Crown v Accused

For sentence indication and plea: Ms Georgina Connelly SC with Ms Adele Balkin

For sentence indication and plea: Dowling McGregor Solicitors

1. AB, you pleaded guilty to the murder of Ethan Hoac ('Ethan') on 21 October 2024. The maximum penalty for murder is life imprisonment.[1]
2. You are alleged to have committed the offence on 26 June 2023 along with two co‑accused, DM and KA.[2] You were in company with DM and KA, both before and after the offence.
3. You and KA applied for a sentence indication before me on 10 October 2024.[3] Subsequent to my giving the sentence indication KA's matter did not proceed and he is currently awaiting investigation for fitness to stand trial.
4. You accepted my sentence indication and were thereafter arraigned and entered the plea of guilty to murder. The plea hearing was conducted for you and for DM on 17 February 2025. DM had pleaded guilty to murder before you did, but after the plea hearing DM applied to change his plea and that process is still on foot.[4]
5. You were to be sentenced firstly on 2 April 2025, and then on 28 April 2025. Both of those dates were vacated, on the first occasion when you sought a four‑week adjournment so you could complete your VCE Vocational Major ('VM') and on the second occasion, because you withdrew instructions from your counsel. There was then an intervening period during which you retained new counsel and the Court was informed that a change of plea was contemplated although this was ultimately not pursued, as advised last Friday.
6. I will now describe the circumstances of your offence.

1. Ethan was killed on the evening of 26 June 2023, whilst walking home with two friends, AN and MV. The attack on Ethan lasted less than a minute and was captured on CCTV.
2. The murder was committed near the intersection of Furlong Road and Bailey Street in St Albans. At the time of the murder, you, DM and KA were each 17 years old. Ethan was only 14 years old.
3. There was no previous connection between your group and Ethan's group that could explain why you chose to attack Ethan.
4. Ethan had spent the day in the city with AN and MV. The three boys decided to go home and caught the bus from Flagstaff train station to Sunshine train station, where they boarded a train at 10.20pm. They got off the train at Ginifer station at 10.27pm and began to walk south on Willaton Street towards Furlong Road at around 10.38pm.
5. Meanwhile, at 10.33pm, you were with KA and DM in a stolen white Volkswagen Tiguan with cloned licence plates that DM was driving. You, AB, had been in possession of the Tiguan and driven it from time to time since 20 June 2023. DM and KA were often in the Tiguan with you.
6. You had been with DM and KA in the Tiguan at various locations at various times on the day of the offence.
7. Between 10.45pm and 10.47pm, DM drove past Ethan and his friends. As he approached the intersection of Furlong Road and Willaton Street, he performed a U‑turn and returned down Furlong Road in a westerly direction. It appears that the three of you were looking for the group of boys.
8. At 10.52.06pm, Ethan, AN and MV began crossing Bailey Street on the northern footpath of Furlong Road. The Crown alleges that DM drove west along Furlong Road and as he approached the three boys he veered onto the wrong side of the road, towards Bailey Street and intentionally collided with Ethan, causing Ethan to become airborne and to be thrown onto the western side of Bailey Street landing on the edge of the nature strip.
9. DM continued driving for a short distance and then stopped the car. You, AB, got out first and ran towards Ethan. KA also got out and ran towards Ethan. As this was happening, DM reversed the car, and stopped nearby.
10. AN described seeing a male in a mask come from the front passenger door of the car and charge towards them with a machete which the male then swung at Ethan. MV saw a second masked male who came from the rear driver's side also carrying a machete.
11. Ethan's friends remained with him at first but then were compelled to flee, frightened for their lives.
12. AB, when you reached Ethan, you immediately began stabbing him with a large machete notwithstanding that Ethan had already been struck by the car. While Ethan was on the ground, you stabbed him repeatedly using downward thrusting motions with both hands. KA also wielded a large machete and stabbed, struck and kicked Ethan. During the machete attack which lasted for at least 20 seconds, if not longer, Ethan crawled from his initial position towards the roadway.
13. Fourteen seconds after he had stopped the car, DM got out of the driver's seat and approached. Meanwhile, emergency sirens became audible, and the attack came to an end. The three of you got back into the Tiguan and departed north on Bailey Street, leaving Ethan for dead.
14. The Crown submitted, and I accept, based on the nature of the weapon used and the conduct involved, that the Court can be satisfied as to an intention to kill, not just cause really serious injury.[6] However, it was not suggested that the intention to kill was reached until just prior to the machete attack.[7]
15. AN and MV raised the alarm, seeking assistance from nearby residents. Paramedics arrived at 11.09pm and began treating Ethan where he lay. Police arrived soon after and established a crime scene. A black fabric machete sheath was located on Bailey Street approximately 30.8 metres north of its intersection with Furlong Road.[8]
16. Ethan was transported by ambulance away from the scene but tragically died enroute to the Royal Children's Hospital.[9]
17. Meanwhile, your group travelled from the crime scene to the carpark of Sydenham Tennis Club, collecting a fourth person, MM, along the way. You arrived at the carpark around 11.22pm and remained there for the next 45 minutes. You, AB, were observed on CCTV footage getting out of the front passenger side of the Tiguan, wearing the same clothing as earlier. You were leaning over the front passenger seat and using the torch on your phone, apparently looking for the missing machete sheath. At 11.29.28pm you appeared to use water and tissues to attend to your lower leg area. At 11.33.37pm you can be seen making slashing and downward stabbing motions with your right arm. Your group also inspected the front bumper bar of the car.
18. Your group left the carpark and continued to drive around in the Tiguan through the early hours of the next morning. At 5.44am on Tuesday 27 June, food was purchased at McDonald's in Hillside and then you, AB, dropped DM home before returning to your own home shortly after 7.30am that morning.
19. Your movements in the Tiguan on the evening of 27 June 2023 were able to be traced by police via mobile phone data until 11.10pm that night, when your phone last connected in Balmoral Park before being placed into Airplane mode.[10]
20. At approximately 1.35am on 28 June 2023 police received a report that a Tiguan was on fire in Truganina. When police arrived, they found that it was already heavily burnt and the registration plates had been removed. The vehicle was forensically examined, and the front near‑side bumper bar appeared to have impact damage and was misaligned. Remnants of partially burnt clothing were found inside the vehicle, including the tops worn by you and KA at the time of the murder. The Crown do not allege that DM was involved in the arson of the Tiguan.
21. The black machete sheath that was found near the scene of the crime was forensically examined at a later date and subjected to DNA analysis. Swabs taken from the end of the handle, the mid‑section near the pointed end and at the pointed end yielded mixed DNA profiles consistent with yourself and DM being contributors. A swab from the mid‑section near the handle yielded a mixed DNA profile consistent with you being a contributor.[11]
22. On 28 June 2023, Dr Judith Fronczek, a forensic pathologist, conducted a post‑mortem examination of Ethan's body and identified 30 stab wounds and 4 incised wounds. Seven of the stab wounds perforated vital structures. Ethan's body also had scattered, partly linear and irregular bruises and abrasions. The cause of death was multiple stab wounds to the torso.
23. You were arrested on 8 July 2023 and interviewed by police. You denied involvement in Ethan's death and said that you did not have anything to do with the murder. You were medically examined and incised sharp force wounds were noted to your right index finger and right shin. Tracksuit pants and shoes seized from your wardrobe were forensically examined, and testing of apparent blood staining confirmed the presence of blood. The results of DNA analysis were consistent with you being the source of that blood. You were also linked by DNA to a tissue discarded at the Sydenham Tennis Club.
24. Your iPhone was seized and later analysed. The results of that analysis revealed, among other things, that at 3.26pm on 28 June 2023 there were a series of images depicting you in the company of other males and you were holding a machete; at 5.12pm on 28 June 2023 you accessed a news article about Ethan's murder; on 29 June 2023 you purchased another machete from eBay; and on 1 July 2023 you created a series of violent rap lyrics.
25. A notebook seized from under your bed was also found to contain handwritten song lyrics in a similarly violent vein.[12]
26. At the plea hearing, Ms Churchill advised the Court that another song had been recently produced and posted to YouTube, apparently created from custody. She submitted that the lyrics appeared to be a boast about the murder involved in this case.
27. Ms Connelly, who was then acting for you, conceded that while on remand you wrote the lyrics and were involved in producing the song knowing it would be uploaded to the internet, but she submitted that I could not find that the lyrics relate to this case as there are clear points of difference in the references used.[13] Accepting that that may be so, the timing of creating content that glorifies violence and killing while awaiting sentence for murder is disturbing. This issue is best considered within the framework of the question of remorse and rehabilitation which I will discuss later.[14]

