Eneasi Taumoefolau, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking ecstasy, a drug of dependence, between 10 March 2013 and 27 March 2013, one charge of trafficking in methamphetamine, a drug of dependence, between 1 April 2013 and 12 April 2013, and one charge of trafficking in cannabis, a drug of dependence, on 5 April 2013. Each of these charges carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment. Circumstances of the offending are contained in the exhibited summary of prosecution, which will be retained on the file for future reference.
Briefly stated, a police operation commenced in January 2013 which focused on the drug trafficking activities of a number of men, including yourself. These were Nelson, Waheed, Sempas and Dimitropoulos. The investigation comprised of surveillance, a covert operative and the interception of telephone calls. It demonstrated that you sourced quantities of methamphetamine from Nelson and Dimitropoulos. You supplied ecstasy to Dimitropoulos and sourced ecstasy from a person referred to as 'O' and you utilised a number of mobile phones connected in fictitious names and details.
Further, it is clear that Dimitropoulos also sourced ecstasy from 'O'. Nelson supplied methamphetamine, not just to you but to Waheed and Dimitropoulos. Sempas supplied cocaine to Dimitropoulos to sell to Waheed and for the covert operative.
Charge 1 involved you offering an unknown quantity of ecstasy to Dimitropoulos in the charge period. You sent a series of messages to him during which you made the offer and he agreed to have a look at them. The next day you confirmed you had the ecstasy, in messages which were coded. You gave Dimitropolous the details of the supplier 'O' and described the tablets by appearance and price. Dimitropoulos contacted 'O' and they arranged to meet and collect the tablets. These tablets eventually were supplied to Davis. Some days later Dimitropolous asked you to get some more and you told him you would immediately attend to that. Later he came to your home to collect the ecstasy tablets.
The second charge arises in an overlapping period. Dimitropoulos told you in coded messages he had some work for you and you told him you would "smash it for him". You met and supplied him with methamphetamine. You told him you'd break up the drug into samples. In later calls you confirmed this and you then arranged to meet with him at your home, where an outstanding debt was also discussed as to an earlier supply.
Later that same day a series of SMSs with Dimitropoulos disclosed that you ordered six ounces of methamphetamine and then cancelled the order because another supplier had arrived. He asked you if you still needed the ten and you agreed to this supply on the basis of cash on delivery. You arranged to meet at 'O''s home. Dimitropoulos met also with Nelson to collect the ten ounce order for you. You then indicated you had the payment in cash and Dimitropoulos told you he was coming over. He had in fact collected seven ounces. He SMS'ed you to tell you he was on his way to supply them to you but you were not home so that transaction was not completed it appears.
That same evening there were messages to indicate a six ounce delivery to Nelson and Dimitropoulos, by them to you at your home. When you were unable to provide the money, Dimitropoulos put off the supply. The following day you asked Dimitropoulos for a price for ten ounces, which he told you would be $85,000. He requested from Nelson the ten ounces you had spoken to him about, and while you were away interstate you had organised for a contact for Dimitropoulos, and that contact was organised with him to receive four ounces of methamphetamines for cash. The order was cancelled but the drug had been sourced from Nelson.
Two of the four ounces were returned to Nelson; the other two were retained for you. Dimitropoulos told you about the two ounces and you arranged to meet at your home. He confirmed he would come to your home the following day. After the drug was supplied payment was discussed and you told Dimitropoulos you had $14,000 for a previously outstanding drug debt.
Charge 3 arises out of a series of messages between yourself and Dimitropoulos, during which contact you indicated you were going interstate and he asked you how you were going with the one pound bag of cannabis. Your involvement with him apparently ceased on 12 April, after a series of messages between you, Nelson, Dimitropoulos and others, in which it was revealed that Waheed had threatened Dimitropoulos with a firearm.
In August 2013, Victoria Police executed a search warrant upon your home. You were present and you were arrested. During the search eight mobile phones, SIM cards, four laptops and an IPad were seized. They also seized a sword, which formed the basis for a summary charge of possessing a prohibited weapon, to which you also pleaded guilty. You made a 'no comment' record of interview and you were remanded in custody.
Nelson was sentenced by me in May of this year. He pleaded to one charge of trafficking in no less than a commercial quantity, 345 grams of 80 per cent purity methamphetamine. He had a prior conviction for trafficking and was sentenced accordingly.
