, you returned to the garage, with a sledgehammer, where, with Ferrer, you loaded 159 blocks into your car. You then drove to a Deanside housing estate where you disposed of the blocks into a commercial waste bin and then drove home.
9. On the morning of 4 June 2021, police arrested you at Gisborne where you were on a worksite.
10. In your wallet, they found false identity cards, including a New South Wales drivers licence with your photo, in the name of Benjamin Stephenson.
11. In your car, they found an invoice, in the Stephenson name, for the lease of a self-storage unit at Braybrook.
12. Later, the same morning police, arrested Ferrer.
13. In the afternoon, the Türkiye based syndicate member messaged the Hong Kong supplier, "my 2 guys got pinched".
14. When police questioned you exercised your right to remain silent.
15. On 17 June 2021, police searched the self-storage unit which you had rented, using the false Stephenson identity, on 20 April 2021.
16. Inside the unit they found 30 green 20 L containers labelled "dishwashing liquid".
17. The containers contained 11.2 kg of pseudoephedrine,[7] which is a controlled precursor.

Sentencing principles and objective seriousness of offending

1. The sentencing principles in federal drug importation and possession cases are well-established:

(a) the offender's role and involvement in the enterprise, the sophistication of the enterprise and the amount of drugs involved are relevant to the assessment of the seriousness of the offending;

(b) because of the difficulty in detecting the offending and the great harm stemming from the distribution of illicit drugs in the community, significant weight is attached to the principle of general deterrence;

(c) sentences must signal to would-be drug traffickers the potential profits from serious federal drug crimes are neutralised by the risk of severe punishment;

(d) for involvement at any level, an offender should expect a significant sentence;

(e) as a matter of common sense, it should be inferred, unless there is evidence to the contrary, the person who possesses or imports drugs is doing so for profit; and

(f) prior good character is generally to be given less weight as a mitigating factor.[8]

Charge one - attempt to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border control drug

1. A member of a sophisticated international crime syndicate hired you to remove cocaine, which was packaged in 160 1 kg blocks, hidden in a shipment of air purifiers, and transport it to other premises for further redirection or collection.
2. You went to a warehouse where you removed the blocks of powder, which were believed to contain cocaine, photographed them to let the syndicate member know what you had done and then took them to other premises for storage. After the substitution was discovered, you collected the blocks and disposed of them in a commercial waste bin.
3. Your involvement was essential to the syndicate's plan to get the drugs from the shipment for distribution in Australia.
4. The size of the drug shipment was substantial.
5. The quantity of cocaine, 117 kg pure weight, is 58.5 times the statutory commercial quantity. Estimates of its value range from $35.3 million (wholesale) to $90.6 million (street value).
6. The only conclusion to be drawn is you were involved for financial gain.
7. Considering the sophistication of the drug importation enterprise, your crucial participation in it and the very large quantity of border-controlled drug involved, your offending is objectively very serious.

1. You had control of the pseudoephedrine which was stored in a storage unit which you rented.
2. By your guilty plea, you admit you pre-trafficked the controlled precursor,

(a) by possessing it;

(b) with the intention of using it to manufacture a controlled drug;[9] and

(c) with the intention of selling, or believing that another person intends to sell any of the drug so manufactured.[10]

1. It is not alleged you knew the nature of the precursor chemical[11] or the quantity you possessed.[12]
2. To reduce the risk of your detection you had used the false driver's licence, bearing your image, to rent the unit in a false name.
3. While objectively less serious than the offending in charge one it nonetheless represents additional criminality.

1. You have admitted a criminal record.
2. You have two summary convictions for drug possession, methylamphetamine in 2015 and a prescription drug in 2017. They are of limited relevance.

1. When police arrested you on 4 June 2021, you were charged with serious federal drug offences and remanded in custody. Because of pandemic related restrictions, prison conditions were harsher then.
2. On 2 December 2021 you were released on bail on stringent conditions including daily reporting and a curfew.
3. On 26 March 2025, you pleaded guilty to the two charges on the indictment.
4. On 6 June 2023, you voluntarily surrendered yourself into custody.