1. As submitted by the Crown, your actions towards Ethan were an extremely serious example of the already grave crime of murder.
2. Ethan was born on 15 January 2009 and was living with his grandmother in Braybrook at the time of his death. As is apparent from the grossly disturbing summary of the offence, Ethan's life was taken from him in appalling circumstances.
3. I agree with the Crown submission that the seriousness of the offending is underlined by the use of a machete in a public street and the ferocious nature of the attack, involving multiple machete blows inflicted by you and KA in circumstances where Ethan was already helpless on the ground after being driven into by DM.
4. Frankly, it is hard to comprehend the horror of this attack on young Ethan - an attack performed without the slightest reason or provocation.
5. Ethan's vulnerability was obvious given his size and age at the time. He was a slightly built,[15] smaller boy who had no chance to anticipate what you would do to him. Even if the requisite intention for murder was formed shortly before the fatal act, there is little that mitigates the objective gravity of this shocking crime.

1. Victim Impact Statements ('VIS') were initially provided by Ethan's mother, Hien Huynh, and grandmother Thi Thu Ngo, as well as Ethan's friend AN who was with him the night he died.
2. Ethan's mother - who attended Court during the plea hearing and at subsequent mentions - said that she has lost the purpose of life. Every moment she is in anguish.
3. She said of you:

I want them to have a good lesson to understand their huge mistake to kill and hurt people is not right for the human race. I pray for them and am praying for their family as I believe they would be suffering too... As parents it's painful, more hurt than anyone.

It's not fair they can take a life. I want to give a message to these boys. They've taken my future and given a painful life for me, my children and my family. This is going to be forever. When they finish their gaol time they can start again. But my son, he can't [...]

[...] My son [N] is hurting. [...] After Ethan died, he made himself like Ethan, dress, hair, personality, he copied exactly. [...] I feel I lost [N] too, he completely changed...

There is still the biggest question, why? But there will be no answer....

To keep going in this life is heavy. I am very hurt, so is my family. This hurt is forever.

