DPP v Islam [2019] VCC 217

3. You had been in the bank withdrawing money 15 minutes earlier and were unhappy with the service you had received. You poured petrol on the ground just outside and inside the front entrance of the bank. Using a lighter, you then ignited the petrol, which exploded into flames.
4. When you poured the petrol on the ground, some people who were near you immediately fled from the bank. There were some 39 people inside the bank when the petrol ignited. Four of the people inside the bank sustained serious injuries as a result of your act. This conduct is represented by Charges 2 to 5: causing serious injury recklessly.
5. Another 11 people inside the bank sustained injury as a result of your actions. This is represented by Charges 6 to 16: causing injury recklessly.
6. The other individuals present and affected gave context to the circumstances.
7. By way of background, you were born in Myanmar (formerly Burma) on

31 December 1994 and arrived on Christmas Island on 30 April 2013 at the age of 18. You had no family travelling with you and no family in Australia at the time. You were subsequently processed on-shore at the Wickham Point Immigration Detention Centre in the Northern Territory and the Scherger Immigration Detention Centre at Weipa in Queensland before being granted a bridging visa on 10 July 2013.

8. You moved to Victoria on 20 September 2013, assisted by the Australian Red Cross and, later, an organisation called Life Without Barriers.
9. From September 2016 you lived in a house in Springvale with a number of other men who had come to Australia from Burma. On 11 November 2016, you were granted a further bridging visa which was valid until 11 March 2017.
10. Shahur Shakur also came to Australia from Burma and knew you well. He came to Melbourne before you and you lived with him when you first came to Melbourne and at the time of the fire at the bank. Mr Shakur describes a decline in your presentation and behaviour over a period of time leading up to the offences, including aggressive behaviour. Mr Shakur and the others who lived with you had become concerned about your mental health and had considered evicting you from the house but had decided against this. Mr Shakur had never seen you take drugs or drink alcohol.
11. Another man who lived at the house, Soe Min Aung, who was commonly known by his Islamic name Feroz, had also noticed a physical and mental deterioration in you over the previous months. He describes you as erratic and withdrawn and that you spent most of your time sleeping. You were difficult to communicate with.
12. Another resident of the house, Joseph Joseph, describes an earlier occasion when you became angry at the bank when you couldn't get your Centrelink payment. You were saying that the bank had received money from the government but they did not give you the money. You were shouting when you spoke about this.
13. As to the circumstances of the offending, on the night before the fire you had asked to go to Chelsea Beach and Mr Shakur, Feroz and you and another friend had gone there for a few hours.
14. The following morning at around 9.30 am, you wanted Mr Shakur to take you to the bank. You said to him, "Let's go, let's go, it's serious bro." Mr Shakur drove to Springvale Road, arriving at approximately 10.17 am. He parked his car outside 242 Springvale Road. He obtained a short term parking ticket and left when he decided that you were not coming back.
15. You entered the Commonwealth Bank at approximately 10.18 am. In the bank, you lined up in a teller queue before being approached by the customer service manager Vanny Tiang at approximately 10.31 am. She offered assistance and you told her you were there to make a withdrawal. She took you to the iPad area of the bank to log on to internet banking. It became apparent that there was an issue with your card and so she told you that she would get you assistance straight away. You sat down on a seat and waited.
16. At approximately 10.42 am a bank employee, Kelvin Nguyen, spoke to you. Your ATM card needed to be activated and a new PIN set. Mr Nguyen assisted you with this.
17. At approximately 11.01 am, you went out of the bank to try to withdraw money from an ATM on the footpath just outside the bank. Your card would not work, so you went back into the bank and again spoke to Mr Nguyen.
18. At approximately 11.03 am, you and Mr Nguyen went outside to the ATM and you again tried to withdraw money from the ATM on the footpath outside the bank. Again, you were unsuccessful. You became angry and rude. You punched a wall and threw paper on the ground.
19. You re-entered the bank with Mr Nguyen. You waited while Mr Nguyen walked into the secure area of the bank to assist you. Mr Nguyen asked you how much money you wanted to withdraw and you replied, "All."
20. At approximately 11.11 am you signed a withdrawal slip and Mr Nguyen handed you $442.
21. You then left the bank and headed south along Springvale Road. At approximately 11.14 am, you walked back and stood on the footpath, directly outside the front entrance of the Commonwealth Bank for approximately one minute before walking off north along Springvale Road.
22. At approximately 11.17 am you walked passed a café at 186 Springvale Road. There, you picked up an empty 20-litre plastic container from the front of the café and then continued north along Springvale Road.
23. At approximately 11.21 am you arrived at the Caltex service station at

