DPP v Ghali [2025] VCC 1910

(i) the vehicle traffic lights applicable to you had been green and then amber for approximately 9 to 10 seconds;

(ii) the vehicle traffic lights applicable to you had been red for approximately 4 to 5 seconds; and

(iii) the pedestrian traffic lights applicable to the victim and the other pedestrians had turned green ('man walking' mode) after the vehicle traffic lights applicable to you had turned red.

1. On 3 January 2025, MCIU Investigators attended the collision scene and recorded various distances which are detailed in the prosecution opening at paragraph 40.
2. A Universal Forensic Examination Device download report and call charge records of your two mobile phones was obtained by police. The records revealed there was no telephone or data activity recorded on the mobile phones in the lead to or at the time of the collision.
3. The Toyota driven by you sustained minor damage to the front as a result of striking the victim. The Toyota was mechanically inspected by police. As a result of that inspection, no mechanical faults, failures or conditions were identified that would have caused or contributed to the collision.
4. Detective Sergeant Dr Jenelle Hardiman prepared a detailed statement about her assessment of the collision and the relevant circumstances. She concluded that: '...the driver failed to stop for the red traffic light at the pedestrian crossing located about 40 metres east of James Cook Drive. The vehicle continued through the pedestrian crossing, impacting a pedestrian crossing from south to north. At impact, the pedestrian was wholly within the pedestrian crossing...At impact with the pedestrian, the Toyota was travelling between 66 km/h and 70 km/h.'
5. At 1:48pm on 17 October 2024 you participated in a record of interview. You made the following comments:

(a) I was driving down Heatherton Road and it was a bit bright. I was going down. I'm pretty familiar with the road since I've been living in the area for a while. I wasn't speeding. I was just going, it was just downhill so I had my foot on the brake. I typically do anyway if I'm going downhill to make sure I'm not speeding;

(b) when I came to the bottom where that kind of intersection light part is I just remember looking up. I glanced at, I believe it was a bit bright I glanced at the time, which is the time, and then all of a sudden I see the kids cross across the road and I slam my brake on and the parents are like screaming at her because they're on my left side when I'm driving and the child let go of the parents and she ran in front of my car and I slammed and I tried to swerve to avoid hitting her but it was unavoidable. Yeah, a freak accident;

(c) yeah, I was still in shock and the second I pulled over I got up and tried to make sure she was okay, but it all happened so quick;

(d) yeah, I was on time. I wasn't rushing;

(e) um, to, my memory's a little bit hazy. To the best of my ability I, I did, I believe it was, like, yellow.....I, I think it was yellow;

(f) I don't remember. I just, I do remember seeing a yellow, I believe so. I'm not sure;

(g) I just glanced at it to look at the time;

(h) I'm not sure. I just remember it was a bit bright. I just remember it was going down, it was clear so I glanced at the time the, just, like, in the centre console and then just, like, on my wireless screen and then I just literally looked and then looked up and then the little girl;

(i) it was just a freak accident, yeah. I did, the, the little girl just ran out in front of the car;

(j) that's all I can really say. As I was going down I remember just, I remember glancing it and yeah. I remember seeing, like, a yellow colour; and

(k) (with reference to whether you saw a yellow traffic light), I'm not sure ... I'm not sure, yeah. I can't say with any complete certainty.

1. During the interview, Police played you the dash cam footage and asked you questions as follows:

(a) so you can see that it stays red that whole time. It doesn't change. Is that fair to say? Yeah;

(b) are you, are you satisfied that that's a red light? Yeah, yeah, of course;

(c) looking at that footage and thinking about today can you provide any explanation as to why you didn't see that red light? No;

(d) I don't know. I don't know. I don't know how this happened;

(e) obviously I wouldn't wish this upon anyone;

(f) it just breaks my heart just knowing yeah that obviously it's a mistake you know; and

(g) I'm just disappointed in myself, like, I've never done anything you know. I just can't believe this happened.

