DPP v Hennessey [2025] VCC 916

1. Clearly, the offending for which you must now be sentenced is very serious and this is apparent when the charges are considered individually and when considered as a whole. You possessed a traffickable quantity of illegal firearms, two without serial numbers and one without a serial number that enabled it to be identified as stolen.
2. In addition, you possessed, for the purpose of sale, a considerable amount of both 1,4-Butanediol and methylamphetamine. With the methylamphetamine 147 grams. Although you are not to be dealt for an intention to traffick a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine this amount is significant in terms of a trafficking simpliciter.
3. Mr Hennessey, you had possession of stolen property, drugs, three firearms and ammunition. Your offending is aggravated because you were on bail pursuant to a deferral of sentence and you are a prohibited person in relation to firearms.
4. As the sole offender, you are solely responsible for the charges and as such on its face your moral culpability is high. You have relevant and extensive prior convictions which raises the need for specific deterrence.
5. I accept that your psychological profile, your onerous custodial circumstances and the application of the principle in Bugmy are all factors that mitigate your sentence and combine to temper your moral culpability.[1] However, they do not eradicate the need for the application of general deterrence, denunciation, just punishment and protection of the community, all of which remain important sentencing considerations.

1. You were born in 1989 in Rockhampton to your mother, Carrie and your father, Shane. Both your parents have Aboriginal heritage, your mother from the Durumbal mob in Queensland and your father from the Wiradjuri mob of New South Wales. Your aboriginality was unknown to you until adulthood due to the nature of your childhood.
2. Your mother and you moved to Victoria, away from your father when you were very young. She eventually re-partnered with Keith Hennessey. You have two younger sisters from that relationship, Cheyenne and Jessica. To your knowledge, Keith Hennessey worked at a fabric or textile business and you cannot recall your mother ever having paid employment.
3. Overall, your childhood and adolescence were characterised by constant instability and disruption. You experienced numerous occasions of abandonment, separation and reunification with your family and time spent in and out of respite and foster care. Your mother was physically and emotionally abusive towards you as she struggled with drug and mental health issues. Your stepfather would intervene during occasions of physical abuse to try and protect you, however you felt he was not deeply invested in your life.
4. You have an extensive childhood history of involvement with the Department of Human Services, 'DHHS', as it was then known, commencing when you were just four years old. You have been subject to numerous court orders including Interim Accommodation, Protection and Guardianship Orders. DHHS records indicate that you were placed on a Protection Order when you were eight years old, following substantiated allegations of abuse including strangulation, suffocation, drowning and substantial emotional trauma.
5. Several years later when you were about 11 years old, Child Protection were notified about concerns that your mother had abandoned you in foster care. Your mother again expressed difficulties caring for you and due to a history of harm to you in that context, it was decided that it was best for you to remain in foster care.
6. In the beginning of January 2002, you returned to the family home for several months until your mother was unable to cope and you were once again placed into respite and then foster care. By the end of 2002, your mother told DHHS that she wanted to relinquish guardianship of you as she was not well enough to manage you at home.
7. By 2004, when you were 15 years old, a plan was put in place for you to move to Rockhampton, Queensland to join your mother and siblings at her request. Your behaviour deteriorated in the care of other family members and once again your mother determined you would not be able to live with her at that time. You spent several months living between residential care and visiting your family in Rockhampton with the view of a transition back to the family home. This extreme instability evidently began to affect your mood and behaviour, and you frequently absconded from residential units, used drugs, and behaved aggressively towards staff.
8. In part due to the lack of suitable placements, you were once again placed in the care of your mother and stepfather. This situation lasted less than a month before you were asked to leave after you assaulted your stepfather and sister. You moved between several youth refuges in Rockhampton before running away to Victoria to live with friends. At a case planning meeting with DHHS at the end of that year, your mother indicated she no longer considered you to be part of the family and wanted nothing more to do with you.
9. From about July 2004, DHHS lost consistent contact with you. Eventually, they decided to allow the Protection Order in place to lapse shortly before you turned 16 as they considered (to quote the DHHS report that your counsel read to the court):

For the majority of the last 9 months Willem has been missing and been providing for himself. There has been limited information given to the Department about his current situation and there is no information to suggest that he is at significant risk of harm.