154 Springvale Road where you started filling the container with unleaded petrol. The console operator saw that you were using an inappropriate fuel container and manually stopped the bowser. You had poured 11.33 litres of petrol into the container. You paid cash for the petrol. You then walked south along Springvale Road carrying the container.

24. At approximately 11.29 am, you walked back into the Commonwealth Bank. As you entered the front entrance of the bank, you started pouring the petrol onto the ground. You firstly tipped petrol onto the tiled area at the front of the bank where the ATMs are located and then you walked inside the bank, tipping out more petrol onto the carpeted area past the second set of automated glass doors.
25. As you were pouring the petrol on the floor, some people had seen what you were doing and started running from the bank.
26. After you finished pouring the petrol onto the floor, you walked further into the bank. You then took out a cigarette lighter from the left pocket of your pants. You walked back to the pool of petrol on the carpet. You bent down and, using the cigarette lighter, ignited the petrol.
27. The petrol exploded into flames, setting you on fire and preventing staff and customers from leaving the bank. Some people took the risk and ran out of the bank in the midst of the fire. The bank started filling up quickly with heavy black smoke, making it extremely difficult to see. The inside of the bank was a scene of panic, confusion and danger.
28. The fuel container caught fire, causing you to drop it onto the floor. With your clothes on fire, you ran to the back of the bank and then circled back and ran to the front again. People in your path fled from you.
29. The bank's security door could only be opened with a key. Several customers tried to leave through this door but could not open it. Several other customers and bank employees sought refuge in the sales offices at the south and north sides of the bank.
30. Some people, fearing for their safety, ran through the fire to escape via the front entrance. These people were Choy Hok, Daryl Jackson, Srushti Ruparel and Tam Minh Tran. They all sustained burns to their hands and faces.
31. After a few minutes, emergency services arrived. At approximately 11.35 am, a Commonwealth Bank employee opened the security door and the rear fire exit. Several people left the building through this exit, including you.
32. Bank employees pointed you out to several bystanders as the person responsible for the fire. They apprehended you until police arrived shortly after.
33. Police arrested you and remained with you at the rear of the bank while you were treated at the scene by paramedics. People remained with you while you were transported to the Alfred Hospital.
34. On Wednesday 15 February 2016 at approximately 11.14 am, forensic physician Dr Angela Sungaila conducted a 'Fitness for Interview' assessment of you at Caulfield Hospital. Dr Sungaila, after consulting with other doctors at Caulfield Hospital, formed the opinion that you were fit for interview.
35. At approximately 9.50 am on Thursday 16 February, police went to Caulfield Hospital. You were transferred to the Spencer Street police complex for an interview.
36. During the interview, you said you had received your Centrelink payments the day before the fire at the bank. You said that usually at the bank you get your money straight away but on that day they made you sit and wait and everybody in the line was going fast. You said that they made you wait and wait and finally you got your money. Then you went and got the petrol. You said you were not normal at the time of the incident and that you had used 'ice' the night before.
37. You agreed that you had a problem with your new ATM card, which had not been activated, and the bank took a long time to serve you. You said you could not remember why you went to get petrol, but as you were walking to get the petrol you were angry. You found the container in the street. You said you bought $5 worth of petrol. You were asked why you lit the fire and you said you could not think of why you did it but you felt angry at the time. You said you threw the container and ran in panic after you lit the fire. You remembered that when you started pouring the petrol everybody ran away and that when you started making the fire nobody was around. You said that you tried to stop the fire because you did not want other people to get burnt from your clothes.

