DPP v Memedoski & Anor [2025] VCC 1412

Mr Wilson won $11,500 while playing the pokies on his phone, withdrew $6,500 from the winnings and continued to gamble with the rest of the money. 3. At dawn, Mr Wilson drove you, Mr Vuwai, back to his address, arriving at about

7 am. During the trip you asked if you could borrow $300 from his winnings so you could pay back a debt. Mr Wilson declined, saying the money had not cleared his account. 4. The following morning Mr Wilson woke at 10 am and noticed you, Mr Vuwai, still at his address. You again asked to borrow $300, he again refused and you got angry. 5. Mr Wilson walked down the hallway with you, Mr Vuwai, yelling 'where the fuck are you going?' You continued to abuse him, saying that he was belittling you, as he walked back into the house to get his car keys. He left the address and called you, Mr Memedoski, asking if you could help to settle Mr Vuwai down. 6. Mr Wilson parked his car in Zest Lane, Dorreen and waited some 20 minutes for the pair of you to arrive in Mr Memedoski's car. He got into the car with you and the three of you drove around Doreen having a conversation. During the trip you, Mr Vuwai, told Mr Wilson that he owed you $2,000 for making you angry and you would be keeping his car until the debt was paid. 7. You, Mr Memedoski, parked opposite Mr Wilson's car. Mr Vuwai had told you that Mr Wilson had called you a dog. You, Mr Memedoski, told Mr Wilson that he now owed Mr Vuwai $6000 and the pair of you took Mr Wilson's black Ford Falcon. 8. Mr Wilson called a friend who knew you both and asked for help getting his vehicle back. 9. At about 9 pm the following evening, being 26 November 2023, you, Mr Vuwai, called Mr Wilson and said you would not meet up with him but would drop the car off and send him the address. He received a message stating the car was in Currajong Street, Thomastown and he went to that location and retrieved the vehicle. 10. Between 12.32 am and 2.21 pm on 27 November, a lengthy series of text messages were exchanged between Mr Wilson and you, Mr Vuwai. It would seem that Mr Wilson had enlisted the help of others, possibly outlaw motorcycle club members, to approach you at home and get you to return the car. 11. Later that evening, at around 11 pm, the pair of you approached Mr Wilson's address and entered, making your way to Mr Wilson's bedroom. You,

Mr Memedoski, entered the bedroom and removed a face mask before saying to Mr Wilson, 'shut the fuck up, you thought I wasn't coming back for you'. 12. You, Mr Vuwai, removed your face mask before entering the bedroom carrying a baton which you used to hit Mr Wilson. He fell to the ground and you continued to hit him with the baton while you, Mr Memedoski, began to kick him. 13. You, Mr Memedoski, told Wilson to get into the ensuite and directed him to get his phone. You directed him to transfer $500 payments to Mr Vuwai until there was no money left in his account. He made six $500 transfers to an account in the name of Mr Ratu Antonio Napolione Lealea, which is another name used by you, Mr Vuwai, and one $339 transfer to an account in the name of S. Memedoski, a total of $3,339 which is the subject of the armed robbery. 14. You, Mr Memedoski, made Mr Wilson write down all his account passwords and told him he had lost all his money and that he was going to lose his car too. You directed Mr Wilson to take off all his clothing as you, Mr Vuwai, entered the ensuite and resumed hitting Mr Wilson with the baton and kicking him. A perfume bottle was thrown at Mr Wilson's head by you, Mr Memedoski. 15. You, Mr Vuwai, then produced a knife and slashed at Mr Wilson, causing a 10 cm laceration to his left thigh which is the subject of the recklessly cause injury charge. The pair of you demanded jewellery, which Mr Wilson said he did not have, and put a number of items into two bags. 16. You, Mr Memedoski, directed Mr Wilson to get into the shower. The two of you left the property in Mr Wilson's black Ford Falcon. 17. Mr Wilson went to a friend's house and was then transported to hospital by ambulance. On 29 November he made a statement to police outlining the events of the previous few days. 18. The Ford Falcon was recovered, bearing stolen registration plates. Police executed a search warrant at your house, Mr Memedoski, and located items including white Tommy Hilfiger Slides belonging to Wilson. 19. You, Mr Memedoski, were interviewed and stated that:

(a) you met up with Mr Vuwai in Thomastown on the night of the armed robbery;

(b) Mr Vuwai owed you money;

(c) the two of you made a plan for Mr Vuwai to get the money he owed you;

(d) you knew Mr Wilson and had met through a mutual friend;

(e) you had not seen Mr Wilson since October 2023; and

(f) the Tommy Hilfiger slides were, 'the same slides that fucking everybody has probably got'.

