DPP v Simon [2026] VCC 456

1. The prosecution tendered a summary opening for the plea which sets out the agreed facts of your offending, and I sentence you on the basis of those facts.[1]
2. In brief, the circumstances of your offending are as follows:
3. You and Ariel Garth formed a relationship in early 2023 and during your relationship Ms Garth lived with her mother and niece in Walker Street, Prahan.
4. The offending occurred on 25 February 2024 and 7 March 2024.
5. At the time of the offending you were a prohibited person pursuant to the Firearms Act 1996 as a result of being the respondent in two Family Violence Intervention Orders.
6. On 23 July 2020, your driver's licence was disqualified for a period of four years and at the time of the offending you were a disqualified driver.
7. On 20 February 2024, you attended Ms Garth's home looking for her. She was not at home at the time and her mother, Ms Karyn Quarrell, called 000 out of fear. You fled the address before police arrived.
8. You attended Ms Garth's home again the next day and she was not at home. You again fled the address prior to police arriving and as you left you assaulted a neighbour who was assisting Ms. Quarrell. When the police arrived, she advised them that Ms Garth was hiding from you.
9. On 25 February 2024, at 1:10am, you drove a 2019 Mazda CX5 station wagon which had been stolen from Tuan Bui, along Sydney Road, Coburg. This is Charge 2, theft of motor vehicle.
10. The car had a stolen Victorian registration plate affixed to the front (this is the basis of Charge 3, handling stolen goods) and a false registration plate affixed to the rear.
11. You were pursuing Ms Garth who was driving a stolen Haval station wagon, also bearing false Victorian registration plates. This is the commencement of Charge 1, reckless conduct endangering life.
12. At this time an Uber ride-share driver, Gandeep Singh, was stationary at the intersection of Sydney Road and Bell Street, waiting at a red light to turn left onto Bell Street from the left lane.
13. You and Ms Garth were also travelling in the left lane and were travelling at an excessive speed, rapidly approaching Mr Singh's stationary vehicle. Ms Garth swerved into the right-hand lane to avoid Mr Singh's vehicle and struck the rear of Mr Singh's vehicle, causing damage to both vehicles.
14. She continued through the intersection against a red light with you immediately behind her in pursuit. Mr Singh observed the front of your Mazda ram into the rear of Ms Garth's vehicle several times. Both you and Ms Garth continued driving in a dangerous manner. This is the basis of rolled up Summary Charge 24, failing to stop after an accident.
15. Seconds after the collision with Mr Singh, both you and Ms Garth continued south on Sydney Road between Bell Street and Blyth Street. Members of the public individually called 000 to report the collision with Mr Singh's vehicle and the erratic driving of you and Ms Garth. The callers estimated that the vehicles were travelling more than 100 kilometres an hour whilst you continued to ram into Ms Garth.
16. At the same time your pursuit of Ms Garth was observed by local detectives who were travelling south on Sydney Road near the intersection of Hope Street.
17. Ms Garth subsequently performed a U-turn to head north, passing the detectives a second time and you followed before Ms Garth performed a second U-turn to go south, passing the detectives a third time. You maintained your pursuit of Ms Garth south on Sydney Road.
18. Fearful that the erratic and high-speed driving would endanger members of the public, Detective Senior Constable Morrison immediately notified Police Communication Centre by radio.
19. At approximately 1:15am, a DiDi ride-sharer, Mr Gajanayakage, was driving south along Sydney Road, Brunswick, with passenger Jessy Brown.
20. As he passed the Aldi supermarket situated on Sydney Road, you continued to pursue Ms Garth along the tram tracks, rapidly approaching Mr Gajanayakage's vehicle from behind.
21. As Ms Garth evaded you she overtook Mr Gajanayakage's vehicle on the right-hand side, side-swiping his vehicle in the process and causing damage to the driver side mirror.
22. As this occurred, another motorist, Ms Canedo, was travelling north when she had to take evasive action to avoid colliding with Ms Garth head-on, as Ms Garth had crossed over to the wrong side of the road into the path of oncoming traffic.
23. Ms Garth continued driving towards the Melbourne CBD with you maintaining your pursuit. This is also part of the rolled-up Summary Charge 24 of failing to stop after an accident.
24. You continued to pursue Ms Garth into the Melbourne CBD. Uniform police observed the pursuit heading south along Elizabeth Street past Therry Street at a fast rate of speed.
25. Ms Garth made two U-turns along Elizabeth Street, passing police members three times, yelling out to them before heading east on Latrobe Street. Sergeant Brett Sidebottom immediately notified the Police Communications Centre by radio.
26. At approximately 1:18am on Latrobe Street, you intentionally rammed into Ms Garth's vehicle at speed, colliding directly into the driver's-side door of the vehicle. The impact caused Ms Garth's driver's-side curtain airbags to deploy, and both vehicles were rendered immobile. This is the end of the basis of Charge 1, reckless conduct endanger life.
27. Immediately following the collision, you got out of the Mazda and ran towards Ms Garth who had climbed out of the damaged Haval via the front passenger window. You pulled Ms Garth up off the road and ran from the collision scene, holding onto her. She was limping and struggling to keep pace with you.
28. When you observed police vehicles approaching the scene, you abandoned Ms Garth on Latrobe Street and ran south on Russell Street, fleeing the scene. This was captured on mobile phone footage from a nearby resident, Jake Stollery.
29. You also were captured on CCTV footage form the State Library of Victoria and the QV shopping centre running along Russell Street when you approached a parked white 2023 Toyota Camry sedan. You were filmed opening the front passenger-side door and entering the car where you remained for approximately ten seconds before getting out and running west on Little Lonsdale Street.
30. You entered the QV shopping centre and at 1:24am you were captured on CCTV footage leaving the shopping complex. You removed your black hooded jumper.
31. You travelled on foot towards Queen Street and at 1:47am you were captured on CCTV footage at the Ezymart at 339 Queen Street, to hide from patrolling police.
32. You then left the Ezymart and fled in an unknown direction.
33. At the time of the offending, you were a disqualified driver, and this gives rise to Summary Charge 4, driving whilst disqualified.
34. Police arrived at the scene on Latrobe Street and located Ms Garth on Russell Street.
35. She was injured and was arrested in relation to the theft of the Haval car. She told police she was being chased by an unknown person and that she drove the stolen car to get away. She did not want to talk further at the scene but told police to check her recent phone activity and speak to her mother in order to identify the other driver.
36. At the collision scene on Latrobe Street, both vehicles were photographed and searched by police, and in the Mazda driven by you the police located the following:

