Steve Papadopoulos, you are to be sentenced for the following indictable offences. One charge of possession of a drug of dependence, methylamphetamine, two charges of dealing with the proceeds of crime, one charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence, methylamphetamine, one charge of prohibited person possessing a firearm, one charge of handling stolen goods, one charge of possessing a drug of dependence, heroin, one charge of possessing a drug of dependence, cannabis, and one charge of possessing a drug of dependence, cocaine.
Applicable maximum sentences here are: for trafficking a drug of dependence, to knowingly deal with the proceeds of crime and handling stolen goods 15 years' imprisonment; possession of a firearm as a prohibited person, 10 years' imprisonment; possession of a drug of dependence, 12 months' imprisonment. However, as here, for a small quantity of cannabis, a fine of five penalty units.
Also, you are also to be sentenced for the summary offence of possessing cartridge ammunition, maximum penalty a fine of 40 penalty units.
You pleaded guilty before the County Court on 2 July 2025. When interviewed by police on 19 September 2023, you made minor admissions, but falsely denied the substance of the offending, including that of trafficking. At committal, in July 2024, you pleaded not guilty. After that, there was negotiation, including in the context of a sentence indication, under s207 of the Criminal Procedure Act. I accept that you raised during this time the question of proven quantity of methylamphetamine trafficked by you. Ultimately, the trial resolved to a plea on 27 June 2025. I should consider the timing of your plea in such a context.
You receive the benefit of your plea of guilty. It has accepted fundamental responsibility, expresses remorse and has facilitated the interests of justice. It is necessary to note that your plea of guilty to trafficking methylamphetamine does not admit, or did not admit, the quantity of that drug alleged by the Crown. That question was the main focus of your plea hearing before me on 21 August. I do not see you as actually or genuinely remorseful.
At that plea hearing, Mr Cameron for the Crown tendered a written summary of prosecution opening and a USB showing video and audio of meetings between you and others in August and September 2023. That footage was played to me and a transcript provided. Mr Cameron called the informant, Detective Senior Constable Sam Holdcroft, to give evidence. He was cross-examined by your counsel, Mr Delorenzo.
Mr Delorenzo provided and made reference to forensic psychological reports by Carla Lechner dated 3 and 4 November 2019 and the neuropsychological report of Anna McLaren dated 30 December 2019. Both were tendered this morning. They relate to a plea hearing and sentence of you in August 2020. That sentence of 12 August 2020 was also provided to me.
The broad circumstances of your offending are set out in the tendered Crown opening, which is Exhibit A. As to those broad aspects, my own summary may be short.
You are 36 years old and were 34 at the time of offending. These offences were charged arising out of a police operation named Durango 2022, which investigated drug trafficking in the Mildura area during 2023. Charge 3 on the indictment is trafficking methylamphetamine.
The investigation particularly included surveillance of a number of persons, including you. A number have been charged and sentenced. Some of those sentences are provided or before me. The other offenders are said by the Crown not to be co-accused in the strict sense. You and they were running or part of Giretti-style trafficking businesses, individual, but connected in the sense of knowledge, contact and communication between you. There were transactions.
Part of the police surveillance was a video and audio device at the home of a Sean Curphey at San Mateo Avenue, Mildura, where a number of these persons gathered. Part of that, covering the 22 August to 16 September 2023, is relevant to your business and said by the Crown to prove at least the closely approximate quantity of the drug methylamphetamine trafficked by you.
The playing of that footage and evidence, including cross-examination of the informant, was directed at that. Of course, there was other surveillance of you, evidence and information gathered during the operation, to which the informant made some reference in his evidence.
As best described, the aspects of your challenge to the Crown case was that the alleged quantity of drug and that it was always or only methylamphetamine is not proven.
For example, the conversations and conduct shown in the surveillance film may have also concerned such drugs as cocaine and heroin.
In the circumstances here, the quantity, or at least level of trafficking in methylamphetamine, must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Given no seizure of drug discussed or seen in the surveillance footage, purity is unknown.
Having considered the surveillance footage, evidence before me and relevant aspects of the otherwise agreed Crown summary, I make the following findings, or refer to the following evidence.
(1) The footage depicts meetings between you and mainly Curphey at which, it can be said, aspects of your trafficking business were raised and discussed.
(2) This related to sales, purchases and possession in the trade or movement of the drug by the business.
(3) There is specific, consistent reference to quantity by use of such terms as "bags", "ball", "half ball" and some reference to quantity without such a disguise, for example, ounces and ounce.
