DPP v George

1. The circumstances of offending are set out in the agreed Summary of Prosecution Opening and I sentence you on the basis of the facts contained in that document.[4] I have taken into account the additional circumstances contained in your counsel's submissions to which there was no objection by the prosecution.[5] I summarise these circumstances as follows:
2. The deceased, Carol Barker,[6] was 81 years old at the time of the offending, and had been in hospital in Victoria while residing with her niece, Diana Miller,[7] in Bairnsdale. The deceased did not have a driver's licence and her car, a Daewoo, was parked at Diana Miller's house. The deceased was due to return to the ACT to live with her granddaughter, Louise Young,[8] who is Diana Miller's cousin. You lived in Canberra and had known Ms Young for about three months.
3. About a week before the offending, Ms Young asked you to travel to Bairnsdale with her to drive Ms Barker from hospital back to Canberra, but you declined. Between 24 and 48 hours prior to the offending, you consumed cannabis and methamphetamine.
4. The night before the offending, you went to visit Ms Young at her home in Canberra. You helped set up the room which Ms Barker was to occupy, and you then slept at Ms Young's house. The next morning, Ms Young told you that Ms Barker had to be discharged from hospital and you agreed to help Ms Young and her friend, Jeffery Sellers,[9] drive Ms Barker back to Canberra from Bairnsdale.
5. You, Ms Young and Mr Sellers left Canberra at 3.00pm on 8 November 2024 for Bairnsdale. You had a sleep during that drive. You all arrived at the hospital at around about 10.45pm that night and picked up Ms Barker. You took her to Diana Miller's house, where you all packed up Ms Barker's belongings. By 3.00am, Ms Barker was keen to leave. You all had some coffee, loaded the Daewoo and the second car with a trailer, and set off for Canberra. Ms Young and Mr Sellers were driving ahead of you in one car and you were driving the Daewoo with Ms Barker in the front passenger seat.
6. After about two and a half hours of driving, and two short breaks (one of about 10 minutes and the second of about 20 minutes), at approximately 6:00am on 9 November 2024, you were driving the Daewoo in the northbound lane on a highway in Victoria, on the way to the New South Wales border. You approached a lefthand bend and failed to actively steer the Daewoo so that you could safely negotiate the curvature of the road. Instead, you continued driving in a straight line, crossing the opposing lane and driving across the road, and hitting a roadside barrier before coming to rest at the bottom of an embankment. After this collision, the Daewoo caught fire. You were able to get out of the car, but Ms Barker remained in the vehicle, which was incinerated in the fire. The collision caused Ms Barker's death (charge 1, dangerous driving causing death).
7. Ms Young noticed that the Daewoo had disappeared from her car's rear vision mirror and so Mr Sellers turned around and drove to the site of the collision. They saw the burning Daewoo and tried to help Ms Barker, but were unable to do so. Ms Young saw that you had blood on your face and were holding your phone and your bag. She had no phone reception, and Mr Sellers' mobile was flat, so they drove to get help, leaving you at the scene. They flagged down a 4WD driven by Mr David Potter[10] on the highway, and he went to the collision site. Ms Young and Mr Sellers kept driving north and did not return to the collision scene.
8. Mr Potter was ultimately able to contact triple zero. It took 40-50 minutes for emergency services to arrive. During that time, Mr Potter observed you to be screaming and crying. You said to him:

I killed my mother. I swerved to miss a deer and my family left me here on the side of the road.

1. You were taken to Canberra Hospital for treatment. At 8.00am on 10 November 2024, police spoke to you at the hospital. After you were cautioned, you made a number of admissions during the recorded interview: you drove without sleeping; you meant to swap driving with Ms Young but that did not happen; the last thing you remembered is that a deer came out and Mr Sellers almost hit it, but did not, and that is what made you realise that you did not hit it either. The next minute, you woke up, and the Daewoo was smouldering. You did not know how the accident occurred. I note that after seeing police photographs of the accident scene, you realised that you did not see a deer at the location of the collision. Your instructions to counsel were that you do not know if you failed to see the bend in the dark, or briefly lost concentration, or, as you told police, fell asleep at the wheel. You felt the Daewoo roll down the embankment. When you came to, you saw Ms Barker's foot over the steering wheel and called out to her. She was a very large woman and you could not have dragged her out of the car. You saw smoke coming from the bonnet, panicked, and got out of the car. You were injured in the collision. You climbed up the embankment and started screaming for help.
2. Through your counsel you accepted that whatever the immediate cause of the collision, at the time of the collision you had high levels of amphetamine and cannabis in your system and that these likely had some adverse effects upon you which were compounded by fatigue.

