DPP v Guerra [2026] VCC 335

I started getting concerned at some stage the gates going to open so I made a phone call to Lee because I was down there by myself. It was Sunday night, there was no one else around and ... I thought it would be a good idea that if whoever was out the front, once they came in, it would be good to have like a mate with me, two you know, something, so it just would make - it would me feel a lot better.

1. The two women remained on the outside of the gate but left close to 12.30 am. Less than a minute later, the Toyota Hilux with you and another male inside returned and parked momentarily in front of the gate before driving forward into the metal gate and dislodging it (Charge 2 - Criminal Damage). You got out of the vehicle and walked through the gap in the gate. The other person remained in the car.
2. You approached Mr Cousins. He heard you yell 'oi Desmond' and turned around to face you. Mr Cousins yelled 'who's that', to which you replied 'You know who it is'. He recognised you. Mr Cousins gave evidence that:

straight away. It was Cody's voice... I could hear it. It was distinctive...I just turned around and here he was walking from Clayton Road direction towards me ... walking down [the] middle of [the] driveway ...... he was in fluoro, High vis. I couldn't miss him.

1. Mr Cousins was questioned further about whether he recognised you. He said:

Without yeah without a doubt. ... When I met him just prior to that, a few weeks or whatever he was 20ish, little sort of bloke... not hard to see that it was him, young bloke, young kid.

1. You walked closer and closer to him with your hand in your jumper making a gesture. You walked straight up to Mr Cousins 's face and asked 'who's around' and 'are there any cameras here?' You then revealed a firearm. Mr Cousins was still holding the baseball bat and in fear swung it at you 'missed by a hair'
2. You ran and he yelled out to you 'You want to do a gun fight? Fucking guns, what the fuck's wrong with you?' he took cover behind a fuse box. He estimated you were about five car widths away.
3. At that point you yelled out 'No [Desmond], ... don't shoot don't shoot'.
4. All of a sudden he saw muzzle flash. You then yelled out 'Oh no you've got me. You've got me.' Those were statements intended to deceive anyone who heard the gun shot or who saw the footage, and to imply that Mr Cousins had in fact fired a shot at you.
5. You discharged the firearm in his vicinity (Charge 1: Prohibited person use firearm). He described hearing the bang and seeing the flare. Both were obvious on the various footage shown at the trial.
6. At the time of the discharge Mr Cousins was proximate to you, positioned behind the fuse box.
7. You ran from the scene, got into the Hilux and drove away.
8. At the time of the discharge of the firearm, you did not hold a firearm's licence and you were a prohibited person[2] on account of your prior criminal history and the fact you were on bail.
9. Earlier in the night Mr Cousins had organised for his ex-girlfriend and close friend Nicole Baker[3] to come over.
10. She was on her way when she received a phone call from him. She said he:

Was panicked ... asking me if ... I had a car ... at the factories ... he asked if it was open and if my keys were anywhere about... I believe [the] batteries on his mum's car was ... flat or something, and he wanted to get out there because he'd been shot at.