1. You, Mr Vuwai, exercised your right to make no comment when interviewed.

1. This offending is said to have arisen in the first instance because you, Mr Vuwai, felt belittled by your victim. The consequent escalation in your behaviour beggars belief.
2. Mr Mortley, appearing for you, Mr Memedoski, and Ms Kushnir, appearing for you, Mr Vuwai, both conceded that this was a mid-range example of armed robbery. In circumstances where you cornered your known victim in his bedroom, in company, assaulted him with a weapon and forced him to transfer funds to you, that must be the case.
3. I note that you, Mr Vuwai, were on a Community Correction Order at the time of the offending which is aggravating.
4. While I did not receive a victim impact statement from Mr Wilson, it takes little to imagine the fear he must have felt during the armed robbery and having sustained the injury to his thigh.

1. I accept that you each pleaded guilty to the current indictment at the earliest opportunity. You have saved the community the time and expense of running a trial and spared the witnesses the ordeal of giving evidence. As such, you have facilitated the administration of justice and you are entitled to a benefit for that.
2. Each plea is also demonstrative of an acceptance of responsibility for your offending and of some remorse. You, Mr Memedoski, expressed insight into the impact of your actions to Ms Cidoni, whose report I shall return to. You acknowledged to her that your involvement in the offending was a 'stupid decision'.
3. You, Mr Vuwai, similarly stated to Mr Simmons, whose report I shall return to, that you regret your behaviour and it was 'so stupid' and should have stopped at the text messages. You told him you were sorry for what you did and explained that, 'no one should be treated like that no matter how they behave'.

1. Sebastian Memedoski, you are 36 years old, having been born in March 1989. You were raised in Thomastown by your paternal grandparents after your mother returned to Macedonia shortly after your birth. She died when you were two years of age. You had no contact with your father prior to his death in a motor vehicle accident.
2. Your grandparents assumed full care of you and your older brother, Ibrahim, from birth. They provided a strict, religious and financially limited home but always provided for your needs. Both have since passed away whilst you have been incarcerated.
3. You are the second of two children and remain close to your brother. You also have a cousin who was raised by your grandparents and is like a sister to you. Your relationship with her deteriorated however, after you learnt she had falsified your signature and disposed of your grandparent's estate, leaving you and your brother with nothing.
4. You left home at the age of 14, moving in with a friend and intermittently couch surfing in the northern suburbs of Melbourne. You acted out as a teenager due to the absence of your parents, though you frequently returned to your grandparents' home.
5. After attending Thomastown Primary School, you completed Year 11 VCAL at Peter Lalor Secondary School whilst studying a panel beating apprenticeship. Your early ADHD diagnosis contributed to difficulties in behaviour and concentration, often resulting in physical altercations and multiple periods of suspension.
6. Having completed your apprenticeship, you worked as a panel beater for several years. You subsequently worked at Rodent Restorations in Campbellfield and soon after operated your own fencing business. You have always been employed during your limited time in the community.
7. You enjoyed regular contact with your now 16 year old son, Caleb, up until your most recent remand, however contact has now stopped at his request. You regret your absence from his life, having spent a total of nine years of Caleb's life in custody.
8. In 2019, you commenced a relationship with Renee, whom you met through mutual friends. In September 2022, she gave birth to your second son, Isaac.
9. You have never met your Isaac due to a lengthy family violence intervention order in place between you and your ex-partner. This expired in May of this year, and you have since recommenced contact with Renee. You report that she is willing to engage in communication with you for the sake of your son, with whom you hope to establish a relationship upon your release.
10. You began using substances at the age of 13. You progressed to regular cannabis use by the age of 15 and used methamphetamine daily in your mid-adolescence. Since then, you have maintained periods of abstinence whilst being in and out of custody. You were prescribed medicinal cannabis in the community.
11. Prior to your remand, you were living with your brother until you began using illicit substances again. You acknowledge the disappointment you have caused him.
12. Since being in custody, you have obtained the role of lead billet in the laundry as well as obtaining qualifications in civil engineering, mechanical engineering and metal fabrication.
13. I received a Psychological Assessment report by Ms Gina Cidoni dated 8 May 2025. She diagnosed you with polysubstance use disorders as well as ADHD and made a provisional diagnosis of bipolar disorder.
14. She opined that you '[have] a history of emotional dysregulation and impulsivity linked to longstanding ADHD symptoms, with provisional features consistent with a bipolar spectrum disorder. [You] described periods of heightened mood, increased energy, and reactive decision-making followed by regret, which [you] connected to [your] poor judgement at the time of this offence'.
15. Your personal history involving the loss of both parents in early childhood, unstable accommodation, fractured family relationships and extended periods of incarceration have led to, 'maladaptive coping patterns, reliance on peers and vulnerability to impulsive and reactive behaviour'. Ms Cidoni opined that it is this, in combination with your lack of psychiatric supports, that contributed to your poor choices in the context of this offending.