You said you did not know how many people were in the bank when you started the fire and that you did not know anything at that time because you were burning.

38. You said that you used the drug 'ice' by smoking. The night before you had used ice and then went to Chelsea Beach where you sat for a while, then you went home and went to sleep. You said that ice made your mind feel active and it made you feel good.
39. You said again that you were angry at the time you lit the fire.

40. As to those affected by your actions, first of all as to Charge 1 of arson: approximately 24 people who were present inside the bank are not the subject of particularised injury charges on this indictment. These people however also suffered physically, emotionally or both to some degree by the experience.

The greater detail of their personal experiences is set out in the prosecution opening and in some of the victim impact statements. These people also represent those endangered by your act of arson. In summary, they variously describe effects such as smoke inhalation, soot adherence to their clothes and body and consequent anxiety and distress.

41. As to the causing serious injury recklessly charges, as to Charge 2 of causing serious injury recklessly to Choy Hok: Choy Hok was transferred to the Alfred Hospital by ambulance and admitted. He sustained 10% total body surface area deep dermal and full thickness burns to face, neck, bilateral arms and hands. He required multiple operations in theatre for debridement and skin grafting. He was also treated for left corneal abrasion. He was transferred to Caulfield Rehabilitation on 12 December 2016 and discharged on 2 February 2017. He was seen in the Burns Outpatient Clinic on 3 January 2017 and his face wounds had healed well, the wounds to hands had healed well with small remaining raw areas to the right fingers and no signs of infection; he had a reduced range of movement in both hands. He was advised that he required ongoing input from a hand therapist three times a week for a three-month period and no further burns follow up was required unless scar contracture became problematic.
42. As to Charge 3 of causing serious injury recklessly to Daryl Jackson: Daryl Jackson was transferred to the Alfred Hospital by ambulance and admitted. He sustained partial thickness burns to his face and bilateral hands. These were debrided in theatre on 19 November 2016 and then managed with dressing and antibacterial ointment. He was discharged on 28 November 2016.

On 29 November 2016, he attended the Emergency Department for a review of his dressing. At the time his wounds were last seen they were noted to be healing. In January 2017, Daryl Jackson stated that he still has pains in his hands and suffers from severe anxiety when entering a Commonwealth Bank.

43. As to Charge 4 of causing serious injury recklessly to Minh Tran: Minh Tran was transferred to the Alfred Hospital by ambulance and admitted. He sustained 10% total body surface area partial thickness burns to face, bilateral and arms which were managed with dressing and antibacterial ointment. He was discharged on 26 November 2016. He was seen in the Burns Outpatient Clinic on 28 November 2016, 5 December 2016 and 16 January 2017. When last seen, he had a good range of movement in his fingers with some hypertrophy which will require burns garments. He was to be seen again in three months. It was recommended that he be followed up by the Ophthalmology Outpatient Clinic. He was seen in the Occupational Outpatient Clinic on 5 December 2016,

44. As to Charge 5 of causing serious injury recklessly to Srushti Ruparel: Srushti Ruparel was transferred to the Alfred Hospital by ambulance and admitted. She sustained 8% total body surface area partial thickness to her face and both hands and forearms. These required debridement in theatre on

19 November 2016 and then were managed with dressing and antibacterial ointment. She was discharged on 22 November 2016. She was seen in the Burns Outpatient Clinic on 24 November 2016, 28 November 2016, 5 December 2016 and 9 January 2017 with further follow-up appointment recommended in six months' time.