1. Ethan's grandmother said in her VIS that her life will never be the same without her grandson. She said:

My grandson has passed away and it makes my heart hurt, having to pay for his funeral and organising it was the hardest thing to do.

1. AN described who Ethan was as a person. He said:

Ethan was very joyful, happy and peaceful. He was carefree and wanted to have a good time. Ethan was only a small kid, not affiliated with anything.

1. AN said his life has changed since the death of his best friend Ethan, and that he thinks more about his safety now. He said:

Some days [I] was to[o] emotionally distressed to leave my room to get food or water, [I] felt like there was no purpose. I felt angry and sad. Angry that I couldn't do more. Angry in the way that it happened. Sad that he is gone.

1. As a result of the delay in finalising your matter, in circumstances where sentence had been set down for April this year, six further VIS from Ethan's mother, father and siblings were provided and read out prior to sentencing today. The additional VIS serve to emphasise, even more, the special place Ethan held in his family, and that he was irreplaceable to his parents and siblings. He lives on in the memory of all of his family, but the pain of losing him continues. The unfortunate delay in finalising this matter has added to their pain. I have taken all of the VIS into account in sentencing you.
2. As is clear from the VIS, the impact of Ethan's murder has devastated his family and friends, and has no doubt reverberated throughout the wider community. Our society regards each human life as precious. Your crime took away Ethan's most precious right - his right to life.

1. I have drawn your personal history from the plea submissions made on your behalf and from the four psychological reports of Ms Gina Cidoni placed before the Court.[16] Ms Cidoni had previously assessed you on 11 and 14 May 2020, when you were aged 14 and before the Children's Court. She saw you again in November 2024 in preparation for her 31 January 2025 report relevant to the current offending ('the 2025 Cidoni report').[17] She had been supplied with a range of material relevant to your engagement with Youth Justice that was not otherwise before the Court.
2. You were born on 7 January 2006 and you are now 19 years old. You will turn 20 in January next year. You are one of 7 children to your parents who migrated from Sudan.[18]
3. You attended St Andrews Primary School and then McKillop Secondary College for Year 7 and part of Year 8, completing Year 8 at a different school. You attended a flexible learning centre for a period in between youth detention remands, and you claim you enjoyed school, although your schooling was interrupted by adolescent remands and the COVID‑19 pandemic.
4. At the time of the 2020 Cidoni reports, when you were aged 14, it was already your third time in Parkville YJC. By then your father had left the family home to live at an aunt's house, and there was a loss of parental control and discipline. Your school attendance was declining.
5. Intellectual testing at that time put you in the low average range with no signs of cerebral dysfunction, and you were found to show mild symptoms of adolescent anxiety and depression, acknowledging some disruptive and antisocial behaviours.[19]
6. Ms Cidoni opined at that time that your peer influences were a major problem, along with low parental control, and she expressed concern that continued detention would lead to greater entrenchment in the criminal justice system and poorer outcomes. She expressed the hope that involvement with Youth Justice with a focus on addressing family issues, delinquent peers, truancy, schooling and sport could reduce offending.
7. Various materials advanced on the plea adverted to inappropriate discipline, family violence and aggressive behaviour between siblings in the family home during your developmental years.
8. Your sister, AA, gave brief evidence at the plea hearing as to paternal family violence in the home during your childhood and an absence of any real relationship between you and your father. She said your father was an alcoholic who was violent, mostly towards your mother, although she observed violence towards you, once or twice.[20] She said that she noticed you wandering off and being influenced by friends from your early teens.
9. The 2025 Cidoni report also referred to the absence of any appropriate relationship with your father.
10. You have been the subject of nine reports to Child Protection for a range of concerns over the years.[21]
11. In January 2021, your mother moved to Canberra with some of your siblings. Your mother hoped to provide you with a fresh start. You went there for a few months between August and November 2021 but refused to stay, preferring to return to Melbourne, avowedly to pursue your interest in music.[22] You moved in with your older brother, KB and his family in Wyndham Vale. It seems that KB tried to be a supportive influence but was busy working and had difficulty managing your behaviour.
12. You have a substantial relevant Children's Court criminal history dating back to 2020.[23] It seems, based on Ms Cidoni's reports, that you began to attract police attention and spend time in youth detention from the age of 13,[24] although some of the earlier matters you were charged with appear not to have proceeded due to doli incapax. Ms Cidoni provided reports supporting the doli incapax defence in that period. As submitted by your counsel, you have spent a lot of time in custody on remand on‑and‑off since early adolescence, with all of the adverse consequences that such an environment entails.
13. By 2020 through to 2021, when you were aged 14 to 15, you were under a Youth Supervision Order ('YSO') from different court hearings for a range of juvenile delinquent offences including car thefts, burglaries, affray, robbery, assault, recklessly cause injury and the like. Alcohol and drug treatment conditions and offence‑specific programs were applied, but you nevertheless breached the YSO. Authors of professional reports into your offending at that time referred to you citing a sense of excitement and peer approval as the reason for offending. In July 2022, you were sentenced to 15 months' YJC for worsening offending.[25]
14. Despite Youth Justice interventions, the 2025 Cidoni report described your history of criminal activity with negative peers and your difficulty disengaging from that environment, noting that you often offended in the company of others and that you admitted to acting out of loyalty rather than coercion. She referred to your limited insight and need for external supervision to support behavioural change.[26] You also admitted to cannabis, alcohol and other non‑prescription medication use.
15. Currently, you face outstanding charges for alleged involvement in the Malmsbury YJC riot in October 2023, which occurred while you were on remand for the current matter.[27]