1. You were born in September 1994. You were 26 when you offended. You are now 30.
2. Your father had four children before he met your mother. You are the only child of your parents' union.
3. You have always had a good relationship with your older half siblings. One of your sisters runs a family landscaping business which employs your other sister and you.
4. Your childhood was disrupted and you were disruptive at school. You left during year 11 to start a mechanic's apprenticeship. Before you completed the apprenticeship you went to work for your sister in a family landscaping business.
5. Your parents had separated when you were was six years old. You lived with your mother who denied you contact with your father.
6. When you were seven years old, the teenage son of your mother's best friend sexually abused you over a 1 - 2 year period. Ten or so years later you reported the abuse to police and the perpetrator has since been convicted.[14]
7. When you were 14, you went to live with your father but, because he was a violent alcoholic, you did not like or respect him. You left and lived between the homes of your oldest brother and sister. You started abusing drugs, cannabis and then methamphetamine and GBH, to manage your trauma symptoms and became "too much for them to handle". You admitted you were an "angry teen".[15]
8. In your early 20s, you recognised the negative impact of your drug use and you stopped.
9. However, in your mid-20s, you started using cocaine, up to 2 g a week; you believed then it helped you "focus". [16]
10. When you offended, you were working in the family business and living with your mother.
11. In prison, you struggled with the isolation of prison lockdowns and absence of programs, and the hostile prison environment made your trauma and anxiety worse.
12. When you were released on bail in December 2021 you returned to your mother and the family business. In 2024 you set up your own business. And your long-term partner agreed to marry you. Your engagement has given both of you a goal to look forward to preparing for a wedding when you are released from prison.[17]
13. You voluntarily engaged with a psychologist, Laura Fleming, to develop emotional regulation strategies to cope with negative emotions and stress. You reconciled with your father who offered a surety for your bail. You renovated a house, which your uncle owns, for your mother to live in. You also helped homeless people through a local food charity.
14. And you remained sober.
15. Since your recent return to custody you have put in applications for employment[18] and education[19] courses.

1. In February 2025, a forensic psychologist, Carla Ferrari assessed you.
2. In her opinion, based on your self-report, psychometric assessment and clinical presentation, you have post-traumatic stress disorder following a traumatic childhood.[20] As well, you have symptoms of a major depressive disorder, likely attributable to your worry the impact your incarceration will have, in particular, on your partner, your mother and you.[21]
3. She also found evidence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder which is consistent with your school history.[22]
4. She believes, because of your psychological conditions, prison will weigh more heavily on you than a person without them. She also believes there is a risk prison will significantly exacerbate your existing mental health conditions.[23]
5. A large number of impressive references[24] show your significant progress to your rehabilitation with the assistance of a wide pro social network, psychological treatment and drug abstinence.
6. You wrote a letter to the court.[25] In prison, you see the damage drugs cause. At age 26, you never thought about it. Now, at age 30, you are sorry for what you have done and are focused on living an honest, hard-working and law-abiding life with your fiancé, family and, hopefully, children.

1. Your counsel, Mr Farrington, in comprehensive submissions, acknowledged, because of the objective seriousness of your crimes, a term of imprisonment, with a non-parole period, must be imposed.
2. In mitigation of penalty, he relied on

(a) your guilty plea, for its high utilitarian value and facilitation of the course of justice;

(b) your remorse, demonstrated by your plea and letter to the court;

(c) your mental health problems attributable to childhood trauma, because:

(i) prison will be harder for you than for a person without your conditions; and

(ii) there is a risk your conditions will significantly worsen in prison;

(d) the delay in prosecution because, since your arrest,

(i) you have struggled with the uncertainty of outcome; and

(ii) you have tried hard to improve your life and the lives of people around you.

1. He submitted, considering your strong support network and the steps you have taken to reform, I should assess your prospects of rehabilitation as good.

1. Mr Stevens, who appeared for the prosecution, submitted the only appropriate sentence is a term of immediate imprisonment with a non-parole period.
2. He submitted, considering the "common sense" inference is financial gain was your motive for offending, your moral culpability is high, and a substantial prison term is required to meet objectives of deterrence, denunciation and punishment.
3. He accepted you are remorseful and have good prospects for rehabilitation.

1. The maximum penalty of life imprisonment demonstrates the inherent seriousness of attempting to possess a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug.
2. The maximum penalty for charge two is seven years imprisonment.
3. The maximum penalties provide a yardstick and a basis for comparison between your case and the worst case.[27]

1. The prosecution provided me with a helpful schedule of comparative cases.[28]
2. The sentences imposed for the offence of attempting to possess a commercial quantity an unlawfully imported border control drug, in quantities comparable to the quantity here, were six years three months, seven years three months, eight years, nine years, 12 years, 15 years and 18 years.
3. They provide guidance as to the identification and application of the relevant sentencing principles and also show sentencing practices and a range of sentences against which to examine your sentence.
4. For a federal offence, after taking into account all relevant factors, including the matters set out in s 16A(2) of the Crimes Act, which are known to the court, I must impose a sentence that is of a "severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence".[29]
5. As I said earlier, your offending is objectively very seriousness. Considering you were involved in an attempt to get possession of a large quantity of a border control drug for a sophisticated criminal syndicate, for personal profit, your moral culpability is high.
6. Overall, a significant prison sentence, with a non-parole period fixed, is required to achieve sentencing purposes.