45. As to the causing injury recklessly charges:
    • (i) Charge 6 - Kelvin Nguyen was transferred to the Alfred Hospital by ambulance and admitted. He sustained partial thickness burns to his face and left hand. These required dressing and treatment with antibacterial ointment. He was discharged on 19 November 2016. He was last seen in the Burns Outpatient Clinic on 24 November 2016 where it was noted that he was well looking and he had a fingernail-sized superficial burn to left thumb, left temple burns healing well and superficial erythema (redness) to the dorsum left hand.
    • (ii) Charge 7 - Zacharias Tessema was taken to Monash Hospital. His oxygen saturation levels were 98%. Smoke was noted on both hands and feet and two small black spots approximately 1cm x 1cm were noted on the right forearm, suggesting superficial burns. Possible mild smoke inhalation was also observed. He was placed under observation and did not require any intervention.
    • (iii) Charge 8 - Lang Chhiv was admitted to Dandenong Hospital. She presented with soot on her face, hands and legs but no burns. She had an intermittent cough, a hoarse voice and a sore throat. Some wheezing had already been treated with salbutamol nebulisers. She was experiencing flashbacks and could smell the smoke and burning. Management consisted of salbutamol nebulisers, saline nebulisers, IV dexamethasone (an anti-inflammatory) and IV fluids. She was admitted overnight for observation and seen by psychiatric services, as well as being referred to a general practitioner for follow-up and to obtain a referral to a psychologist. On 24 November 2016, Ms Chhiv made a statement in which she stated that since the incident, she has a lot of spots on her lungs and has had to go back to hospital. She also stated that she felt tired and unwell since the incident and that, because of this incident and health problems, she could not go back to work.
    • (iv) Charge 9 - Song Hieng Iea was taken by ambulance to Dandenong Hospital and admitted. He was found to have soot on clothing and skin, a hoarse voice and blackened nostrils. The findings were consistent with smoke inhalation. He was examined by the ENT service and received saline nebulised, salbutamol nebulised and IV steroid with anti-emetic. Mr Iea was kept overnight for observation.
    • (v) Charge 10 - Phalla Kim was taken by ambulance to the Monash Medical Centre. She had an elevated heart rate initially of 119 but returned to normal within 30 minutes. Soot was evident on her hair, skin, clothing and around her nostrils and mouth. She had a superficial burn to her right foot, with a blister roughly the size of a 20-cent coin and surrounding reddening to the right medial heel. Her foot was cooled under running water before hydrogel and dressing were applied to the foot. She was seen by social work staff and given contacts for ongoing support for her emotional distress. She was observed for four hours in the Emergency Department, after which time she was discharged.
    • (vi) Charge 11 - Thi Van Phan was taken to a doctor in the Springvale area by his wife. He was advised to go directly to hospital and was driven to the Monash Medical Centre by his brother. Mr Phan was examined and found to have soot over his face, mouth, tongue and mildly burnt hair. His airway had no sign of burning and he had no difficulties breathing or swallowing. He was given pain relief. His burns were dressed and he was administered IV fluids. He also received a tetanus immunisation and was reviewed by a plastic surgery team, who found that surgery was not required. He received a follow-up plan in the clinic and was given ointment for his skin and face. The findings were consistent with superficial burns to the face, partial thickness burns to both arms and left leg, totalling approximately 7.5% of his body surface area.
    • (vii) Charge 12 - Thu Nga Vin was taken by ambulance to Dandenong Hospital. She was examined and found to have soot on her clothing and skin and a blackened tongue. She also had a minor wheeze. These findings were consistent with smoke inhalation. She was treated with intravenous steroid and placed under observation.