Current circumstances according to the 2025 Cidoni reports

1. Currently, your mother and some of your siblings continue to reside in the ACT. In the second week of June 2023, not long before the current offence, you had visited your family in Canberra and enjoyed the visit and wanted to visit them again. You told Ms Cidoni that since being remanded you had been in frequent communication with your mother and siblings and maintain a close relationship with them.
2. While in custody, you have attended Parkville College, showing particular interest in music, literacy and numeracy and attempting to complete VCE‑VM subjects.[28] There have been positive reports about your attitude and behaviour in the educational setting.[29] You have expressed interest in warehouse work and participated in logistics and forklift training through the DET Reconnect Program.
3. At the time of the plea hearing I was told that you had not been involved in any adverse incidents since being moved to Cherry Creek.[30] I understand that since the plea hearing there have been some reasonably minor behavioural incidents at Cherry Creek.[31]
4. The 2025 Cidoni report describes that when she recently assessed you, you referred to past traumas contributing to distressing dreams, difficulty sleeping, and feelings of hypervigilance.[32] This was supported by Justice Health records from 2023-‍2024 referring to frequent nightmares and complaints of auditory hallucinations concerning past trauma. Your presentation was considered to be consistent with complex PTSD and acute stress reactions related to court proceedings. You were encouraged to continue engaging with mental health professionals.
5. Unfortunately, your engagement with custodial mental health professionals has been somewhat inconsistent, although it may possibly improve once these proceedings are complete.
6. The 2025 Cidoni report diagnosed you with complex PTSD based on various life traumas and found that you currently meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder ('MDD') with anxious distress.[33] While Ms Cidoni suggested that your depression was chronic, I had some difficulty following her reasoning in that regard.[34] I accept that you have shown symptoms of MDD and PTSD, but I note that the symptoms of these conditions have not stopped you from participating in making rap music of the kind referred to earlier.
7. The 2025 Cidoni report, and Ms Cidoni's supplementary report dated 12 February 2025 ('Supplementary Cidoni Report'), noted that no full‑scale IQ testing was done when she assessed you in 2020, but the tests that were done put you in the low average range.[35] She said that testing completed in 2024 reflected significantly worse intellectual functioning,[36] and that the findings suggested a decline in verbal comprehension and working memory likely reflecting environmental factors[37] rather than true cognitive decline. She also suggested caution when comparing the 2020 results and the more recent results.
8. She opined that you met the criteria for a diagnosis of intellectual disability,[38] based on your cognitive and functional impairments. I do note, however, that the 2025 report needed to be revised to correct some errors Ms Cidoni had made when referring to your earlier test results.
9. Ms Cidoni opined that at the time of the offence, the collective impact of your cognitive impairments, pre‑existing mental illness, substance use and history of trauma diminished your ability to engage in rational decision‑making and that your intellectual disability significantly affected your capacity to anticipate consequences, regulate emotions and resist peer influence. This was said to leave you vulnerable to impulsive behaviour.
10. Ms Cidoni also thought that consumption of Xanax before the offence further compromised your already‑impaired decision‑making abilities. She concluded that the convergence of your cognitive limitations, PTSD, substance use, peer influence and developmental immaturity[39] significantly compromised your decision‑making at the time of the offence.
11. Ms Connelly urged the Court, based on Ms Cidoni's reports, to find that you have an intellectual disability significantly affecting your daily functioning, limiting your ability to understand consequences, regulate emotions and engage in logical reasoning.
12. The Supplementary Cidoni Report and a supportive letter authored by Jack McCombe[40] were received by the Crown after the Crown had already filed their plea submissions. In light of that additional material, Ms Churchill drew a contrast between Ms Cidoni's description of your functional capacity in education (which Ms Cidoni said was severely limited) and Mr McCombe's letter describing you as participating and possibly excelling in a school environment.[41]
13. I have some difficulty accepting that Ms Cidoni's more recent intellectual testing of you is fully representative of your actual intellectual capacity.
14. Following the prolonged period during which you explored options prior to the imposition of sentence, once your lawyers indicated that no further material would be proffered on your behalf, the Crown sought to address the issue of your intellectual functioning, based on further information they had obtained. An additional document was put forward for consideration prior to sentencing,[42] which indicated that, following an assessment obtained by DFFH,[43] you do not meet the criteria for an intellectual disability.[44] However, an agreed position was put forward by the parties that your intellectual functioning is on the lower side.[45]
15. The result of all the information now before me on the topic of your intellect is that I accept you are relatively low‑functioning, but I observe that your capabilities need to be seen through the prism of the comments made by Mr McCombe about your educational achievements and through the lens of your ongoing musical endeavours as made known to the Court. At any event, if your intellectual capacity is better than initially foreshadowed by Ms Connelly you may have better prospects for rehabilitation than if you were intellectually disabled.
16. Accepting your intellectual functioning is on the lower side, I also note that your development has been hampered by a very disrupted adolescence and a lack of continuity in your schooling which has been detrimental to your overall development and maturation.