1. Pathologist, Dr Gregory Young, reported extensive charring and fragmentation of Ms Barker's body. His opinion was that:[11]

...whilst the incineration and fragmentation has potentially obscured some of the injuries, it appears reasonable that based on the circumstances the deceased would have sustained fatal injuries from the motor vehicle incident with a possible contribution from the subsequent fire.

2. A blood sample was taken from you at 10:04am on 9 November 2024. When analysed, the relevant substances detected in your blood were: Amphetamine at a level of 0.07 milligrams per litre; Methylamphetamine at a level of 0.42 milligrams per litre; and Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol at a level of 14 nanograms per millilitre.
3. Forensic physician, Dr Schreiber, gave the following opinion about the impact of these drugs on your ability to drive at the time of the collision:[12]
   1. The presence of the detected illicit drugs would elicit an expectation of adverse effects in the public traffic. In addition, the illicit drugs were on high recreational levels at which impacts by impairment on driving were anticipated.
   2. The illicit substances methamphetamine and THC, in relation to driving, and their known detrimental effects on the psychomotor skills had created an appreciable risk such that Ms George 's driving would have posed a significant risk to the public.
   3. Coming off a lane or a road is one of the usual effects of methamphetamine and THC.
   4. Coming off the road and swerving by Ms George ... who was described as having had quite much sleep prior ... can be attributed to the impairing effects of methamphetamine and its rebound effect, as well as the impairing effects of the high amounts of THC.
   5. It is likely the organisation of Ms George 's driving would have been better and more controlled if Ms George had not taken the drugs as detected in the blood.
4. Investigations revealed no evidence of any other vehicle or animal being involved in the collision. The Daewoo had no faults, failures or conditions that caused or contributed to the collision. There was no evidence that the Daewoo was out of control or travelling at excessive speed prior to leaving the road. However, Detective Senior Constable Dr Zhao, who prepared a collision diagram, opined that "... the damage to the vehicle and the barrier is consistent with an impact at a speed close to the speed limit"[13] of 100 km/h. There were no defects in the road that caused or contributed to the collision. There was no evidence that you commenced emergency braking before the collision.

1. In her Victim Impact Statement dated 25 February 2026,[14] Melanie Wall,[15] the daughter of Ms Barker, described the profound impact that losing her mother has had on her and on the family. She stated that she was very close to her mother and has continued to suffer distress, emotional suffering, shock and grief after losing her suddenly, particularly in these circumstances. Her day-to-day functioning has been badly affected.
2. Whilst it is conceded by the prosecution that you are unlikely to have foreseen that the Daewoo would catch fire after the collision, or that Ms Barker would be unable to exit the car and that her body would be burned in that car, these matters nonetheless remain relevant aspects of the immediate impact of the collision upon her.[16]

1. You have two relevant drink/drug driving matters. In November 2000 you were fined $200 without conviction for driving a motor vehicle with a prescribed concentration of alcohol in your blood. You were disqualified from holding a licence for 2 months. In July 2020 you were convicted of having a prescribed drug in your oral fluid/blood, fined $600 and disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for 12 months.

1. It is common ground that you made an offer to plead guilty to this charge on 4 July 2025, prior to the second committal mention, that you entered your plea on 4 September 2025 and that your plea is to be regarded as having been made at the earliest opportunity.