    • (viii) Charge 13 - Le Bac Vu drove himself to a local doctor before driving to the Monash Medical Centre. He was examined and found to have superficial burns with areas of erythema (redness) from left wrist to mid upper arm and left side of face. The burns were treated and hydrogel was applied. He was discharged with hydrogel that he continued to apply at home.
    • (ix) Charge 14 - Truc Thien Vuong went to her local doctor and was advised to go to hospital. She had very minor burns to her left hand and leg, as well as to hair and eyelashes.
    • (x) Charge 15 - Muoi Wong was taken by ambulance to Dandenong Hospital and remained overnight. She was examined and found to have soot on her clothing and skin, blackened nostrils and hypoxia (low oxygen in tissues). She had widespread wheezing and her oxygen saturation was 90%. Her treatment consisted of oxygen therapy, salbutamol nebulised and intravenous steroid. She was referred to the Ear, Nose And Throat service and admitted into intensive care.
    • (xi) Charge 16 - Maria Lim-Kounadis was treated at the Monash Medical Centre. She had minor soot around her nostrils, no soot or swelling in her mouth or throat, no difficulty swallowing or breathing, no thermal burns but a mild headache and minor smoke inhalation. She was subsequently diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, anxiety and depression, for which she is receiving ongoing counselling and treatment with medication.
46. Most of your actions, both at the bank and also when you left the bank before returning, were comprehensively captured on video by a number of different cameras. It constitutes dramatic and sickening viewing.
47. The total cost of the rebuild of the damaged bank was in excess of $2.6 million. That figure does not include loss of business, ad hoc ex gratia payments made by the bank to assist impacted customers and staff and any costs associated with the investigations into the incident or management insight required to respond to the incident and rebuild the branch.
48. Twelve victim impact statements were tendered on the plea and seven of those were read out by the prosecutor in court. They represent only in part the effects of your conduct on the approximately 39 people in the bank when the fire ignited.
49. Your crimes have had a serious and in some instances profound effect on persons who were there. Victims have spoken of their clothes melting and the smell of burning skin, of lives and quality of life ruined, of loss of pride and dignity through treatment, of shame at not being able to provide for others, of looking in a mirror and seeing a freak and seeing others in the community recoil at their appearance, of loss of confidence, insomnia, fear of leaving the home, physical incapacities, depression, anxiety, nightmares, suicidal ideation and heart palpitations, and increased blood pressure, hyper-vigilance, panic attacks through fear of the dark, recurrent rumination of the incident, adverse effects on relationships, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and loss of trust.
50. You were admitted to the Alfred Hospital after the offending and then admitted to Caulfield Rehabilitation Hospital on 9 February 2017. You were released on 1 March 2017 and then taken into custody. As at today's date, you have served 833 days' pre-sentence detention (not including today).
51. I now turn again to your personal circumstances. A comprehensive account of your background was tendered by your counsel on the plea and parts are also referred to in the prosecution opening. I have read and taken into account all that has been tendered and said on your behalf. A further summary of your circumstances is as follows.
52. As mentioned earlier, you were born on 31 December 1994. You are now 24 years old and you were aged 21 when the offending occurred in November 2016. You have no prior criminal history in Australia.
53. You had a disrupted childhood. You were born in Myanmar (Burma).

