Director of Public Prosecutions v Hazell [2026] ACTSC 80

1. Tayler Hazell, you have entered pleas of guilty to the following charges: (a) A charge of aggravated robbery which occurred on 8 September 2017. The maximum penalty for this offence is 25 years’ imprisonment, a fine of 2,500 penalty units, or both. (b) A charge of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm (CC 2025/4246) which occurred on 28 March 2025 of which BT was the victim. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years’ imprisonment with an automatic disqualification from holding or obtaining a licence for 12 months. (c) A charge of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm (CC 2025/4247) of which BX was the victim. (d) A charge of taking a motor vehicle without consent which occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for five years’, a fine of 500 penalty units, or both. (e) A charge of unlawfully taking a child which occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years’ imprisonment. (f) A charge of driving a motor vehicle without consent which occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for five years’, a fine of 500 penalty units, or both. (g) A charge of failing to appear on a bail undertaking on 23 July 2012. This offence carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment, a fine of 200 penalty units or both. (h) A charge of aggravated dangerous driving on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is two years’ imprisonment, a fine of 200 penalty units or both. The offence also carries an automatic disqualification from holding or obtaining a licence for 12 months.

2. In addition, you ask that I take into account in sentencing you on the charge of aggravated dangerous driving the following four charges contained in a List of Additional Offences dated 19 February 2026: (a) Two charges of having been the driver of a motor vehicle involved in an accident failing to stop to give particulars to another driver (CC 2025/3470 & CC 2025/8032). These offences occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for each such offence is a fine of 20 penalty units. (b) A charge of driving with a prescribed drug in your oral fluid on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of 25 penalty units. There is an automatic disqualification from holding or obtaining a driver’s licence for a period of six months. (c) A charge of driving whilst disqualified on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is six months’ imprisonment, a fine of 50 penalty units or both. There is also an automatic disqualification from holding or obtaining a driver’s licence for a period of 12 months.

3. In sentencing you on the charge of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm (CC2025/4246) you ask that I take into account the following charge in a separate List of Additional Offences: (a) One charge of having been the driver of a motor vehicle involved in a crash failing to give particulars to another person who was injured in the crash (CC2025/3554). This offence occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of 20 penalty units.

4. Finally, in sentencing you on the charge of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm (CC2025/4247) you ask that I take into account the following charge in a separate List of Additional Offences: (a) One charge of having been the driver of a motor vehicle involved in a crash failing to give particulars to another person who was injured in the crash (CC2025/3469). This offence occurred on 28 March 2025. The maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of 20 penalty units.

5. [Redacted]

6. The next offending in point of time is that of aggravated robbery which occurred on 8 September 2017. At that time, you were 24 years old. At approximately 6:05pm that day, you entered a supermarket in the suburb of Duffy wearing a white face mask and holding a 30 cm kitchen knife. You approached a female employee who was working behind the counter and demanded that she give you money and cigarettes. You also demanded to know who else was in the supermarket.

7. The employee handed you the supermarket till, which contained approximately $1,184.70, and several packets of cigarettes. You then walked towards the front door with the items and said to the employee “I’m sorry darling, please don’t cry”. You had arrived at the supermarket in a silver Mitsubishi Pajero and upon leaving the supermarket you handed the stolen items to another person in that vehicle before you entered the driver’s door and drove away.

8. On 10 September 2017, ACT Police were provided with information by members of Victoria Police suggesting that you may have been the offender in this offence of aggravated robbery. At 11am that day, New South Wales (NSW) Police located you driving the Mitsubishi Pajero and a search of the vehicle revealed a facemask, clothing, a knife and a cash register drawer consistent with clothing worn by the offender in this aggravated robbery, the knife wielded by that offender, and some of the property stolen in the offence. NSW Police arrested you and charged you in relation to separate NSW offences.

9. On 23 October 2017, police attended Wellington Correctional Centre in NSW and spoke to you. You declined to participate in a record of interview, but you did ask police if “the girl was all right, I feel real bad, I did say sorry”. A warrant was issued in relation to this offending on 15 December 2017.

10. I now turn to the offending which occurred on 28 March 2025. At the time of this offending, you were 31 years old. As of 28 March 2025, you were a disqualified driver, having on 21 July 2015 been disqualified from driving in NSW until 6 December 2027.

11. Before describing the events of 28 March 2025, I will provide some background. After being arrested in NSW on 10 September 2017 you were sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, of which you served 15 months. Upon release, you were extradited to Victoria on 10 December 2018 where, on 14 February 2020, you were sentenced in Melbourne County Court to an aggregate sentence of six years eight months’ imprisonment for offences of aggravated burglary, armed robbery, recklessly causing serious injury, making a threat to kill and theft. A non-parole period of three years and 10 months was imposed. An appeal against severity of sentence was unsuccessful.

12. As I understand it, you were released on parole on 7 January 2025. On 25 March 2025, you removed your ankle monitoring bracelet which you were required to wear as part of your parole conditions, resulting in your Parole Order being cancelled and a warrant was issued for your arrest. You travelled to the ACT shortly before 28 March 2025. Consequently, all of the offences which occurred on that date occurred not only while you were on conditional liberty on parole but also while you were in breach of the conditions of your release from custody. Facts

13. At about 1:30am on Friday, 28 March 2025 you were travelling in a stolen Ford Falcon vehicle bearing Victorian registration plates when it crashed into the median strip on the corner of Bywong Street and Victoria Street in Sutton, NSW. A witness who heard this crash came out of their home and had a conversation with you. Between 6am and 7:20am that day you were captured by way of in-car video and other devices at various places in Sutton. At about 7:20am, you walked to a Telstra telephone box outside the Sutton Bakery on the corner of Victoria Street and Sutton Street before leaving the phone box a few minutes later. You walked back towards the intersection of Victoria Street and Bywong Street, Sutton.

14. At approximately 7:30am on 28 March 2025, a man, who I will refer to by the initials AM, drove into the car park of Country Bumpkins Early Learning Centre in Sutton. He was driving his green VE Holden Commodore bearing Victorian registration plates. In the car with him were his three children. AM parked his car and assisted two of his children to get out of the car. At this time, his other child, eight-year-old EM, remained seated in the rear passenger seat of the green Commodore, preferring to stay in the car rather than to get out with her father and two siblings. As AM was assisting his children out of the car, you walked past the car park area gate.

15. As AM entered the childcare centre, you returned to stand at the car park area gate. You waited in the area for approximately 10 seconds before initially walking, and then running, towards the green Commodore. You entered the green Commodore through the driver’s side door, closed the door and put the car into gear. You briefly stopped the car, got out of the driver’s seat and stood beside the open driver’s door. You then re-entered the car and drove it out of the car park area and south along Victoria Street, Sutton, with EM still in the car.

16. In evidence which you gave at your sentence hearing, you denied knowing that EM was in the green Commodore when you drove it away. You denied that the reason that you initially got out of the green Commodore before getting back in and driving the vehicle away was that you had seen EM sitting in the back seat. I do not accept that evidence, for reasons which I will give in a moment.

17. It was approximately two or three minutes after AM entered the childcare centre that he noticed that his car and EM were missing. He ran out the front gate of the centre. The owner of the centre called police and AM spoke briefly to the 000 operator. He then tried to log into his accounts to track his phone which was in the green Commodore.

18. EM did not speak to you when you entered the car. She believes that you looked at her several times in the car including when you initially got in, about halfway between the childcare centre and when you stopped, and just before you stopped the car. Right before you stopped the car, you said “Oh, you’re a girl”, and told her to “Hop out of the car and run to your dad”.

19. You stopped the car near the Sutton Bakehouse on Camp Street. EM got out of the car and started to walk back towards the childcare centre. On the way, she stopped at the road as she was not allowed to cross the road on her own. After a brief time, a woman came along who helped her across the road and walked with her to the childcare centre, where EM was reunited with her father. AM noted that she was shaken and upset.

20. AM provided a Victim Impact Statement dated 9 February 2026 in which he states that the morning of 28 March 2025 changed his family’s life in an instant and proved to be the most harrowing 15 minutes of his and EM’s lives. He speaks of EM’s trust in the world being broken and of the continuing emotional impact that your actions had on her. Her childhood feeling of security has been replaced with an undertone of anxiety of what might happen next. The knowledge that their family car was used to cause serious injury to two innocent boys has compounded their family’s distress. His family carry the memories of what happened with them every day.