(a) A Victorian probationary driver's licence in the name of Sagar Lama that was altered with a photograph of you. This is the basis of Summary Charge 8, fraudulently use driver's licence document.

(b) An apple iPhone. This is part of rolled-up Charge 6, trafficking in a drug of dependence, and also includes electronic scales, empty zip-lock bags, a lighter, a Commonwealth Bank debit card in the name of Pamala Ciavarella located in the central console, and four zip-lock bags and one Eclipse breath mint case containing a white crystal substance believed to be methylamphetamine, located inside a black Louis Vuitton satchel bag, located on the front passenger seat, as well as two large zip-lock bags containing white crystal substance believed to be methylamphetamine and a black and a green coloured case containing a large zip-lock bag of white crystal substance believed to be methylamphetamine and $1240.00 in cash.

(c) A bag of brown powder believed to be heroin, located in the front passenger footwell. This is the basis of Charge 5, possession of a drug of dependence.

(d) Eight shotgun ammunition cartridges, located in the front passenger footwell. This is the basis of rolled-up Charge 10, possess cartridge ammunition without a licence.

(e) A 12-gauge Boito double-barrel sawn-off shotgun, unloaded, located in the rear driver footwell. This is the basis of rolled-up Charge 4, prohibited person in possession a firearm.

(f) A flick knife located inside a black Louis Vuitton satchel bag, located on the front passenger seat. This is the basis of Summary Charge 11, possess a controlled weapon.