1. Mr Cousins told Ms Baker not to come to the factory. He said he had been shot. Ms Baker said 'He told me it was Cody'.
2. Mr Cousins also told Ms Baker 'That there were girls ... at the gates ... and not to [come] ... for [her] own safety.'
3. She was in an Uber and got dropped off at a nearby BP service station.
4. Mr Cousins called Mr Prentice three or four times to tell him what had happened. He was still with Mr Krishnan and they arrived at the factory. In one of the phone calls Mr Cousins told Mr Prentice 'You wouldn't believe it. Cody come and fired a gun at me'. He also said '... he can't believe it. ... I can't believe this is happening.' Mr Prentice said he thought Mr Cousins was in shock.
5. Mr Cousins also called Mr Hooman Afshar, the manager of the factory compound, to tell him that 'someone had fired at him, at the complex'.
6. Immediately after, Mr Prentice and Mr Krishnan left the factory complex, and pulled into the BP service station in Clayton North. It was the same station as Nicole Baker had been dropped off at. Also present were the two women who had been at the factory gates. One was your heavily pregnant partner, and the other was a woman later identified as a Ms Manning-Meadows.
7. An argument ensued between the two women and Mr Prentice and Mr Krishnan wherein one of the women shouted 'You're going to get shot' and 'I'll fucking shoot you right here under the cameras, I don't care.' As this was occurring, Mr Cousins arrived in his white van but seeing the women, he drove away, accidentally clipping one of their cars.
8. Ms Baker asked the BP service assistant to call police. Police arrived and spoke to Ms Graham and Ms Manning-Meadows.
9. Later that morning Mr Cousins received a call from Ms Manning-Meadows but refused to engage with her. She and Ms Graham had been involved in calls relating to the recovery of the scooter.
10. On 18 December 2023 you attended the Springvale police station by appointment, you were arrested and made a no comment Record of Interview. You were charged on that day and remanded. The following day you were bailed. On 22 April 2025 you were arrested and remanded on further offences alleged to have been committed between 6 March and 10 April 2025. An application to revoke your bail on this matter was granted on 12 June 2025, and your trial commenced on 23 July 2025.

1. Mr Cousins provided a victim impact statement detailing the profoundly detrimental impact your offending has had on life. He has asked for it not be read out and I will not recite its contents but I do take it into account. The offending against him has negatively affected his living arrangements and his employment. It has left him isolated and damaged his reputation. Themes of anxiety, terror and resulting hypervigilance are apparent.
2. Ms Nicole Baker also provided an articulate victim impact statement. She has asked that I do not read it out and as such, I will not recite its contents. Needless to say she too has suffered, watching the significant impact on her close friend.

1. Any offence involving a firearm is a serious offence. Possession of a firearm where that is for the purpose of a criminal act is viewed very seriously in sentencing.[4] Possession creates an obvious risk of causing serious injury or death. Here, the offence is one of using a firearm which of course increases the seriousness of that risk.
2. The community does not tolerate people carrying or using guns. They do not tolerate people doing so to take revenge or to settle a score with another person. The sentence I impose must generally deter others from committing similar offences, in particular from the high-risk act of discharging a firearm in the close presence of another person.
3. The sentence I impose must denounce the behaviour on behalf of the community and it must seek to achieve community protection by stopping other young men from acting in this way.
4. The maximum penalty for that offence is 10 years' imprisonment. The maximum penalty for criminal damage is 10 years' imprisonment.
5. In assessing the objective gravity of your offending I note the following features which elevate its seriousness.
6. First, you are a prohibited person on account of your prior criminal history. That is an element of the offence and not an aggravating feature. It is Parliament's intention that certain people must be prohibited from possessing firearms on account of their poor record and as such must be exposed to a higher penalty.
7. Second, this was a premeditated incident. You went to Mr Cousins' premises in the company of others and for the sole purpose of scaring him off pursuing the return of the e-scooter.
8. You were the person in the wrong in relation to the e-scooter. You had taken it on the promise that you would give it back or would pay for it. You did neither. I do not accept that Mr Cousins was the aggressor or that he was in the wrong for making attempts to contact you. I listened to and observed him give his evidence over a period of days. In my view, he was quite entitled to pursue contact with you in an effort to recover that valuable item. He did so, aware that it was not his and that he had been entrusted to sell it. He did so without threatening you or causing you any harm. His frustration at your lack of response and your avoidance of him, which ultimately resulted in him breaking a camera at your partner's front door in no way justified your retaliation.
9. Third, you attended at premises which you knew were his residence. You had been inside that factory and had opportunity to observe that is was effectively where he was living. He was entitled to feel safe there.
10. Fourth, you attended in the middle of the night when other people were not present and therefore when he was alone and vulnerable. The factory footage bears that out.
11. Fifth, you attended in company with others who were there to support you and drive you away.
12. Sixth, once inside, you walked right up to him and vigorously pursued him. I have seen the footage. His comments to the effect 'You want to gun fight? What's wrong with you?' are his attempt to get you to see sense and to stop. He was forced to take cover. Nonetheless you shot in his vicinity and when he was only a few car widths away. I repeat the comments of the Court of Appeal (Kyrou and Osborn JJA) in Cooper v The Queen[5] to the effect that although you did not shoot at him, the risk of a bullet ricocheting off the many objects in the factory area was real. It is extremely lucky for him and for you that you did not injure him or worse.
13. Seventh, your offending was brazen. You walked in, not only visible, but wearing a high vis vest.
14. In my view and for those reasons it is a serious example of this offence.
15. In relation to Charge 2 of criminal damage, you and your co-offender - who you have chosen not to name - drove at the gates of the factory compound for the purpose of your gaining entry, with the firearm, so you could pursue Mr Cousins. it is a serious offence for that reason.
16. Mr Afshar gave evidence at the trial regarding the expense of fixing those gates. No doubt it was a great inconvenience. The dislodged gate exposed many factories and equipment in the compound. In addition to those matters you were on bail at the time of this offending, which further aggravates the situation.