21. After dropping EM on the side of the road, you drove the green Commodore west, away from Sutton. Police received multiple calls from the public who had seen the green Commodore travelling towards Queanbeyan, before travelling into the Australian Capital Territory.

22. Over the next hour and 40 minutes, the green Commodore was sighted multiple times travelling in and around both NSW and the ACT. The vehicle was able to be tracked via an Apple “Airtag” personal tracking device that was in EM’s schoolbag in the vehicle. The global position system data from the Airtag was monitored by police and assisted in tracking the green Commodore’s direction of travel. Police used their own tracking resources and capabilities to attempt to locate and stop the green Commodore, however there were no opportunities to safely engage or stop it.

23. During this period of one hour and 40 minutes, you drove the green Commodore in a dangerous manner across NSW and ACT roads. Some of this driving was captured on dashcams of other vehicles. At about 8:52am, you drove the green Commodore at high speed and entered NSW from the ACT via Lanyon Drive. You travelled northeast towards the intersection of Lanyon Drive and Tompsitt Drive in Jerrabomberra, NSW. You drove the vehicle onto the centre median dividing the two directions of traffic, before you re-entered the roadway and manoeuvred around several motor vehicles and proceeded through a red light at the intersection of Lanyon Drive and Tompsitt Drive.

24. At approximately 9:03am, police located the green Commodore at Patches Asphalt Park in Queanbeyan. You were outside the vehicle and there were no other occupants of the vehicle. Police attempted to apprehend you, but when you noticed police you re-entered the green Commodore and drove away, accelerating and screeching the wheels.

25. At about 9:05am, you turned from Coolebah Street onto Cameron Road in Queanbeyan, narrowly avoiding a collision with another vehicle. You were in the driver’s seat, and you were observed to be looking around. You travelled along Cameron Road towards the intersection of that road and Alanbar Street. In doing so, you failed to safely and appropriately navigate the roundabout at the intersection, and you travelled directly over the roundabout median. As you drove past the Queanbeyan South Public School, you slowed the green Commodore and attempted to manoeuvre the vehicle around the nearside of a Mitsubishi Pajero.

26. You mounted the pedestrian crossing refuge on the school side of the road and impacted with the protective barrier, which caused it to break away and travel underneath the Green Commodore as you continued to drive. You moved the Commodore so as to attempt to overtake the Mitsubishi Pajero on the offside and, in doing so, you struck the rear of the Mitsubishi at the tow-ball, causing damage to that vehicle. You overtook the Mitsubishi by crossing onto the incorrect side of the road and accelerating past it. You made no attempt to stop following the crash, to exchange details or render assistance.

27. After the collision, the tow ball of the Mitsubishi Pajero was pushed in and there were some scratches on the rear bumper. The driver of the Mitsubishi had pain in her neck and required assessment by NSW Ambulance, but was not transported to hospital. The other driver’s insurance excess is approximately $1,100 which will be required to be paid by her out-of-pocket.

28. After colliding with the Mitsubishi, you continued along Cameron Road past the intersection with Anne Street and travelled towards the intersection of Fergus Road. You overtook another two vehicles maintaining at least two tires on the incorrect side of the road which was across a dual white line. You continued to drive at high speed towards Fergus Road in Queanbeyan.

29. Your driving behaviour was erratic and dangerous to the safety of pedestrians and other road users. There were many pedestrians within the school zone as well as a steady stream of traffic. You travelled well in excess of the posted 40km/h speed limit.

30. The Agreed Statement of Facts does not record how you travelled from the area of the intersection of Cameron Road and Fergus Road in Queanbeyan to where you entered the ACT on Canberra Avenue. You continued to drive in a dangerous manner on Canberra Avenue as you entered the ACT. Traffic was heavy, due to the time of the morning and school drop-offs. You drove extremely closely to other vehicles, squeezed through traffic and you did not slow down to do so.

31. At approximately 9:10am, you drove the green Commodore in Lane Two of Canberra Avenue as you passed the school zones of St Clare’s and St Edmund’s Colleges. You were overtaking other vehicles. You then put the right-hand driver’s side wheels onto the grass median strip to manoeuvre past congested traffic.

32. At this time, two pedestrians, BX (14 years old) and BT (15 years old) were standing on the median strip adjacent to the front of St Edmund’s College. You struck the rear of a blue Toyota Corolla causing damage to the front left of the green Commodore and the right rear of the Corolla. The Corolla was shunted forward and came to a stop on the median strip of Canberra Avenue after the Burke Street intersection. Simultaneously, you struck both victims, BT and BX, with the Commodore’s right-hand side guard and windscreen. The victim BX was thrown approximately 9 m from the point of impact and BT was thrown a distance and was subsequently located 31 m from the point of impact. You did not stop the green Commodore and you continued to drive towards Manuka.

33. BT you continued driving on Canberra Avenue, you straddled the vehicle across both lanes and past other cars at speed. At this time, the green Commodore had smoke coming from the front of the vehicle. At approximately 9:11am, the green Commodore activated the red light and speed camera at the intersection of Canberra Avenue and Captain Cook Drive before coming to a stop at the intersection of Canberra Avenue and Furneaux Street in Manuka. You got out of the vehicle and ran towards Manuka Shops, where members of the public effected a citizen’s arrest. A short time later, police arrived and took you into custody.

34. While police were taking you into custody, you made a number of statements including: (a) “I fucking hope I haven’t hurt anyone”; (b) “I think there’s two kids man, I think I fucking hit one of them”; (c) “I think I hit one of those kids man, I really think I fucking hit one of those kids” and (d) “Oh no, please God no”.

35. You were later taken to the Canberra Hospital for medical assessment. A sample of your blood detected methylamphetamine was present at a level of 0.06 mg/L and amphetamine was present at a level of 0.02 mg/L. On 2 July 2025, a forensic medical officer provided an expert opinion based upon observations of your driving behaviour from video footage, and the amphetamine and methylamphetamine levels revealed by your blood sample, that you were incapable of being in proper control of a motor vehicle at the time that you were driving.

36. You were offered an opportunity to participate in a record of interview with police, but you declined.

37. Both of the victims, BT and BX, received emergency medical treatment at the scene, before being conveyed to hospital. I received comprehensive medical reports concerning both victims. In a first report dated 12 June 2025, Doctor Amanda Barry, a staff specialist at the Canberra Hospital, stated that BT suffered the following injuries resulting from him being hit by your car: (a) A complete transection of the left brachial artery. This would have been fatal without immediate medical intervention. Tourniquet application, blood transfusions and surgical intervention were required to preserve his life and his left arm. He underwent left brachial artery bypass surgery with a vein graft to treat the injury. (b) A transection of a left brachial vein. This is a complete rupture of a major vein in the left arm and, in combination with the atrial rupture, would have been fatal without immediate medical intervention. Surgical intervention was required to treat this injury. (c) Catastrophic injuries to the left brachial plexus. The brachial plexus is a network of nerves that supply both motor and sensory nerves to the upper limb and chest. The injuries sustained were: (i) i. 10% laceration of the Median nerve; (ii) ii. 10% laceration of the Radial nerve; (iii) iii 100% laceration of the Musculocutaneous nerve; (iv) iv 100% laceration of the Ulnar nerve; and (v) 100% laceration of the Medial Cutaneous nerve to arm and forearm prior to bifurcation. (d) These injuries required specialist surgical intervention and the median, radial, musculocutaneous and ulnar nerves of the left arm were repaired by the plastic surgery team. Surgical intervention was required to optimise the function of BT’s left arm. Without treatment, the function of his left arm would have been significantly compromised.

38. As a result of his injuries, BT required the following additional life-saving interventions: (a) Intubation, sedation and Intensive Care Unit admission. (b) Haemorrhagic shock, being life-threatening blood loss, required blood transfusions, activation of massive transfusion protocol and vasopressors to maintain his blood pressure.

39. In addition, BT sustained a comminuted right distal femoral fracture in which his right thigh bone was broken into three or more segments. Surgical intervention by way of open reduction and internal fixation was required to treat this injury. BT also sustained a mildly displaced right hip fracture that did not require surgical intervention. On arrival at Canberra Hospital, BT had a pulseless left foot, most likely caused by vasospasm secondary to trauma. This did not require additional treatment. BT also suffered soft tissue injuries to his right and left legs.

40. BT sustained a complete laceration to his left biceps muscle which required surgical repair by the plastic surgery team. He sustained a fracture of the left shoulder blade that did not require surgical intervention. He also sustained soft tissue injuries to his left arm, one of which was an open wound heavily contaminated with glass and gravel which required surgical washout and wound closure.

