DPP v Byrne [2025] ACTSC 459

1. The offender, Matthew William Byrne, has pleaded guilty to the following offences: (a) Attempt to traffic in a controlled drug other than cannabis by joint commission, contrary to s 44(1) of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) by virtue of ss 45A and 603(7) of the Criminal Code (SC CAN 416 of 2023); (b) Money laundering, contrary to s 114B of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (SC CAN 431 of 2023); and (c) Use unregistered/suspended vehicle, contrary to s 18 of the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Act 1999 (ACT) (CAN 12297 of 2022).

2. The maximum penalty for each of the offences of attempt to traffic a controlled drug and money laundering is 10 years’ imprisonment or 1,000 penalty units (equivalent to a fine of $160,000), or both.

3. The maximum penalty for the offence of use unregistered/suspended vehicle is 20 penalty units.

4. The offender initially entered pleas of not guilty, and the proceedings were listed for trial before a jury from 19 March 2025 to 7 April 2025.

5. A number of pre-trial applications were heard from 19 to 25 March 2025 before Loukas- Karlsson J. As a result of those applications, a body of evidence was excluded. The parties then entered into plea negotiations. Following those negotiations, the offender pleaded guilty to an amended indictment on 27 March 2025.

6. The offender now comes before the Court for sentence.

The offending

7. On 11 August 2022, the offender provided instructions to a co-offender via the encrypted messaging application Threema to obtain a kilogram of methylamphetamine. The offender directed the co-offender to visit a house and obtain a package from inside that house. Consistent with the offender’s instructions, the co-offender secured a kilogram of what was believed to be methylamphetamine.

8. On 2 September 2022, police executed a search warrant at the co-offender’s residence. Police seized items including 55.701 grams of methylamphetamine and four mobile phones. On one phone, police located the text message instructions from the offender referred to above.

9. On 19 October 2022, the offender communicated with an unknown supplier to co-ordinate the delivery of methylamphetamine to him at approximately 4:00pm that day. The communications occurred via encrypted messaging applications. Between 3:25pm and 4:04pm on that day, the offender’s vehicle was parked in Mitchell, Canberra. The offender was sighted around the vehicle at this time.

10. The offender then drove from Mitchell to an address in Kambah, where he remained for approximately 20 minutes. He then drove to Richardson, arriving at approximately 5:10pm.

11. The offender met with a buyer, NH, at a location in Richardson. The offender gave NH approximately 140 grams of methylamphetamine, and NH gave the offender a box containing $54,250.

12. At approximately 5:15pm, the offender left Richardson and drove to Chisholm. He arrived at approximately 5:20pm and met with an unidentified male. The offender then departed at approximately 5:30pm.

13. The offender had been subject to police surveillance during these events (although police did not see the exchange of items between the offender and NH). The offender was stopped by police shortly after these events. Police declared a crime scene and subsequently obtained a warrant to search the offender’s vehicle.

14. On 20 October 2022, the vehicle was searched, and the following items were located: (a) A cardboard box containing six bundles of cash in vacuum-sealed bags, totalling $54,250; (b) A Google Pixel mobile phone containing the messaging application Threema, which contained messages with a contact labelled ‘Korea New’. The offender’s messaging profile was labelled ‘6TTUB78X’. (c) An Apple iPhone containing the encrypted messaging application Wikr, which contained messages with a contact labelled ‘Mrtakeoff4’.

15. The messages on the Google phone and the iPhone were found to be two parts of the same conversation between the offender and an unidentified person, concerning the delivery of methylamphetamine. The address for the delivery of methylamphetamine was on a different application to the remainder of the conversation.

16. Subsequent analysis of the bags of money revealed that the DNA located on the bags was likely to have come from the buyer NH. NH subsequently provided an induced statement, which included evidence of the exchange between NH and the accused, and an accurate description of the box of money. A police search of NH’s home located a vacuum sealer, which was forensically tested and determined to be consistent with having sealed each of the bags of money.

17. The co-offender was charged and entered pleas of guilty to several offences, including drug trafficking, drug manufacturing and unauthorised possession of prohibited firearms, on 23 October 2024. The co-offender is yet to be sentenced.

The offender’s subjective case

The offender’s background

18. The Court was provided with two psychological reports, namely, a report of Dr Steven Dawson, dated 30 September 2003 (prepared when the offender was in year 7), and a report of Dr Jenna Bollinger, dated 30 September 2025.

