DPP v Duell [2026] VCC 340

1. The prosecution read a summary which you accepted, and the circumstances of your offending are as follows.
2. You and Ms Dean were in an intimate relationship which commenced in August 2022.

1. On 18 November 2022, you and Ms Dean attended a Melbourne hotel to celebrate your birthday.
2. At approximately 2.00am the following morning, while in your hotel room, an argument began as Ms Dean had texted a male friend.
3. The argument escalated in the hotel room bathroom, when you demanded Ms Dean hand over her phone and said, 'do you want to fight, cunt?'
4. You then grabbed Ms Dean by the throat with one hand, lifted her up and dragged her across the bathroom wall, whilst continuing to scream and demand her phone.

You eventually let her go and Ms Dean ran from the bathroom to the far side of the bed. You chased her, grabbed her by the hair and dragged her across the floor before standing on her with one foot on her neck, and the other on her face. (This constitutes Charge 1 intentionally cause injury). You threatened you would continue unless she handed her phone which she refused.

1. You began searching the hotel room for Ms Dean's car keys. Whilst searching for the keys you called your friend and put him on loudspeaker. Ms Dean could hear the person on the other end of the phone call telling you to leave, not to kill her, and that you should remember what you had been told by a judge in a previous matter. She kept asking you to leave however you refused.
2. You eventually found Ms Dean's phone and began going through it. You told her you would take the car and phone and leave her with nothing.
3. Ms Dean eventually fell asleep and when she woke up there was a note from you saying you loved her. The room was in complete disarray: her bags had been emptied and her possessions scattered across the room and you had removed cards from her wallet. Ms Dean also discovered that you had tried to collect her car from the hotel valet, however, they had refused to provide it to you. Her phone was gone. (That constitutes Charge 2 theft).
4. Ms Dean had bruising over her body as a result of the assault. In the course of standing on her head you ripped an earring from her ear. Ms Dean did not lose consciousness as a result of the choking but found herself hyperventilating and needing her asthma puffer.

1. On 14 December 2022, you attended upon Ms Dean's parents' address. She went outside and discovered you sleeping in your car.
2. Ms Dean felt bad for you and believed that if she did not see you then you would escalate and contact her constantly. She agreed to book a room for the two of you at a Hotel in Dandenong. You both spent the night there.
3. The following morning, on 15 December 2022 you woke up and began making accusations that Ms Dean had stolen from you. You again said, 'do you want to fight, cunt?' You grabbed Ms Dean by the neck and held her forearm against her neck so she could not breathe. You lifted her from the ground. Ms Dean kicked out at the wall until you finally let go. Ms Dean felt like she was losing consciousness but did not actually pass out. (This constitutes charge 3 common assault).
4. You then went out to the car leaving Ms Dean to clean up the room. She eventually joined you in the car and you began ranting about how she was just like your other ex-girlfriends who had stolen from you. You were laughing, calling her a dog, and claiming all women are the same.
5. Later that day Ms Dean attend the Narre Warren police station and reported your offending to Victoria Police. She later provided photographs of her injuries sustained as a result of the incident on 19 November 2022.
6. You were arrested by Police on 18 December 2022 and conveyed to the Cranbourne Police Station for interview.

1. The prosecution submitted your offending are serious examples of personal violence committed whereby Ms Dean was choked and strangled by you to the point she feared passing out.
2. The prosecution submitted the main sentencing purposes were specific and general deterrence, denunciation, just punishment and community protection, and that taking all relevant sentencing factors into account the only appropriate sentence is a term of imprisonment.
3. Your defence counsel acknowledged the sentencing purposes applicable are punishment, general and specific deterrence, and community protection.
4. Defence counsel tendered a psychological report by Mr David Ball, a clinical neuropsychotherapist, dated 11 July 2024. Mr Ball diagnosed you with having a severe antisocial personality disorder and severe stimulant, sedative, hypnotic and anxiolytic use disorder, which was in early remission at the time of the report. Counsel submitted at the time of this offending, you were affected by substances and had limited recall of what occurred.
5. Counsel submitted because of your chaotic and dysfunctional upbringing by your father after your mother died, your moral culpability should be reduced in line with the principles in Bugmy v The Queen.[2]
6. Defence counsel submitted the application of the principles in Bugmy, together with your efforts at rehabilitation whilst on a community corrections order, and the discount for your plea of guilty, were relevant sentencing considerations to be taken into account in any term of imprisonment imposed.