41. BT also sustained a fracture of his left nasal bone and facial lacerations that required surgical intervention by the plastic surgery team.

42. BT also sustained bilateral lung bruising and other soft tissue injuries of the chest and abdomen.

43. Doctor Barry expressed the opinion that BT had sustained extensive and life-threatening injuries to his left arm due to impact blunt force trauma. Without life-saving interventions and immediate medical and surgical care, BT would have died. BT required highly specialised medical care to treat his injuries.

44. Doctor Barry provided an additional report dated 6 February 2026 regarding BT’s treatment progress. On 22 January 2026, a vascular surgeon noted a reassuring ultrasound scan revealed a patent left brachial artery and bypass graft. This injury was progressing as expected. On 14 January 2026, a 30% flexure contracture (bend) of BT’s left elbow was noted. BT was able to fully bend his left elbow but was unable to fully straighten his arm due to that contracture. On 8 August 2025, a nerve conduction study of BT’s left upper limb demonstrated reduced activity of all of the major nerves maximally impacting the ulnar nerve. On 4 August 2025, there were documented signs of recovery of the left ulnar nerve as BT had started to bend his fifth finger. On 27 June 2025, it was documented that all of the damaged nerves, except the ulnar nerve, in BT’s left arm were expected to show continued improvement. A guarded prognosis was stipulated regarding the left ulnar nerve due to the severity of the injury.

45. Doctor Barry states that BT underwent left arm surgery under general anaesthesia on 5 November 2025 to explore the possibility of nerve transfer to improve ulnar nerve function. The nerve transfer was unable to be performed due to clinical contraindications identified at the time of the procedure. It is proposed that further surgery involving tendon transfers may occur in early 2027. With regard to BT’s left elbow contracture, it was thought that, with ongoing intensive physical rehabilitation and elbow splinting, there was a chance of improvement without major surgery over the first half of 2026. BT has ongoing plastic surgery reviews booked at the Canberra Hospital and also has a review with the vascular surgery team in early 2027. He has continuing physiotherapy and rehabilitation.

46. On 27 November 2025, it was determined that BT’s right leg was 1 cm shorter than the left as a result of arrested bone growth secondary to damage to the growth plate. This required corrective surgery.

47. Doctor Barry states that, as at the date of her second report, BT had ongoing significant nerve dysfunction and physical disability due to the injuries sustained to his dominant arm as a result of being struck by a motor vehicle. At that point, BT had undergone 10 months of extensive treatment including surgery under general anaesthesia and intensive rehabilitation in an attempt to optimise nerve recovery and function of his left arm. Given the severity of the injuries sustained, it is highly likely that there will be a degree of permanent functional and sensory impairment of his left arm. Further surgery may be required.

48. Regarding BT’s right leg, Doctor Barry stated that it is not possible to prognosticate the degree of potential disability incurred as a result of the injuries sustained. BT will have permanent scarring of the right leg as a result of his surgery.

49. Generally speaking, BT continues to receive highly specialised medical care to treat his injuries.

50. I also received a report from Doctor Richard Lawson, a hand, nerve and micro surgeon, dated 6 February 2026. He states that BT is still recovering from his injuries and he would expect BT to improve for 2-3 years post operatively. Doctor Lawson performed one operation on BT and further surgery is being contemplated. Doctor Lawson opines that BT will have permanent deficits of both motor and sensory function in his ulnar nerve and is unlikely to regain full elbow function.

51. I received a Victim Impact Statement from BT’s mother. She says that 28 March 2025 is a day on which you changed BT’s life forever, not because of an accident but because you chose to get behind the wheel of a stolen car, to drive at high speed, to weave through traffic, and to mount the median strip hitting BT and BX. She refers to the pain which BT has experienced in his treatment, the 49 days that he spent in hospital, the ongoing surgeries, physiotherapy, specialist appointments, tests and scans. His dominant arm was so severely injured that it will never be the same. When he arrived at the hospital, there was a possibility that the arm may have to be amputated.

52. BT’s mother speaks of the time that BT has lost from school, from socialising with his friends, playing sport and the normal experiences of a teenager. Instead, his days are filled with pain, surgeries, rehabilitation, physiotherapy and medical appointments. This is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

53. Beyond the immediate effect that your actions had on BT, his injuries have affected his whole family. BT’s mother says that, despite everything, BT is a most resilient young man, but his strength does not lessen your responsibility for what you did.

54. Doctor Barry also provided a report dated 12 June 2025 regarding the injuries sustained by the other victim, BX. BX was admitted to the Canberra Hospital from 28 March 2025 until 8 April 2025 requiring limb-saving interventions to treat injuries that were documented as being sustained secondary to being struck by a motor vehicle. He was treated in the Intensive Care Unit from 28 March 2025 until 3 April 2025.

55. BX sustained hand-threatening injuries to his left hand. He sustained partial amputations of the second, third and fourth fingers of his left hand. These could be described as degloving injuries which occur when part of the skin and underlying soft tissue is completely or partially detached from the body. The following associated injuries to underlying anatomical structures were documented intraoperatively: (a) Left index finger distal laceration and extensible avulsion with joint exposure. (b) Left middle finger open proximal phalanx head comminuted fracture. (c) Left ring finger open middle phalanx comminuted fracture with bone loss on the back of the bone, 80% laceration to the flexible muscle of the hand that closes the fingers, radial digit nerve and radial digital artery 100% laceration and extensible tendon 100% laceration. All structures were repaired by a plastic surgery team under general anaesthesia.

56. In addition, BX sustained a 20 cm long longitudinal laceration to his right arm and limb which was sutured in theatre. He also sustained a laceration over the third metacarpal on the back of his right hand with a 20% laceration of the extensible muscle in the forearm that opens the fingers and extends the wrist. This injury was sutured in theatre. He also sustained a laceration of the inner border of the right hand with intact underlying structures. This was sutured in theatre.

57. BX also sustained the following abdominal injuries: (a) Two graze abrasions on the upper and middle anterior abdominal wall. (b) A 5 cm superficial abdominal laceration which was sutured in theatre. (c) A pelvic haematoma that did not require surgical intervention. (d) A grade 3 splenic laceration with some capsular haematoma. This injury was monitored and did not require surgical intervention. (e) A grade 3 hepatic laceration and small perihepatic haematoma. This injury was monitored and did not require surgical intervention. (f) A right adrenal laceration with surrounding haematoma.

58. BX also sustained undisplaced fractures to the right anterior fourth and fifth ribs with minor buckling of the sixth to ninth ribs. He also sustained a trace, right-sided 2 mm apical posterior pneumothorax which was monitored and did not require additional treatment. He also sustained a right parieto-occipital subgaleal haematoma and a right thigh laceration.

59. In Doctor Barry’s opinion, BX sustained extensive upper limb injuries including left hand-threatening injuries most likely due to high impact blunt force trauma. He required urgent surgical interventions under general anaesthesia to preserve his left hand, including surgical repair of bones, tendons, the radial artery and the ulnar nerve. Surgical intervention was required to optimise the function of BX’s left hand. Without intervention, the functionality of BX’s left hand would have been significantly compromised resulting in partial amputation of three fingers. Doctor Barry stated that there will be permanent scarring of BX’s left hand as a result of these injuries and the required surgical interventions. BX also sustained additional significant injuries to his right forearm, right hand and abdomen that required surgical intervention under general anaesthesia.

60. There will be permanent scarring of BX’s right arm, right hand and abdomen as a result of these injuries and required surgical interventions. The injuries to BX’s liver, spleen, right adrenal gland, right lung and head required admission to the Intensive Care Unit. Doctor Barry states that BX received highly specialised medical care to treat his injuries.

61. I also received two reports from Doctor Maurizio Damiani, a hand and upper limit surgeon regarding BX. The first report is dated 17 November 2025. Doctor Damiani states that BX sustained significant injuries to both hands in the accident on 28 March 2025, requiring multiple operations at Canberra Hospital. The primary concern related to his left hand, particularly affecting the long and ring fingers. BX performs daily stretching exercises with minimal sustained improvement. His right hand continues to extrude glass fragments.