1. The reality was you were at significant risk of harm and you survived by moving around between the homes of friends, former carers and by living on the streets.
2. You have had some contact with your biological father, Shane Charles, who provided some support to you when you were using drugs and living on the streets in Rockhampton. Through this rekindled connection you also met your grandmother who was another rare familial source of love and care. Your troublesome behaviour ultimately made living with them unsustainable. You later discovered from DHHS documents that your mother had had an affair during her relationship with Mr Charles and she was therefore unsure if he was really your father. Despite this, you still consider Mr Charles as your biological father.
3. You have not had any contact with other members of your immediate family since you were about 20 years old.
4. During your time in the care of the State you were repeatedly abused by a foster father in Wangaratta. You tried to run away from this placement but you were always made to return. You were also abused by a man who picked you up whilst you were hitchhiking to Wangaratta when you were 12 or 13 years old. It was evident to Dr Brann, that these events were distressing and traumatic for you and that you felt shame and guilt that they had happened. I was told that you have made a successful compensation claim under the National Redress Scheme for the abuse you experienced whilst in foster care and you have now received payment.
5. Your difficult upbringing combined with poorly managed ADHD symptoms led to a fractured and incomplete education. You attended Wangaratta West Primary School from prep to Grade 6, Grade 6 being the last full year of schooling that you can recall completing. Though your teachers considered you to be capable, you struggled to concentrate and apply yourself in school. During primary school you were bullied, suspended frequently, and got into fights with other children. You completed only a couple of weeks of high school and spent the majority of the time riding around on your bike and smoking cannabis.
6. Your drug use and the unstable living situation have hampered you from gaining any significant employment besides a couple of brief periods as a sandblaster and a bakery apprentice. You have not been in paid employment since you were a teenager. When in the community you have survived financially as a recipient of Centrelink payments.
7. You have a long history of abusing drugs which likely originated from exposure at the hands of your mother. When you were 11 years old, your mother injected you with heroin in order to keep you quiet during a birthday party which made you feel really unwell. You first drank alcohol at age 10 but your dislike for the taste meant it did not become a problem for you. Before you became a teenager you were associating with other children who introduced you to more drugs and over the years you have used ice, cannabis, speed and ecstasy. You were first introduced to ice at age 14 and use of this drug came to dominate your time and energy when you were not in custody.
8. At the time of your offending before this court, you had relapsed into drug use. You had achieved a period of abstinence of seven years which was, for the most part, achieved whilst you were in custody. You remained abstinent for a period of time after your release and complied with and completed the short period of parole that was left after emergency management days had been applied to your sentence. That was in relation to the last sentence.
9. Drug addiction is not ordinarily treated by the courts as a mitigating factor, however, where drug addiction becomes enmeshed at a young age and the corrosive effects have continued to influence conduct well into adulthood drug taking is a factor that can be taken into account for a variety of sentencing purposes.
10. I have considered your particular circumstances, including the age and mechanism of your introduction to drug use, as part of your personal circumstances and it is my view that it provides the background against which your offending was committed. It is relevant to issues of rehabilitation and community protection and is something that will require concerted treatment if you are to achieve reform.[2]
11. You are currently prescribed methadone now whilst on remand. However, you have started to reduce this dose and may be considering injectable buprenorphine as this would not prohibit you from in-patient treatment in the future. This is a topic that I will return to shortly.
12. In terms of your own family, you have two children aged in their teens from a relationship which commenced when you were 16 and lasted approximately seven years. They live interstate and you do not currently have contact with them.
13. You were in a relationship with Leshay Morgan for several years and you have two young children with her. You recognise that your relationships with intimate partners and your children have consistently been damaged by your drug use and associated criminal behaviours.
14. At the time of your last plea hearing, you were engaged to Natalie and she has remained supportive of you during your time in custody, during these proceedings, attending most of the hearings in Bendigo or Melbourne in person or online. You had a close relationship with her young daughter with whom you had fostered a love and admiration of Aboriginal culture whilst you were at liberty. On deferral, Natalie became pregnant and gave birth to your son in May 2024. As I understand it you have not seen him in person which has been a source of angst for you.
15. Your relationship with Natalie has now disintegrated to the point that you do not have contact. You deposited your compensation into her bank account, a not insignificant sum, and you have concerns that Natalie may have spent your money or at least it will be difficult for you to recover. You described your compensation money as a poisoned chalice as it seems to have interfered with several of your relationships.
16. In 2021, for the purpose of your compensation claim, you were assessed in custody by Susan Brann and it was her opinion, at the time, you met the diagnostic criteria for ADHD, conduct disorder, substance use disorder, chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. She opined that the onset period for your ADHD, PTSD and conduct disorder were all when you were primary school age. Though you were prescribed medication for ADHD when you were a child you did not take it consistently. You told Dr Brann that the only mental health treatment you have received throughout your life has been in gaol and you were prescribed antidepressant medication and mood stabilisers for the first time at age 23 whilst in custody.
17. For the purposes of the last sentence you were assessed by a Forensicare clinician, Gregory Lane and he did that assessment on 2 August 2023. This was the first time you had been assessed by Forensicare. Mr Lane considered that you had insight into your mental health and you demonstrated an openness to seeking help. Your comments to him indicated a motivation to remain abstinent from illicit substances and it was his view that you had a thorough understanding of the negative effects that drugs have on all aspects of your life.
18. In the past while in the community, you have been prescribed the mood stabiliser, quetiapine and an anti-anxiolytic. You reported experiencing lower mood and anxiety during your first period of remand which was improved by working and taking your prescription for mirtazapine, an antidepressant. You acknowledged that ongoing mental health support and medication would be necessary to prevent reoffending and to allow you to move forward with your life in a positive way. Mr Lane's opinion was that at the time you had a mild mental health issue which would benefit from ongoing assessment and treatment and considered that you would benefit from ongoing support from a GP to assist you with medication and referrals for AOD assistance and a trauma informed culturally sensitive psychologist. An adult ADHD assessment may also be of benefit.