1. The prosecution case is that you drove in a manner dangerous to the public as you failed to keep proper lookout in relation to the traffic control signals and the pedestrians using the crossing and, that you drove into the pedestrian crossing against a red light and while the victim and others were using the crossing legitimately.
2. Further, the prosecution case is that the traffic lights applicable to you had been red for approximately 4 to 5 seconds when the collision occurred. Importantly, for the entire time that the victim was using the pedestrian crossing, the traffic control signals applicable to you were illuminated red.

1. The offence of dangerous driving causing death is, by its nature, a serious offence as it involves the death of a human being. The seriousness of the offence is also reflected in the maximum penalty set by Parliament, being 10 years imprisonment, and its classification as a Category 2 offence.
2. In assessing the nature and gravity of your offending in this instance it is necessary to address the basis of the dangerousness upon which the prosecution rely, as outlined above.
3. Of significance in my view, is the fact the traffic light applicable to you had been red for 4 to 5 seconds before you drove through the pedestrian crossing. When you entered the pedestrian crossing, you struck the victim at a speed of between 66 and 70 km/h. While it is not alleged that you were speeding as you approached the crossing, it is self-evident that you were distracted until just prior to entering the crossing and hitting the victim. As you said in your record of interview, you were looking at the consol of the car at the time and you simply did not see the red light.
4. The prosecution submit that a further significant factor is that there are multiple warnings and signage - indicating a pedestrian crossing ahead - that were applicable to you as you approached the traffic control signals. While I accept that consideration of the signs is relevant and a clear indication to drivers of a crossing ahead, this was a road that was familiar to you, and you were already well aware of the crossing and its location.
5. It was submitted on your behalf that while this is not a case of momentary inattention, it was nonetheless still a short period of inattention. Further, as there is an absence of other aggravating features such as speed, erratic driving or the presence of alcohol or drugs, in all the circumstances it was submitted that your offending is objectively at the lower level.
6. The prosecution submit that this is a serious example of the offence and that in all the circumstances the objective gravity and your moral culpability are high.
7. In dangerous driving cases of this nature, it is difficult to quantify what period of inattention may be viewed as 'short'. It is plain that when in control of a vehicle travelling on a road where the speed limit is 80km/h, 4 to 5 seconds can be a significant amount of time to loose attention or fail to keep a proper lookout. As noted, your attention was averted from the task of driving until you entered the crossing and struck the victim, in circumstances where you passed warning signs and then failed to see the red light.
8. I do not accept that your offending is at the lower level and in all the circumstances in my view, this is a relatively serious example of the offence.

1. I turn now to the impact of your offending on Amelia Wang's family.
2. The victim's mother, Wenna Lin, prepared an eloquent and moving victim impact statement which I have taken into account. She struggles to articulate the gravity of the pain and loss experienced by her family. She speaks of the inability to see her daughter grow, to celebrate her successes and to nurture her when she is sad.
3. Ms Lin describes the trauma and confusion her daughter Ella experiences. She notes that Ella asks questions about heaven and whether she can go there so her sister can come back home. Ms Lin notes that she and her husband struggle to engage with Ella while they process their grief. Ms Lin describes frequent suicidal thoughts and states she now feels like she is simply existing rather than living, and that she has no purpose. She also notes that her mother Ms Men, who was present at the incident, blames herself, and has also expressed suicidal thoughts.
4. Ms Lin notes her husband has continued to work to provide for her family however he feels intense emotional pain and struggles to cope. She states her relationship with her husband has suffered and that she has not returned to work putting the family under constant financial pressure.
5. Ms Lin states:

Our family has been torn apart by this incident. Not only do I have to deal with the unthinkable loss of my little girl, but I am watching those around me crumble with pain and loss. Our family will never be the same and our pain will be forever within our hearts for as long as we live.