1. Ms Connelly pressed reliance on Verdins[46] limbs 1, 3, 4 and 5. She submitted that by reason of your PTSD, intellectual disability and MDD, your moral culpability was reduced. At the time of Ms Connelly's submissions, the information about your intellectual functioning was less complete than is the case now, so her submissions need to be viewed in that light.
2. The Crown submitted that your moral culpability could be regarded as reduced to a very limited extent under limb 1, noting that there is little explanation of how your symptoms were said to engage with the circumstances of the offence or your awareness of its wrongfulness. This was not a complex situation that needed to be negotiated or could be explained by poor judgement in the moment. Indeed, on the Crown case, this was a situation that you and your co‑accused sought out and created.
3. The Crown accepted that there may be some moderation of general and specific deterrence,[47] but submitted that actions performed with knowledge of what you were doing, and with knowledge of the gravity of those actions, means that any such moderation need not be great.[48]
4. I am not persuaded that your decision‑making was impaired to a significant extent by the factors referred to by Ms Cidoni. Nor am I persuaded of the basis for a significant reduction in moral culpability or moderation of general or specific deterrence based on Verdins limbs 1, 3 or 4 due to the matters referred to by Ms Cidoni. However, I will make some modest allowance under those limbs.
5. The 2025 Cidoni report referred to your Justice Health file and to your ongoing struggles with emotional regulation and adaptation to the custodial environment, since being remanded for the current offence, notwithstanding your past experience of sequential remands in YJC and a previous YJC sentence during your adolescence.
6. I accept that based on your current presentation, and your symptoms of variable mental health, imprisonment will weigh more heavily upon you than on a person of normal health, and I will allow some moderation of your sentence based upon limb 5 of Verdins.[49]

1. Ms Connelly submitted that a general expression of Bugmy[50] applies to reduce your moral culpability, invoking your background of childhood disadvantage and exposure to violence. The Crown accepted the relevance of a general expression of Bugmy principles but noted that Bugmy may simultaneously reduce one's moral culpability and increase the need for community protection.[51]
2. I accept the relevance of Bugmy in your case, due to the absence of proper parental supervision and a dysfunctional adolescence. Bugmy factors also go some way to explain your previous offending. I will accord significant weight to this aspect, although the ramifications of your disrupted upbringing may make rehabilitation more challenging for you, increasing the need for community protection.

1. As indicated, you applied for a sentence indication in late 2024 which you accepted, and you pleaded guilty to murder on 21 October 2024. Your plea was not entered at the earliest stage, but it still has important utilitarian value in avoiding the need for a contested trial. After entering your plea, there were delays in finalising your sentence while you explored various matters. Regardless of those further delays, which were not the fault of the Crown, I adhere to the proposition I indicated earlier in the proceedings that a plea of guilty to murder is something that deserves proper recognition in the sentencing exercise. I will mitigate your sentence accordingly.

The presence or absence of remorse and your response to the offending

1. Your counsel referred to evidence of occasions where you expressed a degree of victim empathy and distress at your own offending, suggestive of remorse within the limits of your constrained ability to express yourself.
2. Ms Cidoni indicated that you struggled to discuss the attack on Ethan and became visibly distressed when pressed for detail, being unable to give a clear explanation for your actions.[52]
3. The 2025 Cidoni report indicated that your expressions of remorse appeared genuine at times, as you became tearful or sobbed and struggled to find words, but your emotional responses were inconsistent. You were seen to fluctuate between distress and detachment or avoidance when pressed on certain aspects of the offence. At times, you seemed to deflect responsibility or minimise the impact of your actions. Despite these limitations, you did express a desire to change, particularly in relation to your emotional regulation and decision‑making.
4. The Crown submitted that you lack remorse or insight into the enormity of what you have done, and that I should give limited or no weight to remorse. They argued that while your plea of guilty shows an acceptance of responsibility, it does not indicate remorse, particularly when it is not coupled with an explanation for the offending.
5. I consider that examples of inconsistent remorse or minimal insight are found in your attention‑seeking and glamorising references to violence and killing in your creation of rap music whilst on remand awaiting sentence for Ethan's murder. Ms Connelly accepted that the YouTube song and Arunta[53] call tendered by the Crown at the plea hearing were not consistent with remorse. Assessment of remorse is complicated in this case because of your developmental immaturity and emotional instability.