1. This was addressed on the last occasion and remains relevant, that is in relation to the application of Bugmy principles. Ms Walker submitted the principles of Bugmy clearly applied in your case and remain a significant mitigatory factor that I should take into account. In this regard she relied upon the DHHS closure summary dated 15 June 2005 and the psychiatric report of Dr Brann.[3]
2. In making an assessment of your moral culpability or degree of blameworthiness to be attached to you for your offending conduct, it is necessary to closely examine your personal circumstances and background and explore factors which may explain the offending conduct. To the extent that the offending conduct is due to factors beyond your control, the harshness of the moral judgment is likely to be moderated.[4]
3. An examination of your personal history reveals that you suffered significant childhood neglect and depravation as a result of the following factors. There was your surrender to DHHS by your mother. The repeated attempts and failure to reunify with your mother. Your early and repeated exposure to violence and drug use at the hands of your mother. Disrupted living situations. Abuses whilst in care. Lack of care and support. Being kicked out of home and abandoned by DHHS at the age 16, thereby being left to fend for yourself in circumstances where you living on the streets or couch surfing.
4. I accept that there is both a foundation and a nexus between your experience of significant childhood depravation and the current offending and in my view both limbs of Bugmy have application in your case.
5. Further, I consider the following observation of the High Court is relevant in your situation and that is:

The experience of growing up in an environment surrounded by alcohol abuse and violence may leave its mark on a person throughout life. Among other things a background of that kind may compromise the person's capacity to mature and learn from experience. It is a feature of the person's makeup and remains relevant to the determination of the appropriate sentence notwithstanding that the person has a long history of offending because the effects of profound childhood depravation do not diminish with the passage of time and repeated offending. It is right to speak of giving full weight to an offender's deprived background in every sentencing decision.[5]

1. Understanding your profoundly traumatic childhood experiences and consequent self-medication with illicit substances has helped to put context to your extensive and relevant prior history. Your earlier prior offending was characterised by primarily drug and dishonesty offending and in more recent times you engaged in armed robberies and serious firearm offences that have seen you incarcerated for lengthy periods of time.
2. As a consequence of my findings pursuant to the principles in Bugmy I do consider protection of the community to be an important sentencing consideration in your case.