1. Both the vehicles were towed from Latrobe Street, and the Mazda was searched by police again the following day. During the second search police located items including:
   • A zip-lock bag of white powder. This also forms part of the basis of rolled-up Charge 6, trafficking in a drug of dependence.
2. On 7 March 2024, you were arrested at a townhouse in Queen Street, Reservoir. Your mobile phone was seized.
3. Ms Garth and two male associates were also located inside the premises.
4. You were conveyed to the Melbourne West Police Station where a Record of Interview was commenced but suspended so that police could execute a search warrant at your address.
5. The search warrant was executed that evening and during the search police located the following items including:
   • A Perazzi MX8 double-barrel shotgun, located in the downstairs bedroom. This is also part of rolled-up Charge 4, a prohibited person in possession of a firearm.
   • An extendable baton, located in the downstairs bedroom. This is the basis of Summary Charge 20, possess a prohibited weapon.
   • Shotgun ammunition cartridges, located in the downstairs bedroom. This is also part of the basis of rolled-up Summary Charge 10, possess cartridge ammunition without a licence.
   • Five zip-lock bags containing methylamphetamine, located in the downstairs bedroom. This is also part of rolled-up Charge 6, trafficking in a drug of dependence.
   • Two brown bottles containing butanediol, located in the downstairs bedroom and the kitchen bench. This is the basis of Charge 8, possession of a drug of dependence.
   • Three bags of green vegetable matter, located in the loungeroom and kitchen. This is the basis of Charge 7, possession of a drug of dependence.
   • A Victorian learner driver permit in the name of Alexandra Limberis, a Victorian probationary driver's licence and Citibank debit card in the name of James Hill, and a Bank of Melbourne card in the name of Adrian Salvucci. This is part of the basis of Summary Charge 21, deal with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime.
6. On 8 March 2024, during your record of interview you were given a direction pursuant to s 465AAA of the Crimes Act 1958 for the PIN code to your devices that had been seized and you refused to comply. This is the basis of Summary Charge 23, failing to comply with a direction.
7. In relation to Charge 5, the total quantity of heroin located was 21 grams.
8. In relation to Charge 6, the total quantity of methylamphetamine located was 47 grams.
9. In relation to Charge 7, the total quantity of cannabis located was 85.4 grams.
10. In relation to Charge 8, the total quantity of butanediol located was 530 grams.
11. Your criminal history has been admitted.
12. No victim impact statements have been made.

1. You were aged 41 at the time of this offending.
2. You were born in Australia and raised in Craigieburn. Both your parents are from New Zealand, and they separated when you were one. You lived with your mother and your mother's new partner became your stepfather and you grew up in a blended family with six half siblings. Your family operated a milk bar next to the family home.
3. You had a relatively normal upbringing until you were 12. Your elder brother was released from a psychiatric unit and had a siege with police at the family home. As a result of the siege your brother was shot dead by police after producing knives. This event was deeply traumatic for your family.
4. In terms of your education and employment, you completed Year 11. You left school and commenced work in caravan manufacturing. Since 2017 you have primarily relied on Centrelink benefits and casual work.
5. You played football until you were 19, and had ambitions of getting into the AFL through the draft. You instruct your solicitors you had various clubs watching you, however, after an injury to your ankle you were unable to play.
6. In terms of family, you are currently supported by your mother, your sister and your partner. Your biological father died in 2017 as a result of a car accident. As you were in jail you were not able to attend his funeral.
7. You have three children. Your eldest son is 23 and is currently expecting his first child. You also have an 18-year-old daughter. You have no contact with your 14-year-old son.
8. In terms of drug use, you commenced using cannabis and alcohol when you were 13 years ofage. You would witness substance abuse at your family home and recall parties when your parents smoked cannabis and you felt smoking cannabis was relatively normal due to your experience.
9. You commenced using methylamphetamine at 17 with your peers. After your injury that ended your football aspirations, you commenced heavy substance abuse.
10. In early December 2025 you were attacked in a shooting, suffered several gunshot wounds and were hospitalised. Your counsel describes this caused significant trauma, anxiety and stress and led to a significant relapse into substance abuse beyond your normal usage which ultimately led to your current remand.
11. Around the time of your arrest you admit you were using methylamphetamine and other substances.[2]
12. Your counsel described you acknowledged that your substance abuse has strained your positive relationships with your siblings and mother and you have lost significant periods of your life to substance abuse. You have been using drugs for 30 years.
13. On 28 August 2024 you were granted bail on condition you engage in residential rehabilitation at The Cottage, and you completed the program on 20 November 2024. You relapsed in February 2025 due to significant stress surrounding your family unit. This relapse continued until your remand in custody around December 2025.[3]
14. During your time in custody your elder sister passed away, and you were again unable to attend the funeral.