1. Antonio Vuwai, you are now 31 years of age, having been born in April 1994.
2. You were born and raised in Melbourne to Fijian parents and you have three siblings.
3. You describe your upbringing as 'pretty good' but also note times of physical punishment when you were younger which later evolved into discipline by being smacked and hit with belts and rolling pins. Overall however, you reflect upon your relationship with your parents as 'very positive' and 'loving'.
4. Your family attended church services weekly and you had some involvement in youth groups, but this was limited.
5. You attended Thomastown primary school, later moving to Lalor Secondary College for high school. You described yourself as academically average and disclosed that you did not have significant difficulties with your peers at school.
6. You moved between several schools during your secondary education and eventually ceased formal education in Year 11. You report that you started to attend house parties in high school. You wanted to be more social, as you were not allowed to socialise a great deal when you were younger.
7. Upon ceasing your studies, you attempted a panel beating apprenticeship but did not complete it. You worked in cash-in-hand concreting work for a few months before obtaining a position at a warehouse, where you remained for several years.
8. You were introduced to cannabis at the age of 14. You note that it would relax you and you smoked once a week. You began consuming alcohol at the age of 15. You would drink every weekend at house parties, often becoming intoxicated. At the age of 18, you decided to stop drinking alcohol as you discovered that you could not consume alcohol and cannabis together.
9. You started experimenting with methamphetamines at the age of 17, which was introduced to you by your peers. You started to smoke cannabis daily in your early 20s and began to use cocaine at the age of 21, usually after your football games on weekends. You stopped using cocaine when you stopped playing football.
10. You have never been married, and do not have any children. You commenced a serious long-term relationship at the age of 23 which lasted approximately five years.
11. While you were in a relationship you maintained stable work at a scaffolding company for four years. You enjoyed your position, but when your relationship broke down, your drug use escalated and you were unable to continue working.
12. You began to associate with old friends as your relationship deteriorated and were reintroduced to methamphetamines. Your usage quickly rose to 1 gram per day. This was around the same time you started to consume GHB. You report peak use of 40 mils a day.
13. You do not have any significant medical history. You are currently prescribed Avanza and report struggling when you were first in custody, however you do not have any involvement with mental health services. You completed a post-traumatic stress disorder checklist and although there were some minor symptoms, it was not enough to reach the threshold for a formal diagnosis.
14. During your time in custody, you have completed a number of certificates and courses. You work as a gym billet and continue to stay in contact with your parents.
15. I received a psychological assessment from Mr Warren Simmons dated

4 September 2025. 16. Mr Simmons opined that, 'there is no doubt that [your] substance use is heavily influenced by peers, which may very well be a reflection of the fact that [you] were not encouraged to socialise in [your] early years and therefore, [you] tend to drift towards those with whom [you] can form friendships and [you] are then influenced in engaging behaviour that may be antisocial or inappropriate to maintain that friendship'. 17. Mr Simmons further stated that, '[you] are not without some prospects for rehabilitation given that with the right support [you] are able to maintain a long-term relationship as well as a significant period of employment. There appears to be limited antisocial personality traits with either peers or substance use being a factor in [your] offending rather than a tendency towards general criminal behaviour'.