1. You are 37 years old and were born and raised in the southeast of Melbourne.
2. You have two half-siblings on your mother's side, a brother and sister.
3. Your mother passed away when you were five years old.
4. Your half-siblings moved to Queensland to live with their father, and you have little contact with them since.
5. You were living with your father at this time. Your childhood was chaotic and dysfunctional. You instructed your counsel that your father did not parent you, and was not a role model for you. Your father was dependent on alcohol and committed family violence towards you through physical and verbal abuse.
6. Windemere Child Services became involved. On two occasions, you were removed from your father's care and placed in secure child refuge. At the age of 15 or 16, you left your father's care and was assisted into a share house accommodation.
7. You attended school to Year 10, leaving school around the same time that you ceased living with your father. You have had a various amount of work including in abattoirs, warehouses and construction.
8. You have had three significant relationships and have three adult children from your first relationship, and a six-year-old child from a more recent relationship. You currently do not have contact with your youngest child but you have instructed your counsel you would like contact in the future.
9. In terms of drug and alcohol use, you commenced drinking alcohol at the age of 14. You used cannabis consistently between the ages of 14 and 28. You commenced using methamphetamine at the age of 26, and GHB at the age of 28. Your use of alcohol decreased with your increase in use of illicit substances.
10. At the time of your offending, you had been consuming a significant amount of illicit substances. You were consuming approximately 2 to 3.5 grams of methamphetamine a day and 20 to 30 mils of GHB a day.
11. You concede that at the time of your offending, you were affected by illicit substances on both occasions.
12. You recommenced a relationship with your father when you were 28, and shortly thereafter, your father passed away and you located his body in his house.

Psychological report by Mr David Ball dated 11 July 2024

1. Mr Ball assessed you on 5 July 2024 for a range of other charges related to another court appearance. The assessment post-dates this current offending, although it is not referenced.
2. You completed a Millon Clinical Muliaxial Inventory which is a self-report measure of adult personality.
3. Of his mental status examination, Mr Ball stated:

'Overall, Mr Duell impressed me as a man with impairment to his capacity for generally good judgment and to his ability to plan and execute positive and self-sustaining behaviours. He has a significant history of illicit substance abuse and a criminogenic lifestyle. He articulated minimal insight into his offending or his general psychological functioning.'

1. He noted after your mother died you lost contact with your half siblings and you stated to Mr Ball, 'When mum died my whole extended family took off because dad was an arsehole.' Mr Ball stated you described a chaotic and grossly dysfunctional childhood with a father who 'did not do anything with me,' and 'I just roamed the streets and got up to shit.'
2. In terms of your personality functioning, Mr Ball described you as immature and that you 'suffered psychological trauma, emotional neglect and physical and verbal abuse as a child growing up in a chaotic and dysfunctional household.' You were five years old when your mother died, leaving you in the care of an alcohol dependent father.
3. Mr Ball diagnosed you with having a severe antisocial personality disorder and severe stimulant, sedative, hypnotic and anxiolytic use disorder, which was in remission at the time of the report. He noted:

'Importantly individuals who suffer anti-social personality disorder or significant anti-social personality features into their 40s, be it through lack of professional resources or their failure to address their attitudes and behaviour, most often develop severe and debilitating depressive symptoms later in life. These depressive symptoms can arise when individuals look back across their life at time spent in prison, poor health, lost relationships and squandered life chances.'[3]