1. Mr Hennessey, you again made the very difficult decision to participate in Koori Court. In actual fact it probably was not a hard decision for you but the difficulty was that you had already been to Koori Court and so you had to face the Elders again. You appeared at the sentencing conversation before Auntie Pam Pedersen and Uncle Dave Farrall at Melbourne County Court and that was on 16 June 2025. As I said, you had previously faced the Elders at Bendigo undertaking the sentencing conversation there. It is to your credit that you again faced your Elders.
2. You again participated fully in the sentencing conversation and to my observation you engaged respectfully and appropriately. You apologised to both the Elders and to your victims for your offending. You spoke of your struggles in custody, what led you to offend, your children and your family, your future and your artwork. Auntie Pam and Uncle Dave encouraged you to seek out services to help you in the future. They discussed with you services that may exist where you could go on parole.
3. In addition to your words spoken at the sentencing conversation, you also wrote a letter to the Court, which I read to Auntie Pam and Uncle Dave before the sentencing conversation.
4. In that letter you wrote to the court explaining why you offended and apologising for your behaviour. I accept that you are sorry for the way things have turned out. I take into account your participation in the sentencing conversation and I consider this to be a significant matter in mitigation in your case.[6]
5. After the sentencing conversation, Ms Chanel Kinniburgh who is the acting County Koori Court manager contacted the Ngwala Willumbong Aboriginal Corporation. Ngwala manage the referrals for the Yitjawudik and Galiamble residential rehabilitation services. The Aboriginal liaison officer, Dana McAleese, has been made aware of your desire to be assessed for these programs and has indicated that she will do all she can to make referrals. I understand that those referrals need to be done through STAR which is the substance treatment and recovery service. They are the people who will be able to assist you in referrals to these organisations. Can I encourage you as far as possible to persist with this but it is my understanding that this process could take some time
6. I accept as things currently stand it is your position that you are going to undertake those assessments and that you are really keen to explore those options for your eventual release on parole. One, to help you with your release on parole but two, to help you improve into the future.
7. Further, both Auntie Pam and Ms Kinniburgh have advocated on your behalf for you to receive a large canvas for your artwork and Ms McAleese confirmed that you were passionate about your culture and that you express yourself beautifully through your artwork. Ms McAleese also confirmed that you were doing well at MAP and that you have matured greatly by taking on some mentoring of other Aboriginal men in the unit and you are exceeding expectations.

1. You have now been in custody on this matter since 8 February 2024. It was not until 12 March 2024 that your bail was revoked. So you have 33 days pre-sentence detention that can be reckoned against this sentence.
2. You have experienced extremely punitive conditions in custody. Since your remand you have been incarcerated at MAP in 23 to 24 hour lockdown and your only reprieve from this arduous regime has been your involvement in painting a mural in the visitors centre.
3. You continue to have a significant injury to your leg and are continuing to battle the same issues you struck in the community with regard to pain management. It is clear from the affidavit material that was filed for the last matter that this has been very difficult for you to manage. I take into account that your experience in custody continues to be very difficult as a result of this injury.
4. Your experience on remand has been more onerous as a sentenced prisoner as a result of your status as a protection prisoner. Your health concerns and your worry about your future as a result of the lack of control you have over the significant amount of compensation you were paid out are all factors that have added to that burden. I accept that this situation is likely to continue for the majority, if not all, of the sentence that I impose.

1. In terms of other matters in mitigation, I accept your plea of guilty was entered at an early stage in the proceedings. Witnesses were cross-examined at committal with the result that several charges were withdrawn by the prosecution. Once such resolution was achieved you entered your pleas.
2. Further I accept that this is demonstrative of your remorse and your willingness to facilitate the course of justice. Importantly, it shows that you have accepted responsibility for your offending. There is also significant utilitarian benefit in your plea of guilty in that you have spared the court the cost and time of what would have been a lengthy trial and I have given you a significant sentencing discount for your plea of guilty.

1. I consider the relevant sentencing principles that must be applied in this case are general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment albeit that each of these principles should be somewhat moderated given my findings pursuant to Bugmy.[7]
2. Specific deterrence remains a relevant sentencing consideration given your prior history and protection of the community will also be achieved given the lengthy term of imprisonment and period of supervised release that I intend to provide.
3. The principles of proportionality and parsimony are also important considerations. They require me to make sure the punishment imposed fits the crime committed and that I do no more than is necessary to punish you for your offending. I have taken these principles into account in fixing the sentence I will now impose.
4. I take into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in s 5 of the Sentencing Act are relevant in your case.[8] In particular I have had regard to the sentencing landscape for the offending before me. Ultimately, the sentencing exercise requires that I balance all relevant factors and make a judgment as to the appropriate sentence in the circumstances of your particular case.
5. What I intend to do is impose individually appropriate sentences on the current charges taking into account the relevant sentencing principles and also the mitigatory factors applicable to your case.
6. In arriving at my orders for cumulation I have considered the principle of totality and further I have ensured that the new overall total effective sentence gives effect to the totality principle, taking into account the overall criminality of your offending and your circumstances.
7. Mr Hennessey, after consideration of all of the above factors I determine that the only sentence that can be imposed for the serious offending before the court is one of imprisonment. On 2 July 2024 I imposed a sentence of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 1 month and 386 days were reckoned as served by way of pre-sentence detention at that time. I will therefore be required to set a new single non-parole period.

