DPP v Green [2025] VCC 1770

1. Mr Graeme Reynolds owns and operates a small bakery in Maffra. The Maffra Bakery is a family partnership, and was established in 1973 in Maffra, Victoria. It is a small business. In about July 2000 you became employed by the Maffra Bakery as a bookkeeper. You had full access to this account and were responsible for wages and paying suppliers. It is obvious that you had the full trust of the bakery's owner, Mr Reynolds, over all those years from 2000 until 2024 when your offending was discovered. I will come to some of those details, only as necessary, when dealing with the relevant matters on the plea.

"The objective gravity of any theft needs to be considered by reference to what was taken (including its value), from whom it was taken, and all other relevant surrounding circumstances, including the purpose for which it was taken."[1]

2. Here, I assess your offending as in the mid range. This is because:

(a) you were a long-term employee and had developed an ongoing relationship with the business owners where you were a valued and trusted member of a very small team. This is obvious from the fact that you maintained over 20 years of employment with them;

(b) this was a small family-run business, and was therefore in a position of real vulnerability;

(c) you occupied a position of expertise, trust, and control where there was very little oversight of the bookkeeping functions because it was a small family business that had come to trust you;

(d) the offending was over a period around one year. At times it was brazen, such as not paying a creditor such as Shaw's Meats, but it also involved some deception, making up anodyne names such as "Customer 232" for transactions to hide its true nature;

(e) it was to fund the lifestyle you and your husband had become used to - although this not lavish or excessive - it was to maintain your hobby farm, after your husband ceased working. Although the prosecution defined this as greed, it is clear it was a modest lifestyle that you were seeking to maintain;

(f) the amount taken was very significant.

1. There was no victim impact statement formally filed. However, in his statement to police, Mr Graeme Reynolds stated the following at paragraph [39] of his statement:

"After finding out what has happened, I am absolutely gutted, I trusted Catherine for 24 years and that trust is broken. I am upset and hurt that so much money has been taken from me and has now impacted my business."[2]

1. You were born in November 1960 and are now just over 65 years of age. A report from psychologist Ms Fakhri dated 19 November 2025 was tendered in support. The following details are briefly taken from that report.
2. You have two sisters. You were born into a difficult family relationship. This was particularly because your mother was physically abusive towards you. You were abused sexually from about the age of 14 on a monthly basis by a family friend. You left school at about age 16 or 17 in year 10. Shortly thereafter you obtained a job at Nissan, where you did some financial and bookkeeping work.
3. In about 1984 you met your first husband, Joe, and had three children, born in 1983, 1987 and 1989. Your marriage became abusive, with both emotional and physical abuse which you suffered at the hands of Joe. You were working and attempting to manage the finances and the family by yourself. In the early 1990s your marriage was ending, and you lost your job at Nissan. Your first round of offending then occurred. Details of this are unclear, but you received a fine for what appears to be a theft charge.
4. You went on to other bookkeeping roles then, and committed your second round of offending in 1995 when working for PCM Electronics. You then had further offending of obtaining property by deception for which you received a six-month community correction order in 1997.
5. You then met and formed a lasting relationship with Mr Brendan Green in about 2000. He worked as a welder and always brought in a good income. In addition to looking after your own children, he had four children who you had some responsibility for.
6. As indicated, you worked with Maffra Bakery on a part-time bookkeeping basis as well as taking other work in the local region in that area.
7. In about 2023 your offending subject to this sentence began to occur. Your counsel submits on your behalf that the offending began as Brendan had stopped working due to his age. You lived on a hobby farm, and had bills in relation to maintenance of the property and the animals. Instead of adjusting your lifestyle to meet your limited financial income, you began the offending in an attempt to continue on with the lifestyle you became accustomed to. Interestingly, Ms Fakhri describes the fact that as your offending was occurring, your alcohol abuse also began to increase. She suggests that it was a situation where you were using alcohol to hide your increasing sense of despair.
8. Though, on discovery of your offending in early June 2024, you initially tried to prevaricate, you almost immediately confessed to Graeme Reynolds, made full admissions to police, and then pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. Ms Fakhri notes at paragraph [81] that you are "deeply regretful and remorseful" for your actions.[3] That is reflected in the fact that you and Brendan made an immediate plan to pay back the amounts. He took money out of his superannuation, and you both then sold your house. With the proceeds from those two sources, you paid back Graeme Reynolds and Maffra Bakery completely. The episode has left you depressed and anxious, and, as Ms Fakhri notes at paragraph [142], prison will certainly be more onerous for you.[4]
9. No particular Verdins[5] issues were raised, and I consider that you must take full responsibility for your offending.

1. The Crown submitted a combination sentence was not outside the range. Defence submitted a merciful sentence could be a straight community correction order, noting what the Court of Appeal said in Boulton,[6] that the punitive features of a community correction order means that the sentencing principles of general deterrence can be met.
2. The principle of general deterrence in this case I consider looms large. This is because of the objective seriousness of the offending, the fact that there was a small vulnerable business that was targeted, the breach of trust this involved, the significant amount taken, and the fact that the offending occurred over a one-year period.
3. Specific deterrence also has work to do, given your prior histories. Though somewhat dated, it is clear that you knew from those repeated offences that this was wrong to do, and that there would be significant penalties as a result. Not only that, but you decided to commit these offences in any event.
4. I accept that you are remorseful for the reasons set out above; that you have pleaded guilty, made early admissions, and have fully paid back the amounts. I note that as a result of all of that, you and your husband Brendan now live at the Summer Breeze Motel in one room in the Woodside region. Your circumstances are certainly straitened.
5. I consider that punishment has a limited role. Despite the seriousness of your offending, you have really only ever offended while at work. Given your age, limited work experience and skills, it is quite clear that you will not work in this field again, therefore, your opportunities to reoffend are almost non-existent.
6. An assessment considering the matters outlined in Section 8B of the Sentencing Act 1991 was undertaken on 4 December 2025. The pre-sentence outcome report dated 5 December 2025 assessed you suitable for a community correction order.
7. Rehabilitation I do not consider to be so significant, given your age.
8. Balancing all these matters, I sentence you to a term of 4 months' imprisonment with a community correction order of 18 months.
9. But for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 6 months.

1. Catherine Green, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft, contrary to s74 of the Crimes Act 1958. The charge of theft carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment.
2. You have a relevant prior criminal history.
3. The principle of general deterrence in this case I consider looms large. Specific deterrence also has work to do, given your prior histories. Though somewhat dated, it is clear that you knew from those repeated offences that this was wrong to do, and that there would be significant penalties as a result.
4. I accept that you are remorseful for the reasons set out above; that you have pleaded guilty, made early admissions, and have fully paid back the amounts. I note that as a result of all of that, you and your husband Brendan now live at the Summer Breeze Motel in one room in the Woodside region.
5. I consider that punishment has a limited role. Despite the seriousness of your offending, you have really only ever offended while at work. Given your age, limited work experience and skills, it is quite clear that you will not work in this field again, therefore, your opportunities to reoffend are almost non-existent.
6. Rehabilitation I do not consider to be so significant, given your age.
7. Balancing all these matters, I sentence you to a term of 4 months' imprisonment with a community correction order of 18 months.
8. But for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 6 months.
9. This summary is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the County Court or to be used in any later consideration of the Court's reasons.

[1] Chamma v R [2020] VSCA 232 at paragraph [71]

[2] Statement of Mr Graeme Reynolds dated 8 June 2025

[3] Psychological report of Ms Rebecca Fakhri dated 19 November 2025

[5] The Queen v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269

[6] Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342