Obtaining financial advantage by deception - Employee fraud - Breach of trust - Gambling addiction - No prior convictions - Imprisonment with CCO
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
Obtaining financial advantage by deception - Employee fraud - Breach of trust - Gambling addiction - No prior convictions - Imprisonment with CCO
Judgment (6 paragraphs)
[1]
Sentence: Aggregate term of three months' imprisonment, to be served immediately, followed by a community correction order for two and a half years (18 months' supervision; 100 hours unpaid community work; psychological treatment condition); and a compensation order in the sum of $320,269.97.
[2]
Stephanie Leddin, you pleaded guilty to an indictment of 5 charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception. The maximum penalty for each of these charges is 10 years' imprisonment. You have no criminal history.
A summary of prosecution opening was filed and read to the court by Ms Suhren, who appeared on behalf of the prosecution in this matter. I adopt that summary as part of these reasons for sentence. I will not repeat it here in detail; however, a summary of your offending is as follows.
The offending occurred between 25 March 2021 and 19 January 2024. The victim in this matter is your former employer, an advertising agency formerly known as GEN C and then later known as Sunday Gravy. The cofounders and directors of Sunday Gravy are Jack White and Anthony White. You were employed at the agency from around 2020 and remained employed there until November 2023 and then continued to work there as a freelancer until February 2024. You worked in the role of producer, managing the production of advertisements being made by the agency. Your role involved managing the budget of shoots and the budget of the productions and campaigns that Sunday Gravy did. Your role saw you involved with the provision of invoices, bank account details, and receipts.
It appears that after you left the agency, an audit was conducted in 2024, where a number of things were identified, including extra expenses being placed on invoices and the doctoring of receipts so that the amount paid was higher than what was actually charged by the supplier. Account numbers were altered so that funds were placed in your account. The methods employed by you included invoicing for additional expenses that were never incurred, altering supplier account numbers so that funds were directed into your account, intentionally overpaying production companies with the refunds deposited into your bank account, and doctoring receipts to include expenses for hotels and equipment that were in fact never used.
Charge 1 involves 11 payments totalling just over $20,000. Charge 2 involves 31 refunds paid totalling just over $95,000. Charge 3 involves 18 payments totalling just over $107,000. Charge 4 involves six payments totalling $32,800. Charge 5 involved 11 payments totalling $69,400.
The discrepancies were initially detected by a freelance producer who was hired to take over your role in March 2024. After these were detected, Mr White telephoned you and had a conversation regarding these matters. It was stated in the summary of prosecution opening that you did not say much in that phone call; however, you then sent a follow-up text message making substantial admissions to the conduct and expressing shame and regret for that conduct. You said you felt ashamed as a person, a mother and as a friend, and that you will live with the regret forever.
As I follow it, between April and October 2024, you communicated with lawyers representing Sunday Gravy in relation to a plan to commence repayment of the monies owed. I was informed that a payment plan was attempted, and as I understand it, you initially paid $1,000; however, that payment plan did not continue, and Jack White and Anthony White went to the police in May 2024.
You were interviewed by police in Queensland on 23 February 2025. You told the police that you had been mentally unwell with a gambling addiction. You were charged on that day.
I received two victim impact statements from Jack White and Anthony White. From those statements, I infer that the advertising agency Sunday Gravy is a relatively small business, and it was significantly impacted by this offending, and by the sum of money that was obtained from it. The victim impact statements illustrate the manner in which offending of this nature can have a significant and far-reaching impact. The two founders of this business are integrally and personally connected to the business and to the finances of the agency. This offending had a significant financial impact on the business and on each of the two brothers individually who are its cofounders. In addition to this financial impact, each of the two victim impact statements highlights the emotional and psychological toll that this offending has had on them, on their families, and on other employees of the business. I have considered each of these statements carefully, and I take the victim impact into account.
Mr Ian Hill KC, together with Mr Barker, appeared on your behalf at the plea hearing. They filed a written outline of plea submissions dated 13 February 2026, which were supplemented by oral submissions in court. I also received a psychological report from clinical psychologist Ms Kim Wood, a bundle of five personal references, a self-exclusion document from BetStop, and a blood test result indicating that you are currently pregnant.