19. It is clear from these reports that the offender had a childhood marked by disadvantage and challenge. He grew up in an abusive and traumatic household. He was exposed to alcohol abuse and violence by his father when he was very young. As a young child, he experienced poverty, and lived in residential care facilities as a young person for periods of time. He [redacted] consumed alcohol and drugs from a young age. He experienced difficulties in learning and social functioning [redacted].

20. Dr Bollinger diagnosed the offender as suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder with dissociative features. She considered that it was likely that the offender has been suffering from this condition since childhood. She noted that while Dr Dawson had previously diagnosed the offender with ADHD, her own assessment was that the offender’s symptoms were “better accounted for by trauma and a PTSD diagnosis”.

21. As Dr Bollinger eloquently articulated, the character of the offending is more readily understood when seen through the lens of the offender’s background of disadvantage and mental health diagnosis: For an individual with complex PTSD emanating from a severely traumatic childhood, similar to Mr Byrne’s perhaps, the brain is still developing when the traumas are occurring. For him, his early memories include being physically assaulted by his father, witnessing violence with his mother, hearing his mother screaming in terror and having to leave his brother behind when needing to escape. It would be ill-informed to believe this was the first traumatic event. It is likely that his father’s violence pre-dated these memories, leading Mr Byrne’s mother to be preoccupied with ensuring his emotional stability, requiring the children to manage themselves to such a degree as to be frightening, to avoid ‘setting off’ the father. Subsequent to these events, he was placed in residential facilities when his mother could no longer cope, experienced profound poverty, neglect [redacted]. It is also traumatic for children to be in a domestically violent home, even without being harmed themselves as it is traumatic for children to be raised by a caregiver who is frightened and one who is frightening. That leaves the child with nowhere to go for safety and support. Therefore, Mr Byrne would not have developed a sense of safety in the world as his brain grew to cope with the world as it was for him, which was dangerous, chaotic and unpredictable. A child’s brain does not grow to reflect the entirety of human experience, but rather the experience it was exposed to. He was given access to drugs and alcohol from a young age and this would have impacted his capacity to regulate his emotions and develop comprehensive skills in executive functioning. He would likely have been prone to hyper vigilance, excellent reading of body language, a memory for faces, moods and small details that would make an excellent detective; but not necessarily a happily functioning adult. (emphasis in original)

22. When asked whether the offender’s mental health contributed causally to the commission of the offence, Dr Bollinger continued: As noted, Mr Byrne has struggled with PTSD to the extent that he has regular suicidal thoughts. He has had chronic nightmares that have impacted his ability to manage relationships, with chronically poor sleep which impacts general mood, irritability and functioning. In order to manage all of these factors, Mr Byrne has developed dissociative skills that make it difficult for him to connect to reality at times. PTSD impairs an individual’s capacity to consider and weigh up the consequences of actions to the extent that they may act impulsively. It appears likely that this was the case here, that he acted to support a friend rather than considering the likely implications of his actions. As discussed previously, and again at [70], Mr Byrne is likely highly sensitised to rejection and abandonment. He would find it challenging to take any course of action that may trigger any abandonment or rejection from a partner or a friend, once he was able to connect closely to that person. He has had multiple experiences across his life of his behaviour resulting in abandonment of a severe nature and observed abandonment of others due to their circumstances. It is therefore likely that his mental health and early life experiences contributed causally to the commission of the offence, in that he would find it far more difficult than most to say no a friend when asked for assistance, even to his own detriment in committing the offence.

23. The prosecution appropriately conceded that the offender’s background is such that Bugmy and Verdins principles are enlivened. I find that the weight to be given to the need for denunciation, general deterrence and specific deterrence is reduced by reason of the offender’s background.

The offender’s present subjective circumstances

24. Despite the challenges of his childhood and adolescence, the offender’s subjective case now presents cause for optimism. He has not had any issues with drugs or alcohol for many years. He is in full-time employment in land development. He has a supportive pro-social circle of family and friends, a number of whom have written character references which speak of the offender’s remorse for his offending, and his commitment to his rehabilitation. Sentencing considerations

The nature and seriousness of the offences

25. In assessing the nature and seriousness of the offence of attempted trafficking, I have borne in mind the following matters: (i) The offender’s liability has been particularised in the indictment as an attempt. Accordingly, even though the Agreed Statement of Facts records a completed offence, the offender is not to be sentenced for the completed offence; (ii) The offending was not isolated. The attempted trafficking is confined to two attempted transactions, one which occurred on 11 August 2022 and one which occurred on 19 October 2022; (iii) The first attempted transaction was constituted by communications in relation to the collection of a large quantity (1kg) of methylamphetamine; (iv) The second attempted transaction was constituted by the offender communicating with an unknown person and taking steps to deliver a small quantity (140g) of methylamphetamine to NH; and (v) The offender’s role in the second attempted transaction was limited to that of a courier. The offender used his own car to convey the drugs from an unnamed supplier to NH. The offender’s role in the first attempted transaction was more serious. In that transaction, the offender was acting in the role of an intermediary. He provided detailed instructions to his co-offender. The use of encrypted text messages on multiple platforms is indicative of a level of sophistication in relation to the trafficking.