1. In terms of your mental health, Mr McKinnon, consultant psychologist, prepared a report dated 13 February 2026. He had previously assessed you and referred to his earlier report dated 11 September 2021, and an addendum report dated 22 April 2022.
2. He noted at his most recent assessment you were uncertain about your plea, so your offending was not discussed.
3. Mr Mackinnon diagnosed you as suffering from longstanding complex post- traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse disorder. In his opinion you suffered from these conditions at the time of your offending.
4. In his opinion the primary identifiable antecedent to you developing C-PTSD 'include the death of his older brother (c1994), dramas and violent encounters associated with your involvement in criminal milieus, terms of imprisonment and the shooting attack that he suffered late in 2025.'[4]
5. He stated: 'At present Mr Simon's C-PTSD is compounded by grief associated with the very recent death of his sister and the re-living of his father's death this has generated. Indeed, Mr Simon presented in an extremely depressed state (despite being treated with Endep...).'
6. Mr Mackinnon also diagnosed you with substance abuse disorder which is in a current state of partial remission due to you being on remand.
7. In his opinion your criminal history suggests you continue to labour with anti-social and criminal traits with a propensity for engaging in violent, reckless and weapon related offences.
8. In his opinion he stated:

'C-PTSD and SAD, along with antisocial and criminal traits, were major factors in his offending by significantly degrading his ability to apply good reasoning and sound judgment, disinhibiting him, reducing his ability to apply consequential thinking, raising his impulsivity and fostering a self-absorbed perspective that tended to ignore the rights and welfare of other members in the wider community.[5]

1. Mr Mackinnon noted that you had used your time in custody productively to prepare yourself for post release life, engaging with programs and services in the prison system.

1. The prosecution submits the main sentencing purposes are protection of the community, specific and general deterrence. Protection of the community as a purpose is high for the offending of reckless conduct endangering life, trafficking a drug of dependence and being in possession of firearms. Counsel also noted the conduct comprising the reckless conduct endangering life occurred in the context of family violence offending in your pursuit of your intimate partner, Ms Garth.
2. Prosecution counsel submits the objective gravity for Charge 1, which was the charge of reckless conduct endangering life, is high. You were disqualified from driving[6] and drug affected at the time of offending.
3. The prosecution challenges the defence reliance on Verdins Limb 3 to moderate the weight to be given to general deterrence on the basis there is no evidence that your diagnosis of C-PTSD impacted on your ability to exercise good judgement with respect to this offending. Further, substance abuse was a factor in your offending as you admitted to using methylamphetamine prior to your arrest. This is reiterated in the prosecution's further submissions on sentence which note there is no discussion about the index offending in Mr Mackinnon's report and the conduct cannot be disentangled form your drug use.[7]
4. The prosecution also contest the punitive nature of your residential rehabilitation be taken into account in the sentencing exercise as you spent twelve weeks at The Cottage, whereas in the case of Akoka relied on by defence the accused spent 12 months at Odyssey House.
5. Your defence counsel submits the main sentencing purposes are community protection and specific deterrence. Your counsel submits the case of Verdins is applicable to moderate the weight given to general deterrence as a sentencing purpose. Whilst your rehabilitation prospects are guarded, they are not extinguished as you have recently demonstrated your capacity to complete a residential rehabilitation program.
6. The defence submitted you have pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
7. The defence, noting that you have not received a non-parole period in the past, submit that a term of imprisonment with a head sentence and non-parole period is the only option for sentencing given the seriousness of your offending and your prior criminal history.
8. Counsel submitted the third limb of Verdins applies, namely, you should not be considered as a vehicle for general deference due to your mental health diagnosis, which affected your decision-making when committing these offences.
9. Defence also submitted the length of your sentence should be moderated given the three months of residential rehabilitation you completed at The Cottage.
10. Defence also relied on a reference from your mother Colleen Simon dated 5 March 2026, a reference from your sister Rochelle Simon dated 5 March 2026, a letter from your addiction counsellor Maria Hutchinson dated 22 July 2024, and a letter from the Clinical AOD counsellor/recovery coach Timothy Ridgeway which was undated but referred to your application for bail.[8]