Your parents separated shortly after your birth and when you were four months old your mother left to live in Yangon and you were raised by your grandparents until you were five. You then moved to Yangon to be with your mother and her then partner. After some time, you returned to live with your grandparents. They died when you were about ten and then you continued to reside in the same town with a maternal aunt.

54. You described experiencing difficulties throughout your childhood given your ethnicity and Muslim religion in a region which was predominantly Buddhist. You recall an event from your childhood when you were attending a local mosque during a military raid and witnessed people being shot.
55. You completed Year 10 of school and fled to Thailand, then to Malaysia at age 15 in the context of serious political turmoil and refusal by the Burmese government to issue you with an identity card.
56. You committed burglary whilst destitute in Malaysia, were imprisoned for one and a half years and then were returned to Myanmar in early 2013.
57. A few months later, you fled again, first to Thailand and later to Indonesia and arrived by boat in Australian waters in April 2013. As previously mentioned, you moved to Victoria on a bridging visa in September 2013.
58. In Melbourne, you lived with Mr Shahur Shakur and his sister for about six months and then with a second Burmese family until about June 2016.

After June, you moved into another house which you shared with about seven other people. In April 2016 you had slept for a time under a bridge, even though you had a room for yourself with a Burmese family.

59. In the months leading to the incident, witnesses have described your behaviour as disturbing, indicating possible mental health issues. This was evidenced by you talking to yourself, believing that insects and snakes came out of your mouth and that you had trapped two ghosts in your house which you intended to eat.
60. When interviewed by police and asked your reason for lighting the fire, you expressed no reason other than you were angry by having to wait and that your thinking was not normal at the time because you had used a drug the night before and were not normal when the incident occurred.
61. It was not submitted on the plea that you had a long term drug problem, although you do admit having used a drug known as 'WY' in Myanmar. In your interview, you acknowledged using the drug 'ice' occasionally, usually only once a month or fortnight, sometimes more, depending on whether you had the money for it. You said you take it because it makes you feel like your mind is active and it makes you feel good.
62. Whilst there is evidence that you were acting erratically in the months before this incident, there was no evidence before me that you were suffering from a diagnosable mental illness at the time. Your observed behaviour may be considered in the context of occasional illicit drug use. This is not a mitigating factor.
63. The video footage reflects that you were engulfed in flames following the lighting of the petrol inside the bank. You sustained burns covering approximately 60 per cent of your body and a mixture of full and deep partial thickness.
64. The statement of Dr Heather Cleland attests to the multiple procedures, including skin grafting. Initially you were in the Intensive Care Unit but later transferred to the Burns Ward. You were in the Alfred Hospital under police guard from your admission on 18 November until 9 February 2017. You were then transferred to Caulfield Hospital until March 2017. You spent some five months in a hospital setting.

65. You have experienced great discomfort due to your injuries following your incarceration. Initially, you required daily dressing changes, however this has steadily improved. You instruct that you no longer experience pain due to your injuries. You will however remain permanently scarred over almost the entirety of your body.
66. Your time in custody has been an isolating experience given your infirmity and limited language skills.
67. Your offending represents serious offending and serious examples of each of the charges on the indictment. The bank video gives a clear representation of the horror you created. You appeared calm and detached as you entered the foyer and deposited the fuel. Some present observing your actions sensed trouble and began retreating hastily. One woman with a child in a pusher narrowly escaped the combustion as she raced past.
68. Explicit as the video is, it does not fully present the complete horror and terror that developed. You ignited the petrol and it immediately burst into a ball of flame. Black acrid smoke engulfed the area within seconds as those present panicked and ran in confusion and terror, choking and burning. The fire, set at the entrance, created a barrier to escape.
69. Some victims went to a security door and found it locked. Some were almost hysterical and banging on the door. People were screaming and yelling for help. Victims describe feeling trapped as darkness enveloped them and smoke burned their eyes.
70. In their police statements, a number of people said that they thought they were going to die. An eight-year-old was crying as she was being comforted, saying she was going to die and that she did not want to die.
71. Apart from the physical effects suffered from the burning and the smoke inhalation, it takes little imagination to appreciate the sustained psychological impact of such a terrifying experience.
72. In mitigation, I take into account the matters submitted by your counsel, and in particular:
    • your plea of guilty and the early time at which it was entered, both for its utilitarian value and as expression of some remorse;
    • your youthfulness, both at the time of the commission of the offence and at sentencing;
    • your difficult early life and dislocated later life bringing about your arrival in Australia;
    • that you have no family in Australia, speak little English and will be relatively isolated in custody;
    • the serious and protracted injuries you sustained by your own act - I accept that you were the most significantly burnt and have experienced great discomfort and your scarring will remain a continual reminder of your offending - this is a significant feature.
73. I also take into account the anxiety likely to affect you due to the uncertainty of your fate after release through likely deportation and possible statelessness.
74. Finally, I find it very difficult to make a clear assessment as to your prospects of rehabilitation. There appears no rational explanation for your bizarre and callous act. Whilst there is evidence that for some time prior to the incident you were observed by friends to be behaving strangely, there is no objective evidence of diagnosable mental illness. There is evidence of a recent history of some illicit drug use, however it is not established to have been chronic or operating on your mind at the time. You have no history of like or violent behaviour and whilst there is an acknowledgement of dishonesty in Malaysia - when you were destitute and for which you were imprisoned - you have not committed any offences in Australia since your arrival.