1. In your case along with a sentence which generally deters others, specific deterrence also plays a role as you are someone with a prior criminal history which is extensive, despite your young age.
2. Your prior history is largely in the Children's Court where you first received a period of probation in 2018 for a raft of drug, driving and dishonesty offences as well as assault in company. You breached Probation which was extended.
3. In 2019 you received a youth supervision order for offences including reckless conduct endangering serious injury, dangerous driving while pursued by police, and weapons, drugs and driving offences. You breached that order which was reimposed.
4. In 2020 you received Probation again for a consolidation of drug, driving and dishonestly offences. You breached again but the order was confirmed. You reoffended, again committing an offence of reckless conduct endangering serious injury, dishonesty, criminal damage, failing to stop a vehicle on police direction, possessing GHB and committing offences on bail. You were again released to a youth supervision order which you breached.
5. A similar picture emerged in 2021 but included an unlawful assault and burglary. You were again released to supervision.
6. In 2022 you committed drug, dishonesty, burglary and driving offences and were placed on probation.
7. In May 2024 you were dealt with for the first time in the Magistrates' Court for another raft of offending and received an adjourned undertaking. This offending in November 2023 breaches that undertaking.

1. You pleaded not guilty to this offending and opted to run a trial which is your right.
2. The fact you ran a trial does not aggravate the offending or your personal circumstances, however, it deprives you of any benefit which flows from a guilty plea.[6]
3. Mr Cousins was required to give evidence at a committal and at the jury trial. He was cross-examined, which was clearly distressing after an already traumatic experience. That does not aggravate your offending but is the reality for a victim when you have not accepted responsibility.

1. In understanding your personal background I have been assisted by Counsel, and previous Counsel, in written and oral submissions, I have been assisted by a neuropsychological report dated 28 October 2025 authored by Senior Clinical Neuropsychologist Dr Sami Yamin, an extended pre-sentence report dated 20 January 2026 authored by Patricia Palmos, and a Disability Overview Report dated 19 December 2025 authored by Disability Justice Coordinator, Forensic Disability Program, Statewide Disability and Housing Operations, Chloe Osborn.
2. Your personal history is one where you were exposed to criminal activity early in your life. Your father was an illicit drug user and perpetrator of family violence towards your mother. He was imprisoned when you were young. You told Ms Palmos 'I didn't really have a dad.'
3. You have four brothers and three sisters, you are the second youngest. One or more of your older brothers have been involved in criminal behaviour. You told Ms Palmos that you watched them go in and out of gaol and by Year 3 you were making your own lunches and catching two buses on your own to go to school.
4. You recall police attending your house and your brothers being arrested.
5. You and your siblings were subject to Child Protection intervention from 2001. Reports from the Children's Court confirm you were in need of protection from physical and psychological harm from your parents in relation to their mental health, family violence, criminal activity, exposure to substance use, unknown adults frequenting the home, and school refusal issues. You were also subject to a multiple and complex needs care plan managed through the DFA in relation to your siblings and families entrenched within the criminal justice system.
6. As a result of your family's reputation, you were bullied at school and ultimately stopped attending high school. You were later enrolled in Gateways which was a school for young people who had disengaged from or been excluded by other education providers.
7. You struggled academically.
8. You left home at 15 or 16 and moved in with your first partner. She was 23.
9. You had begun using drugs at age 14, using cannabis. You have used many other drugs since, but more recently and until your remand you were using 3 to 4 points of methamphetamine close to every day.
10. You have tried various detoxes, but it is clear from your offending history that you relapse to drug use quickly.
11. Your Counsel submitted and I have no difficulty accepting that the principles enunciated by the High Court in Bugmy v The Queen[7] are enlivened on account of your history. That is, your early exposure to family violence, instability, and neglect has left a mark on you and has played a significant role in the path your life has taken.
12. The consequence of such a finding is that your subjective culpability cannot be equated with a person who committed the same offences but had the advantage of a normal, stable and regular home environment.[8]
13. I accept that that is a mitigating factor which reduces your moral culpability to an extent.[9] Further, in your case, I take into account those principles viewed through the additional prism of your mild intellectual disability. I undertake that consideration with the comments of the Court of Appeal in Eser v The Queen[10] in mind.
14. According to Dr Yamin you have had numerous psychological and similar assessments through your life. In 2013 on neuropsychological testing your full scale IQ was assessed as 75. In 2019, three months after a serious car accident it was assessed as at 50. According to Dr Yamin, your full scale IQ is currently 69. Dr Yamin states:

On the whole Mr Guerra has a severe cognitive impairment with reduced intellectual function, memory and learning and executive function. His performance is consistent with his previous DSM-V diagnosis of an intellectual disability of mild severity and the reported functional difficulty that he continues to experience. Individuals with his level of function will have difficulties in reasoning, problem solving, planning, abstract thinking, judgment, learning from instruction and experience, and practical understanding. Further, [he] ... [describes] deficits in areas of more complex adaptive function[ing] ...

In addition, [your] deficits ... are possibly due to an acquired brain injury of mild severity, secondary to the motor vehicle accident and cognitive deficits from drug use.

1. Those findings reflect those of Ms Gina Cidoni who assessed you in 2019.
2. In 2019 you were also assessed by the Forensic Disability Statewide Access from Forensic Disability Services. It was determined that your adaptive functioning skills were in the extremely low range which means you need significant support to maintain your health and well-being and to assist in daily living tasks. Those findings are consistent with the comments of your partner who reports that your disability affects every aspect of your life. She says 'Cody struggles every single day with things many people take for granted.' In relation to the impact of your intellectual disability and cognitive deficits as they relate to your offending, Dr Yasmin expands to say 'The deficits outlined represent an immaturity in his thinking and therefore would have influenced Mr Guerra's behaviour by impairing his ability to exercise appropriate judgment and to make clear and rational and even age-appropriate choices. The results of the assessment also indicate that he is likely to have been disinhibited at the time the offences were committed.'
3. As I understand that last comment, it relates to the fact you were significantly affected by illicit drugs at the time of your offending. That is apparent from your self‑report during the extended pre-sentence report.
4. The 2020 Plan of Services Report authored by disability justice coordinator, Ms Janelle Devine, found that when you are substance affected you neglect yourself. She says 'He does not maintain his ... over all well-being.' You self‑reported previous incidents where you had been sectioned under the Mental Health Act after attempting to commit suicide by hanging.
5. A Statement of Intellectual Disability was issued to you pursuant to the Disability Act 2006 by the then Department of Health and Human Services on 23 March 2020. You are in receipt of a disability support pension.
6. You have an NDIS package which provides you with access to a range of supports. There were difficulties with your previous provider however, in mid-2025 you changed to Hope Circle for management of your NDIS package. Although they are unable to work with you in custody, they have visited you, provided support to your partner, and have been present during these proceedings. The letter authored by Ashwin Joshni of Hope Circle states:

We recognise the complexity of Cody's situation and the importance of specialised services. As a provider experienced in supporting individuals with similar disabilities, we will engage experienced allied health professionals - to conduct assessments and offer tailored recommendations.