1. I take into account the factors in s 5(2) of the Sentencing Act.
2. I accept the submissions from both counsel that protection of the community, specific and general deterrence are relevant sentencing purposes, and I will return to general deterrence in my consideration of the submissions.
3. In my view punishment and denunciation as sentencing purposes are also relevant.
4. I take into account current sentencing practices but was not referred to comparable cases by counsel. I have had regard to the JCV Sentencing snapshots for the charge of reckless conduct endangering life. No cases are on all fours with your offending.
5. Charge 1 carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment.
6. In my view the most serious offending relates to Charge 1 and your driving, and I accept the prosecutor's submission that the objective gravity for Charge 1 is high. Your conduct on the road lasted about ten minutes, your driving was erratic and dangerous. Your driving caused Ms Garth to engage in erratic and dangerous conduct whereby she hit two other vehicles whilst you were pursuing her and purposefully and deliberately ramming her car on a number of occasions. The safety of the community was put at enormous risk as a result of your behaviour on a busy road used by pedestrians and other drivers. You weaponised your driving to pursue her and ram her car. There is no victim impact statement from her but your pursuit clearly terrified her as evidenced by the desperate nature of her attempts to evade you.
7. The fact that your offending occurs in the context of your intimate relationship with Ms Garth increases its serious nature and gravity. The authorities have noted offending in the context of family violence as central to the task of sentencing, the prominence of deterrence as a sentencing purpose, as well as denunciation, protection of the community and punishment.[9]
8. The reckless conduct endangering life charge did not result in actual serious injury or death to any person or road user, however, Ms Garth was described in the prosecution opening as a result of the collision sustaining substantial pain in the left side of her torso and left arm and a graze to her left knee that was bleeding. She also described feeling nauseous and light-headed.'[10] Ms Garth hit two cars and many people in the vicinity witnessed your and her driving and reported it to 000, and police also witnessed your driving. Your offending is aggravated by the fact you were disqualified from driving, and driving a stolen vehicle, and on your admission were affected by drugs, although you were not charged with that offence. You used the car as if you were on a film or a TV show and exposed the public in the vicinity to serious risk. It was a miracle no-one other than Ms Garth was injured.
9. The other offending is also serious, particularly the drug trafficking and possession of firearms offences. These were detected as a result of the search of the Mazda and the search warrant executed at the Reservoir house. Some of the items were located in the Reservoir residence which you shared with two others and I accept the submission that whilst you were not the sole possessor of these items, no-one else has been charged with respect to them.
10. Charge 4 relates to you being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, namely, a double barrel sawn-off shotgun that was in the Mazda at the time of your offending. Although it was unloaded, there were eight shotgun ammunition cartridges in the front passenger footwell. Charge 8 also includes another double barrel shotgun located at the Reservoir residence in the downstairs bedroom. Shotgun ammunition cartridges were also located in the downstairs bedroom.
11. This is serious offending and the need for protection of the community is high.
12. Also located in the Mazda and the Reservoir residence were various items that make up the rolled-up Charge 6, trafficking methylamphetamine, including scales, zip-lock bags containing methylamphetamine and cash. The total quantity of methylamphetamine was 47 grams. The trafficable quantity is 3 grams.
13. Both Charges 4 and 6 are rolled up charges. A rolled-up charge is a collection of identifiable charges bundled together in a single charge. As they bundle a collection of counts together a significantly higher sentence than a single offence is justified.
14. Your counsel submits the weight I give to the sentencing purpose of general deterrence should be moderated as your diagnosis of C-PTSD impacted on your ability to exercise sound judgement. I have referred to the prosecution's objection to this submission.