1. Armed robbery is all too common an offence. People must be able to feel safe in their own homes.
2. General deterrence is of paramount importance in cases such as this. While the instant circumstances are somewhat unusual, members of the public minded to commit armed robberies must be made aware that stern sentences of imprisonment will be imposed for such offending.
3. Given your prior convictions for relevant offending, I consider that specific deterrence applies to each of you. You, Mr Memedoski, have three prior convictions for armed robbery in 2009, together with convictions for assault, drug, traffic and weapons offences. You have been incarcerated for much of the last decade.
4. You, Mr Vuwai, have a 2011 prior conviction for armed robbery, together with convictions for robbery, theft, driving, weapons and assault offences. This is the longest period you have spent in custody.
5. You both knew your victim. I consider community protection does have a role to play in the sentencing exercise given Mr Vuwai's dramatic response to a situation in which he felt belittled, and Mr Memedoski's willingness to jump to his friend's aid in circumstances that were nothing to do with him.
6. Mr Memedoski, I consider your prospects of rehabilitation to be guarded, contingent entirely upon you addressing your drug use and mental health and returning to paid employment to keep yourself occupied. You have been assessed as a medium to high risk of reoffending. You have extensive prior convictions and have spent most of the past decade in custody. You have expressed a motivation to remain abstinent from drugs and to cease offending. You have let your brother and your children down but hope to rebuild their trust.
7. Mr Vuwai, I consider your prospects of rehabilitation to be reasonable, again dependent on you addressing your drug use and returning to employment. As noted by Mr Simmons, you have a demonstrated ability to maintain long term relationships and significant periods of employment, both of which bode well for your future. You maintain the support of your family when not substance affected which provides an important pro-social protective factor.
8. I also give weight to just punishment and denunciation in each of your cases.
9. As the armed robbery was committed in company, it is a category 2 offence. As per s5(2H) of the Sentencing Act 1991, I must impose a custodial order for this offence unless one of the circumstances set out in paragraphs (a) to (e) of that sub-section exist. No such exception was argued on behalf of either of you.
10. While you, Mr Memedoski, have significantly more prior convictions than you,

Mr Vuwai, I consider your culpability for the instant offending to be essentially the same. It was Mr Vuwai's argument with Mr Wilson, but Mr Memedoski made it his own. 11. Neither the prosecutor nor either of your counsel took me to current sentencing practices in relation to armed robbery or recklessly causing injury. I accept that the circumstances before the court are somewhat unusual in that you knew your victim and robbed him in his own home, making comparable cases difficult to find. 12. I apply the principle of totality in relation to each offender, noting the two charges before the court in relation to Mr. Vuwai and the 75 days of 'dead time'

Mr Memedoski served in 2022, having served 165 days before receiving a sentence of 95 days. 13. In each of your cases, I have no option but to impose a head sentence and non-parole period, as was conceded by each of your counsel.

1. Sebastian Memedoski, on charge one, armed robbery, you are sentenced to three years nine months' imprisonment.
2. I fix a non-parole period of two years and four months to be served before you are eligible for parole.
3. I declare that pursuant to s18 of the Sentencing Act 1991, you have served 651 days by way of pre-sentence detention, excluding today.
4. I declare that pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, had you not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would have imposed would have been five years with a non-parole period of three years and four months.
5. Antonio Vuwai, on charge one, armed robbery, you are sentenced to three years and nine months' imprisonment.
6. On Charge 2, causing injury recklessly, you are sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
7. I direct that three months of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively on the sentence on Charge 1.
8. That makes a total effective sentence of four years.
9. I fix a non-parole period of two years and seven months to be served before you are eligible for parole.
10. I declare that pursuant to s18 of the Sentencing Act 1991, you have served 606 days by way of pre-sentence detention, excluding today.
11. I declare that pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, had you not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would have imposed would have been five years and six months with a non-parole period of three years and nine months.
12. Ms Devany, is there anything further from the prosecution?
13. MS DEVANY: No, thank you, Your Honour.
14. HER HONOUR: Mr Mortley?
15. MR MORTLEY: Nothing further, Your Honour.
16. HER HONOUR: Ms Clarebrough?
17. MS CLAREBROUGH: No, thank you, Your Honour.
18. HER HONOUR: Thank you, we will adjourn the court.