62. Surgical intervention to the left hand was performed on 28 March 2025. As of November 2025, BX’s left long finger demonstrated a swan neck deformity with limited joint movement. BX had post-traumatic stiffness of his left long and ring fingers with significant joint damage to the long finger PIP joint, loss of terminal extension mechanism and early post-traumatic arthritis likely in the long finger PIP joint due to cartilage loss. The ring finger demonstrated post-traumatic deformity with bone shortening.

63. Doctor Damiani’s second report is dated 11 February 2026. On examination on that date, BX demonstrated hyperextension deformity of the left long finger joint with associated Z-deformity pattern due to tendon mechanics. The ring finger showed a shortened middle bone with healed fracture line and slight deviation towards adjacent finger. An MRI revealed the completely abnormal joint appearance of the left long finger compared to other digits. Evidence of post-traumatic arthritis was developing in the affected joint. Doctor Damiani stated that BX has significant joint deformity with developing post-traumatic arthritis of the left long finger. Normal joint mobility is unlikely to be achieved due to severe structural changes. Surgical management options were discussed, including amputation. No decision had been made on any further treatment as of 11 February 2026.

64. I was provided with a Victim Impact Statement from BX, dated 16 February 2026. He refers to the fact that, on the morning of 28 March 2025, he was simply going to school like any other day and was not doing anything wrong. He was badly injured in the crash, especially his hands. On his left hand, his pointer, middle and ring fingers were degloved. He has lost movement and strength in his middle finger, and his grip in that hand is now much weaker. His left hand causes him the most problems. It hurts a lot and there are many things he can’t do properly anymore.

65. His right hand was also badly injured, with damage to tendons and ligaments, including a snapped tendon in his middle finger and damage to the veins in his hand which caused a lot of blood loss. That hand is also weak and now does not work the way it used to. The injuries to both of his hands affect what he does every day.

66. Before this accident, football was a huge part of his life. He was a good player and playing first grade for his school. He had the potential to play professionally one day. Since the accident, he has lost his love of football. Because of his hand injuries, it is hard for him to catch and control the ball. Losing football has been really hard and upsetting for him. Before the accident fishing was BX’s favourite activity, but he now struggles to hold the rod properly and it causes pain in his hand.

67. BX understands that what happened to him on 28 March 2025 has affected not only him but his whole family. Things feel more strained within the family. There have been a few times when BX has felt sick in his stomach and his heart has started racing when he sees the crash site.

68. Before the accident, BX had habits where he felt like he needed to touch things or do things in a certain order, but these had never caused him worries or fears. After the accident, this got a lot worse. He started feeling that if he didn’t do things a certain way or a certain number of times, something bad would happen. This has been really hard to deal with and makes him feel anxious.

69. BX states that he has had to go to lots of medical and psychology appointments since the accident, sometimes one after another. He describes it as really frustrating and makes him feel like he’s missed out on being a normal teenager. After the accident, he stopped caring about school and didn’t care about his schoolwork or doing well anymore. Everything felt overwhelming, and it was hard to find motivation when his life had changed so much.

70. I also received a Victim Impact Statement from BX’s mother, NT. When she heard that BX had been hit by a car and rushed to hospital, she felt physically ill. Rushing to the hospital herself, she was taken directly to BX. He was surrounded by nurses and police, was white as a sheet, covered in his torn, bloodied school uniform with deep cuts, lacerations and gravel burns. His three middle fingers on his left hand were barely hanging on, with blood dripping to the floor. Seeing him like that absolutely shattered NT.

71. NT refers to the surgery which BX endured on 28 March 2025. The surgeon who reattached BX’s fingers said that she could not guarantee their functionality. BX was placed in an induced coma in the Intensive Care Unit, intubated and surrounded by machines. That image of him continues to haunt her. The stress of seeing him so helpless and injured often left her collapsed on the floor of the Intensive Care Unit, terrified of BX’s uncertain future. On top of her anxiety and exhaustion, she struggled to keep her family informed while focusing everything on BX’s recovery. BX completely lost his independence, which was devastating for him.

72. Following the trauma, NT was diagnosed with PTSD. She couldn’t sleep, her anxiety was constant and she withdrew from everyone just to survive. She lost motivation and lived with a constant fear that everything precious could be taken away at any moment. She says that BX now carries the same fear. As BX’s mother, her entire world became consumed by his pain and recovery. That came at a heartbreaking cost to her other two sons. BX’s older brothers received only the bare minimum of her attention while she focused on BX’s recovery. Balancing their emotional well-being with her work, her business, and maintaining a household as a single parent left her utterly drained. She lost all sense of normal family life.

73. NT’s small business, which supports her family, almost came to a standstill. Her public service role also suffered. She took 10 months off work.

74. The week before she completed her Victim Impact Statement, NT was informed that the damage to BX’s fingers is too extensive to fully repair. The damage to BX’s hands has ended his rugby career and even made fishing painful. BX lost almost a full year of schooling.

75. KX, BX’s father, also provided a Victim Impact Statement. By coincidence, KX was near St Edmund’s College just after this incident on 28 March 2025. He saw you in the green Commodore, as he describes it: “screaming down the road splitting cars”. He nearly chased you but instead turned to drive back towards the College. When he arrived there, as he said, “it was just carnage”. KX had no idea what was going on and got out of his car and saw BT laying on the ground. His whole shirt was completely red from blood. There was no skin on BT’s face. His arm had a large laceration and he was bleeding out. KX saw somebody with a first aid kit and he took it and provided essential first aid to BT. At this point, KX did not know that his own son BX had also been injured. While he was providing life-saving assistance to AS, he was informed that BX had also been injured.

76. Paramedics arrived and assisted AS, allowing KX to move to where BX was being treated. He saw that BX’s fingers had been ripped off and were hanging there by his skin. He comforted BX and accompanied him in the ambulance to the hospital. He remained with BX until he was taken into surgery. He then provided assistance to NT and extended family members.

77. KX states that he didn’t feel like his body really relaxed again until BX was out of hospital and even then it took another month or so before his body let go of what had happened. He suffered delayed PTSD, and he was dealing with depression for the last few months before he completed his Victim Impact Statement. It has affected his ability to work, to get up and get going, and has impacted his relationship with NT. KX states that it has been very hard for BX, and he sees the frustration and pain that he still lives with because he cannot use his hand in the same way that he could before. BX has lost his love of football and is not as passionate about fishing as he once was.

78. I received Victim Impact Statements from other members of BX’s family. Without meaning any disrespect or in any way diminishing the contents of those statements, I will not refer to them in detail. They confirm the deep and long-lasting effect that your criminal conduct has had on BX, them, and other members of their family.

79. You gave evidence at your sentence hearing, some of which related to the events of 28 March 2025. Of significance at this particular point, you gave evidence that when you got in the green Commodore at the childcare centre in Sutton you were unaware of the presence of EM in the back seat. It was suggested to you that the reason you got out of the driver’s seat after having sat down, started the car and put the transmission into gear, was that you saw EM in the rear seat and immediately got out of the vehicle. You denied this, but you were unable to provide any credible reason for you having got out of the vehicle after you entered the first time. You claimed that you had “second thoughts”. I do not accept that evidence. A cursory examination of your criminal history, together with your actions after you took the green Commodore, make it highly unlikely that you had qualms of conscience about taking that vehicle.

80. I am satisfied that you initially got into the vehicle, started it and put the transmission into gear. You then saw EM in the rear seat, which took you by surprise. You got out of the vehicle but then decided to take the vehicle in any event with EM in the car. I have no doubt that you lied in your evidence on this issue.

81. In addition, the agreed Statement of Facts records the only conversation that you directed towards EM during the period in which you drove with her in the rear seat was to say to her: “Oh, you’re a girl”. This was not a statement of surprise that there was someone in the rear seat. It is indicative of you being aware that there was a child in the rear seat, but you thought that it was a boy. I do not accept your evidence that you were unaware of the presence of EM in the rear seat when you drove the green Commodore away from the childcare centre. I am satisfied that you deliberately lied on this issue in an attempt to minimise your criminal behaviour.

82. In cross-examination, when pressed with the contents of the agreed Statement of Facts, you claimed that there were parts of the Statement which you were coerced into accepting. I reject that proposition. You agreed that your lawyer took you through the Statement of Facts and that you signed the Statement. Clearly, by signing it you intended to adopt the contents. You lied in your evidence as part of a process of trying to minimise your culpability for the offences on 28 March 2025. I will have more to say about your evidence later, but for now I simply indicate that I do not accept that you were attempting to be truthful in your evidence.