26. On behalf of the offender, it was submitted that the offender’s motive in engaging in the offending was to assist a friend. The prosecution submitted that I should infer that the offender’s motive was to make a profit. Having considered all of the evidence, I find that the offender’s motive was both to make a profit and to assist a friend. I do not consider that these motives are inconsistent.

27. As the offender’s co-offender has not yet been sentenced, principles of parity do not arise. In these circumstances, I do not consider that it is necessary for me to make any findings concerning the relative culpability of the offender and his co-offender. I note that the co-offender has been charged with more serious offences than the present offender.

28. In relation to the offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime, I have taken into account the following matters: (i) The dealing was constituted by the offender taking possession from NH of a cardboard box containing a significant sum of money ($54,250) at approximately 5:00pm on 19 October 2022; (ii) The period of the possession was short in duration, but only because the police intercepted the offender, and took possession of the money shortly after he received it; and (iii) The offender knew that the money was the proceeds of crime.

Hardship to others

29. The offender’s partner is pregnant; the offender’s son is due in February 2026. The child is much wanted, and follows lengthy infertility and struggles with IVF. Any period of full-time custody would have a profound effect upon the offender’s partner, who would lose the offender’s support during this time, and would have a profound effect upon their unborn child.

Remorse

30. The author of the Intensive Correction Order Assessment Report (ICOAR), Dr Bollinger, and various family and friends stated that the offender has expressed remorse for his actions.

31. The prosecution submitted that the offender’s account of the offending, particularly to Dr Bollinger and the ICOAR author, minimised his responsibility for the offences. In particular, the prosecution noted that the offender told Dr Bollinger that his friend had “[thrown him] under the bus” and that “this is the price you pay for helping people who don’t deserve it”. Whilst the prosecution’s concern is understandable, these comments need to be assessed in the context of all of the offender’s statements, and in the context of his background.

32. As the offender’s counsel noted, the offender reported to Dr Bollinger that “I’ve seen what being involved with drugs does – it ruined my brother… me being involved with that is something I regret.” The ICOAR author noted that the offender accepted responsibility for his offences, and attributed his involvement to a desire to assist a friend. The offender’s fiancé similarly noted that the offender had “expressed genuine remorse, taken full responsibility for his choices, and reflected on the poor judgment he exercised in associating with certain individuals”.

33. Most importantly however, as the offender’s counsel submitted, the offender’s background rendered him acutely sensitive to rejection and abandonment. As Dr Bollinger explained, the offender “struggles more than most when friendships or relationships end or are threatened with ending”, so that, when the offender’s friend requested his help, the offender “would find it more difficult than others to say no”.

34. Viewed against this context, the offender’s focus on the connection between the offending and his friendship does not, of itself, indicate a lack of remorse, or a failure to accept responsibility for his conduct. As noted above, the ICOAR author described the offender as having “accepted responsibility” for his offending and his friends and family have confirmed that the offender has reflected deeply upon his conduct and regrets his actions.

35. I find that the offender is remorseful for the offences.

Prospects of rehabilitation, likelihood of reoffending

36. Dr Bollinger expressed the view that the offender presents with very few risk factors for reoffending. This conclusion sits a little uneasily with Dr Bollinger’s opinion that the offender “[struggles] to carefully consider the consequences of his actions”.

37. Nonetheless, on balance, I am satisfied that the offender has good prospects of rehabilitation, and that with treatment, he has a low likelihood of re-offending. Central to this conclusion is the support which the offender has from his family and friends, and the motivation that he now has to be break the cycle of hardship and to build a stable and caring life for his son.

38. Whilst the offender has a criminal history, that history does not include any drug-related offences. Most importantly, the offender has not committed any offences since 2014. The offender is now in a very different position to that which prevailed when he was committing offences over a decade ago. As the character references attest, he is now committed to making positive changes, and living a responsible, law-abiding life.