This offending is serious and the court should denounce acts of trafficking without hesitation. Here there is a course of conduct encompassed by Charges 1 and 2, usually referred to as a 'Giretti' count. They are of duration of two weeks, therefore limited to that time but concerning two different drugs and involving different people, and a number of transactions. The first count is the traffick simpliciter with unknown quantities, and the second relates to actually transacted two ounces, that is 56 grams, and the willingness or attempt to source and move seven to ten ounces; each of these of unknown purity.
There is no doubt that drug trafficking is trafficking in human misery. Such a trade causes enormous costs, measured in human suffering, damage to physical and mental health, the destruction of families, damaged lives, often young lives, and is the cause of much associated or derivative crime in our community. It is a tawdry, evil blight that is central to many of our social ills. While you were not the person selling drugs directly to the public, or the manufacturer, you were a mid-level supplier and dealer, and your responsibility is substantial. On the occasions the transactions about which you were exchanging messages with others fell through, it was your intention and purpose to proceed and procure sale and supply.
Trafficking is no less serious in respect of unsupplied drugs than in respect of those which are actually supplied to ultimate consumers and other traffickers. The potential harm of unsold or unsupplied drug of dependence must be viewed as seriously as the actual harm caused by the sale and distribution of the drug. The seriousness of the trafficking is unaffected by the fact that the drug may not have reached the public. You willingly and knowingly engaged in trafficking for profit. Your motive was greed. You undertook a willing risk and made yourself a partner and link between suppliers, and you closed your mind to the insidious effects of the drug, concerning yourself only with your own real and potential benefit.
The third charge arises on a single date. The code used to describe the bag was explained ultimately by you in relation to one pound, and in that sense I take into account that you have facilitated the course of justice by the admission as to the quantity, and as to the substance itself.
This accompanies your plea which was made at committal, therefore at the earliest opportunity available. I will take this into consideration and assign it an appropriate discount, which I will make clear. I accept that the plea is indicative of a level of remorse, although with such a matter that is often difficult to fully assess. I accept it is early and a timely offer. The facilitation of the resolution and its utilitarian effect indicate that you are regretful and are remorseful of your involvement.
I accept there is no evidence of enrichment, though this conduct is motivated by greed. The plea leads to an assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation of which this plea probably forms only a good start. I take into account your personal circumstances. You have a criminal history which is not extensive but relevant and noteworthy.
In January 2008 you were arrested and fined for attempted possession of a prescribed, restricted substance. In 2009 the District Court convicted and sentenced you to three years, with a non-parole period of one and a half years, for supplying a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug, and supplying cannabis, as well as driving offences and handling stolen goods. The sentence was to commence in May 2008, so back dated.
You were released on 25 November 2009 on parole, having served 18 months. Whilst on parole for the New South Wales matters you committed offences on 5 March 2010 in Victoria. In the meantime, as you waited for those matters to be dealt with in this court, you were fined in November 2010, again for handling stolen goods. Then in August 2011 your New South Wales parole was revoked with a year owing. In November 2011, Her Honour Judge Lawson of this court sentenced you for intentionally cause injury, threat to kill and use of an unregistered firearm, to 21 months with a non-parole period of nine months. You were granted parole on that sentence on 12 December 2012 and you were released on 19 December, having served 386 days in custody.
Only three short months later you committed these offences, whilst on parole for the sentence I have referred to. This is an aggravating feature of your offending which I must take into account. This history, although not extensive as I have said, nevertheless demonstrates your disregard for the law and the sanction of the court and its obligations. It is an indicator that specific deterrence is a significant, relevant factor which I must also consider in order to persuade you from further similar conduct. The criminality involved here of course requires that general deterrence to be paramount. The court must make clear to like-minded individuals, who would seek to engage in trafficking in drugs of dependence, that the court will meet such conduct with stern punishment, and denounce this behaviour as totally unacceptable.
You were arrested on 1 August 2013 and your parole was cancelled on 7 August. I will take these days into account by way of pre-sentence detention. I note this period of parole will expire on 5 July 2015. I will take into account this and your recent previous days of detention upon your breach of parole, in terms of the principle of totality which I will explain later. I take into account your personal history.