(4) The evidence of Detective Senior Constable Holdcroft about these terms is based upon his experience in drug investigation. I accept such qualification as relevant expertise. I find reference to a "bag" to be commonly recognised drug terminology for an ounce, "ball" for 3.5 grams and "half ball" for 1.75 grams.
(5) There was also conduct or actions seen in some meetings (the presence and passing of drug of different sizes or amounts, the spooning of drug in at least observable size or amount, payment of money and discussion of price). There was some smoking of drug, consistent with that for methylamphetamine on the evidence of the informant.
(6) As to the puttage that the drugs discussed and seen may have been other drugs, the informant's evidence was that this and other surveillance and evidence obtained by the operation showed your business to be dealing in methylamphetamine, not other drugs; that aspects of the scan, or tendered footage (for example, reference to "puff", particular price or prices spoken of) supported this.
(7) I note that in paragraph 16 of the Crown opening, described as a sample of other "more generalised" drug trafficking conversations, there is reference to a conversation about cutting cocaine. Beyond this, there is no evidence or real suggestion that you trafficked drugs other than methylamphetamine. Mr Delorenzo pointed to small quantities of heroin, cannabis and cocaine found in the raid of your home, amounts consistent with use, not trade. I see this as not atypical of the drug trafficker's lifestyle or situation. The informant's evidence was consistent with this. That you are a drug user is not disputed. You did not give evidence before me. That is your entitlement and does not, of course, change the burden and standard of proof on the matters challenged.
Ultimately my conclusion on the basis of the evidence is that I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the following.
(1) That your drug trafficking business dealt predominantly in methylamphetamine if not solely.
(2) The evidence does not precisely prove 322 grams on the basis of the video or audio footage tendered. That is the quantity specifically alleged by the Crown. However, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the level of your business in the relevant period was substantial trade in methylamphetamine, getting at least close to that quantity, at least at or beyond the relevant threshold level for commercial trafficking, 250 grams. You are to be sentenced for trafficking simpliciter. It is not alleged on the evidence that you had the requisite intention to traffick at the commercial quantity level.
There are other serious offences on the indictment.
Charges 1 and 2 relate to an attempted police interception of you on 1 May 2023, three or four months prior to the period of trafficking on Charge 3. You escaped, dropping three Ziploc bags, amounting to 13.3 grams of methylamphetamine (Charge 1) and $12,280 in cash (Charge 2).
On Charge 4, you are a prohibited person, under s5 of the Firearms Act, because of your prior convictions. You are seen on surveillance film handing a firearm to Curphey and explaining how to load and cock it. This was on 1 September 2023.
On 19 September, police observed you driving a vehicle with stolen plates, (Charge 5, handling).
Charges 6 to 9 and the summary charge of possessing ammunition, relate to what was found in the raid of your home. There was $13,025 in cash, (Charge 6, dealing in the proceeds of crime); as stated, smaller quantities of heroin (0.3 grams), cannabis (3.6 grams) and cocaine (0.1 gram) and assorted ammunition. I find that at least the dealing with proceeds of crime offence at Charge 6 is connected to your drug trafficking business.
You are a 36-year-old man awaiting this sentence in remand custody. You have been in custody since arrest on 19 September 2023. I meant to get a certain update of that. I make that to be 703 days. Perhaps before I declare it, if I can be given a certain figure?
You grew up in the Mildura area, the older of two children and having a younger stepbrother. Your childhood was disrupted and difficult, featuring your parents' separation, dislocated arrangements for you after that, poor performance at school, caused by intellectual impairment, and witnessing an horrific car accident in teen age, which killed six of your school friends.
You have poor literacy.
You have maintained some positive family connection. Since leaving school, you have worked on farms, including that of your father and with an uncle in concreting. You have not worked consistently in recent years.
You were introduced to drugs in teen age and that has developed to periods of heavy use, including methylamphetamine. You have never married and have no children.
In 2019, forensic psychologist Carla Lechner diagnosed symptoms of depression and of post-traumatic stress disorder in or from teen age. Her preliminary testing showed poor intellectual function. More comprehensive testing by a neuropsychologist, Anna McLaren, showed a range of results in the extremely low to borderline range.
Your full scale IQ score was 66, within or very close to the intellectual disability range. There is a possible but uncertain contribution of head injuries suffered over your life.
You have a significant criminal history. There are a number of court appearances between October 2012, when you were in your early to mid-twenties and January 2023. Most fall within the 2018 to 2023 period. There is some dr,ug offending. Firearm and weapon offences predominate. In August 2018, you were sentenced to four years and two months, with a minimum term of two years and eight months for violent offending, including aggravated burglary. There has been a short sentence for threatening to kill, assault and possession of an imitation firearm since.