1. There are 9 days pre-sentence detention to be declared as having been served.

1. Your personal circumstances were set out in detail in the psychological report of Ms Naomi Cameron dated 19 December 2025.[17]
2. You grew up mainly in Canberra, with your parents, brother and sister. You had a deprived childhood. Both parents were alcoholics who also used cannabis. Money was extremely tight, and there was nothing to spare for sport or hobbies. The family would eat the same meal for days on end, and you and your siblings would do many domestic chores from a young age.
3. In addition, your father was violent towards your mother, but she would not allow you to report this behaviour. You once got into trouble for calling police. Your father was arrested twice, but was never charged with any offence. On the most serious occasion, he broke your mother's leg, and you feared that that one day he would kill her.
4. You and your sister, who shared a bedroom, were sexually assaulted by a family friend over a period of 10 years when he came twice per year to stay with the family. You were 15 years old when you told your mother about this abuse.
5. You had a disrupted education due to your family's instability, and attended six different primary schools. You suffered some bullying and struggled academically from your first year. You had learning support from then on, but had no support at home with your school work, which you had to do on your bed. You were a quiet child who did not get into trouble. The highlight of your high school life was having a role in the backstage crew of your school in a national performing arts competition.
6. You got your first casual job at the age of 12 and left school at the age of 15 to work full time as a cleaner and shop assistant. You have used cannabis since your mid-teens and remain reliant on it.
7. You married at age of 19 and had three sons with your first husband. He was convicted of rape of a stranger when you were 25 years old. You were a full time mother at that time. Each of your three adult sons has Fragile X syndrome, a genetic condition associated with cognitive impairment and behavioural problems. You devoted much effort into getting professional support for them when they were young, and are very proud that they all managed to complete year 12 and graduate from special high school. You remain close to them.
8. You have a teenage son and daughter with your second husband and they live with him. You maintain relations with them. Your father died of brain cancer 10 years ago.
9. You started using amphetamines in 2018 whilst working long hours in a takeaway business. However, you became unable to cope at work and were found hysterical outside your second husband's house. Police and an ambulance attended and you were diagnosed by a psychiatrist with ADD and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). You were prescribed Ritalin and had ten counselling sessions with a psychologist under a mental health care plan. You ceased taking Ritalin the following year. You switched to methamphetamine in 2020 and found that it improved your mood, gave you confidence, and did not have any adverse effects on you.
10. You saw a psychologist briefly as part of a probation order in 2022.
11. You had a volatile third relationship which ended in mutual intervention orders.
12. You have a current partner who has his own children. In recent years, you completed a certificate II in small business, and have operated a small trash and treasure stall at a local market. Your sister died suddenly from a heart attack in August 2024 and you spend considerable time assisting your mother who is frail and has emphysema. You have a close relationship with your brother.
13. You suffered physical injuries in the collision, including a fractured collarbone, a fractured elbow, a large complex laceration to the forehead, and pulmonary contusion. You were airlifted to Canberra hospital for treatment which included surgery on the elbow and conservative treatment of the collarbone. You experienced suicidal thoughts whilst in hospital and received counselling. The hospital discharge summaries note depression and PTSD.[18]
14. Your collarbone fracture failed to heal and in April 2025 you had surgery involving the insertion of a plate with 6 screws and a bone graft. You continue to suffer some ongoing pain and reduced mobility in your left arm.
15. You have recognised the role that drug taking played in your offending and ceased using methamphetamine after the accident, without adverse effects. You have indicated that you are determined not to take it again and that you will undertake drug programs and treatment in prison to help you end your dependence on cannabis. Your partner has also ceased drug use and supports you in your rehabilitation efforts. You do not have a problem with alcohol.
16. Ms Cameron opined that against a background of longstanding trauma, mood disturbance and substance dependence, as a result of the collision you suffer symptoms of complex PTSD (including emotional numbing, pervasive guilt and pronounced affective instability) and major depressive disorder (including persistent sadness, hopelessness and lack of motivation).

1. It was common ground that: the offence of dangerous driving causing death is a very serious offence; you bear high moral culpability for your offending because you knew the illicit drugs were in your body at the time you decided to drive the Daewoo with a passenger for a long distance on a public highway; your offending is objectively at a mid-level of seriousness for this kind of offence; and your offending will attract the imposition of a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period.