1. Ms Connelly submitted that your youth remains a primary sentencing consideration despite the seriousness of your crime. You were only 17 at the time of the murder and your immaturity was said to make you less blameworthy than if an adult had behaved in the same way. It was argued that your potential for rehabilitation should be prioritised, and that you are now showing more stability in custody than on previous occasions, offering some signs of hope for rehabilitation. Since a very considerable proportion of your young life will be spent in custody, including adult custody, your sentence would have a greater punitive impact on you than on an older offender, even while you may be more receptive to change.[54]
2. Ms Connelly submitted that your family continue to offer their support to you and will continue to do so upon your release. She submitted that you create and produce rap or 'drill' music and have done so for years and that this activity is not inconsistent with your rehabilitation.
3. The Crown countered the Defence submissions by highlighting that you already had a significant criminal history prior to this offence, and that the offending occurred in the context of negative peer associations and antisocial attitudes.[55] Whilst accepting that your youth focuses attention on your rehabilitation, Ms Churchill argued that the gravity of the offence means that specific deterrence and community protection remain relevant.[56] The Crown correctly pointed out that the authorities show that in cases of very grave offending the weight to be accorded to youthfulness is reduced.[57] The Crown submitted that the Court should be guarded about your prospects for rehabilitation due to your inconsistent attitude to the offending and Ms Cidoni's findings that you pose a high risk of future violence, with historical, contextual and clinical factors contributing to that view.
4. While Ms Cidoni said that intensive, structured interventions were required to reduce your risk,[58] the Crown pointed out that your response to treatment in custody has been inconsistent.
5. In considering the competing submissions about your youthfulness at the time of the offence and now, and the importance of rehabilitation, I note that you have engaged in educational, vocational and cultural opportunities at Cherry Creek and appear to be more settled there than you were at Malmsbury. When Ms Connelly made your plea submissions you had been working towards completing your VCE‑VM subjects, and Jack McCombe's report from Parkville College was especially promising.[59]
6. While you have been inconsistent in your engagement with custodial mental health treatment,[60] there were some improvements noted around February this year.[61] You will need to make mental health treatment a firm priority if you wish to successfully reintegrate into the community in the future.
7. I conclude that your prospects for rehabilitation are currently hard to assess and whilst not very promising at this time, I am conscious you are still young and previously responded well to education while at Cherry Creek. Over time, you may reflect further on the path of your early life and develop greater insight and appreciate the benefits of fuller engagement with treatment and other programs in custody. If you do so, in combination with the ongoing support of your mother and siblings, your prospects may brighten.

1. The Crown submitted, and I accept, that your sentence for this vicious, unprovoked violence should reflect denunciation, just punishment, general and specific deterrence, and community protection. I agree with the Crown submission that the gravity of the offence requires that youthful offender principles deserve less prominence than is often the case. Nevertheless, your youthfulness is still an important consideration.[62] I will also allow some moderation of punitive sentencing purposes by reference to Bugmy and Verdins factors as previously mentioned.

1. Ms Connelly submitted, and I agree, that there are insufficient similar cases to constitute a 'sentencing practice', but some cases arrived at by both parties involving murder sentencing for offenders aged under 18 at the time of the offence are of assistance.[63] A table of cases was supplied by the Crown, although they correctly noted that current sentencing practice is but one factor in the instinctive synthesis. The most relevant comparative cases appear to be DPP v SA & Ors (No 2)[64] (which involved the sentencing of four offenders after a trial) and DPP v JA & Ors[65] (which involved sentencing another offender for the same murder).
2. Also of relevance are the cases of DPP v DJ,[66] DPP v AK,[67] AP v The Queen[68] and DPP v Wentworth.[69] Of course, in sentencing, no two cases are truly alike, and care must be taken in making comparisons between offences and offenders.

1. Regarding disparity of your roles, I regard DM as having played a less significant role in the offending than you and KA. DM is not alleged to have wielded a machete, and he remained in the car until towards the end of the attack. He was also not alleged to have been involved in the disposal of the Tiguan.
2. The Crown submitted that while the CCTV footage suggests you inflicted the greater number of blows to Ethan, both you and KA were armed with and used machetes, and were vigorously engaged in the attack, ceasing at about the same time.[70] I regard the objective gravity of KA's alleged role in the offending as equivalent to yours.

1. I must apply s 5(3) of the Sentencing Act 1991, which provides that 'a court must not impose a sentence that is more severe than that which is necessary to achieve the purpose or purposes for which the sentence is imposed'.

1. You have served 3 months and 21 days for a sentence imposed by the Children's Court subsequent to your remand for this offence. This means the pre‑sentence detention ('PSD') available to you is lessened to that extent, and that is a factor I take into account on a totality basis.[71]

1. At the sentence indication hearing I indicated that if you were to plead guilty to the murder of Ethan Hoac, I would sentence you to no more than 17 years' imprisonment with a non‑parole period of 13 years.
2. I am not persuaded that there is any reason to impose a lesser sentence than that which was indicated. Your sentence has been mitigated because of your plea of guilty, and based on all of the personal matters that I have already adverted to. Your dysfunctional upbringing, immaturity and intellectual limitations and the custodial environment you are currently in may mean that it will be some time before you develop proper and lasting insight into what you have done. I accept that you may have the capacity to do so. Whilst it is ultimately a matter for the authorities, in circumstances where the Court does not have full and up‑to‑date information about your current progress in custody, it is open to the authorities to consider that it may be preferable for you to remain at Cherry Creek for some period after the imposition of sentence.[72]
3. AB, you are convicted of murder and sentenced as follows:

(a) On the charge of murder, I sentence you to 17 years' imprisonment. I fix a non‑parole period of 13 years.

(b) I declare that pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, had you not pleaded guilty I would have imposed a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment with a non‑parole period of 16 years.

(c) Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991 I declare that you have already served 753 days by way of PSD, not including today's date, and I direct that this time be reckoned as time already served under the current sentence.

[1] While murder is a Category 1 offence, and the standard sentence for murder is 25 years, AB's age at the time of the offence makes that categorisation and the standard sentence provisions inapplicable: see Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 28 November 2024, [113]-[114] ('Plea SPO'). However, since AB was 17 at the time of the offence, the Court must have regard to Sentencing Act 1991 ss 5B(1)(a), 5(2J), 11A(3) and see also s 586(2) of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005.

[2] The Crown alleged that AB and KA were each involved in the offence pursuant to s 323(1)(c) of the Crimes Act 1958, and that DM was liable pursuant to s 323(1)(d): Plea SPO [104].

[3] KA applied for a sentence indication first, on 2 September 2024.