1. I wish to direct some comments to the family of Amelia.
2. There is nothing this Court can say or do that will bring back Amelia or heal your significant and unmeasurable grief and pain. The sentence I must impose can in no way be a measure of the worth of the life of Amelia. Rather, the sentence I must impose is a reflection of a large number of factors which judges are required by law to take into account, only one of which is the impact on victims.

1. You are currently 25. You were born in Australia however your parents have their origins in the north-Sudanese/Egyptian community. Your parents immigrated to Australia in 1999 and your family is part of the Coptic Orthodox Church community.
2. Both your parents work and you enjoy positive relationships with your family. You report you were raised in an environment free of abuse or other trauma. You and your sister reside at home with your parents.
3. You attended school without incident up until year 12 where you completed VCE. Upon finishing school you completed a Bachelor's Degree and Master's degree at Victoria University. You graduated Osteopathy in 2022 and commenced working as an Osteopath with various providers. You report that you left a previous employer due to bullying and harassment however you were employed up until the offending.
4. You have been in a relationship with your partner for two years. Your partner is studying to become a medical practitioner and you intend to marry.
5. You report no medical issues or mental health issues prior to the offending. You state you have never engaged in illicit substance use and report your alcohol consumption is limited to special occasions.
6. Following the incident you were assessed by Dr Ian McKinnon who provided a report dated 21 October 2024 which was tendered on the plea. Dr McKinnon assessed you to be suffering with an Adjustment Disorder which is directly and solely in consequence of your offending. You reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, rumination, social withdrawal, guilt and confusion.
7. You engaged with Dr McKinnon on numerous occasions between October 2024 and November 2025. An updated psychological report dated 9 November 2025 was tendered on the plea which details your functioning over the past year. Dr McKinnon opines that you continue to struggle with Adjustment Disorder and notes that you struggle with suicidal ideation, culminating in an admission to hospital in October of this year.
8. Psychologist Paul Grech provided a report dated 24 November 2025 which was tendered on the plea. Mr Grech re categorised your Adjustment Disorder as PTSD. He notes you have engaged well with therapy and have demonstrated significant insight. Mr Grech also opines that you are racked by unrelenting guilt which has led to the development of your severe depressive symptoms.
9. A further psychiatric report of Dr Robert Kruk dated 20 November 2025 was tendered on the plea. Dr Kruk also opines that your experience of low mood, insomnia, decline in functioning and suicidal thoughts is related to the torment and guilt you feel in relation to this offending. He notes that you will have to bear the natural consequences of your actions for the rest of your life. You are currently prescribed antidepressant, antipsychotic, antihypertensive and mood stabilising medication to manage your symptoms.
10. It is evident from the material tendered that you are a well-intentioned person having consistently applied yourself to positive self and professional development. The tragedy of this offending has turned your life upside down and your personal goals have now been seriously jeopardised. It is clear it will take years to partially resolve your guilt and that your time in custody will require ongoing and intensive mental health support.
11. You have no prior history of substance abuse, mental health or criminality. You are a respected member of your community and have lived a productive, prosocial life. A number of character references were tendered on the plea. In summary your friends and colleagues are of a similar view that you are a respected and kind person who is motivated to help others. They speak to the impact this offending has had on you. It is clear that upon your release from custody, you will continue to receive the support from your social network to assist you as you move forward from this offending.