Seriousness of the offences

83. In assessing the objective seriousness of the offence of failing to appear in accordance with a bail undertaking which occurred in [redacted], I take into account [redacted]. At the time that you failed to appear you were 19 years old. No explanation has been provided for your failure to appear on that occasion, although your counsel notes that a pre-sentence report dated 17 July 2012 refers to your lifestyle at that time as “chaotic”. I would assess this offence as being in the lower range of such offences.

84. A plea of guilty was indicated to this charge on 24 July 2025 and was formally entered on 20 August 2025. In assessing the discount for your plea of guilty on this charge I note that the case against you was overwhelming. I do not accept that your plea of guilty is evidence of complete remorse on your part. If you had been remorseful for this offence, you would have taken steps well before you were apprehended in 2025 to have this charge dealt with. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate penalty by approximately 15% because of your plea of guilty.

85. Turning to the offence of aggravated robbery in 2017, in assessing the objective seriousness of this offence I take into account: (a) You were 24 years old at the time. You were at the upper limit of what might be considered a young adult. (b) The weapon which you used to commit this offence was potentially lethal. You not only held the weapon, but you brandished it in the direction of the victim. (c) There was obviously a degree of planning and preparation involved in this offence. You travelled by car to the scene of the offence, brought the weapon with you and also a facemask to hide your identity. (d) The victim was in a relatively vulnerable position as a female shopkeeper in a small suburban supermarket. (e) The amount of money stolen was $1,184.70, together with several packets of cigarettes of unspecified value.

86. While you apologised to the shopkeeper as you left the shop after the offence, I do not accept that this reduces the objective seriousness of this offending. I assess this offence as in the mid-range of such offences.

87. A plea of guilty was entered to this charge on 24 April 2025 in the Magistrates Court. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your plea of guilty, but I am not persuaded that your plea reflects true remorse. I note that the prosecution case against you was strong but not overwhelmingly so. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by approximately 20% because of your plea of guilty.

88. Turning to the offence of taking a motor vehicle without consent on 28 March 2025, in assessing the objective seriousness of this offence I take into account: (a) There was limited planning involved in this offence. It is clear that you were trying to arrange transport out of Sutton on the morning of 28 March 2025, having damaged the vehicle which you had driven to that location earlier that day. While the choice of the green Commodore may have been opportunistic, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that you had formed the intention to unlawfully take a vehicle before you entered the car park at the childcare centre. (b) The vehicle was used by you from approximately 7:30am to about 9:11am.

89. I assess this offence as in the mid-range of such offences.

90. You entered a plea of guilty to this charge on 20 August 2025, but an indication that a plea of guilty would be entered had been given at an earlier time. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your plea, but I’m not persuaded that your plea reflects true remorse. The prosecution case against you was overwhelming. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by about 15% because of your plea of guilty.

91. I now turn to the charge of unlawfully taking a child. In assessing the objective gravity of this offence, I take into account: (a) The offence was spontaneous and was not the subject of significant planning. You did, however, deliberately choose to take the green Commodore knowing that EM was in the rear seat. (b) The child was 8 years old which is considerably younger than the upper age limit contemplated by the provision creating the offence, which is 12 years of age. (c) The child was only detained for a matter of minutes. No physical force was used, although she was effectively trapped in the moving vehicle and unable to escape. (d) You drove the child out of sight of her father before simply leaving her on the side of the road, not taking any steps to ensure her safety. (e) You were a complete stranger to EM, a fact apt to cause greater distress to a young child.

92. I assess this offence as on the border of the low and mid-ranges of such offences.

93. I understand that you entered a plea of guilty to this charge on 20 August 2025. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your plea, but I am not persuaded that your plea reflects true remorse. I am satisfied that you have lied on oath in your evidence about the circumstances of this offence in order to try to minimise your responsibility. The case against you on this charge was overwhelming. I do accept, however, that your plea of guilty has relieved the victims of the need to give evidence. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by approximately 15% because of your plea of guilty.

94. Turning to the charge of driving a motor vehicle without consent, I take into account that the green Commodore was taken by you at about 7:30am on 28 March 2025 and you continued to use that vehicle by driving it until you finally abandoned the vehicle at Manuka at 9:11am that day. During the period that you drove the vehicle, it was driven in a manner which caused significant damage to the vehicle resulting in it becoming unusable. You were also under the influence of illicit drugs when you drove the vehicle. While driving the vehicle you committed other offences for which you will be separately punished.

95. I assess this offence as in the upper part of the mid-range of such offences.

96. You entered a plea of guilty to this charge on 20 August 2025, but an indication that a plea of guilty would be entered had been given at an earlier time. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your plea, but I’m not persuaded that your plea reflects true remorse. The prosecution case against you was overwhelming. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by about 15% because of your plea of guilty.

97. I now turn to the charge of aggravated dangerous driving. As I understand it, the circumstances of aggravation alleged are that you were driving while under the influence of a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle, you failed to stop for police and you drove in a way that risked the safety of a vulnerable road user. In assessing the objective seriousness of this offence, I take into account: (a) Numerous members of the public were put at risk by your driving. You drove at speed in busy suburban areas, including school zones around the Queanbeyan South Public School, during peak school drop off time, when there were many pedestrians and other road users in close proximity to the vehicle you were driving. (b) You struck the Mitsubishi Pajero while trying to dangerously overtake it. (c) Your erratic and dangerous driving was protracted. The distance over which you committed this offence was about 7.3 km. You had ample opportunity to take stock of what you were doing and to desist. At one point you got out of the green Commodore, but you re-entered the vehicle and continued driving dangerously after you saw police. (d) Your driving included driving at high speeds, driving through red lights, driving over median strips, driving over a roundabout, mounting a pedestrian crossing outside a school and damaging the protective barrier, striking the rear of another vehicle, and overtaking over a dual white line. (e) Your motive in engaging in this driving was to avoid apprehension by police.

98. I assess this offence as on the border of the mid and upper ranges of such offences.

99. I understand that you entered a plea of guilty to this charge on 20 August 2025. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your plea. The case against you, however, was overwhelming. I do not accept that your plea of guilty is evidence of true remorse, as opposed to being simply acceptance of the inevitable. I will nevertheless reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by approximately 15% because of your plea of guilty.

100. The next offences are those of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm. I will in the first instance deal generally with both offences together, because they both arose out of the same course of driving. As the Court of Appeal in this Territory accepted in the decision of Monfries v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 46, the aggravating factors identified in the NSWCCA decision of R v Whyte [2002] NSWCCA 343 which may attend offences of the comparable NSW offence of aggravated dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm are also relevant to assessing the objective seriousness of an offence of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm in this Territory.

101. The first such matter is the extent and nature of the injuries inflicted. I have already set out in some detail the injuries sustained by both BT and BX. While it is always possible to imagine more serious injuries, those suffered by both the victims fall within the upper range of injuries that would constitute grievous bodily harm, particularly those sustained by BT. It is no exaggeration to describe the injuries sustained by BT as life-threatening. Without the immediate first aid provided by KX and others it is probable that BT would have bled to death. The injuries sustained by each victim were truly catastrophic, life changing and permanent. You have taken from them things that they love and possible futures which they had imagined for themselves.

102. The second matter is the number of people put at risk. It is not possible to accurately assess this figure, but it certainly exceeds the two victims, BT and BX. Traffic was congested on Canberra Avenue in the area of St Clare’s College and St Edmund’s College at the time these offences occurred. In addition, this was a peak time for school drop off, and the collision with the victims occurred in a school zone. Following the collision, you drove away at speed.

103. The next relevant matter is the degree of speed involved in the offence. There is no reliable evidence of the speed of the green Commodore in the moments leading up to the collision with the victims. It is fair to say, however, that you were travelling much faster than the other vehicles travelling in the same direction and well in excess of the posted speed limit.

104. The next relevant matter is the degree of intoxication or substance abuse. Both methylamphetamine and amphetamine were present in your blood. The levels identified were such that you were incapable of having proper control of a motor vehicle.

105. The next relevant matter is whether the offence involved erratic or aggressive driving. In the period leading up to the collision, there is evidence of you driving both erratically and aggressively. Your vehicle was seen to weave through traffic without slowing down and you drove with the driver’s side wheels on the grass median strip in an attempt to manoeuvre around congested traffic and in doing so struck the rear of another vehicle whilst also striking both victims.

106. The next relevant matter is whether the offending involved competitive driving or showing off. This was not a relevant consideration in these offences.