1. On each of the charges that you face now you are convicted and you are sentenced as follows:
2. In relation to Charge 1, theft of motor vehicle, six months imprisonment.
3. In relation to Charge 2, possession of a traffickable quantity of firearms, three years imprisonment.
4. In relation to Charge 3, possession of a firearm with no serial number, nine months imprisonment.
5. In relation to Charge 4, handling stolen goods, nine months imprisonment.
6. In relation to Charge 5, trafficking in a drug of dependence, 20 months imprisonment.
7. In relation to Charge 6, trafficking in a drug of dependence, 9 months imprisonment.
8. In relation to Charge 7, possession of a drug of dependence, convicted and discharged.
9. In relation to the summary related offences, so that is Charges 8 and 30 of unlicensed driving, Charges 11 and 13 of fraudulent use of number plate and Charges 25 and 26 possess cartridge ammunition, I sentence you to an aggregate of 6 months' imprisonment.
10. The sentence on Charge 2 is the base sentence, that is three years. One month of the sentence on Charge 1 is cumulative. One month of the sentence on Charge 3 is cumulative. Four months of the sentence on Charge 5 is cumulative and one month of the sentence on Charge 6 is cumulative. This makes a total effective sentence of three years and seven months.
11. I order that 15 months of this sentence be cumulative upon the sentence you are now undergoing. I am making this order for cumulation. I am mindful of the time that you have already served and this results in a global total effective sentence of five years and three months.
12. I now turn to the issue of parole. The purpose of parole is to provide for mitigation of punishment in favour of rehabilitation through conditional release where appropriate. The non-parole period is the minimum time that I determine justice requires you must serve having regard to all of the circumstances.
13. Pursuant to s14(1) of the Sentencing Act I am required to set a new single non parole period in light of the global total effective sentence as between your previous sentence and my order for cumulation.[9] Your new overall non-parole period is two years and 10 months with the commencement date being 2 July 2024, the date of your previous sentence.
14. A new single non-parole period can be achieved either by backdating the new single non-parole period to commence at the date of the original sentence or by directing that it commences from today. I am mindful that the Court of Appeal has expressed a view that there should be uniformity of practice and that all new non-parole periods should be made to commence on the date on which they are fixed. However, given the amount of time you have already served under the original sentence and for clarity, I have backdated the single non-parole period to the date of your original sentence. In doing so I note that the Court of Appeal has endorsed either approach, noting the most vital concern is that the start date be expressly stated.[10]
15. So I am expressly stating that the start date of the new single non-parole period is 2 July 2024. That is, two years and 10 months which will run from that date.
16. It is my intention to add nine months to your earliest parole eligibility date and if my orders do not have this effect then the matter should return to me for any necessary corrections.
17. As I understand it, there is no need for me to make a s 18 declaration in relation to the period of 386 days as this has previously been made and remains effective.
18. I do however declare that you have served 33 days by way of pre-sentence detention that must be reckoned as time served against the sentence I have imposed today. So those 33 days will be deducted.
19. Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act but for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a term and this is global term, of seven years and six months with a new single non-parole period of four years and six months.[11]
20. I make the order for forfeiture which I believe is unopposed in the terms sought by the prosecution and I think those are the matters.
21. In relation to Charge 1, you are disqualified from obtaining a driver's licence for three months from today.
22. HER HONOUR: All right. Thanks, everyone.
23. OFFENDER: Thank you.
24. HER HONOUR: We'll adjourn.

[2] R v McKee & Brooks [2003] VSCA 16 at [21].

[4] R v Hermann [2021] VSCA 160 at [14].

[5] Bugmy v The Queen 249 CLR 571 at [43]-[44].

[6] Honeysett v The Queen [2018] VSCA 214.

[8] Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 5.

[9] Ibid s 14(1).

[10] R v Rich (No 2) (2002) 4 VR 155 at [9] & [106]; R v Brown [2009] VSCA 23 [44]; R v Stares [2002] VSCA 70; (2002) 4 VR 314 [31] & [33].

[11] Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 6AAA.