The following matters, in combination, were relied upon in mitigation. You are currently 35 years old. You were aged between 30 and 33 at the time of the offending. You currently reside in Queensland, in Mermaid Beach, with your partner Jake Barrett, and the two of you have a now four-year-old son. You are pregnant with your second child.
You were born in Melbourne, you have two older siblings, your mother suffered from multiple recurrences of breast cancer throughout your life, and ultimately, your mother passed away when you were around 21 years old. You were very close to your mother, and her passing was very painful to you. It seems that you have not fully processed the grief from your mother's passing.
Your partner Jake is a carpenter by trade, but now works as a project manager for a team of plumbers. I am informed that his job is approximately one hour away from home, requiring travel to and from work, and he is away from home from around 5:30 am to 5 pm on weekdays. Your four-year-old son Jack has suffered from stomach and gut issues for around two years, which are ongoing and presently not resolved. You are pregnant with a second child due in September this year, and you are nearing the end of your first trimester with upcoming tests. I was informed that this pregnancy was unplanned, and that you have had a previous miscarriage when pregnant with twins in 2020, and as a result of that miscarriage, you have suffered a higher level of stress and anxiety in the following pregnancies.
You completed primary school and high school in Melbourne; you did well at school and passed with high marks. I was informed that you initially wanted to study nursing or midwifery, but you were talked into doing a Bachelor of Arts in film and television at the University of Melbourne. You have a long employment history that goes back to part-time work in your teenage years. At around 21 years old, you started working in production assistant jobs. You moved to Queensland for a time and then back to Victoria in 2020. In 2021, you started working for Sunday Gravy, where the offending occurred. You left this employment before the offending was detected because you moved back to Queensland in 2024. I was informed that you worked for a company in Queensland, but then lost that job once the media reported on this offending. You have not worked or obtained Centrelink since that time; however, you have been volunteering weekly with an organisation called Orange Sky to assist homeless people with laundry and food, amongst other things. You have enjoyed this work and wish to explore a career in this area.
Mr Hill informed me that you had developed an online gambling addiction, gaming in online casinos. This was done at night and in secret from your partner. Mr Hill submitted that your partner, Jake, was initially angry when these matters were uncovered, but you have worked through it, and he is now supportive of you. The psychological report of Ms Kim Wood explores a number of matters related to gambling. Ms Wood states that it appears that you could be diagnosed with a gambling disorder at the time of the offences, and that you meet the criteria in a number of ways that are outlined in the report. Ms Wood states that you are currently in early remission, which means that after full criteria for gambling disorder were previously met, none of the criteria for gambling disorder has been met for at least three months but for less than 12 months. Sustained remission would be after no gambling for a period of 12 months, which timeframe you are currently nearing.
Ms Wood states in her report that the progression of a gambling disorder can be more rapid in females than in males and may increase during periods of stress or depression. She notes that you were experiencing financial stress at the time of the offending. Ms Wood also states that, in your current presentation, you meet the criteria for social anxiety disorder, including symptoms such as fear of, anxiety about, or avoidance of social situations, particularly those involving unfamiliar people. She further notes that you meet these criteria in a number of ways. You have attended 10 sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy focused on managing mood and anxiety symptoms.
Ms Wood states that childhood adversity is a risk factor for social anxiety. Your mother had been very ill since you were very young and her illness recurred at times throughout your childhood. I was informed that it appeared that she had beaten it multiple times only for it to return years later with her passing away around the time of your 21st birthday. Ms Wood comments that this appears to have led to a trauma response in you.
In terms of positives moving forward, Ms Wood states that there is a significant degree of remorse; that a payment plan was attempted to be negotiated prior to court proceedings, indicating an effort to take responsibility for your behaviour; and that the secrecy and shame surrounding the behaviour have been challenged. She notes that you have strong family support, have made multiple attempts to set limits around your gambling, and have a young child whom you are motivated to parent. She also observes that you have demonstrated an extended period of remission from gambling behaviour and currently report no desire to gamble. Further, you have engaged productively in therapy, addressing the motivations behind your behaviour, its consequences, and more constructive alternatives. Ms Wood states that you appear to recognise the negative consequences of maintaining old patterns and assesses the current risk of future theft to fund gambling as low.
