DPP v Perkins

1. At the time of this offending, you were living at a unit in Warrnambool and Ms Fischer was your neighbour next door.
2. At about 10:30 pm on the 6 December 2024, you were at home and you heard yelling from Ms Fischer followed by loud bangs on the roof of your unit. You went outside to see what was happening, and when you got there, you heard her front door slam. You became enraged.

1. You went back into your unit and put your shoes on and grabbed a tomahawk from the bedside drawers in your bedroom. You walked out of your unit, through an open side gate to the rear glass sliding door of Ms Fischer's unit. That door was already partially smashed and had a large board inside it. You used the tomahawk to shatter more glass and gain access.
2. You went down the hall toward the front of the house.
3. Ms Fischer had locked herself inside the bathroom towards the front of the unit. She was yelling at you from behind the locked door. You used the tomahawk to smash the door handle off the bathroom door and then kicked the door to force entry.
4. You located her sitting on the toilet in the bathroom, although not using the toilet. You then approached her and both engaged in a heated dispute.
5. She called you a 'fucking fleabag' at which point you struck her with the blunt side of the tomahawk to the left side of her body in the rib area and shin, causing a small laceration to her rib area.
6. You then left the address through the front door and returned to your unit.
7. About two and a half hours later, at approximately 1 am, you called Triple 0 to ask for a welfare check on Ms Fischer. You identified yourself by name and you stated you had assaulted your neighbour with a tomahawk, and you wanted someone to check on her because you had not heard anything from her unit since the offending and you were worried. You later told Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist Dr Hanratty that you thought Ms Fischer might be 'lying there suffering'.
8. Police arrived and Ms Fischer showed them the injury to her left rib-cage. Police called an ambulance.
9. They then attended your address where you presented with a self-inflicted wound to your neck. You told police you had assaulted Ms Fischer. Ambulance Victoria were called to treat the wound on your neck.
10. You told the constables that you had entered Ms Fischer's unit through the backdoor with the tomahawk and that you had hit her multiple times.
11. You were arrested and given a caution. You gave your consent for the police to enter your unit where they seized the tomahawk. You were then taken by ambulance to Warrnambool Base Hospital for treatment.
12. Upon discharge you were taken to Warrnambool police station where you participated in a record of interview. You made fulsome admissions to the offending, stating you went into Ms Fischer's unit with the tomahawk to 'cause maximum damage', and that she was 'lucky her brains weren't spread across the wall'. You stated if her partner was there, you would have done the same thing to him and if you were to be released on bail, and she made too much noise again, you would do it again.
13. You were remanded into custody and have remained there since.
14. This is your first time in custody.

1. Aggravated burglary is a serious offence reflected in the maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment. Entry into another person's residence armed with a weapon and for the purpose of assaulting them, is a terrifying thing for any victim. The sentencing principles which I must have in mind include denunciation by the Court on behalf of the community. That is, vigilante behaviour or taking the law into your own hands because of a perceived wrong is disapproved of by the community and must be reflected in sentencing.
2. The sentence I impose must also have a focus on general deterrence and community protection. That is, it must work to deter others from engaging in this type of behaviour. It must express the community's strong disapproval and must protect other people from becoming victims in their own homes.
3. Here your offending was serious. Although it was a spontaneous over reaction, the aggravated burglary did involve arming yourself with a weapon - a weapon which could have caused serious injury - and it involved smashing a glass door to force entry into her premises.
4. Aggravated burglary stops at the point of entry. It is often eclipsed by what occurs inside. Here, that involved you forcing your way through a locked bathroom door, getting into a verbal dispute with Ms Fischer and then assaulting her. It is very fortunate she was not more seriously injured. I note that the charge is one of recklessly causing injury rather than intentionally doing so.
5. Ms Fischer has elected not to provide a victim impact statement, nonetheless, I can anticipate this event must have been frightening for her and left her feeling unsafe and anxious. As I noted she has her own mental health issues and to that end, I have no doubt that she is a more vulnerable victim.
6. Higher courts have been clear that this type of confrontational aggravated burglary must be met by stern punishment.
7. Having said that, I accept Mr Pyne's characterisation of this offending to the following effect -

This offending, it is submitted, is a spontaneous, dramatic overreaction to a very difficult neighbourhood situation by a person with limited capacity to control those types of reactions because of a serious, debilitating personality disorder. The offending was clearly unplanned. The decision to carry out the offending was made in the heat of the moments after the accused heard loud bangs on the roof of her unit and concluded the victim was responsible. That the accused called Triple 0, confessed to the offending and asked for someone to check on the victim in the hours after the incident, reinforces that this was largely spontaneous offending and the product of a sudden, extreme emotional state. There is no sophistication about the offending.