107. The next relevant matter is the length of the journey during which others were exposed to the risk of your driving. The course of driving relied upon by the prosecution for this offence commenced at Queanbeyan South Public School and terminated at Manuka in the ACT. This is a distance of about 11.6 km.

108. The next two relevant matters can be dealt with together. They are whether the offending involved ignoring warnings and whether the offending occurred in the course of an attempt to escape a police pursuit. Police attempted to stop the vehicle you were driving but you deliberately evaded their attempts. You were fleeing police apprehension at the time of this driving, including at the time of the collision with the victims.

109. The next relevant matter is the degree of sleep deprivation relevant to the offending. After your arrest, you said that you hadn’t slept in four days. This, together with your intoxication with amphetamines, must have made you aware that you were in no fit state to drive a motor vehicle.

110. The final matter is whether the offending involved failing to stop. You did not stop after the collision with the victims to render assistance to either of them. Despite your prevarication in your oral evidence, I have no doubt that you knew that you had struck at least one of the victims before you drove away at speed from the scene of the collision. You accepted that the driver’s side windscreen was shattered at the point of the collision. This could only have occurred in the circumstances that existed if you struck one of the pedestrians.

111. The only circumstance distinguishing the charges involving BT and BX is the extent of the injuries inflicted on each of the victims. I assess the offence in which BT was the victim as falling within the worst category of this type of offending. More severe forms of injury than those suffered by BT but still falling under the rubric of grievous bodily harm, such as quadriplegia or severe brain damage, may be imagined. The fact that more serious forms of harm may be imagined does not mean that the offence of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm against BT does not fall within the worst category of that offence. To suggest that the objective seriousness of an offence of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm is to be assessed only by reference to the degree of grievous bodily harm inflicted is to take an unjustifiably narrow approach. One must consider all relevant factors, including the degree of culpability of the driving.

112. While the injuries inflicted on BX were also catastrophic, they were not as life-threatening as those inflicted on BT. For this reason, I do not find the offence of culpable driving causing grievous bodily harm to BX to fall within the worst category of this type of offence, but it nevertheless falls within, and well within, the upper range.

113. You entered pleas of guilty to these charges on 20 August 2025, but an indication that a plea of guilty would be entered had been given at an earlier time. I accept that there is utilitarian value in your pleas, but I’m not persuaded that your pleas reflect true remorse. The prosecution case against you was overwhelming. I will reduce the otherwise appropriate sentences by about 15% because of your pleas of guilty.

114. I will now turn to your subjective features. I received a pre-sentence report dated 4 February 2026. That report states that you were born in Camden, NSW as the only child of your parents’ union and you were raised alongside two older half siblings from your mother’s earlier relationship. You stated that you identify as Aboriginal from your father’s side, but you were unsure of your Nation. You reported no childhood memories of your father and expressed the belief that your parents separated prior to your birth. You stated that your childhood was difficult, with your mother exerting excessive physical discipline and engaging in excessive alcohol consumption. [Redacted] and describe yourself as an “out-of-control” child.

115. You told the author of the report that your mother had numerous partners throughout your childhood, some of whom perpetrated physical abuse against your mother and her children. You said that when you were about 12 years old your mother formed a relationship with a former Outlaw Motorcycle Gang member from which your younger half-sister was born. Your mother’s partner also had three daughters from a previous relationship whom you recognise as your stepsisters.

116. You told the author of the report that you were frequently assaulted by your mother’s partner who often directed you to leave the family home. You would take refuge at a friend’s home before being required to return to your family home where the cycle would repeat itself. You said that you were sleeping outdoors at the age of 13 and [redacted]. Your mother’s relationship with this man ended after he physically assaulted her, reportedly causing her brain damage. During that assault it was claimed that your mother cut her partner’s hand with a knife, and consequently [redacted].

117. You stated that you met your biological father for the first time when you were 21 and discovered that you had a younger half-sister from your father’s subsequent relationship. You stated that your father was a methamphetamine user. You said that you last saw your father in 2017 and there has been no further communication between you.

118. You told the author of the report that your mother continues to struggle with alcohol abuse. She reportedly terminated all contact with you in May 2025 after your ex-partner allegedly stole money from her. You have no ongoing contact with your siblings and step-siblings as they do not want to associate with you due to the nature of your criminal history.

119. You have had three prior significant intimate relationships, each resulting in children. Your first two relationships each produced one child. Both children, now aged 11 and 10 years old, remain in the care of their mothers and you have no contact with them. Your third relationship lasted approximately three years and reportedly involved mutual substance use and family violence perpetrated by yourself. One child was born at that relationship during a period when you were incarcerated. Parental responsibility for that child was transferred to your brother with your consent. That child is now 7 years old, and you have limited communications with him.

120. You told the author of the report that you developed a further romantic relationship during your most recent period of parole. You stated that the woman, who had previously been a childhood friend, travelled from the ACT to Victoria to visit you. During her stay, you say that your relationship became intimate, and you realised that she had developed methamphetamine dependence. You claimed that you remained abstinent from the substance for three weeks before relapsing in her company. Parole conditions were then imposed in an attempt to separate you from this woman, and you claim that you asked her to leave but she did not and the two of you continued to engage in substance abuse. This led to continued positive urinalysis tests in breach of your parole. You said that you decided to leave Victoria to transport the woman back to the ACT and visit your mother in anticipation of being returned to custody. You claim that this relationship has now ended.

121. The pre-sentence report notes that you were incarcerated in NSW from 2017, after which you were extradited to Victoria where you served over six years of imprisonment before your release to parole in January 2025. You then resided in Ballarat, Victoria in male-only accommodation supported by an Aboriginal organisation. You claimed other residents of the accommodation were allowing anti-social visitors and illicit substances onto the premises.

122. It is significant that ACT Corrective Services contacted Ballarat Community Corrections who advised that during your period of incarceration in Victoria you successfully completed the Talking Change Program and the High Intensity Violence Program. Following your release from custody, you reportedly engaged with parole supervision at a superficial level. It was, however, noted that you demonstrated a good understanding of your risk factors and you were able to articulate what you needed to do to address your risk in the community, but you were unable to maintain a drug and crime free lifestyle. You attended drug and alcohol counselling and engaged superficially with support workers. During your parole period, several reports were submitted to the Parole Board regarding your failure to provide a sample for urinalysis, providing positive urinalysis results and late attendance at appointments. Consequently, a non-association condition was added to the Parole Order.

123. On 25 March 2025, you removed your ankle monitoring bracelet resulting in your Parole Order being cancelled and a warrant was issued for your arrest. You travelled to the ACT where you committed the present offences on 28 March 2025. Since being remanded in custody you have been subject to seven custodial charge notices for fighting, possessing or dealing in things without the Director General’s approval, making, possessing, knowingly consuming or dealing with a prohibited drug without the Director General’s approval, and being disrespectful or abusive towards a correctional officer in a way that undermines the officer’s authority.

124. The pre-sentence report notes that you were expelled from school in Year 9 after reportedly assaulting a schoolteacher. You reported that you had been frequently suspended, primarily for fighting. You then obtained some employment at an abattoir and subsequently at a recycling plant. You attempted apprenticeships as a chef and a signwriter, but you did not complete either. You stated that you spent three years working as a removalist and shorter periods at other occupations. Your last period of employment was at the age of 20. That employment was terminated after you failed to attend work which you attributed to your use of methamphetamine. You engaged in community work at an Aboriginal Cooperative during your most recent period of parole, but you did not attend on a regular basis. During your current period at the AMC you were employed as a sweeper for several months, but this was terminated in November 2025 following an accommodation transfer resulting from disciplinary action.

125. You told the author of the presentence report that you first consumed alcohol at the age of 13. Between the ages of 15 and 17 your alcohol use became problematic and contributed to [redacted]. You said that you were working as a removalist at the time and alcohol was part of the after-work culture. You claim that you rarely consume alcohol now, although you acknowledge that when you do drink it tends to lead to negative outcomes. You stated you had been consuming alcohol during the days that you were in breach of your parole and leading up to the present offences.

126. You claimed that you first used cannabis at the age of 13 in the company of your brother and older peers. You said that you didn’t enjoy the substance, but you continued intermittent use. You told the author of the report that, when you were 18 and consuming alcohol at an associate’s residence, you were assaulted by three people and stabbed 15 times resulting in a four-week hospital admission. You said that you began consistently using methamphetamine and cannabis at heavy levels and stealing to support your habit at that time.