I also received a bundle of personal references, written by your partner, your brother, and your sister, and others who have known you well for a long time. They speak very much as one voice of you as being a kind, caring, supportive and compassionate person, and that this conduct is very much out of character for you.
Under the heading of hardship, the following submissions were made. You have a now four-year-old son, and you are pregnant with your second child, due in September 2026. I was informed that if imprisoned, your son will remain with his father, that being your partner Jake, and your father will relocate to Queensland to live with them to look after your son. It was acknowledged by Mr Hill that this circumstance, although it will be very difficult, is not exceptional. There will be hardship for your son in being away from his mother, particularly given his current health issues. There will also no doubt be hardship upon your partner and your father to accommodate this circumstance, and again it was not contended that this amounts to an exceptional circumstance.
What the Court can and must take into account, however, is the effect of this hardship on you and the increased burden of imprisonment it will create. First, while not strictly hardship to another, you will enter prison approximately 10 weeks pregnant and will experience imprisonment during your pregnancy. This will be an added source of stress and anxiety, increasing the burden of imprisonment.
Second, you will be separated from your four-year-old son and will be unable to parent him during this time. This will cause anguish for you. There will also be an additional financial impact in adapting to this change, it seems to me either through the cost of childcare or your partner working less during this time. You will no doubt suffer additional sense of shame and guilt for having brought this about. Mr Hill submitted that these matters create additional hardship for you from the experience of imprisonment, which will be more burdensome due to these matters.
You have indicated a willingness to pay compensation. I am informed that you have repaid $4,250, which, although only a small portion of the total amount obtained, demonstrates a genuine preparedness to make reparation. I have also been informed of the possibility that you may be able to borrow money from family members to make further repayment, although at this stage that remains, in my view, only a possibility.
Mr Hill also relied upon the period of delay from the time of the offending, through reporting to the police and the commencement of proceedings, to the date of finalisation. He relied on both the fact that these matters have been hanging over your head, causing ongoing anxiety about the outcome, and on the fact that during this period you have sought treatment, addressed your gambling addiction, and worked on the underlying causes of the offending, thereby demonstrating both actual rehabilitation and prospects for rehabilitation.
Mr Hill conceded that a term of imprisonment must be imposed in this case, given the seriousness of the offending. He submitted that, in all the circumstances, and by reference to the mitigating factors, and in particular your personal circumstances, a term of imprisonment combined with a community correction order ('CCO') is open and appropriate in this case. He submitted that a term of imprisonment towards the shorter end of the range, together with a lengthy CCO that allows you to be reunited with your family and provides some support and supervision for your continued rehabilitation, is in the community's best interest.
Ms Suhren, who appeared on behalf of the prosecution in this matter, filed written submissions which were also supplemented by oral submissions in court. The prosecution largely accepted the matters put in mitigation on your behalf; however, the prosecution position was that a term of imprisonment is warranted because of the seriousness of the offending and because of the need for general deterrence and denunciation in respect to offending of this kind. This submission was clarified further in court by Ms Suhren, who submitted that the prosecution position is that a term of imprisonment involving a head sentence and non-parole period is warranted, for the following reasons.
The total monies appropriated were approximately $324,518. The offending was protracted, spanning the period from 25 March 2021 to 19 January 2024, and involved a degree of sophistication, using various methods to obtain the monies. It was committed in the course of your professional employment with the victim business, Sunday Gravy, where you were entrusted with managing budgets and issuing invoices. The prosecution submitted that the offending should be characterised as a mid‑range example of obtaining property by deception, and that your culpability was high, given that the conduct was deliberate, sustained over a lengthy period, and involved multiple methods of deception. The prosecution further submitted that the existence of a gambling addiction does not diminish your culpability. The victim impact was significant, with the victim impact statements describing the serious breach of trust involved, the financial strain caused, and the resulting instability to the business. While the prosecution accepted that there were matters available in mitigation, including delay, hardship, the absence of prior convictions, previous good character, and prospects of rehabilitation, it was submitted that such matters assume less prominence in offences of this kind. Greater weight, the prosecution said, must be given to denunciation and general deterrence, which in the circumstances could only be adequately reflected by the imposition of a term of imprisonment, in the order of a head sentence with a non‑parole period.