1. Turning to your history. I understand Ms Perkins, this will be probably upsetting for you to have your history read to you, but it is part of what I need to do to explain why I have reached the conclusions that I have.
2. I have received a number of reports which importantly, span nearly 10 years. They are not all written for court purposes. I have received a neuropsychological report dated 27 September 2016 authored by neuropsychologist, Alison Schokman; a neuropsychological report dated 21 January 2025 authored by Felicity Butselaar; a psychiatric report authored by Dr Hanratty dated 4 March 2025; an Assessment Outcome Report authored by Monique Dicesare dated 7 April 2025; a Mental Health Assessment Report dated 7 April 2025 authored by Pauline Kahombe; and a Forensicare Pre-sentence Report dated 13 May 2025 authored by Professor Michael Daffern.
3. Your history is also neatly summarised by Mr Pyne in his very considered submissions. He submits -

... her background answers the description of 'profoundly disadvantaged'. Her story is tragic. At virtually every turn in her life, she has suffered from events largely not of her making. She was the victim of longstanding sexual abuse by her biological father. She witnessed domestic violence and was the victim herself of violence. She witnessed a horrible car accident. Her son was born very prematurely. She has a long and serious history of suicide attempts and suicidal ideation. She has a history of substance abuse from a very young age. She has experienced unstable accommodation and periods of homelessness. She has experienced social exclusion and isolation. She has had multiple psychiatric admissions and treatment with electroconvulsive therapy. [She] submits her background clearly enables the court to take Bugmy considerations into account ...'

1. Elaborating somewhat on that summary, you are the eldest of five daughters. You experienced a deprived childhood with your parents experiencing financial hardship. You lived in 'extreme poverty' where there was inadequate 'food, books and toys'. You report sometimes eating what your family could catch on the land, including 'rabbits or yabbies'.
2. Your father was a violent and predatory man, who physically and sexually abused you. He was also physically violent towards your mother which you witnessed. From the age of four until 14 he abused you daily. At times that involved other adult men.
3. From the age of eight he facilitated that abuse by giving you alcohol and cannabis, leading to intoxication. No doubt as part of guaranteeing your silence, he discouraged you from participating in activities outside the house including playing sport or engaging in community activities, resulting in you being socially isolated.
4. When you were 14, your parents separated, and your father started a relationship with another woman. An attempt to sexually abuse his new partner's daughter led to her approaching you and your acknowledgement of being the victim of his abuse. Reports were made to police and ultimately your father was sentenced to imprisonment.
5. Abuse committed in a family setting often leads to the fracturing of other family relationships - between the non-offending parent and the victim, and between siblings and the victim. Sadly, that is common. You have experienced that within your family, although happily now you have a good relationship with your mother and you describe her as your 'best friend'. I note that she and one of your sisters are on the link in support of you today.
6. I also note the excerpt counsel referred to from The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse about the profound and broad ranging impacts of child sexual abuse, affecting the:

...biological, social and psychological development of a child. Child sexual abuse can result in profound trauma, affecting the chemistry, structure and function of the developing brain and potentially interrupting normal psychosocial development at every critical stage of a child's formative years.