127. You stated that at the age of 23 or 24 your grandfather died and you were struggling with your inability to communicate with your child and consequently began using opiates. You used those substances for about four or five months. While in custody in Victoria, you claim that your prescribed mental health medications were temporarily discontinued and you began using contraband buprenorphine as a form of self-medication. You were later prescribed methadone as an opioid treatment. You reportedly experienced liver failure and consequently ceased use of methadone and were instead prescribed buprenorphine.

128. Following your release to parole in 2025, you claimed to have been abstinent from illicit substances and engaging with drug and alcohol counselling on a weekly basis until your most recent partner arrived to visit you which resulted in you relapsing into substance abuse. Ballarat Community Corrections confirmed that you were engaged with drug and alcohol counselling during the short period of your parole. You completed 13 urinalysis drug tests, seven of which were negative to tested substances. The remaining six test results consisted of failure to provide a sample, providing diluted samples and providing positive results for benzodiazepine, amphetamine and methylamphetamine.

129. You told the author of the report that you are currently prescribed buprenorphine as an opioid treatment. You recently completed a four-week SMART Recovery Program, and your engagement was considered positive. You also expressed a desire to complete the Therapeutic Community program offered at the AMC, and you have been waitlisted for that program since September 2025.

130. You enjoy painting Aboriginal artworks in the custodial environment and you occasionally sell your paintings. Whilst at the AMC, you have been attending indigenous art sessions in the cultural space. Your engagement with this activity has been described as positive.

131. You told the author of the pre-sentence report that you suffer from PTSD and anxiety stemming from the serious assault when you were 18 years old. You have subsequently suffered panic attacks, sometimes whilst using cannabis. You stated that you have been reluctant to speak about your trauma, but you have recently expressed an interest in engaging in therapy with a counsellor or psychologist. You claim that the present offending has left a significant impact on your mental health and you have begun experiencing depression. You stated that you have been prescribed antidepressants and you are on a waitlist to receive counselling. You have other physical conditions which are being treated in custody.

132. In discussing the present offences with the author of the pre-sentence report, you stated that the offence of aggravated robbery in 2017 occurred when you were under the influence of methamphetamine and your motive was to obtain money to support your drug habit. You stated that the victim likely experienced trauma from this offence and you expressed empathy towards her whilst reflecting on your own history of traumatic assault.

133. You repeated to the author of the report your lie that you did not know that EM was in the rear of the green Commodore when you took the vehicle in Sutton. The author of the report states that you expressed empathy towards the victim and her father and you reflected on your own children and how you would have felt or reacted had you experienced this crime.

134. Regarding the culpable driving offences, you acknowledged that you were fleeing police apprehension and driving in a dangerous manner in a school zone. You acknowledged the lifelong medical complications the victims have suffered as a result of your actions. You admitted that you were under the influence of methamphetamine at the time of committing these offences, but you did not want your drug use to be considered as an excuse for your actions. You expressed a desire to take full accountability for your behaviour. You nevertheless went on to reflect that most of your prior criminal history was also drug related. You expressed an interest in attending a residential rehabilitation program following your eventual release from custody.

135. You acknowledged that you are likely to serve a significant term of imprisonment in this Territory before you are returned to Victoria to be dealt with for your breach of parole.

136. The author of the pre-sentence report assessed you as a high risk of reoffending. The author noted that you experienced a difficult childhood, marred by parental substance abuse, excessive discipline and exposure to family violence. [Redacted]. You have limited education resulting in a restricted employment history. You have a lengthy criminal history and substance issues. You acknowledged a long-standing correlation between substance use and your criminal offending.

137. As part of your case on sentence, I received a report from Vanessa Edwige, a registered psychologist, dated 2 February 2026. Ms Edwige stated that you have a childhood and adolescent trauma history which has impacted on your ability to self-regulate. She states that your disregulated behaviour from a young age is indicative of complex developmental trauma resulting from cumulative exposure to adversity and early life disadvantage. She states that you were exposed to multiple adverse childhood experiences which have had a significant impact on your mental health and social and emotional wellbeing. Exposure to traumatic events activates the survival mechanisms of the brain which can result in wide ranging impairments in arousal, cognitive, emotional and social functioning. She states that you have a childhood history of cumulative traumas, relational harm and disrupted attachments. You present as a man who has experienced significant adversities throughout your life. She believes that you meet the diagnostic criteria for complex post–traumatic stress disorder.

138. Ms Edwige states that you also present with a stimulant use disorder. She notes that you have been prescribed an antidepressant, and it is likely that you meet the criteria for a diagnosis of a depressive disorder.

139. It is significant to note that you are recorded as having told Ms Edwige that you are misusing methamphetamine once a week while currently incarcerated. You claimed in your evidence at the sentence hearing that you had not touched methamphetamine for “a few months” before the sentence hearing on 19 February 2026. That could not be entirely accurate, as you agreed that you last saw Ms Edwige for the preparation of her report on 22 January 2026 at which time you agreed that you were still using methamphetamine weekly.

140. It was Ms Edwige’s clinical opinion that your psychological functioning has been profoundly shaped by a childhood and adolescence characterised by cumulative trauma, chronic instability, and significant relational harm. Ms Edwige stated that your early caregiving environment was marked by unpredictability, fear, and a lack of consistent emotional safety. This has led to behavioural adaptations becoming entrenched, manifesting across your lifespan as hypervigilance, emotional volatility, difficulties with affect modulation, and a tendency towards impulsive, reactive behaviour under stress.

141. Ms Edwige expressed the opinion that at the time of these offences you were experiencing clinically significant mental health impairments associated with complex post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder. These impairments, when combined with substance intoxication and sleep deprivation, significantly impacted your capacity to make considered and appropriate choices and impaired your ability to make reasoned judgments, think clearly, regulate your behaviour and fully appreciate the wrongfulness of your acts.

142. Ms Edwige proposed a treatment plan involving you being supported to participate in the Therapeutic Community program at the AMC, engaging in trauma informed and culturally safe psychological support, and engaging in intensive psychological support after release from prison, including intensive drug and alcohol counselling, case management and psychosocial supports. Other suggestions relating to continuation of your art and being supported in learning about your Aboriginal heritage were also made. It was Ms Edwige’s opinion that, with the psychological support and treatment she recommends, you have prospects of rehabilitation.

143. You have a lengthy criminal history, not only in the ACT but also in NSW and Victoria. That history reveals that you have been convicted of very numerous serious offences including aggravated burglary, breaking and entering, contravening an Apprehended Violence Order, driving recklessly, damaging property, driving dangerously in a police pursuit, driving a vehicle under the influence of drugs, using an offensive weapon to prevent lawful detention, armed robbery, recklessly causing serious injury, and making a threat to kill. In addition, you are heavily recorded for breaching bail undertakings. It is clear from your criminal history that you were given multiple opportunities to address your offending behaviour, but you have continued to offend.

144. You are not to be punished twice for the offences which appear on your criminal history. That history is, however, relevant to determining whether you are entitled to any leniency in sentencing for the present offences based upon your history. You are not. In addition, your history is relevant as demonstrating a continuing attitude of disobedience to the law which calls for greater punishment in sentencing for the present offences.

145. You gave oral evidence that you are remorseful for what you did on 28 March 2025. You have also told other people, such as the author of the pre-sentence report and Ms Edwige, that you are remorseful for your actions. I do not accept that you are truly remorseful for what you did. This is for a number of reasons. First, I am satisfied that you lied in your evidence about the circumstances of you taking EM in NSW. I am also satisfied that you lied when you said that you were not sure that you had hit one of the victims, BT or BX, in front of St Edmund’s College before you sped away. I am satisfied that your lies on these issues were an attempt by you to minimise your responsibility for your actions. One of the hallmarks of true remorse is utter frankness and that is something which has been conspicuously absent in your case.

146. After you were apprehended in Manuka you said to police words to the effect of “Yous mob just keep fucking pushing and pushing”. In the circumstances, this can only be a reference to the fact that you blamed the collision with the victims, BT and BX, on the police who were pursuing you.

147. In your oral evidence, you began by reading a prepared statement in which you apologised to the victims, their families and to the police and other first responders involved in dealing with the consequences of your actions. You describe your conduct in these offences as “careless, selfish, erratic, dangerous and gutless”. You said that you will never forgive yourself for the damage which you have caused to the lives of your victims. This was clearly intended to suggest that you are remorseful for your offending.