I must make an assessment of the objective gravity of this offending and of your moral culpability for it. It is clear that the offending must be regarded as serious. For the reasons already referred to by reference to the prosecution submissions, it involved a significant amount of money, multiple acts of ongoing misconduct, and occurred over a lengthy period of just under three years. It involved a degree of sophistication through the use of various methods to obtain the money, and required thought, planning, preparation and sustained follow‑through. The offending was committed in the course of your professional work, in a role that involved responsibility for managing budgets and issuing invoices and thus involved a level of trust. The victim impact was significant. The victim was a relatively small business, where the financial impact appears to have been sheeted back fairly directly to the two cofounders, and the victim impact statements clearly outline both the financial harm and the emotional and psychological toll caused to those individuals. Your moral culpability for this offending must be regarded as high. You offended alone, in secret, and in a persistent manner over a significant period of time.
Offending of this kind is often difficult to detect and is frequently committed by people who, by virtue of the role or position they occupy, are otherwise of previous good character and have no criminal history. For these reasons, prominence must be given to the sentencing objectives of denunciation and general deterrence. In plain terms, the sentence imposed must reflect the seriousness of the offending and send a clear message, both to you and to the community generally, that those who choose to engage in this type of conduct must expect to receive stern punishment. That is the means by which the court seeks to deter offending through sentencing.
There are a number of other matters that I must take into account in determining the appropriate sentence in this case. You have no prior criminal history, and notwithstanding the comments above, that remains a relevant consideration in your sentencing. You pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, without any challenge to the charges or allegations. You admitted the offending and acknowledged its impact immediately, or at least very soon after being confronted by the victim. These matters reflect significant shame and guilt on your part, and I am prepared to accept that you are genuinely remorseful. Your plea of guilty facilitated the course of justice and demonstrated a willingness to take responsibility for your conduct. These matters also bear positively upon your prospects of rehabilitation.
I accept that you likely had a gambling addiction at the time, and that this was a motivating factor for the offending. In this regard, I note the caveats that your psychologist, Ms Kim Wood, appropriately makes about such a clinical diagnosis and its relationship to the court proceedings. Gambling is not to be treated as a mitigating feature; it does not lessen your moral culpability for the offending. It does, however, provide some context for the offending, and I accept that the appropriation of this money was not done out of greed or for personal enrichment. It is also relevant to your prospects of rehabilitation. Based on the material contained in the psychological report, including your engagement with therapy, the matters referred to in the personal references, your own conduct in response to these allegations, and your early plea of guilty, I am prepared to regard your prospects of rehabilitation as being at least very good, if not excellent. Having said that, as is very often the case, rehabilitation will be largely in your hands, and it also seems to me that a gambling addiction, as a motivating factor for offending, has the potential to re‑emerge at any time.
I do accept as a very significant part of your personal circumstances the fact that you are the mother to a four-year-old son and you are currently pregnant with your second child. These are matters that do not bear an easy or straightforward relationship to the sentencing exercise. The law says that I cannot consider hardship to another person unless such hardship is determined to be exceptional, and that was not advanced in this case. However, I can take into account the impact that these circumstances will have on your experience of custody if I consider that they will make your experience of imprisonment more burdensome than it would otherwise be.
In this case, I do consider these to be very significant matters. As I have already referred to, I was informed that you experienced a miscarriage while pregnant with twins in 2020. That was your first pregnancy and has caused you to suffer higher stress and anxiety in the following pregnancies. I accept that the early stages of a pregnancy are a vulnerable and precarious time. There are risks associated with any pregnancy, particularly around this time, perhaps particularly in your case. I accept that this is a time of high stress and anxiety for you. This will impact your experience of custody, and I accept that it will make it more burdensome for you. Although not advanced specifically at the plea hearing, I think it is also reasonable to infer that as the pregnancy progresses, and as the birth of the child approaches, there are other matters potentially of a physical, medical, emotional or psychological nature that may arise over this time.