1. There are mitigating factors which moderate the sentence I will impose.
2. Firstly, your guilty plea, in a large-scale drug case, which would otherwise necessitate a complex trial, has high utilitarian value.[30]
3. Secondly, your acceptance of responsibility for your actions, which is demonstrated by your guilty plea and your voluntary surrender into custody after you were arraigned.
4. Thirdly, your remorse which I accept is genuine.
5. Fourthly, your psychological conditions, following childhood trauma, because, I accept, they will make prison harder for you than person without them and, also because, I accept, there is a risk those conditions will significantly worsen in the volatile prison environment.
6. Fifthly, the lengthy delay in prosecution, which was due to the entanglement of your case in the web of complex "operation ironside" proceedings, because you have endured an anxiety as to the uncertainty of your future and also because, you have taken impressive steps to reform.
7. You are also entitled to some moderation of your sentence because your time in remand custody, following your arrest, was harder due to pandemic related isolation and restrictions.
8. Your rehabilitation is another important sentencing consideration.
9. Considering, during a lengthy period in the community, on bail, with the help and support of a large network of family and friends,

(a) you worked in the family business and then established your own;

(b) you consolidated your relationship with your partner with a mutual commitment to marry when you are released from prison;

(c) you voluntarily engaged a counsellor to help you deal with your psychological problems;

(d) you did charitable work;

(e) you remained sober; and

(f) you did not reoffend,

I assess your prospects of rehabilitation to be good.

1. In reaching this conclusion, I have also taken into account your acceptance of responsibility for your actions and remorse.
2. Additionally, totality, to ensure your total effective sentence properly reflects your overall criminality, and parsimony, which requires me to impose a sentence no more severe than is necessary to achieve sentencing purposes, also have application.
3. By the sentence I impose I must denounce your conduct, punish you and deter you and others from committing crimes of the same or similar kind. I must also look to your rehabilitation.
4. Considering the circumstances of your offending, your personal circumstances and antecedents, and endeavouring to produce a sentence which reflects and promotes the purposes of sentencing in a manner appropriate to you:

(a) On charge 1, attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border control drug, you are sentenced to 9 years imprisonment, which is to commence today ; and

(b) on charge 2, pre-trafficking a controlled precursor, you are sentenced to 2 years imprisonment which is to commence 18 months before the expiration of the sentence I have imposed on charge 1.

1. Your total effective sentence is nine years and six months imprisonment.
2. To mitigate punishment in favour of your rehabilitation, through conditional freedom, I fix a minimum non-parole period of five years and six months.
3. I declare you have served 208 days by way of pre-sentence detention.
4. Whilst there is some artificiality in the process are declared but for your guilty plea I would have imposed a sentence of 12 years imprisonment and fixed a minimum non-parole period of seven years and six months.

[2] The alleged circumstances are set out in a prosecution opening dated 12 March 2025 (Exhibit B). Mr [Crawford] accepts them as agreed facts for the purpose of the sentence indication application.

[3] Its estimated value ranges between $35.3 million and $52.2 million (wholesale value) and $70.2 million - $90.6 million (street value).

[4] AN0M is a dedicated encrypted communications platform. Access to it was generally controlled by the serious crime community.

[6] You were not an AN0M user. You messaged one of the syndicate members using a different communication platform.

[7] A commercial quantity of pseudoephedrine is 1.2 kg.

[8] R v Hai Van Nguyen; R v Phuong Thu Thi Pham [2021] NSWCCA 238 at [72] followed in Nguyen v R;

Phommalysack v R [2011] VSCA 32; (2011) 31 VR 673 at [34] and Suky Lieu v The Queen [2016] VSCA 277 at [41]- [43].

[9] There is a statutory presumption, if the possession was not authorised, the person who possesses it is taken to have possessed the substance with the intention of using some or all of it to manufacture a controlled drug s 406.8 (1) and with the intention of selling, or believing that another person intended to sell, some or all of the drug so manufactured s 406.8 (3).

[11] The fault element for paragraph (1) (b) - the substance is a controlled precursor - is recklessness s 406.4 (2).

[12] The charge is the simpliciter offence.

[13] Your personal circumstances as set out in Carla Ferrari's psychological reports, dated 1 November 2021 (Exhibit 2) and 12 March 2025 (Exhibit 3).

[14] I have read the victim statements of your mother (Exhibit 25) and you (Exhibit 24).

[15] Report of Carla Ferrari (Exhibit 2), [26].

[17] Letter of offender's partner (Exhibit 27); Letter of offender's mother (Exhibit 28).

[18] Written submissions for plea (Exhibit 26).

[19] Character reference of offender's partner (Exhibit 27).

[20] Report of Carla Ferrari (Exhibit 2), [121].

[25] Letter of [Martin Crawford] (Exhibit 31)

[26] While I will refer to them only briefly, I have carefully considered all prosecution and defence written and oral submissions.

[27] Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357.

[28] Exhibit E on Sentence Indication Hearing.

[29] S 16A(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).

[30] Suky Lieu v The Queen [2016] VSCA 277.