You are now 33-years-old. You were born in Tonga, the eldest of five. Your family came to Australia in '89, initially settling in Sydney then in Robinvale. The impact of your offending on your hardworking and law abiding parents must have left them deeply wounded and upset, and that is ongoing. Your father was previously a Police Commissioner in Tonga. He now works as a music teacher and integration officer at the local high school. Your mother is an integration officer at the local hospital. You have three brothers employed or at school and a sister also at school. Bar from one, none of them have ever had problems with the law and the brother who has, appeared only in the Children's Court a number of years ago.
Your relationship with your family is positive. They regularly visit you in prison and this support is very important for your future prospects. You completed and passed VCE and are fully literate. You're in good physical and mental health and fortunately you have not used or abused drugs or alcohol. You are married and have been married since 2000 and your wife visits you, often every week. She runs a child care business. You have four children between the ages of 13 and six months. This factor is both clearly a positive element in your life and hopes for your future. At the same time it gives pause for reflection and is cause for concern.
If the support and protection which your family requires and deserves did not sway you from this conduct, it puts into question your real prospects for the future. It is to be hoped that this period of imprisonment will highlight to you your obligation of responsibility and lawful behaviour in the future. You have worked over the years as a tree lopper and tree removalist and had been working with your cousin prior to your arrest. I was told that the business is ongoing and you would probably be able to return to employment upon your release, if you choose to do so.
The support of your family despite everything, particularly that of your wife, are positive indicators. As was your record during reclusion of clean urine samples and your participation in programs available to you, as well as work as a unit billet and your position in the prison gym. I was told of your determination not to reoffend and your firm intention to not again let your family down. One can only hope this will be so but any assessment of your prospects of rehabilitation must confront the reality of your recent history in which you failed in that intent.
It is noteworthy that in a sentence of November 2011, Her Honour Judge Lawson mentioned that the 2009 drug convictions involved succumbing to the temptation of easy money and you were arrested while transporting drugs interstate. Your 2011 convictions were out of behaviour towards your wife, when armed with a gun, which you fired to frighten her in the presence of your children. She gave evidence for you then on that occasion and about your commitment to a secure a stable future.
All that was so easily undone after Her Honour had found your prospects for rehabilitation were good. I do not consider in the circumstances that the need for specific deterrence is lessened to any extent in your case. Given also that you've twice breached your parole and twice breached your promise not to again offend.
I must take into account that the balance of your parole sentence, close to some 11 months, to July 2015 will be suspended while the non-parole period I impose today is served under the Sentencing Act provisions. I take that sentence and the period outstanding therefore in setting a head sentence and a non-parole period. I have also had the advantage of consulting the Sentencing Snapshots Number 129 in relation to trafficking in a non-commercial quantity of drugs of the Sentencing Advisory Council, together with the overview of sentences, details for which offence are on the website for the Judicial College of Victoria, and have read a number of relevant cases mentioned.
I have considered the issue of parity but, as was conceded on the plea, Nelson was not a direct co-accused and the offending was marked by different length and activities, commercial quantity and the existence of a prior. In my view there should be some small cumulation between each charge to reflect the criminality of the offending period, as well as the different transactions and conduct involved in each. The summary charge will be concurrent on each Charges of 1, 2 and 3.
Please stand. On Charge 1 and 2 you are convicted and sentenced to three and a half years' imprisonment on each charge. On Charge 3 you are convicted and sentenced to two years' imprisonment. I order that twelve months on Counts 2 and six months on Count 3 will be cumulative on Charge 1. That is a total effective sentence of five years' imprisonment. I set a non-parole period of three and a half years.
On the summary charge of possession of prohibited weapon, you are convicted and sentenced to two months concurrent with the same sentence. But for your plea I would have sentenced you to six years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of four and a half years.
I order that you undergo a procedure for the obtaining of a biological sample for placing your sample on the DNA database. If, at the time when a request is made for a mouth scrape, which is not a painful procedure, you refuse that procedure authorised police officers will be able to use reasonable force to obtain a blood sample from you. Do you understand what I have just said?
OFFENDER: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: I have also signed disposal orders for the material outlined in the schedule.
MR COLE: As Your Honour pleases.
HIS HONOUR: Sorry, there is one thing that I should say and declare and that is your pre-sentence detention, that is six days, from what I have outlined before and so I declare that you have spent six days in pre-sentence detention and I will have that noted in the records of the court, and it will be taken into account administratively by the correctional services.
I note that there are members of your family in court so if they wish to say anything to you I will stay on the Bench while that happens, before you are taken away. Thank you Mr Cole, you're excused.