As outlined by Mr Hill, and in the written submissions, I accept that there are other matters that will impact your experience of custody. You will be separated from your four‑year‑old son. There will be an increased burden on your father and your partner, as well as an increased financial burden. I accept that these matters will weigh heavily upon you and are likely to carry a sense of shame and guilt that you have brought this situation about through your conduct.
In my view, all of these matters highlight the need for individualised sentencing. I must sentence you for your offending conduct, taking into account the seriousness of the offending and your culpability for it, as well as all of your personal circumstances. One of the matters I am required to take into account in any sentencing exercise is current sentencing practices. I was provided with some assistance by both parties by reference to comparable cases, as a means of seeking to determine a range representing current sentencing practices. I note, however, as has often been stated, the limited role of comparable cases in that task. While current sentencing practices are one of the matters I must take into account, I consider that there are a number of very particular circumstances in this case which emphasise the need for individualised sentencing.
You have no prior convictions, you pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, after making substantial admissions to the victim and acknowledging the seriousness of the offending. I accept that you have shown remorse. The personal references tendered on your behalf demonstrate that there is more to you than this offending. You are described as a kind, generous, selfless sister and friend whom many people turn to for help.
There has been a delay in the finalisation of this matter in court. It has hung over your head, causing stress and anxiety about the final outcome. You have also sought treatment during this time and worked towards rehabilitation.
You have expressed a willingness to pay compensation and made some efforts towards this.
I accept that prison will be burdensome for you, more so because of your circumstances, than it would otherwise be. Any period of time in prison will be a burden for you, and I think it will have a significant impact upon you.
I must endeavour to structure a sentence that takes all of these matters into account, that is, all of the matters personal to you, into account, but also seeks to reflect the seriousness of the offending, and express appropriate denunciation and general deterrence.
In considering these matters, I have re-read the decision of the Court of Appeal in the guideline judgement of Boulton.[1] The principles discussed there are often cited by reference, but it is worth being reminded of the discussion and the rationale behind the guideline judgment. I will not repeat here the matters discussed by the court in that judgment; however, I have had close regard to the matters discussed at paragraphs 85-155 of the judgment.
I must assess the objective nature and gravity of the offending, and your moral culpability for it, and then consider whether the offending is so serious that nothing short of a sentence wholly comprised of an immediate term of imprisonment will suffice to satisfy the requirements of just punishment and, I infer, denunciation and general and specific deterrence; or whether a CCO, either alone or in combination with a term of imprisonment, would satisfy the sentencing objectives. I must also consider the sentencing objectives that are sought to be achieved through this sentence and the different weight that must be attached to those objectives.
In re‑reading Boulton[2] and considering these matters, I am reminded of the clear way in which the Court of Appeal described the potential for a properly structured CCO to achieve different sentencing purposes. In particular, the Court emphasised that a CCO should not be regarded as a light or soft option. A properly structured CCO can include elements of punishment, deterrence and denunciation. The Court of Appeal also considered the scope of offences which, upon careful consideration, may be appropriate for the imposition of a CCO, either alone or in combination with a period of imprisonment. I am also reminded of the discussion in Boulton[3] concerning the disadvantages and detrimental impacts of imprisonment as a sentencing option, and the advantages, in appropriate cases, of allowing an offender to serve their sentence, or part of it, in the community.
After careful consideration of all the circumstances of this case, I have come to the view that the seriousness of the offending is such that a period of imprisonment must be imposed. In my view, anything less would fail to achieve the necessary objectives of punishment, denunciation and general deterrence, and also a measure of specific deterrence. However, I am also of the view that, in all the circumstances, and your particular circumstances, it is appropriate to seek to achieve these objectives by the imposition of a shorter term of imprisonment, in combination with a CCO.