1. It is no fault of yours that you have been subject to that abuse and those sad impacts.
2. It is in fact that history of neglect and abuse which according to Dr Hanratty predisposed you to the development of borderline personality disorder. It contributed to the entrenchment of poor coping mechanisms and led to your tendency to deliberately self-harm by way of cutting which started in your teenage years.
3. It is to your enormous credit that despite that background and its impact, you managed to complete your VCE. You did so after your parents separated, and while 'couch surfing' with friends.
4. You were unable to attend university because of a lack of financial support, but you secured employment on a horse racing property. Your subsequent employment history includes multiple skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled roles including as a phlebotomist in a hospital in Brisbane and also establishing a business with your now estranged husband. Those are all positives and show your extreme resilience and capacity.
5. You last worked approximately eight years ago and you now receive a Disability Support Pension.
6. At age 19 you witnessed a very serious car accident involving a car setting fire and two trapped occupants dying. It is that incident which led to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder. You described your symptoms of anxiety at that stage as different to the anger and fear you consistently felt as a child. You described flashbacks, nightmares and panic episodes that left you unable to drive and in a constant state of rumination and fear. Those progressed to the point of breakdown which led you to seek psychological support for the first time.
7. You were medicated with antidepressants and anxiolytic medication including benzodiazepines. That medication however worsened rather than improved your symptoms.
8. In that context, your struggle with alcohol and polysubstance abuse increased. You have a long history of substance abuse commencing when were aged eight and your father introduced you to alcohol and cannabis. You have used a range of illicit substances, including methamphetamine and heroin and dependence on opioids.
9. After the car accident your incidence of self-harm increased. You were ultimately diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and a Borderline Personality Disorder.
10. You have had numerous psychiatric admissions and treatment efforts in your adult life. These have generally been precipitated by suicide attempts and self-harm. Mental Health registrations with South West Health Care go back to 2006, with Barwon Health to 2018 and with Inner West Area Mental Health Service in 2023.
11. You also had mental health admissions in Queensland. You were living in Queensland for a time with your former partner Michael. You and he have three children. A daughter aged 16 and a daughter aged now 10, and a

14-year-old son. After the premature birth of your son you suffered

post-natal depression. You felt anxious, and overwhelmed. When he was 10 months old you attempted to take your life by hanging. Prescription of opioids to manage pain again resulted in dependency. 12. When you were pregnant with your youngest child your relationship ended and you returned to Victoria. You have had no contact with your oldest two children who reside with their father. That is clearly a source of sadness for you. 13. You have managed to rekindle contact with your youngest daughter who is now about 10 and who resides with your sister. You had reached a point before this offending where you were having unsupervised weekend contact with her at your unit in Warrnambool. Unfortunately, that fact exacerbated your feelings of anxiety about where you were living. You report it was not an easy environment, with other residents involved in drug use and with the ongoing dispute with Ms Fischer being a greater source of angst when your daughter was present. 14. I have received letters from two other neighbours who have come to know you in the past two and a half years. They support your account of what was occurring at the units. One of your neighbours wisely observes that Ms Fischer was not receiving the significant help or support she needed and confirms the incidents which created disharmony. She confirms that you had previously made various requests of Ms Fischer in an appropriate manner, especially around your daughter's visits. 15. Both neighbours say to them you are a good neighbour who has become a friend and support. One, who has mobility issues, says you are a help to her. They are saddened and disapproving of what you have done but remain supportive friends who look forward to your return. They express concern about you in prison given what they know of your mental health and self-harming. One of your neighbours says it was no surprise to her that you called police on the night of this incident as you do not like to see others suffering. 16. Sadly your attendance at Emergency Departments in relation to self-harm and suicidal ideation continued throughout the time since you returned to Victoria and to the time of this offending. As I have mentioned, at one point you had sessions of electroconvulsive therapy. Looking at 2024, you made a serious attempt on your life in March 2024; you presented after injuring yourself in June 2024; in July 2024 you sustained an overdose in the context of chronic pain; in August you required treatment for abdominal wounds after self-harming with a knife. At that time you complained to the hospital about issues with your neighbours. Similar reports have been made to others prior to this offending, for example you told Professor Daffern that you had requested police help, and you told Dr Butselaar in November 2024, about a week before this offending, of your neighbourhood issues. You reported to Dr Butselaar feeling mentally scrambled in the context of your difficult living arrangements. 17. A complication in relation to your Borderline Personality Disorder is that you are often discharged after very short stays in hospital. You feel a sense of rejection by local mental health services, and that you are in the 'too hard basket'. Dr Hanratty opines that it is not uncommon for those with Borderline Personality Disorder to have short stays, given it is often considered that lengthy inpatient admissions are unhelpful for many with that condition. He says that can lead to people with Borderline Personality Disorder feeling rejected and abandoned and reacting in impulsive and dysregulated ways. 18. The immediate mental health context prior to this offending, as I have said, is that on 4 December 2024 you were admitted to hospital after self-harming by cutting. You remained there until being discharged at 9 am on the morning of 6 December. 19. Immediately after your offending against Ms Fischer you returned home to your unit, calling your mother and confessing to the assault and afterwards cutting your own neck with a razor. That wound was sutured in the Emergency Department. 20. In relation to your worrying comments made during your subsequent record of interview soon after that time, Dr Hanratty suggests you are likely to use extreme language in that way when discussing an issue which is stressful for you, in part due to the symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder, including emotional dysregulation which impairs your rational thought. He opines people with BPD often experience intense shame but instead of expressing it, they may react with anger, defensiveness and blame shifting. 21. Of course, I note in fact you did call the police to request a welfare check, and made full admissions to attending police immediately and to police in your record of interview. Those markers of shame and remorse are matters I take into account.