15. The question of whether general deterrence should be moderated depends on the effect of your C-PTSD on your mental capacity at the time of your offending. This requires some connection between your psychological condition and your offending. In his report Mr Mackinnon specifically states that owing to the uncertainty of your plea, your offending behaviour was not discussed. Other than in the most general sense, there is no consideration by him as to how your C-PTSD diminished your capacity to reason about the wrongfulness of your driving conduct at the time of the offending. As I have already quoted, he stated your C-PTSD and SAD, along with antisocial and criminal traits, significantly degraded your ability to apply good reasoning and sound judgment, disinhibited you, reduced your ability to apply consequential thinking, raising your impulsivity and fostering a self-absorbed perspective. There is no reference by Mr Mackinnon to the details of your offending or any example connecting the symptoms of your C-PTSD to it or the extent to which anti-social and criminal traits played a role. I was referred to the case of the DPP v Tewaka[11] where the psychologist Ms Matthews found an accused's mental state was triggered by an event which was intimately connected to his current offending, which can be factually distinguished here. In fact, there has been no explanation or context provided as to the precursor to, or reason for, your behaviour on 25 February 2024. Your conduct was sustained and deliberate driving over ten minutes. I am not of the view there is cogent evidence in Mr Mackinnon's report to find on the balance of probabilities there is a connection that your C-PTSD directly contributed to the commission of these offences.
16. Further, this is also complicated by your offending in the context of your drug use. You admit you were affected by drugs, including methylamphetamine at the time, although you have not been charged with this offence. You commenced using methamphetamine at the age of 17. Given your extensive history of drug use, I am of the view you were aware of the possible consequences of drug taking and the likely effect on your behaviour.
17. I am of the view general deterrence is a relevant sentencing consideration and I do not moderate the weight I give to it as a sentencing purpose.
18. Both parties have conceded you have pleaded guilty at the earliest stage, and I give the full discount available for your plea. You pleaded guilty at a directions hearing on 25 August 2025. This was after a committal hearing where only the informant gave evidence.
19. Your plea of guilty has the public interest benefit of avoiding a trial and the time and expense involved with witnesses attending court to give evidence.
20. Your prior criminal history is significant, and you have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment in the past. You have relevant prior offences such as driving in a manner dangerous, possessing prohibited weapons and being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm. I note you only have two prior drug convictions for possessing a drug of dependence in 2020 and for GHB in 2021 and for each offence you received a one month's jail. I note despite your poor driving record you do not have prior convictions for driving whilst disqualified or unlicensed driving.
21. I take into account your prospects for rehabilitation. You are not a young offender and have a significant relevant prior history, however, you have recently completed a three-month residential rehabilitation program at The Cottage. This gives cause for some guarded optimism as to your future prospects to reform, moderated by your subsequent offending. I accept the submission this time at The Cottage was the first time you addressed the underlying issues in a structured environment. The letter from Aaron Gilhooley, General Manager at The Cottage dated 19 November 2024, reflects your success. I also accept the submission that the period of imprisonment imposed today reflect the degree and extent to which you were in residential rehabilitation for three months.
22. In my view the sentence I impose should denounce what was outrageous driving behaviour in the context of family violence.
23. I also seek to deter you from engaging in this conduct in the future and deter others from engaging in such behaviour.
24. The need for sentencing to protect the community is also reflected in the sentence I impose.
25. I take into account the principle of totality which requires when a court sentences an offender on a number of offences that the overall sentence must be a, 'just and appropriate measure of the total criminality involved'.[12] I also take into consideration the principle of parsimony that the sentence be no more severe than is necessary to satisfy the purposes of sentencing.
26. There are separate instances of criminality, namely, in being a prohibited person in possession of firearms offence and the trafficking methylamphetamine offence and my sentence will reflect recognition of this.