1. I first take into account your plea of guilty. I note that this matter was subject to a case conference hearing before me on 29 July 2025. The matter resolved and you were arraigned, entering a plea of guilty on 2 September 2025. Your plea has saved the court the time and expense of a trial and demonstrates your acceptance of responsibility. Importantly your plea has avoided the need for witnesses to give evidence and relive the trauma of the incident.
2. Over and above your plea of guilty it was submitted that you have demonstrated genuine remorse. Having considered the many references, the opinions of the medical professionals and the letter you provided to the court, I am satisfied that you have demonstrated a degree of genuine remorse.
3. I have taken into account the psychological and psychiatric materials and I am satisfied that Verdins principle 5 is enlivened. That is, that a term of imprisonment will weigh more heavily on you than it would on a person not suffering your current mental health conditions.
4. Turning to your prospects of rehabilitation, you come before the court at age 25 with no prior convictions. Your relative youth remains an important consideration. You do not have to grapple with any alcohol or drug issues, and you have the ongoing support of your family and friends, many of whom were present at the plea hearing. In the circumstances, while your mental health concerns will require treatment, in my view, once you move through the criminal process, your prospects of rehabilitation are very strong.
5. As dangerous driving causing death is a Category 2 offence, the Court must impose a custodial sentence. Submissions were made on your behalf as to whether any of the s 5(2H) Sentencing Act 1991 ('Sentencing Act') exceptions can be established, specifically:
   • Section 5(2H)(c)(ii): The offender has impaired mental functioning that would result in the offender being subject to substantially and materially greater than the ordinary burden or risks of imprisonment; or
   • Section 5(2H)(e): That there are substantial and compelling circumstances that are exceptional and rare that justify not making an order for an immediate term of imprisonment.
6. In relation to s 5(2H)(c)(ii), it is well settled that the hurdle set by that exception is higher than that which attracts principles in Verdins. As to s 5(2H)(e) as was noted by the court in DPP v Lombardo,[1] the phrase 'substantially compelling circumstances which are exceptional and rare' refers to circumstances that 'are wholly outside the ordinary factors typical of the relevant offence, in this case dangerous driving causing death'.
7. Further, as the Court observed in Peers v The Queen:[2]

It is the necessary reality for offending of this kind that people with unblemished records, undoubted remorse, and with little or no prospect of reoffending, will receive an immediate term of imprisonment. That is the effect of making the charge a category two offence and a consequence of the need for general deterrence. However, other sentencing principles which serve to moderate sentence are not to be put aside as irrelevant. [3]

1. Undoubtedly, this has been a devastating experience for you and has led to you developing mental health conditions as a direct result of the collision. However as noted above, the hurdle set by s 5(2H)(c)(ii) is very high when seeking to establish that your conditions would result in you being subjected to substantially and materially greater burdens or risks if imprisoned. In my view the evidence relied on does not enliven the exception.
2. Further, that the matters upon which you rely in order to establish substantial and compelling circumstances that are exceptional and rare, pursuant to 5(2H)(e) in my view individually or in combination do not satisfy the exception.
3. I note also that in determining whether there are substantial and compelling circumstances I have had regard to the matters in ss 5(2HC) and 5(2I).
4. The primary sentencing consideration in a case such as this is general deterrence. In the circumstances, in my view, this case is a clear example where an otherwise safe and competent driver has driven without the required due care and attention in circumstances where there was ample warning of the approaching pedestrian crossing, including in this instance, facing a red light for 4 to 5 seconds. The unequivocal message to be conveyed is that when drivers fail to keep a proper lookout resulting in the death of a another person, they will face stern consequences. As to specific deterrence, for similar reasons outlined in relation to your rehabilitation, it carries little weight in this instance.
5. Finally, I have taken into account the various cases referred to at the plea hearing by both the prosecution and defence in order to assist the court with respect to current sentencing practices.

1. Mr Ghali, would you please stand.
2. Kamal Ghali on Charge 1, dangerous driving causing death, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months imprisonment. I direct that you serve 15 months before becoming eligible for parole.
3. Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act, I declare that 19 days be reckoned as the period of imprisonment already served under the sentence I have imposed. That does not include today.
4. Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I indicate that had you not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced you to a period of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non parole period of 2 years.
5. Pursuant to s 89(2) of the Sentencing Act, as the charge is a serious motor vehicle offence, any driver licence you hold is cancelled, and you are disqualified from obtaining a further one for a period of 18 months from today.

[1] [2022] VSCA 204, [71]-[72].

[2] [2021] VSCA 264.