Drug trafficking is a serious crime, damaging to our community and its vulnerable. The scale of your business went well beyond so-called street sales, for example, to fund drug dependence. Your proceeds of crime offences entail substantial amounts of cash. As here, drug trafficking often carries a sinister association with firearm possession. Your drug use and dependence is no mitigation. You have a relevant criminal history. Such circumstances make relevant the sentencing considerations and purposes of moral culpability, deterrence, that is, both general and specific deterrence, the need to strongly condemn and proportionately punish. Deterrence in such a case as this is important to community protection.
There are some moderating factors, which include the following.
(1) Your plea of guilty.
(2) Your personal history and circumstances as described by me earlier.
(3) This particularly includes your low cognitive function. Verdins principles are relevant, but have limitation in a case like this. For example, as to lesser moral culpability, you would well recognise the evil of the drug trade and this was a period of considered participation in that over a number of weeks. It is a case unlike the violent episode of aggrieved offending for which you were sentenced in 2018. There is some lesser relevance of purposes of deterrence, but also limited. I accept that imprisonment has been harder for you, given your intellectual impairments. They are a part of the personal context for your sentence.
(4) I must apply the principle of totality. My ultimate aim is an appropriate and fair total sentence. This will require some moderation of individual sentences and only some cumulation between sentences.
(5) In your case, there is the question of delay. You have been in custody now for a period getting close to two years. For example, a number of the others who were associated and charged have been before the courts and a number sentenced.
(6) I have attempted to apply, to the extent it can be, the principle of parity with those others. I have been advised of sentences imposed and have been provided with some sentencing reasons. A difficulty arising is differences in scale, and in that way, seriousness. Curphey is yet to be finally sentenced. In view of your criminal record, the firearm offences in your case require significant and some cumulative punishment.
Through Mr Delorenzo, you have asked for a so-called straight sentence. I find that I must and will set a minimum term. Whether you apply for parole will be a matter for you.
Having considered what I see to be the relevant matters, I sentence you as follows.
On Charge 1, possessing a drug of dependence, four months' imprisonment.
On Charges 2 and 6, possession of proceeds of crime, six months' imprisonment on each.
On Charge 3, trafficking a drug of dependence, two years' imprisonment.
On Charge 4, prohibited person in possession of a firearm, 15 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 5, handling stolen goods, three months' imprisonment.
On Charge 7, possessing heroin, one month's imprisonment.
On Charge 8, possessing cannabis, a fine of $50.
On Charge 9, possessing cocaine, one month's imprisonment.
On the summary offence of possession - of possessing ammunition, I impose a fine of $300.
I direct that one month of the sentence on Charge 1, two months of the sentence on Charge 2 and six months of the sentence on Charge 4, be served cumulatively upon the sentence for Charge 3 and each other.
That is a total effective sentence of two years and nine months. I set a minimum term for eligibility for parole of two years and three months. What is the PSD finally come ‑ ‑ ‑
MR FRASER: Seven hundred and eight days.
HIS HONOUR: All right. I declare presentence detention of 708 days already served on that sentence. Had you not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of four years, with a minimum term of three years. Are there other matters that I need to deal with?
MR FRASER: We're just checking to see if there's any forfeiture.
HIS HONOUR: There'll be a disposal order, I think?
MR FRASER: I think there were disposal orders for the drugs found on 1 May.
HIS HONOUR: Well, it would have been in the raid too there were drugs found.
MR FRASER: Yes and what was found in the raid.
HIS HONOUR: And there'd be - and there'd be orders related to the ‑ ‑ ‑
MR FRASER: The firearms that were found.
HIS HONOUR: There'd be ‑ ‑ ‑
MR FRASER: The firearms that were found.
HIS HONOUR: There'd be orders related to the - to the cash found too.
MR FRASER: Yes, so ‑ ‑ ‑
HIS HONOUR: So those - you don't object to any of those?
MR DELORENZO: No, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: The confiscation, forfeiture or disposal orders and I'll sign them in chambers, if they can be sent to me.
MR FRASER: They will be, thank you, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: All right, anything else to do?
MR FRASER: Nothing from our end, Your Honour, thank you.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Nothing, Mr Delorenzo?
MR DELORENZO: No, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you for your assistance, both of you. I'll now stand down and when the other - when the other cases - I'll do that later.
MR DELORENZO: Yes, I'll give you - I'll ring you shortly, Steve.
HIS HONOUR: Do you wish some time to talk to him?
MR DELORENZO: Yes, I'll see what Mr Papadopoulos has to say, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, but I'll - we'll all leave while that's - while that happens.