75. In the circumstances, my assessment of your prospects must be guarded and your reform will likely depend on the development of some insight and acceptance by you of the value in seeking some diagnosis of possible underlying conditions.
76. The basis purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are punishment, deterrence, being both specific to you and general in order to deter likeminded others, rehabilitation, denunciation by the court and protection of the community. In sentencing, I must have regard to a range of matters such as the seriousness of the offence, your culpability for it, your personal circumstances and those of any victim. I am required to balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interests of the community in seeking to ensure that, as far as possible, offenders are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.
77. In the present circumstances, the principles of denunciation by the court, punishment and deterrence must assume prominence and what may be allowed for youth will not be afforded the weight it otherwise might. I do accept however that the weight given to deterrence should be moderated because of your own severe injury.
78. I have been assisted in my analysis of appropriate sentence by the materials provided by the parties. I have also considered the further materials as to current sentencing practices by the courts as are available within the Judicial College Sentencing Manual. I have given these resources appropriate but not excessive weight.
79. On Charge 1 of arson, you are convicted and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment.
80. On each of Charges 2, 3, 4 and 5 of recklessly causing serious injury to Choy Hok, Daryl Jackson, Minh Tran and Srushti Ruparel, where each of the victims suffered serious burns to the face and other body parts, you are convicted and sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
81. On Charge 6 of recklessly causing injury to Kelvin Nguyen, who suffered partial thickness burns to his face and hand, you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
82. On each of Charges 7 to 16 inclusive of recklessly causing injury to Zacharias Tessema, Lang Chhiv, Song Hieng Iea, Phalla Kim, Thi Van Phan, Thu Nga Vinh, Le Bac Vu, Truc Thien Vuong, Muoi Wong and Maria Lim-Kounadis, each of whom suffered physical injuries such as soot attachment, smoke inhalation and superficial or minor burns, you are convicted and sentenced to

83. I take into account the fact that your entire offending, which occupied perhaps approximately six minutes, constitutes what the law describes as a single course of conduct and, in accordance with the principle of totality, should generally attract substantially concurrent sentences. However, I consider that the circumstances of your offending embrace the different interests by direct injury, both physical and psychological, to a wide range of victims and some cumulation is necessary to realistically reflect the gravity of the offending and appropriate totality.
84. Charge 1 is the base sentence.
85. I direct that 12 months of each of the sentences imposed on Charges 2 and 5 and 3 months of each of the sentences imposed on Charges 6, 9, 12 and 15 be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on Charge 1 and upon each other. The sentences are otherwise concurrent.
86. The total effective sentence is 11 years' imprisonment
87. I direct a minimum period of seven years to be served before eligibility for parole.
88. The sentence starts today.
89. Pursuant to s.18(4) of the Sentencing Act, I declare that the period of 833 days, not including today be reckoned as time already served under the sentence and I direct that the fact of this declaration and its details be noted in the records of the court.
90. Pursuant to s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act, but for your plea of guilty, the total effective sentence that would have been imposed over all charges is 15 years' imprisonment with a minimum of 11 years to be served before eligibility for parole.
91. At the plea hearing the Crown sought an order which was consented to for the taking of a forensic sample. I have made that order today for the reasons noted on the order, namely, the seriousness of the offending warrants the making of the order, the order is by consent and the granting of the order is in the public interest.
92. I need to inform you that if at the time of the request for the sample you do not consent to the taking of a mouth scraping under the supervision of an authorised member of the police force, then the sample to be taken will be a blood sample and police may use reasonable force to enable that forensic procedure to be conducted. Do you understand that, Mr Islam?
93. OFFENDER: (Through interpreter) Yes, Your Honour.
94. HIS HONOUR: At the plea hearing, the Crown also sought a disposal order in relation to the items seized by police to which you consented. I have made that order also today.
95. Are there any other matters from either counsel?
96. MR DOYLE: No, Your Honour.
97. MS BALLARD: No, Your Honour.