148. You immediately, however, then sought to explain your criminal conduct by the fact that you were drug affected, and that drug use has always been a contributing factor to your offending behaviour. You said that you wanted it to be known that you would be doing all of the drug and alcohol courses available to you in custody. In my opinion, this was a calculated effort on your part to minimise the sentences to be imposed on you by suggesting that you have good prospects for rehabilitation because your offending is a result of your drug taking and you are addressing your drug taking. It was also significant that you have sought to minimise your responsibility for your return to drug use after being granted parole by reference to the influence of your ex-partner.

149. You have a criminal history spanning over a quarter of a century. You have experience of how courts work and you know what you should say to try to reduce the time that you will spend in custody. As your criminal history also demonstrates, you are a person given to dishonesty and placing your wants over the rights of others, and you have lied in these proceedings in an attempt to achieve shorter sentences. I exercise extreme caution in accepting anything that you have said as being truthful.

150. From the outset, you have sought to lie and manipulate to minimise your responsibility for your actions. At the scene of your arrest in Manuka, you sought to make out that you were not sure if you hit one of the victims. In fact, you knew full well that you had hit at least one of them. In your oral evidence and in your conversations with the author of the pre-sentence report and Ms Edwige, you lied about being unaware of the presence of EM in the green Commodore when you took that vehicle. In doing so, you were attempting to manipulate those persons and this Court.

151. For a number of reasons, I also do not accept that you are serious in your stated commitment to address drug addiction. First, you were given an opportunity to address drug addiction both in prison and upon your release on parole in Victoria. After having served a long term of imprisonment in that state and having completed programs to address drug addiction whilst in custody, and despite being afforded support in the community with counselling and accommodation through an indigenous organisation, you rapidly returned to drug use, breached your parole and committed further extremely serious crimes. At the time that you returned to drug use after being released on parole you did so in the knowledge that in the past drug use had been a cause of your criminal offending. You were aware that it was a risk factor for you.

152. Secondly, I do not accept that you presently have a commitment to address drug addiction because your behaviour on remand awaiting sentence does not support that proposition. You have continued to use methamphetamine in custody. You have been involved in breaches of the rules of the AMC. When questioned about these breaches, you referred to the fact that you have had trouble in custody because your offending involved harming children. Even if that were the case, that could only provide some explanation for the charges of fighting but provides no explanation for the other infractions to which I earlier referred.

153. As you acknowledged in your evidence, you are aware that your conduct in custody is a matter which will be taken into account in determining whether you are accepted into the Therapeutic Community. Your continued use of drugs and your breach of the rules of the AMC do not support the proposition that you are serious about gaining entry to the Therapeutic Community.

154. I accept that you had a seriously dysfunctional childhood marred by instability, exposure to violence and to drug abuse. I accept that your childhood experiences contributed strongly to your own introduction to drug use at an early age, and to your subsequent trajectory in life. The events of 28 March 2025 did not simply come out of the blue; they were the culmination of your life experiences and your choices. You were, nevertheless, warned by the judge who sentenced you in Victoria in 2017 that your prospects for rehabilitation hinged on you dealing with your disadvantaged background and addressing drug use. You chose to return to drug use and not to take advantage of the resources available to you to address childhood disadvantage.

155. Your disadvantaged childhood and the psychological conditions identified by Ms Edwige reduce your moral culpability for these offences. Someone who has suffered the disadvantages which you experienced cannot be held as morally responsible for offending as someone who has not suffered the same disadvantages. This militates towards more lenient sentences with some moderation of deterrence and punishments as sentencing considerations.

156. The other side of the coin, however, is that you are a danger to the community. It is not to the point that you are dangerous because of your disadvantaged background and the choices you have made against that background. It is simply a fact that you are at high risk of committing further serious crime. You have no regard for the rights of others to their physical safety if you perceive that those rights conflict with your wants or desires. If you were committed to addressing those matters which place you at high risk of committing serious crime, then the risk that you present to the community would be reduced. I am satisfied you presently have no such commitment. It follows that the treatment suggestions made by Ms Edwige cannot be given weight as ameliorating the risk you present to the community as I am satisfied that you would not engage in the treatment she has recommended.

157. As such, I am satisfied that your prospects for rehabilitation are extremely poor. Unless some unforeseen change occurs, you will likely continue in the cycle of offending and imprisonment until you become incapacitated by age, or you die. In the meantime, protection of the community is the most important sentencing consideration.

158. After you were arrested at Manuka, a member of the tactical response team treated you in an unnecessarily aggressive manner, likely constituting an assault, before you were removed from the scene of your arrest. You suffered injuries as a result. I accept that this should be treated as a form of extra curial punishment and taken into account in sentencing.

159. The offences which occurred in 2012 and 2017 are now stale. You have served terms of imprisonment after committing those offences and if all offences had been committed in the same jurisdiction they would have been disposed of at the times that those earlier sentences of imprisonment were imposed. For that reason, I will impose concurrent sentences for those offences, and there will be a high degree of concurrency of those sentences and sentences imposed for the 2025 offending.

160. The 2025 offences of taking a motor vehicle without consent and unlawfully taking a child are antecedent to and unconnected with the later offences that day arising out of your driving. There will be some concurrency of sentences for the offences which occurred in Sutton, NSW because they both occurred at the same time, and there are common factual circumstances. There will also be some concurrency for totality reasons.

161. There will be a degree of concurrency of sentences imposed for the driving offences and for the offence of driving a motor vehicle without consent. This is warranted because of common factual features and also the requirements of totality. In particular, there will be significant, but not total, concurrency of sentence on the two charges of culpable driving because the same course of driving was involved in each offence. There will, nevertheless, be a real degree of accumulation of those sentences to reflect the separate injuries inflicted on each of the victims.

162. I will set a non-parole period of approximately 70% of the aggregate head sentence, reflecting the minimum period that I consider that you should serve for this offending and also reflecting your poor prospects of rehabilitation.

163. Before concluding I would like to commend KX for his actions in providing emergency first-aid to BT. Without that first-aid it is probable that BT would have died. I also commended the actions of those members of the community who apprehended the prisoner at Manuka and held him until police arrived.

164. I will now pass sentence.

Orders

165. The orders of the Court are: (1) On the charge of failing to appear in accordance with a bail undertaking (CAN 3471/2015) you are convicted and you are sentenced to 1 month imprisonment commencing 28 March 2025 and expiring 27 April 2025. (2) On the charge of aggravated robbery from 2017 (CAN 13653/2017), you are convicted and you are sentenced to 2 years imprisonment commencing 28 March 2025 and expiring 27 March 2027. (3) On the charge of culpable driving involving BT (CAN 4246/2025), you are convicted and, taking into account the offence on the List of Additional Offences (CAN 3554/2025), you are sentenced to 8 years 2 months imprisonment commencing 28 March 2026 and expiring 27 May 2034. (4) On the charge of culpable driving involving BX (CAN 4247/2025), you are convicted and, taking into account the offence on the List of Additional Offences (CAN 3469/2025), you are sentenced to 6 years 6 months imprisonment commencing 28 November 2029 and expiring 27 May 2036. (5) On the charge of unlawfully taking a child (CAN 8030/2025), you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment commencing 28 May 2035 and expiring 27 May 2037. (6) On the charge of aggravated dangerous driving (CAN 3467/2025), you are convicted and, taking into account the offences on the List of Additional Offences (CAN 8031/2025, CAN 4883/2025, CAN 3470/2025 and CAN 8032/2025), you are sentenced to 18 months imprisonment commencing 28 August 2036 and expiring 27 February 2038. (7) On the charge of driving a motor vehicle without consent (CAN 3466/2025), you are convicted and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment commencing 28 February 2037 and expiring 27 May 2038. (8) On the charge of taking a motor vehicle without consent (CAN 8029/2025), you are convicted and sentenced to 10 months imprisonment commencing 28 July 2037 and expiring 27 May 2038. (9) The total term of imprisonment which you are liable to serve is one of 13 years 2 months commencing 28 March 2025 and expiring 27 May 2038. (10) I set a non-parole period of 9 years commencing 28 March 2025 and expiring 27 March 2034. I want to make it clear to you that you will not be entitled to automatic release from prison on 27 March 2034. Whether you are released on or after that date will be a matter for the Sentence Administration Board taking into account your performance in custody and any steps which you have taken to address those matters which I have identified as causing you to be a danger to the community.

I certify that the preceding one hundred and sixty-five [165] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Acting Justice Burns .

Associate: Date: 2 April 2026