[4] The Court was first notified of DM's desire to change his plea via email correspondence from his new lawyers on 25 February 2025. AB's (then) lawyers and the Crown jointly confirmed to the Court that they were content to proceed to sentence for AB, notwithstanding DM's foreshadowed change of plea application, at a mention specifically called to ventilate that issue on 13 March 2025.

[6] Prosecution Submissions on Plea dated 11 February 2025, [6(b)] ('Prosecution Submissions').

[7] Prosecution Submissions [5(j)]; Plea SPO [4].

[8] This is the approximate location of the passenger side of the Tiguan when it stopped in Bailey Street and AB and KA got out: Plea SPO [54].

[9] Ethan was pronounced dead on the on‑ramp from Furlong Road to the Western Ring Road.

[10] AB's phone was taken off Airplane Mode at 2.28am the next morning, with his mobile service reconnecting to the network at this time at the Brimbank Shopping Centre area.

[12] I cannot be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that either set of lyrics related directly to Ethan's murder.

[13] Noting I would need to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt if adverse findings were to be made.

[14] Ms Connelly submitted, and I ultimately accepted, that although this was new material received by the Court post‑sentence indication, it should not take AB outside that sentence indication.

[16] I note that Ms Connelly had submitted at the sentence indication hearing on 10 October 2024 (TS 23) that a Youth Justice report should be obtained in order to inform the sentencing exercise, but this submission was not maintained orally or in written submissions at the plea hearing and the Court has therefore not acted upon it further in sentencing AB.

[17] A brief supplementary report dated 12 February 2025 containing corrections and clarifications to the report dated 31 January 2025 was subsequently provided. Ms Cidoni did not see AB again for the purpose of preparing this document.

[18] Ms Cidoni's report of 14 May 2020 refers (p.5) to five sisters and one brother. The eldest was a sister aged 23 and the youngest sibling was aged 6 at that time. Two siblings lived independently.

[19] Ms Cidoni's report of 14 May 2020 (p.7). Ms Cidoni applied the WISC‑V with a score of 86 on the verbal comprehension index (18th percentile) and a score of 82 on the working memory index (12th percentile).

[20] She could count about 10 to 12 different events of physical violence towards her mother, but more frequent verbal violence. She said about 7 or 8 of those events of physical violence required police to be called and the father taken into custody. She could recall one occasion when you contacted police after being beaten by your father. On one occasion an ambulance was called to treat the mother.

These reports concerned his involvement in criminal activity, association with older males involved in crime, refusal to live with his mother in Canberra, absconding from home, inappropriate discipline, family violence, his older sibling [AA] being kicked out, and aggressive behaviour between siblings. The most recent report, received in June 2021, raised concerns about his continued criminal offending and frequent remand while residing with his brother, KB.

[22] AB last stayed with his mother in Canberra between 8 and 12 June 2023.

[23] 99 prior findings of guilt spanning 7 court appearances: Prosecution Submissions [30].

[24] See also Defence Submissions in Support of Sentence Indication dated 30 September 2024, [28] ('Defence Submissions').

[25] On 15 July 2022, AB was convicted of recklessly causing injury, affray, threatening to inflict serious injury, armed robbery and aggravated carjacking - offensive weapon.

[27] It is relevant for the Court to be informed of subsequent alleged offending, but those unproven matters do not bear directly upon AB's sentence for the crime currently before this Court.

[28] The Court assumes that AB has since completed his VCE‑VM.

[29] 'Educators have noted that he demonstrates leadership qualities and a willingness to contribute to discussions within the Umoja program, a cultural education initiative for African Australian youth': 2025 Cidoni report [70].

[31] Update provided by Mr Nathwani KC via email on 19 November in response to an enquiry by the Court seeking an update.

[32] The 2025 Cidoni report also said that AB disclosed experiencing sexual abuse by an aunt at age 13, stating that he had never previously spoken about it; he reported having intrusive thoughts and nightmares related to this: at [80].

[34] Ms Cidoni said AB's psychological assessment in 2020 also indicated severely depressed mood, but that did not seem apparent from my reading of her 14 May 2020 report which referred (p.7) to mild symptoms of adolescent anxiety and depression.

[35] Errors were made in construction of the 2025 Cidoni report where it referenced earlier test results, as conceded in the Supplementary Cidoni Report [2]ff.

[36] The recent WAIS‑IV assessment at age 18 produced a full‑scale IQ score of 65, placing AB in the extremely low range, above only 1% of his peers. His Verbal Comprehension Index had declined to 78 (borderline range, 7th percentile), and his Working Memory Index had also declined to 69 (extremely low range, 2nd percentile). His Perceptual Reasoning Index was 63 (extremely low range, 1st percentile), highlighting marked impairments in non‑verbal problem‑solving and visual‑spatial reasoning (areas not assessed in 2020) and his Processing Speed Index was 71 (borderline range, 3rd percentile): Supplementary Cidoni Report, p.2.

[37] (including educational disruptions, emotional stress, and lack of intellectual stimulation.)

[38] Under the DSM‑5‑TR; see 2025 Cidoni report [140].

[39] Ms Cidoni referred to neurodevelopmental immaturity contributing to a limited capacity for self‑regulation: 2025 Cidoni report [146], [147].

[40] Transitions Team Leader at Parkville College (Cherry Creek Campus).

