Rocco Esposito, you have pleaded guilty before me to two charges of armed robbery. The maximum penalty for armed robbery is 25 years in each instance.
[2]
The circumstances of your offending were comprehensively outlined in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 22 April 2025.
Just after 7.30 pm on Friday 4 October 2024 you entered Onyx Massage and Spa at 346 Victoria Street, North Melbourne. Thattananun Sorawet and Janejira Prasopchok were working at Onyx and were both sitting in the staffroom when you entered.
You were wearing a grey hoodie with the hood pulled up but your face was not disguised and you were captured on CCTV. You were carrying a large McDonald's bag. You entered the staffroom but were directed to the front counter. You asked for a piece of paper on which you began to write.
As you handed the paper to Ms Sorawet, Ms Prasopchok took your photo.
As Ms Sorawet looked at the piece of paper, you took a large knife out of the McDonald's bag. You said to both victims 'Now listen, listen. Shut up. Give me your money. Now'.
As your victims moved into the staffroom, you advanced on them, shutting the staffroom door. While you were no longer visible on the CCTV, it recorded you saying 'Give me the purse. Give me the fucking purse. Hurry up, hurry up'.
While inside the staffroom you stole between $500-$600 from Ms Sorawet's wallet before demanding more money. Ms Prasopchok gave you her purple bag from which she had removed her wallet. As you grabbed it, you cut yourself on the knife.
You removed your hoodie and attempted to clean up the blood that had dripped on the floor. When you emerged from the staffroom the CCTV shows you were no longer holding the knife. The CCTV recorded you saying 'Get the money now, get the money now. I said fucking now, bitch. Okay?' Your victims were heard screaming.
Ms Prasopchok removed a coin purse from her wallet and handed it to you. You said 'bullshit', and threw it across the room.
You tipped the contents of Ms Prasopchok's bag over the floor and took the bag which was valued at $20 as you left the shop. You said 'I'm sorry', as you left. The incident lasted some four minutes in total.
You were identified on 8 October 2024 by a member of Victoria Police. You were arrested and interviewed on 30 October 2024, during which you made no comment to the allegations put to you.
[3]
Armed robbery is a serious offence, evidenced by the 25 year maximum imposed by Parliament. Your offending was unsophisticated but was perpetrated against soft targets in the evening. You did not wear a facial disguise or cause injury to your victims, however I note the door to the staffroom was closed which would have elevated their fear.
You were, it was submitted, a methamphetamine addict with a significant habit at the time of the offending and committed these offences in order to fund your addiction.
You obtained $500-$600 from your offending, a paltry sum hardly commensurate to the fear you must have caused your victims. Ms Sorawet, in her statement to police, said she was fearful that you were going to seriously injure or kill her and her colleague. While neither of your victims provided a Victim Impact Statement, it takes little to imagine the terror they must have felt during the offending.
[4]
You entered an early plea to the charges at committal case conference. You have therefore saved the community the time and expense of running a trial and spared the witnesses the ordeal of giving evidence. As such, you have facilitated the administration of justice and you are entitled to a benefit for the utilitarian value of your plea.
By your plea you have accepted responsibility for your offending and I consider it to be demonstrative of some remorse. I note you apologised to your victims as you left Onyx and while you did not express remorse to Mr Staios, whose report I shall return to shortly, you did not seek to minimise the offending.
[5]
I turn now to your personal circumstances.
You are now 47 years of age, having been born in February 1978. Your parents emigrated from Italy in the 1960s and you have an older sister.
Your father had a gambling addiction, and your mother worked long hours so you were effectively raised by your maternal grandparents.
You attended Saint Peters Primary School and then Catholic Regional College in North Keilor. You were expelled and then attended Saint Bernard's College, from which you were also expelled, and then Essendon High School. You graduated from Year 10 before ceasing formal education. After leaving school you found a job in a meat works and remained there for several years.
From the age of about 15 you used cannabis. You graduated to stimulant use by 17 years of age, including methamphetamine, of which you regularly use between 3-5 grams daily.
You met your former wife when you were in your early twenties and married when you were 24. There are three children of the marriage, now aged 22, 20 and 16.
You purchased a Nando's franchise in 2012 but that commitment lasted for only a year. Your relationship ended in 2014, and your children suspend contact with you when you are drug affected.
Following your separation, you moved back to live with your parents. Your sister and her child also live there. Your parents are supportive of you but disagree with your life choices such as drug use and criminal offending.
Since being remanded in custody you have been diagnosed with depression and are taking antidepressant medication to manage your symptoms. You hold the position of billet and have completed a number of courses.
I received a psychological report from Dr Matthew Staios dated 19 May 2025. He opined that you:
[6]
... did not make any attempt to minimise [your] actions in the context of [your] present offending and attribute [your] behaviour to poor decision-making, substance use and a background of poorly controlled mental health.
[7]
In his report, Dr Staios noted that you have struggled with substance use for over 30 years. He found that your:
[8]
... personality structure appears to be one consisting of depressive tendencies, poor emotion regulation, negative self-image, poor understanding of boundaries and appropriate social norms and the need to depend on other individuals to provide [you] with a sense of meaning and emotional support ... [you] do not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of major depression or anxiety.
[9]
Mr Esposito, you have a long history of drug addiction and have committed several armed robberies in the past. You well understand the correlation between the two and I find your moral culpability to be high.
The sentence I impose must reflect specific deterrence. That is, I must make it clear to you that committing offences of this nature will necessarily result in stern sentences of imprisonment. While you are not to be sentenced again for your past offending, it informs both community protection and your prospects of rehabilitation.
Members of the community must be protected from you as they go about their business. I take this into account.
Your prospects of rehabilitation are best described as guarded, contingent entirely on your abstinence from illicit substances.
General deterrence is also an important sentencing principle. Those in the community minded to act as you have done must understand that armed robberies on soft targets, albeit for relatively small amounts of money, will result in imprisonment.
I also take just punishment and denunciation into account.
Sensibly, your counsel relied on neither R v Verdins[2007] VSCA 62 nor Bugmy v The Queen [2013] principles, although I do take your upbringing into account in a general sense.
[10]
Both Mr Russell, for the prosecution, and Ms Garde-Wilson, appearing for you, submitted that a head sentence with a non-parole period is the only sentence available to you in all the circumstances.
I take current sentencing practices into account but note this offending is clearly too serious for a combined sentence as was imposed in some of the cases provided.
[11]
On Charge 1, armed robbery, you are sentenced to two years and three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 2, armed robbery, you are sentenced to two years and three months' imprisonment.
I direct that the sentence imposed on Charge 1 be the base sentence.
I direct that six months of the sentence imposed on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Charge 1.
That makes a total effective sentence of two years nine months' imprisonment.
I direct that you serve a minimum non-parole period of 21 months before being eligible for release on parole.
Pursuant to s18 of the Sentencing Act1991 I declare that you have served 224 days by way of pre-sentence detention, excluding today.
Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991, I declare that had you not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would have imposed would have been a total effective sentence of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and nine months.