1. In addition to your intellectual disability, you have a subarachnoid cyst on the left side of your brain which causes seizures.
2. As a result of your intellectual disability, your Counsel submits that the principles outlined in Verdins[11], and more pertinent, elaborated on in Leeder v the Queen[12], and Muldrock v the Queen[13] are applicable here. That is, the impact of your intellectual disability on your mental functioning at the time of your offending and in the lead up to it, is such that I cannot take the same approach to your moral culpability, or to deterrence both general and specific. I cannot treat you the same as a person without your impairment. I must moderate those considerations to a degree.
3. I accept that is the case. having said that, they are not eliminated. Further, a finding of such impairment may mean, as I find it does here, that community protection has a real role to play in sentence. That is particularly so when your mental state was very seriously affected by your ongoing drug use.
4. Nonetheless, I take those principles into account.
5. I also take into account that serving time in custody will be more onerous for you on account of your intellectual disability and given your past history of depression and suicidal ideation, there is a real risk your mental health will deteriorate.
6. Having said that, and to your credit, you report that your current period in custody, your first lengthy term in an adult setting, has been a positive for you in that you are motivated to change your life. You recognise, so you say, you are wasting your life.
7. Your motivation in large part comes from the fact that you have a partner and three young children waiting for you. They are aged three, one and three and a half months. You also have a stepson who is seven.
8. Your partner writes of her difficulties in managing without you, and of your hands on role with all four children when you are in the community.
9. The existence of professional intervention via your NDIS package is a real positive in its capacity to assist you to rehabilitate from drug use. The existence of your partner and children are motivating factors for you.
10. In all the circumstances your prospects of rehabilitation nonetheless are difficult to assess. In my view they are guarded at this point.

1. Your age is a significant factor in sentencing you. You were 19 when you committed these offences and you turned 22 last month. Despite the usual punishment for an offence like this, the consideration in the circumstances of a youthful offender are different.
2. Higher courts have long recognised that youthful offenders are more prone to ill‑considered or rash decisions and that they may lack a degree of insight, judgment and self-control that is possessed by an adult. Courts recognise the potential for youthful offenders to be redeemed and rehabilitated and that potential exists because they are typically still in a state of mental and emotional development and may be open to influences designed to positively affect their behaviour.
3. It is for this potential that it has been stated that the rehabilitation of young offenders is one of the greatest objectives of the criminal law.
4. It is largely the result of those two features in mitigation that your Counsel submits that despite the seriousness of this offending, I should impose a term of imprisonment to be followed by a community correction order, that is as a result of your age and your mental impairment.
5. The Prosecution for similar reasons agree that such a disposition is within range.
6. What that means is that I may impose up to 12 months' imprisonment from today, in addition to the pre-sentence detention you have served and to then order your release to a CCO.
7. There are advantages in taking that approach. First, and appropriately the seriousness of the offending will be reflected in a term of imprisonment. No other sentence would suit the gravity of firing a gun in the vicinity of another person as an act of revenge or intimidation.
8. Second, I may order up to 12 months more of imprisonment from today.
9. Third, you will have a definite release date and will not be required to apply for parole. I expect the Department of Justice will formulate a transition plan for you in conjunction with Disability Justice and your NDIS provider.
10. Fourth, I can determine the conditions to which you will be released. They will include supervision, along with therapeutic intervention, compliance with a Justice Plan, and programs aimed at education and employment. In addition, I propose to judicial monitor you.
11. In determining the appropriate length of the term of imprisonment I have been mindful of your mental impairment, your age, and the impact of your background and upbringing on your experience in custody.
12. In determining the appropriateness of the community correction order I have also been mindful of the Court of Appeal decision in Boulton v The Queen.[14]