As I have already stated, I am of the view that imprisonment will be harsh for you, and I am prepared to take the view that the necessary components of punishment, denunciation and deterrence, can be achieved in this case through a period of imprisonment towards the lower end of the scale, together with a lengthy period on a CCO. This option also has the advantage of allowing the sentence to give some weight to your prospects of rehabilitation, and to seek to achieve protection of the community through your reintegration into it.
The CCO will still have conditions attached to it, and I intend to import some of the punishment into the CCO through the conditions that I intend to attach to it. This course will also have the benefit of providing for a period of time where you will be supervised in the community, and your continued rehabilitation will be supported. This will be in your interest, and also, in my view, in the broader interest of the community.
I am also fortified in this approach by the fact that a CCO means that this is not necessarily the end of the matter. The CCO will run for its duration, commencing at the end of the period of imprisonment. If there were to be any breach of a condition of the order, or any re-offending, then you could be charged with the offence of contravening the CCO, and you would be brought back before me, where you could fall to be re-sentenced for this original offending.
I have considered the question of whether I should impose individual sentences for each of the charges; however, given the nature of the charges and of the offending and given that I will be imposing a combination sentence, I am of the view that an aggregate sentence is appropriate.
I ordered that you be assessed for your suitability for a CCO. I have received a report from that assessment, and I have read that report. I will not repeat its contents here, suffice to say that I have considered the matters contained in it and the recommendations, and the basis for those recommendations.
In all the circumstances, Mr Leddin, you will be sentenced as follows:
[3]
(a) On Charges 1-5, you will be sentenced to an aggregate term of three months' imprisonment.
(b) That will be together with a CCO for a period of two and a half years.
(c) I will order that you will be supervised for 18 months of that period of the order.
(d) There will be a condition that you perform 100 hours of unpaid community work. That number of hours I have reduced somewhat because of your personal circumstances.
(e) I will also order that you must attend for psychological treatment as directed.
(f) I will order that pursuant to s48CA[4] that all of the hours successfully completed in rehabilitation may count towards the hours of unpaid community work condition.
(g) The CCO will commence on a date three months from today's date.
[4]
I note the matters stated towards the end of page two of the CCO assessment report about the transfer of a CCO. If that is the intended course, then I suggest that that course be commenced immediately, and I will note on the order that if it is sought for you to transfer the CCO to Queensland in order to return there after the completion of the imprisonment portion of the sentence, that all reasonable steps be taken to allow for your immediate return to Queensland upon release from prison.
Ms Leddin, I have announced the sentence and its effect. In practical terms, you will serve a period of three months' imprisonment. That period will commence today and will run for three months. At the end of that period, you will be released from prison, and a CCO will commence. As I have explained, the order will run for two and a half years. You will be supervised for one and a half years of that period. You will be required to perform 100 hours of unpaid community work and to attend for psychological treatment as directed.
Now, in broad terms, you must comply with those conditions of the order, and secondly, you must not commit any further offence punishable by imprisonment. If you were to breach the order in either of those two ways, you could be brought back before me, where you would fall to be re-sentenced for the original charges.
Now I can only place you on an order of that kind if you agree to being placed on that order. Do you agree to be placed on that order?
OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Now I will take the verbal consent as the consent to the order. The usual course is that a printed document is prepared and signed by Ms Leddin and me formally expressing that consent, but I think in the circumstances I am prepared to take the verbal consent as the formal consent to the order. Are you content with that, Mr Hill?
MR HILL: Yes, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, yes. All right, just one moment. Now the compensation order is sought for the sum of $320,269.97, and that is by consent, and that order will be made.
I am required to make a 6AAA[5] declaration in this matter, which is a statement of what sentence I would have imposed had you not pleaded guilty, but been found guilty of these charges. It does often seem to me that it is difficult to make a meaningful assessment of that matter, but for the purpose of complying with that provision, I will declare that had you not pleaded guilty but been found guilty, I would have sentenced you to a term of nine months' imprisonment together with the same CCO.
Are there any other matters that need to be considered or dealt with?
MR HILL: No, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Thank you to both counsel for the submissions made in this matter.