39. The offender will require treatment to overcome his PTSD. He has expressed a willingness to engage in psychological treatment.

Plea of guilty

40. As outlined above, the offender entered pleas of guilty following negotiations. I will afford the offender a 10% reduction in the sentences to be imposed in light of the offender’s pleas. Pre-sentence custody

41. The offender has spent two days in custody following his arrest for these offences, and prior to being granted bail. The overall sentence imposed will be reduced by two days to account for the offender’s time in custody.

Determination

42. There can be no dispute that both of the offences on the indictment are very serious offences, particularly the attempted trafficking in methylamphetamine. On behalf of the offender, it was properly accepted that the s 10 threshold is crossed, and that no sentence other than a term of imprisonment is appropriate.

43. Taking into account each of the objective and subjective matters outlined above, I have concluded that the appropriate term of imprisonment to be imposed for the offence of attempted trafficking is imprisonment for three years, prior to the application of the discount for the plea of guilty. The appropriate term of imprisonment to be imposed for the offence of money laundering is imprisonment for nine months, prior to the application of the discount for the plea of guilty. Recognising the substantial overlap in the two offences, the sentence to be imposed for money laundering will be cumulated by three months on the sentence of the attempted trafficking offence.

44. Counsel for the offender submitted that I order that the sentence of imprisonment be served by way of an ICO. The offender has been assessed as eligible for an ICO.

45. Where the sentence for an offence exceeds two years, an ICO may only be ordered if the Court thinks it appropriate to do so, having regard to (i) the level of harm to the victim and the community caused by the offence; (ii) whether the offender poses a risk to one or more people in the community; and (iii) the offender’s culpability for the offence having regard to the circumstances.

46. Whilst counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions submitted that there are features of the offending which indicate that a sentence of full-time imprisonment should be imposed, she also acknowledged that it would be open to the Court to impose an alternative to full-time imprisonment such as an ICO.

47. Whilst the matter is finely balanced, I have concluded that it is appropriate to order that the sentence be served by way of an ICO. In so finding, I have taken into account that: (a) Whilst far-reaching harm is occasioned to the community by the supply of methylamphetamine, it must also be borne in mind that, by reason of the way in which the indictment was particularised, the offender is to be sentenced for an attempted supply rather than an actual supply; (b) As stated above, the offender has good prospects of rehabilitation, and, with treatment, presents a low risk of re-offending. The offender will present less of a risk to the community if his rehabilitation facilitated in the community, rather than if the offender’s community connections, such as his employment, and his prosocial relationships were to be severed by the imposition of a period of full-time custody; and (c) The offender’s moral culpability for the offending has been substantially reduced by his background of disadvantage and his mental illness.

48. Accordingly, whilst I will sentence the offender to a total period of imprisonment of 2 years, 11 months and 9 days, I will order that this term of imprisonment be served by way of ICO.

Transfer offences

49. This morning, I was also informed that there is a transfer charge of use unregistered/suspended vehicle, for which the offender also admits his guilt. I was informed that this offence relates to the vehicle which was stopped and searched by police in connection with the second incident the subject of the attempt to traffic charge. I will order that the offender pay a $250 fine with respect to that offending.

Orders

50. The orders of the Court are: (1) The offender is convicted of attempt to traffic in a controlled drug other than cannabis by joint commission (SC CAN 416 of 2023) and sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years, 8 months and 9 days, commencing on 15 October 2025 and expiring on 23 June 2028. (2) The offender is convicted of money laundering (SC CAN 431 of 2023) and sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months and 2 days, commencing on 22 January 2028 and expiring on 23 September 2028. (3) The overall sentence will be a term of imprisonment for 2 years, 11 months and 9 days, commencing on 15 October 2025 and expiring on 23 September 2028. (4) Pursuant to s 11 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), I direct that the sentence of imprisonment is to be served by intensive correction on the following conditions: (a) The core conditions listed in s 42 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT); (b) The offender is to attend any counselling or psychological treatment as directed by Corrective Services. (c) A community service work condition that the offender perform 200 hours of community service. (5) I direct that the 200 hours of community service be performed within the term of the sentence, which is a period of 2 years, 11 months and 9 days from 15 October 2025. (6) The offender is convicted of the offence use unregistered/suspended vehicle (CAN 12297 of 2022) and a $250 fine is imposed.

I certify that the preceding fifty [50] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of her Honour Justice Baker. Associate: Date: 15 October 2025