1. Finally, in considering those matters I have taken into account current sentencing practices. Finding similar cases has proven difficult.
2. Firearm offences can be committed in a wide variety of circumstances and are often accompanied by other, even more serious offences. The offence of using a firearm as a prohibited person is not commonly a matter which comes to trial in this Court as the head charge. I have given some consideration to sentences for the charge of discharging a firearm with reckless disregard for the safety of another although I am very conscious that the maximum term for that offence is 15 years' imprisonment. The higher penalty for that offence reflects the potentially lethal consequences of firearm use, and particularly the dangers posed by the firing or carrying of a loaded firearm. Those considerations are however apposite here.
3. In looking at other cases in any event, there are always similarities and differences between offending and offender. Ultimately, I am required to impose a just sentence and that is what I have endeavoured to do.
4. Mr Guerra, on both charges at the trial, that is on Charge 1 of being a prohibited person using a firearm, and on Charge 2 of criminal damage, I will impose an aggregate sentence, so that is one sentence to reflect that series of events and offending.
5. The aggregate sentence on those two charges will be one of 18 months' imprisonment.
6. That term will be followed by a community correction order of 18 months. I ask you to listen to the conditions of that order, because I cannot impose it without your agreement. The conditions are that you:

a) Will be under supervision > > b) Undertake assessment and treatment for drug abuse > > c) Undertake assessment and treatment in relation to your mental health > > d) Undertake assessment and treatment for your medical health, that includes if directed by Corrections Victoria, to attend to any other treatment and rehabilitation including an assessment in relation to a potential Acquired Brain Injury. > > e) Comply with a Justice Plan > > f) Undertake an offending behaviour program as directed by Corrections Victoria > > g) Undertake Programs aimed at your education and employment as directed by Corrections Victoria > > h) In addition, I propose to judicial monitor you, which means that you will return to me and I will hear about your progress. I will set a date in just a moment.