1. In mitigation, your counsel relied on the following matters. First, a general reduction in moral culpability due to your deprived childhood and disadvantage which caused maladaptive interpersonal patterns, and impaired psychological functioning which you managed by self-medicating with drugs. Second, your early plea of guilty, along with the profound remorse which was reflected in the guilt-related psychiatric symptoms of depression and PTSD related to the collision, in the matters expressed to Ms Cameron and in the letter of apology tendered to the Court.[19] Third, the extra-curial punishment due to the injuries you suffered in the collision and their ongoing physical effects, which will add to the burden of imprisonment. Fourth, the enlivenment of Verdins principles 5 and 6,[20] in terms of the likelihood, expressed by Ms Cameron, that due to your depressive and trauma symptoms, you will find prison more onerous than the average prisoner[21] and the heightened risk that your mental health will significantly deteriorate in prison.[22] Fifth, the fact that you live in Canberra along with your family and friends and are unlikely to receive visits in prison (apart from a possible visit from a niece who lives overseas) which will increase the burden of imprisonment. Sixth, that your prospects of rehabilitation are reasonable to good in the light of your early plea, remorse, general prosocial attitudes, family support, cessation of use of methamphetamines, and willingness to engage in treatment.
2. The prosecution has conceded all of the matters relied upon by your counsel in mitigation, including that any sentence imposed may be moderated to take into account your reduced moral culpability due to childhood disadvantage, the seriousness of the injuries you suffered, and the hardship flowing from serving a sentence in Victoria away from family and friends in the ACT.
3. It was also common ground, and I accept that comparable cases are of limited usefulness and that in each case the appropriate sentence turns on the particular facts and circumstances of that case. I note that the prosecution referred me to two comparable cases as helpful examples of current sentencing practice: Ritchie[23] and Harvey.[24] I will return to these below.

1. The purposes of sentencing includes denunciation, just punishment, general and specific deterrence, protection of the public and rehabilitation.
2. Dangerous driving causing death is an inherently serious offence. The seriousness is reflected in the maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment, which has been in place since 2008. On 30 May 2016, the Court of Appeal held that current sentencing practices for serious examples of dangerous driving causing death were inadequate and needed to be uplifted.[25] The category 2 provisions for dangerous driving causing death commenced on 28 October 2018.
3. In cases of dangerous driving causing death, the sentencing purposes of general deterrence and denunciation must be given considerable weight in order to attempt to reduce further incidents of dangerous driving on our roads, and to reduce the terrible number of deaths and injuries which occur on the roads.[26]
4. Although you have a limited relevant past history, there are a number of relevant aggravating features of your offending. First, the high recreational levels of the illicit drugs detected in your body. Second, the significant distance you drove whilst impaired by drugs (which exposed other road users to risk), from Bairnsdale to the area of impact on the highway. Third, you were tired in spite of taking two short breaks in the hours prior to the collision. Fourth, that you crossed into the oncoming lane at high speed before hitting the barrier, potentially putting other road users at risk, even though fortunately no other car was travelling in the south bound lane. Fifth, that Ms Barker was vulnerable being 81 years old and unable to drive.
5. On the other hand, I accept that at the time you ingested the illicit drugs, you had no intention of driving Ms Barker to Canberra, and did not take any further illicit drugs thereafter. I accept that you had slept the night before you set off driving in convoy with Ms Young, did not feel impaired at the time, and that you took two short rest breaks prior to the collision. I also accept that you were not driving erratically, at excessive speed, using a mobile phone or showing visible signs of impairment or distraction. In addition, I accept that your moral culpability is somewhat reduced by your disadvantaged and traumatic background and reliance on illicit drugs as a coping mechanism. I therefore accept that your offending lies at the middle of the range of seriousness for this kind of offence.
6. I accept that you are profoundly remorseful for your offending, to the point of suffering psychiatric sequelae due to the guilt you feel for your conduct. Given your remorse, your cessation of use of methamphetamine, your determination to undertake appropriate drug counselling in prison to assist you in breaking your psychological dependence on cannabis, and your very limited criminal history, I consider that specific deterrence has less of a role to play than it might otherwise have.
7. I consider that your prospects for rehabilitation are good, provided you engage with the appropriate treatment modalities to end your dependence on cannabis.
8. I take into account the mitigating factors referred to above.
9. I turn briefly to the comparable cases referred to me by counsel.
10. In Ritchie, the accused driver, whose 5 year old daughter was with her in the car, travelled at between 44 and 50 kilometres per hour on the wrong side of the road before striking a pedestrian who was walking along the nature strip, facing oncoming traffic. The pedestrian suffered catastrophic injuries from which she died in hospital later that day. Ms Ritchie had a high concentration of methamphetamine in her blood. Immediately prior to the collision she twice took her eyes off the road to look for her daughter's asthma puffer (once in her handbag, and once in the glovebox and centre console). This was found to be deliberate conduct elevating the seriousness of her offending to above mid-range. In addition, she had a number of prior driving related convictions (for driving while suspended or disqualified) which were more than merely the occasional minor infringement. The sentence imposed of 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 2 months was upheld by the Court of Appeal as being within range consistent with sentencing practice.[27] I note that the higher objective gravity of her offending and the substantial prior history of driving offences are features of that case which are not present in your case.
11. In Harvey, the accused driver had no prior convictions but was in control of a large truck capable of causing catastrophic damage. He had been sleep deprived for days prior to the accident. He was fatigued at the time of driving. He drove for a longer period with a high level of methamphetamine in his system. In addition, for some time prior to pleading guilty he maintained a version of events which cast blame for the collision on the deceased. On appeal by the Director, he was resentenced to 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 21 months. I consider that the objective gravity of his offending is greater than yours in that at the time of taking methamphetamine you had not yet decided to drive Ms Barker to Canberra and you had slept well the night before undertaking the trip to Canberra; you were driving in convoy with another car and took a number of rest breaks prior to collision. In addition, I consider that your profound remorse evident immediately at the scene of the collision, and continuing with the development of guilt-related symptoms of depression and PTSD, when coupled with your early plea of guilty, is stronger evidence of remorse than was present in his case. I also note that while in Harvey, the truck driver suffered some injury to the knees, you have suffered fractures requiring surgery and continue to have limited mobility in the left arm, as well as collision related PTSD and depression which require ongoing psychological treatment. Finally, I note that you face considerable hardship in prison because you will be away from your family and friends, particularly your three vulnerable adult sons, while suffering from PTSD, depression and cannabis dependence, and are unlikely to receive any visits from them.