1. I turn to the factors I must have regard to in s5(2) of the Sentencing Act 1991. The main sentencing purposes in your case are specific and general deterrence, punishment, denunciation and protection of the community.
2. I note the maximum penalties of 10 years' imprisonment for each of intentionally cause injury and theft, and five years for the charge of common assault.
3. The fact that your offending occurs in the context of your intimate relationship with Ms Dean imports its serious nature and gravity. Your conduct comprised of two instances of choking her on consecutive months in November and December 2022. Both occurred in hotel rooms when it was just the two of you. It is the risk and potential life-threatening nature of the act of choking which goes to its gravity. On the first occasion in respect of charge 1, you lifted her up, pulled her hair and dragged her. You also stepped on Ms Dean's face and neck which is a demeaning act. Your conduct resulted in an earring being ripped from her ear. Although she did not lose consciousness, she was hyperventilating and had to use her puffer. On the second occasion you lifted her up when you choked her and she described feeling like she was losing consciousness.
4. The authorities have noted offending in the context of family violence as central to the task of sentencing, the prominence of deterrence as a sentencing purpose as well as denunciation, protection of the community and punishment.[4]
5. When considering your culpability and degree of responsibility for your offending, your Counsel submitted the principles in the case of Bugmy apply, namely the weight I give to your moral culpability should be reduced in a general sense because of your upbringing, in line with the principles in Bugmy.
6. The prosecution has submitted that if Bugmy is applicable to your circumstances, a reduced capacity to control one's violent impulses worked both ways in the sentencing process: it may reduce an offender's culpability, but it also increases the importance of community protection.
7. In your case I take into account your difficult childhood from the age of five when your mother died. You suffered a double loss, both your mother and your extended family, as your half siblings moved to Queensland to live with their father and you lost contact with them. You were left at a very tender age in the care of an alcoholic father who subjected you to verbal and physical abuse. Windermere Child Service was involved and you were removed from your father's care on two occasions.
8. I am of the view the principles of Bugmy are applicable in your case, namely that these social disadvantages do not diminish with time. I take into account the disadvantages of family violence and abuse, having a parent who was an alcoholic, the death of your mother and the impact these factors had on your education. This disadvantage impacted the course of your life. So for this reason, I reduce the weight I give to your moral culpability for your offending.
9. However, this reduction is complicated by two factors.
10. Firstly, you have relevant prior convictions for offending involving violence and in the context of family violence from 2019, as well as a prior conviction for breaching a family violence order in 2018, priors for violence in 2016 (twice), 2012 and from the Frankston Magistrates' Court in 2008. Your continued violent offending increases the importance of community protection as a sentencing purpose.
11. This history and the family violence context of your offending, means mitigation of your moral culpability must yield to the need for community protection. As I have noted, denunciation of your conduct and protection of the community, particularly Ms Dean, are important sentencing purposes and not to be diminished.
12. This moderates the reduction I give to your moral culpability.
13. Secondly, you admit to using and being affected by illicit substances on both occasions of your offending. This is an aggravating feature. Your history of drug use, as I have outlined, indicate you well knew the likely consequences of drug ingestion on your behaviour. This also moderates the reduction I give to your moral culpability.
14. Ms Dean made a victim impact statement dated 3 October 2025 which was tendered and which she also read to the court. Her sense of safety has been violated at home, she is isolated, fearful and has lost her sense of trust in people. She is strongly medicated and has diminished self-worth. She thought you would kill her.
15. Her victim impact statement attached a letter from Smitha Sugathan dated 15 September 2025, a mental health practitioner who is Ms Dean's treating clinician. This was also tendered. This noted her complex post-traumatic stress disorder had been exacerbated by the domestic violence she endured from you in 2022. It noted she is likely to continue experiencing anxiety, nightmares and hypervigilance. She described Ms Dean experiencing severe and enduring psychological harm as a result of the domestic violence perpetrated by you.
16. The impact of your offending on Ms Dean has been profound, and she wished she had never met you.
17. I take into account the impact of your offending on her and her personal circumstances.
18. You pleaded guilty, albeit after a committal hearing when Ms Dean was cross examined. The matter settled following a case assessment hearing, when, it was submitted by your counsel, the charges you pleaded to were offered. The stage in the proceeding at which you indicated your intention to plead is a relevant consideration and your plea of guilty has the objective public interest benefit of saving the cost of a trial and witnesses having to come to court to give evidence. Your plea is still somewhat early as it saves the cost of a trial and thus, I give a significant discount.
19. I have noted your prior criminal history, which is significant, and you have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment in the past.
20. Your counsel tendered two character references on your behalf which I take into account.
21. The first was from your friend of 11 years, Alannah Tsakos, dated 27 August 2025 who has maintained a strong relationship with you. She described you as loyal, respectful, honest and dependable. She is aware of the charges to which you have pleaded guilty and stated you accepted responsibility for your actions and expressed remorse for your mistakes.
22. The second refence was from a friend of 20 years, Shelley Duke, who attended the plea hearing, and her reference was dated 10 October 2025. She described having been in a relationship with you and that 'we never fought and had a happy harmonious relationship.' She described you as a loyal friend and you being a consistently positive presence in her life.
23. Your counsel submitted that on 24 September 2024 you had been given a combination sentence of 14 months and two weeks imprisonment and an 18-month community corrections order for offending which post-dates this offending. The second reference was written when you were on that order, and your counsel submitted that you made efforts to rehabilitate yourself whilst on that order.
24. I take into account the principle of totality which requires when a court sentences an offender on a number of offences, that the overall sentence must be a, 'just and appropriate measure of the total criminality involved'.[5] I also take into consideration the principle of parsimony that the sentence be no more severe than is necessary to satisfy the purposes of sentencing. I note however there are two serious episodes of criminality and there should be adequate recognition of each.

Pre-Sentence detention declaration pursuant to s 18(1) of the Sentencing Act 1991:

1. Thank you. Are there any other orders sought?
2. MR GLASS: No, Your Honour.
3. MS KING: No, Your Honour.
4. HER HONOUR: All right, in that case, thank you. We will adjourn the court.

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

[3] Psychological Report by David Ball dated 11 July 2024, p 6.

[4] Director of Public Prosecutions v Kurtaj [2025] VSCA 203, citing Skeates (a pseudonym) v The King

[2023] VSCA 226.

[5] Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR, 307-306.