7. Before I can impose that order, Mr Guerra, which will commence on your release from imprisonment, I need you to understand that if you breach that order you would be brought back to me and you would be liable to be re-sentenced on this offending, that is the offending against Mr Cousins. Do you understand that?
8. OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
9. HER HONOUR: And you would be brought back to me if you breach it either by any further offending, or by failing to do the conditions that Corrections direct you. Do you understand that?
10. OFFENDER: Yeah, yes Your Honour.
11. HER HONOUR: Do you agree to comply with those conditions I have set out?
12. OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
13. HER HONOUR: All right. So that is the community correction order.
14. On the charge of committing an indictable offence while on bail, you are convicted and sentenced to seven days' imprisonment, that will be concurrent.
15. I declare that you have already served 266 days of pre-sentence detention and that that period should be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
16. In terms of judicial monitoring I will just seek some assistance from Counsel. The 18 months minus 266 days, if someone can assist with determining when that means Mr Guerra is likely to be released.
17. I am required to make the 6AAA on the summary offence. If not for the plea of guilty in relation to that offence, I would have imposed a community correction order. Just let me have a look at this.
18. MS JONES: Your Honour, just in terms of that date calculation, so by my calculations the 18-month sentence from today's date will take us through to 3 September 2027, and then subtracting the 266 days PSD, takes us to 11 December this year.
19. HER HONOUR: Yes, all right.
20. MR LEWIS: I had close to that as well, Your Honour, I had 9 December, but I have calculated it slightly differently, being 18 months equals 547 days, and then subtracting 266 days from that, which equals 281 days and 281 days from today takes us to 9 December. So I think it depends on what, how you constitute a month, because it gets a little bit complicated with months versus days, but - - -
21. HER HONOUR: That's all right, I just wanted a rough estimate - - -
22. MR LEWIS: Yes.
23. HER HONOUR: - - - so that I can set a judicial monitoring date that is going to take that into account. So the date I set in fact it will be a year from today, so 3 March 2027 at 9.30 am.
24. Are there any other matters?
25. MR LEWIS: No.
26. MS JONES: Yes, Your Honour. If I may raise matters in respect of the use of a pseudonym. Unfortunately, we have been unable to speak with Mr Cousins today to confirm his instructions however, I am confident based on a number of conferences I have had with him in the past, that he would be very grateful if he could only be referred to in this proceeding by the use of a pseudonym.
27. HER HONOUR: Yes.
28. MS JONES: I am conscious there are media outlets that are online at present. I am aware that he has some real concerns about being identified publicly. To that end if I could also note, Your Honour referred to the contents of Mr Cousins' victim impact statement in Your Honour's remarks.
29. HER HONOUR: Yes.
30. MS JONES: It took some time for us to confirm his instructions, but I have a note that at the plea hearing in November, he did seek for that statement not to be read aloud, so if I may also note for the benefit of the media online at present, that I understand based on his instructions previously that he would not wish for the contents of his statement to be referred to in any publications.
31. HER HONOUR: Thank you. My note in relation to that, Ms Jones, was that that was not yet confirmed, but I am wrong about that I will remove that also from any published version of the sentence.
32. MS JONES: Thank you very much, Your Honour, we were grateful (indistinct). I absolutely acknowledge that at the time that those documents were filed we didn't have final instructions in respect of that.
33. HER HONOUR: Yes.
34. MS JONES: It was a matter that I had to confirm on the day of the plea hearing.
35. HER HONOUR: Yes.
36. MS JONES: Understandably it has been a matter of concern and apprehension for Mr Cousins in terms of how his views are represented in the context of this hearing, but I just raise that for the benefit of the media in attendance - - -
37. HER HONOUR: Yes, thank you - - -
38. MS JONES: - - - that he does not wish to be named and he would not wish for any portion of his victim impact statement to be quoted in any publications.
39. HER HONOUR: Yes.
40. MS JONES: Further to that, just in respect of the media application that we have been advised of today.
41. HER HONOUR: Yes.
42. MS JONES: I am reminded that the CCTV is CCTV from Mr Cousins' premises, his face is very visible in the CCTV and in reflecting on that, the Crown's position is to oppose the release of that CCTV, as to my mind it is consistent with previous indications he has given about a wish to remain anonymous in the proceeding, to the extent that that is possible.
43. HER HONOUR: All right. I am very conscious that there is another matter somewhat connected to this, where others have already been sentenced. I am not sure whether that has been published. Do you know, Ms Jones?
44. MS JONES: I am afraid I don't, Your Honour.
45. HER HONOUR: I might make some enquiries in relation to that and perhaps if you are happy, I will convey this discussion today, that is that the approach I will be taking on request is that Mr Cousins will not be named in my sentencing remarks and perhaps that similar approach might be taken in that matter.
46. MS JONES: Yes.
47. HER HONOUR: Given the seriousness of that other matter, as well as the seriousness of this matter, for the reasons that you have outlined in relation to Mr Cousins' concerns, which are no doubt very real concerns, I will not release the footage that was tendered at the trial.
48. MS JONES: Thank you, Your Honour.
49. HER HONOUR: Thank you.
50. MS JONES: We will do our best to convey that to Mr Cousins.
51. HER HONOUR: All right, thank you.
52. Are there any other matters?
53. MR LEWIS: None from my end, Your Honour.
54. MS JONES: No, Your Honour.
55. HER HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Lewis and Ms Jones. Thank you, Ms Osborne and Ms Joshni for being present on the link.
56. Mr Guerra, I hope that you have some communication with Hope Circle before you are released and with Corrections about what is going to happen on your release, so that you come out very ready to take on those steps of rehabilitation, so that your life does not just keep going on this cycle, and so that you do not put other people at risk.
57. OFFENDER: Yeah.
58. HER HONOUR: Ms Jones, thank you for your assistance during the course of the trial and the plea in this matter, thank you.

[2] Firearms Act 1996 (Vic) s 3.

[4] Berichon v The Queen [2013] VSCA 319.

[5] [2020] VSCA 288.

[6] Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; (2001) 209 CLR 1, and R v Harris [1961] VicRp 36; [1961] VR 236 and repeated only in the last couple of weeks by the Court of Appeal in the case of Berry v The King [2024] VSCA 274.

[8] DPP v Drake [2019] VSCA 293 quoted in Jawarhiri v The Queen [2021] VSCA 287

[10] [2021] VSCA 287.

[11] R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102.

[12] [2010] VSCA 98.

[13] [2011] HCA 39.

[14] [2014] VSCA 342.