1. In your case, I consider that in all the circumstances, the appropriate sentence is as follows:
2. Ms George, would you please stand.
3. On charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 1 year and 8 months.
4. I declare that 9 days of pre-sentence detention are to be deducted administratively from your sentence.
5. I indicate pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act that but for your plea of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years and 4 months' with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months'.
6. As the charge of dangerous driving causing death carries a mandatory interference with your driver's licence,[28] I propose to cancel your licence and disqualify you from obtaining a further one for a period of four years. This will be noted on the court's records.
7. In addition, I propose to insert into the court records pursuant to section 89C of the Sentence Act 1991 that the offence was committed whilst you were under the influence of a drugs, which contributed to the offence.

[2] See s 5(2H) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).

[3] Ibid s 89(2)(a).

[4] Exhibit 1 - Summary of Prosecution Opening dated 6 February 2026.

[5] Defence outline of submissions dated 20 February 2026, [4]-[16].

[11] Exhibit 1 - Summary of prosecution opening dated 6 February 2026 [46].

[14] Exhibit 3 - Victim Impact Statement of Melanie Wall dated 25 February 2026.

[16] Ss 3(1), 5(2)(db) and 5(2)(daa) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in Benjamin Eade v The Queen; Brent Vanstone v The Queen [2021] VSCA 142.

[17] Exhibit A - Psychological report of Naomi Cameron dated 14 January 2026.

[18] Exhibit B - Bundle of discharge summaries from Canberra Hospital.

[19] Exhibit C - Letter of apology of Charlene George dated 25 February 2026.

[20] R v Verdins & Ors (2007) 16 VR 269.

[21] Exhibit A - Psychological report of Naomi Cameron dated 14 January 2026 [109].

[23] Ritchie v The King [2025] VSCA 154.

[24] DPP v Harvey [2023] VSCA 234.

[25] Stephens v The Queen [2016] VSCA 121.

[26] Singh v The King [2025] VSCA 281.

[27] Ritchie v The King [2025] VSCA 154 [61].

[28] S 89(2) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).