1. Dr Hanratty says you acted in that way in response to the events at the unit that night. He says:

At the time of the index offences Ms Perkins was experiencing multiple symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder, including unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, impulsivity, recurrent suicidal behaviour, affective instability, inappropriate intense anger and difficulty controlling it. These symptoms contributed to her impulsive verbal and physical assault on Ms Fischer by making her reckless, aggressive and disinhibited.

1. He also says you were experiencing symptoms of PTSD including:

... persistent and exaggerated negative beliefs and expectations about others, a persistent negative emotional state, irritable behaviour and angry outbursts with little or no provocation, reckless and self-destructive behaviour and hypervigilance and these symptoms would have contributed to Ms Perkins's violent reaction to the noise coming from Ms Fischer's residence at the time of the index offences. These symptoms of PTSD likely exacerbated her symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder, further contributing to her extreme, violent response...

1. A number of those findings are reflected in the report of Principle Consultant Psychologist, Prof Daffern who refers to your condition as a 'severe form of personality disorder'.
2. In those circumstances there is no doubt that the principles of R v Verdins[3] are enlivened in your case. That is, your moral culpability for your offending is reduced on account of the mental impairment under which you were labouring at that time. The nature, extent and effect of your BPD and PTSD and their combined effect on your behaviour was significant, in my view.
3. In those circumstances, it follows that I do not view you as an appropriate vehicle to hold up to others as an example to achieve general deterrence. Although still relevant, that principle must be significantly moderated here. Similarly, specific deterrence must also be moderated.
4. Those findings lead me to conclude that although imprisonment is warranted for offending such as this, in your case I should consider a different type of order than I would for an offender without your mental impairment.
5. I also take into account that your time in custody has been very difficult. Although to some extent you have appreciated the routine in prison and have managed to form good working relationships with the staff and some other prisoners, you have reduced personal supports and you have struggled in the intense environment.
6. You have been in the Marrmak Mental Health Unit twice and have mostly resided in a unit for women with mental health problems. It is an environment you describe as being noisy, characterised by instability, arguments and fighting. It has been triggering of various past traumas. At one point you self-harmed by burning your hand and cutting yourself; at another you attempted suicide and required CPR which fractured your sternum and ribs. You were hospitalised.
7. It is clear your experience of incarceration is more onerous than a person without your conditions, and it is likely to lead to further deterioration in your mental health.
8. The prosecution did not dispute the findings consistent with Verdins. Of course, moderation is a matter of degree and equally I accept some of those findings increase the need for consideration of community protection.

1. There is equally no dispute here that your history enlivens principles stemming from the cases of Bugmy v The Queen[4].
2. Those principles arise where an offender has suffered significant deprivation in their childhood and formative years. As stated by the Court of Appeal in Marrah v The Queen[5]:

Circumstances of deprivation, abuse and other social disadvantage occurring during an offender's formative years are more than matters of historical significance to the administration of justice. The effects of such social disadvantage do not generally diminish with the passage of time, and are likely to have profound and lasting consequences.

1. The consequence of that finding is that your subjective culpability cannot be equated with a person who committed the same offences but had the advantage of a normal, stable and regular home environment[6]. That is a reflection of the principle of equal justice; though like must be treated with like, where there are differences they should be recognised[7].
2. The Victorian Court of Appeal in DPP v Drake[8] stated -

It is the mark of a humane society that the moral judgement expressed through sentencing should take account of the lifelong damage that may result from exposure to violence or abuse or parental neglect in an offender's formative years. ... childhood trauma can permanently damage - and seriously distort - a person's view of the world around them and their understanding of social norms.

1. That finding of significant deprivation is a matter which does not diminish with time and must be given full weight in sentencing[9].
2. I accept that the experiences of your childhood and in particular the violence and abuse at the hands of your father, and your very early introduction to alcohol and drugs, reflect a background of considerable social deprivation such as to enliven those principles from Bugmy v R[10]. Those early life experiences have left their mark on you, and to a real extent have been entrenched by the ongoing pattern of your life including experiencing intimate partner violence in your relationships.
3. I accept that those matters reduce your moral culpability[11].