[42] Letter dated 2 June 2025 addressed to the Children's Court in relation to AB which stated, inter alia:

Based on the Psychological reports, by Ms Gina Cidoni dated 11 May 2020, 3 January 2025 and 12 February2025 and the assessment and interview by Mr John Phung Psychologist dated 21 May 2025 and 26 May 2025 Forensic Disability Statewide Access Service determined that [AB] does not meet the criteria above for an intellectual disability under the Disability Act 2006 and therefore does not qualify for a Plan of Available Services.

[43] Department of Families, Fairness and Housing.

[44] Under the Disability Act 2006.

[45] The joint position was advanced by the parties in writing in connection with the DFFH letter attached to that joint submission. It stated: 'In so far as the issue relating to [AB]'s intellectual disability, whilst the material seems to be equivocal, both parties agree that irrespective of that issue being determined, there is no dispute that [AB]'s intellectual functioning is on the lower side.'

[46] The Queen v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269 ('Verdins').

[47] (i.e. Verdins limbs 3 and 4). I note that the submissions were filed before the errors in the 2025 Cidoni report were identified.

[48] Citing R v Wright (1997) 93 A Crim R 48, 51 (Hunt CJ at CL) cited with approval in Verdins, 273-4 [20].

[49] As invoked by Ms Connelly on AB's behalf.

[50] Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571.

[53] The Arunta call, which appears to have taken place from custody between AB and his brother KB on 14 February 2025, included the following exchange, although I cannot be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it contains a reference to Ethan:

[KB] Why are you dissing dead people? That's not good.

[AB] I'm not the only one that do it, people do it to us. I'm just returning the favour [...].

[54] Citing Azzopardi v R [2011] VSCA 372; (2011) 35 VR 43, 53-56 [34]-[40] and 57 [44] per Redlich JA, and Boulton v R [2014] VSCA 342; (2014) 46 VR 308, 349-50 [187]-[189] (Maxwell P, Nettle, Neave, Redlich and Osborn JJA).

[57] Prosecution Submissions [16]-[18].

[59] Jack McCombe letter dated 26 November 2024.

[61] The Court was told in submissions for the sentence indication that, since February 2024, AB has been consulting a doctor every two weeks (for about 1 hour) and seeing psychiatric nurses weekly for dispensation of medication, and that this was the most consistent mental health intervention in AB's life: Defence Submissions [17].

[62] The weight to be accorded to an offender's youth and their rehabilitation decreases as the seriousness of the offence for which they are to be sentenced increases, such as in cases where a youthful offender carries out acts of extreme violence: see, eg, DPP v Lawrence [2004] VSCA 154; (2004) 10 VR 125, 132 [22] (Batt JA, Winneke P and Nettle JA agreeing). See also, eg, AP v The Queen [2019] VSCA 278, [33] (Ferguson CJ, Whelan and Priest JJA) as cited in the Prosecution Submissions: 'There are also gradations in age - a 13 year old is likely to be much different from a 17 or 18 year old'.

[63] Ms Connelly referred to DPP v SA & Ors (No 2) [2024] VSC 428; DPP v JA & Ors [2023] VSC 531; DPP v JF [2021] VSC 328; and DPP v TY (No 3) [2007] VSC 489; (2007) 18 VR 241 (and the dismissed Director's appeal from that sentence in DPP v TY (No 2) [2009] VSCA 226; (2009) 24 VR 705).

[64] [2024] VSC 428 (4 offenders found guilty of the group murder of Declan Cutler following judge‑alone trial. SY received a sentence of 18 years' imprisonment with a non‑parole period ('NPP') of 12 years; QM received a sentence of 19 years and six months' imprisonment with a NPP of 14 years and 6 months; DM received a sentence of 17 years and six months' imprisonment with a NPP of 12 years; and SA received a sentence of 19 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 14 years).

[65] [2023] VSC 531 (AM, a 14 year‑old offender, was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 10 years following a very early plea of guilty based on complicity with others in the attack on Declan Cutler. He was the only one to plead guilty to murder from the group and to maintain his guilty plea).

[66] [2022] VSC 358 (14 year‑old offender committed spontaneous attack on stranger - stabbing and beating on a public road; sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 9 years; plea of guilty following sentence indication).

[67] [2019] VSC 852 (17 year‑old offender sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 15 years after a trial for murder committed at a party by unprovoked stabbing of a young woman when the victim was outnumbered and defenceless).

[68] [2019] VSCA 278 (offence of statutory murder with an additional offence of aggravated carjacking; 16 year‑old offender sentenced after a trial to 18 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 14 years (17 years for statutory murder, 3 years for aggravated carjacking, with 1 years' cumulation). Upheld by Court of Appeal from the sentence of Coghlan JA in [2018] VSC 820.

[69] [2020] VSC 435 (plea of guilty by 16 year‑old to stabbing his grandfather 24 times; 16 years' imprisonment with a NPP of 11 years).

[71] The Prosecution Submissions state (at [43] n 42) that on 19 October 2023, AB was sentenced to a total effective sentence of 3 months and 21 days' detention. That sentence would have been served between 19 October 2023 and 8 February 2024, resulting in a deduction of 113 days from the available pre‑sentence detention since his arrest on 8 July 2023.

[72] Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, s 471. A submission was advanced for the first time by AB's lawyers via email at 8.07pm on the evening prior to sentence that the Court should consider giving a recommendation under s 471. This submission had not previously been advanced.