Trafficking in a drug of dependence (methylamphetamine)

Possession of a drug of dependence (1,4 butanediol)

Possess cartridge ammunition without licence or permit

Possess prohibited weapon without exemption or approval

Pre-sentence detention declaration pursuant to s 18(1) of the Sentencing Act 1991:

4 years six months with a non parole period of 3 years

Driver licence cancellation and disqualification:

1. Can I ask, Madam Prosecutor, have those amended notices in respect of confiscation been filed.
2. MS LEKAMGE: Yes, Your Honour, they have.
3. HER HONOUR: Thank you. With respect to the charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine, the application for forfeiture under the Confiscation Act 1997 is granted and I order that the 19 items in the attached schedule to the application are forfeited to the Minister.
4. With respect to the charge of trafficking a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine, the application for forfeiture under the Confiscation Act 1997 is granted and I order that the one item in the attached schedule is forfeited to the Minister.
5. With respect to the charge of handling stolen goods the application for forfeiture is granted under the Confiscation Act 1997 and I order that the 31 items in the attached schedule be forfeited to the Minister.
6. And with respect to the charge of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, the application under the Control of Weapons Act 1990 is granted and I order that the eight items in the schedule to the application be placed in the custody of the Chief Commissioner of Police, to be held until 28 days after the date of this conclusion or any appeal proceeding, and to then be destroyed.
7. With respect to the fines that I have imposed, I will not grant a stay, but I will make the relevant directions in respect of the Fines Commissioner.
8. Could I ask counsel, is there anything that I have missed or - - -
9. MR JAKOBSON: There has to be mandatory licence orders in respect of theft of motor vehicle, Your Honour. I don't believe Your Honour indicated any loss of licence.
10. HER HONOUR: In respect to that offence.
11. MR JAKOBSON: That's correct. There's no mandatory minimum, it just has to happen, otherwise there will be a three-months' automated by VicRoads.
12. HER HONOUR: So that's in respect of Charge 2 - - -
13. MR JAKOBSON: That's the motor vehicle, correct - - -
14. HER HONOUR: The licence order that I make in respect of Charge 2 is three months concurrent with the order that I have made in respect of Charge 1 which is four years.
15. MR JAKOBSON: My apologies, Your Honour.
16. HER HONOUR: Were there any other orders sought.
17. MS LEKAMGE: No, Your Honour.
18. HER HONOUR: All right, thank you. What I might do is if you've got any questions in respect of the formulation of the sentence my associates will have a copy. I might adjourn and in due course perhaps the prosecution can withdraw and give Mr Jakobson an opportunity to have a chat with Mr Simon if that's required - - -
19. MR JAKOBSON: I have a conference with Mr Simon booked tomorrow in any event - - -
20. HER HONOUR: You do, all right, then that won't be necessary - - -
21. MR JAKOBSON: So I can speak to him then as well.
22. HER HONOUR: All right, thank you. Unless there's anything further, we'll adjourn the court. Thank you.

[1] Prosecution opening summary for plea dated 12 February 2026. Prosecution Exhibit 1.

[2] Defence brief outline of submissions dated 1 March 2026, states: 'Around the time of his arrest Mr Simon was utilising Methylamphetamine.' [16]. Mr Mckinnon's report dated 13 February 2026 states 'Mr Tehira (sic) stated that, at the time of the 2024 offences, he was 'mostly using Lyrica, meth and alcohol.' [28] (emphasis in original)

[3] No evidence of the date of remand has been provided.

[4] Report by Mr Ian H. Mackinnon dated 13 February 2026, [44].

[5] Report by Mr Ian H. Mackinnon dated 13 February 2026, [55].

[6] Prosecution opening summary for plea dated 12 February 2026. Prosecution Exhibit 1, [6].

[7] Further prosecution submissions on sentence dated 6 March 2026, [4].

[8] None of these documents were tendered to the court.

[9] Director of Public Prosecutions v Kurtaj [2025] VSCA 203, citing Skeates (a pseudonym) v The King

[2023] VSCA 226.

[11] [2014] VCC 953 [24].

[12] Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR, 307-306.