1. I also take into account in your favour and in mitigation, your plea of guilty.
2. You are described in the reports as having some insight into your mental health and the way it impacted your offending. In your interview with Professor Daffern, you reflected on your offending, describing it as 'terrible'.
3. It is unclear whether the offending would have been reported if you had not rung Triple 0. You receive the benefit of taking that action.
4. You receive the benefit of your fulsome admissions and of your very early plea of guilty.
5. I also accept that those actions and your plea of guilty reflect a level of genuine remorse. That too is reflective of some insight into the offending and a positive marker towards rehabilitation and away from the need for specific deterrence.
6. Turning to your prospects of rehabilitation.
7. You are currently prescribed medication to manage your anxiety and depression and to assist with sleep. You are also prescribed antipsychotic medication. You are consulting mental health staff, including a psychologist from the Marrmak Unit and regard those consultations as 'beneficial'.
8. In the community you have a range of supports still available to you. Significantly you have a National Disability Insurance support package which is coordinated by Ms Amy Hilton of 360 Southwest. Ms Hilton has been present throughout these proceedings and is a support to you.
9. You have also had a psychosocial recovery coach, Maddison MacDonald and you have seen NDIS Psychologist Joe Buckby.
10. Just prior to this offending a report was prepared as part of an application to expand the scope of your NDIS package. That is the report authored by Clinical Neuropsychologist, Felicity Bustelaar. She noted your increasingly severe and violent self-harm episodes meant managing your risk to yourself was being increasingly difficult despite your good engagement with the NDIS. Area Mental Health supports were said to be required imminently and psychiatry assessment and review to review your diagnosis and optimise medication with consideration of admission to a longer term inpatient program to provide stability, security and structure required to improve your mental health.
11. Those matters should certainly be considered in light of this offending. The need is critical to ensure your ongoing stability and the management of risk to yourself and to others.

1. Mr Pyne submitted although imprisonment is warranted, taking into account your chronic and persistent mental health battles and the application of Verdins principles, along with your personal history enlivening Bugmy together with your early plea of guilty and remorse, that I should combine any term of imprisonment with a community correction order which sees your release into the community as soon as possible.
2. You have had one CCO imposed prior to these matters. That was for relevant matters of violence in 2023. It is the only matter on your prior criminal history.
3. After six months that order was cancelled, I gather on account of your health considerations.
4. Fairly, Mr Batten on behalf of the Prosecution, conceded the quite exceptional personal factors at play in your case. While not losing sight of the seriousness of the offending, he acknowledged your limited prior history, and the reduction in your moral culpability given the interplay of Bugmy and Verdins considerations.
5. The Prosecution concede it is within my power to impose a combination term, without stating whether the Prosecution submitted more time was warranted in custody.
6. After hearing your initial plea I adjourned your matter so that an extended Pre-Sentence Report could be obtained.
7. I have since been provided the various reports from Community Corrections Victoria and Forensicare from Professor Daffern. He makes a number of recommendations, while noting there are no impatient units for people with Borderline Personality Disorder in the Warrnambool area, and no appropriate long term supported mental health units. He, much like those who manage your NDIS package, recommends that supported accommodation would be beneficial for you. You have also expressed a view that you believe that could be helpful to you.
8. Professor Daffern also notes the need for intervention to address risk of violent behaviour, as well as support to try and help you with reunion with your children. Psychological treatment is of course an important part of any rehabilitation plan.
9. Despite the nature of this offending, and the various assessments which attest to your moderate to high risk of reoffending, your prospects of rehabilitation are cautiously optimistic if you are appropriately supported in the ways recommended.
10. You have the ongoing support of the NDIS package which may be expanded.
11. There is ongoing support from your mother, and ongoing improved relationships with your sister.
12. You have the motivation of your daughter and your other children.
13. The role of Forensicare, whilst somewhat unclear, appears to be that they will take an oversight role, providing advice to an Area Mental Health Service in particular for consideration of longer admissions when needed for inpatient care. They will also play a role in looking at what programs are available to you in the community.
14. Protection for the victim of this offending is in place by way of the intervention order. That order prevents any harassment, property damage, or interference or threats. It prohibits close contact or going to or remaining within the boundaries of the place where she lives. That order has been varied to allow you to return to your unit where you have resided for two and a half years.
15. Unfortunately squatters have been at that residence but it has been cleared and repaired and you have the assistance from Ms Hilton and 360 Southwest to enter emergency accommodation through Women's Housing Limited and funding to replace whitegoods and new linen. A priority application to move you from that location to a different public housing unit in the local area will be made.
16. I accept the circumstances here point to the need for ongoing efforts towards your rehabilitation and towards keeping you safe and others safe.

1. I have had regard to current sentencing practices.
2. Although there are factual parallels between your offending and that outlined in other cases, your personal circumstances are unique and as such consideration of a number of other cases both in this Court and the Court of Appeal have been of limited assistance to me.
3. I am required to impose a just sentence in all the circumstances and that is what I have endeavoured to do.
4. I am mindful of course of the Court of Appeal comments in Boulton[12] to the effect that a CCO may be imposed even for serious offences where circumstances warrant such an order, noting it has a punitive and rehabilitative focus.
5. In my view it is appropriate here to impose an aggregate sentence given the close connection of the offences in time, purpose and effect.
6. Ms Perkins, if you could stand up please.

1. The sentence that I impose in relation to Charge 1 and Charge 2 is as follows.
2. You are convicted and I sentence you to 167 days of imprisonment, to be followed by a community correction order of 19 months.
3. Before I can impose that sentence, in particular the community correction order, I need to ask you whether you agree, whether you consent to undertake that order and before I ask you that, I need to explain the consequences of any breach and also the conditions.
4. The conditions of that order, as I said it will run for 19 months. The reason I have chosen that is it takes you to Christmas next year, which gives you a clear end date for the order. The conditions of that order, as well as the compulsory conditions which are things like you cannot leave the State of Victoria without permission, and you must notify any change of address, the conditions I add to that are:
5. That you are to be under supervision of Community Corrections.
6. That you are to undertake treatment and rehabilitation for your mental health, where they direct and that can include inpatient rehabilitation if they direct you to do so.
7. And also that you undertake treatment and supervision by way of programs to reduce your re-offending.
8. Do you understand those conditions?
9. OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
10. HER HONOUR: And do you agree to undertake that community correction order?
11. OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
12. HER HONOUR: Do you understand that if you breach that order either by re‑offending or by not doing what Corrections direct you to do, that you would come back to me and you might be re-sentenced on this offending.
13. OFFENDER: Yes, (indistinct words).
14. HER HONOUR: All right, have a seat there. I will have that order printed out.
15. I declare that you have served 167 days of imprisonment and that that time should be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
16. But for your plea of guilty, in accordance with s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, the sentence I would have imposed would have been one of 15 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of nine months' imprisonment.
17. I propose to make the disposal order in the terms sought, noting that it was consented to.
18. So, Ms Perkins, just to explain that in very simple terms. The sentence I have imposed is one of 167 days. You have completed that term. That means you will be released today and you will be released to the community correction order. All right and that order will run up until Christmas 2026. You understand all of that? Okay, I've got that order printed out and I will ask you to sign it in a minute. That signature is your agreement that you will undertake that order.
19. You are welcome to approach the dock, Mr Pyne.
20. MR PYNE: Thank you, Your Honour.
21. HER HONOUR: Thanks very much. So Ms Perkins, your signature on that document is your promise that you will complete that community correction order. I am not going to judicially monitor you, so that means I am not going to bring you back to see how you are going, Corrections have indicated that will not be necessary. They will bring you back if there are any difficulties or breaches. So in the nicest possible way, I hope I don't see you after today and that this is the last day you are in a court room. You have a lot of people around you who are supportive of you and want you to be well and to succeed on this order, so lean on them and Ms Hilton in particular, seems to be an excellent support for you and it's good that you have family and some of the neighbours who are there with you. So I hope it goes well and that you manage to complete that order and of course, you must abide by the intervention order that is in place and that extends I think into 2027.
22. Thanks very much Counsel.
23. As the court pleases.

[3] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269

[5] Marrah v The Queen [2014] VSCA 119

[6] DPP v Drake [2019] VSCA 293 quoted in Jawahiri v The Queen [2021] VSCA 287

[7] DPP v Herrmann [2021] VSCA 160

[8] DPP v Drake [2019] VSCA 293

[9] Jawahiri v The Queen [2021] VSCA 287

[11] Bugmy v R (2013) 302 ALR 192 [at 44]

[12] Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342