DPP v Teryaki [2018] VCC 1876

6. Moving on to incident two. At some stage after this, Ms Woolard was picked up from her home by Ms Teryaki in the stolen Hyundai. Later that night, someone in the group drove the Hyundai to a Coles petrol station in Roxburgh Park. CCTV footage shows one of the males getting out of the car and filling it with petrol, while both Ms Teryaki and Ms Woolard were in the car. None of the occupants of the car attempted to pay for the petrol, and the car was then driven away. This charge of theft is Charge 2 against Ms Teryaki and Charge 1 against Ms Woolard.
7. The third incident. At about 4 pm the next day, the stolen Hyundai was driven to a BP service station in Warrenheip on the Western Highway. Ms Woolard got out of the car and filled the petrol tank with petrol worth $34.57, which was not paid for. This is Charge 2, the charge of theft against Ms Woolard.
8. The fourth incident. That evening, at about 6.30 pm, the stolen Hyundai was driven to a BP petrol station on the Burwood Highway in Burwood East by one of the males, and again, Ms Woolard filled the tank with petrol worth $28.85, which was not paid for. This is Charge 3 of theft against Ms Woolard.
9. The fifth incident. About ten minutes later, the second carjacking was attempted. Alison Todd was driving her red Toyota Yaris along a suburban street in Mooroolbark and pulled over to check the house numbers. She noticed the Hyundai drive past erratically and pull into a driveway about 20 metres from her. It then quickly reversed and sped past Ms Todd.
10. She then continued driving her car towards her friend's house, which was another 15 metres up the road. The Hyundai again sped past her, pulled into another driveway, and reversed back to her location, stopping on the road opposite Ms Todd. She saw two women get out of the car and approach her vehicle. She was frightened. The gears of the car were in park and the doors were locked.
11. Ms Teryaki banged on the window on the driver's side door and yelled and gestured at Ms Todd to get out of the car. One of the younger women was banging on the passenger side window, yelling and hitting the mirror. Ms Todd started sounding her car horn in an effort to deter the offenders, but this was unsuccessful.
12. She then drove away with two of the offenders initially hanging on to the mirrors. She drove about three to five metres when the driver of the Hyundai drove at her car and smashed into the right-hand front light. The two offenders then ran back to the Hyundai, and they drove off. That is Charge 3 against Ms Teryaki, attempted carjacking.
13. Incident six. At about 10 pm that night, Ms Truong Nguyen drove her black Honda Civic from her home to the Keilor Downs shopping centre. She parked outside the gym and took her keys from the ignition. As she opened the car door, she was approached by Ms Teryaki and two of the younger offenders.

14. One of the offenders demanded the car keys, and Ms Nguyen told her no, it was not her car, and she closed the car door. The co-accused Miller produced a knife and managed to grab the door handle as the victim struggled to shut it from inside. Ms Nguyen could hear demands being made for her keys. Miller lunged at her and stabbed her in the right thigh, causing a small laceration.
15. The victim jumped out of the car and the co-accused Williams got in and tried to start it. The victim still had the chip on her person so the car would not start. She ran towards another car, seeking assistance, and she heard Woolard call out from the Hyundai: "Quick, let's go." That is Charge 4 against both accused, attempted aggravated carjacking.
16. The seventh and last incident. At about 3.05 am the following day, 16 July,

Ms Teryaki was driving the stolen Hyundai out of a car park at Federation Square. Police followed the car and activated their lights and sirens in an attempt to intercept it. Ms Teryaki did not pull over as directed, and police ended the pursuit. That is summary Charge 13 against Ms Teryaki, failure to stop a vehicle on police direction.

17. There are a number of other summary charges against Ms Teryaki which

18. I turn now to Ms Woolard's background and personal circumstances.

Ms Woolard, you were aged 20 at the time of the offending and you are now 21. Your family consists of your mother and your younger sister, and your mother raised you both. You are not on good terms with either of them.

19. You struggled at school, both academically and socially, and you were bullied. During your primary school years, you were told that you had a mild intellectual disability. You stopped attending high school during Year 7, and after that, you went to a special school from time to time where you met and became best friends with Ms Teryaki.
20. You have never been employed and you have a very limited social network, although, as I said, you were best friends with Ms Teryaki. You have used illicit drugs sporadically since your late teens, principally methamphetamine and cannabis.
21. In recent times, you have been assisted by a mental health service called Breakthrough, with the goals of obtaining independent housing and general stability. This would enable you to leave home and the difficulties there. Meanwhile, you have been very isolated at home, with nothing much to do with your time. You are currently prescribed Zoloft for depression and Valium for anxiety.
22. As I said, you were diagnosed as a child with a mild intellectual disability, and the possibility of a Justice Plan for you was investigated. Eventually, you were found to be eligible on the basis of that early diagnosis, even though you no longer meet the criteria for an intellectual disability. The preferred diagnosis now is Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or ADHD. You have now been assessed as suitable for a Community Correction Order with a Justice Plan.
23. In a very helpful report prepared by Ms Janelle Devine and Mr David Pearce dated 4 October 2018, the authors referred to the report of neuropsychologist Mr Martin Jackson, who made the diagnosis of ADHD.
24. The writers explain that you did take up Mr Jackson's recommendation to seek medical help for ADHD, but there seemed to be some confusion over this and your support worker from The Salt Foundation will be helping you with that in future. You are shaking your head, but we will come back to that later, perhaps.
25. Another important assistance to you is that you have been found to be eligible for NDIS, and your plan under that scheme has been approved. Funding has been provided for assistance to you in finding independent accommodation and daily supports that you need.
26. In addition, it has been determined that even though Mr Jackson considers you do not have an intellectual disability, your eligibility for Disability Support Services will not be changed. This is important because I understand you were unhappy being labelled as intellectually disabled and are much more content with the new diagnosis of ADHD, but you have agreed not to disturb things as they are now. The report informs me that it has been explained to you that you can ask to have your status changed at any time.
27. I am going to be lenient in sentencing you today for several reasons. First, you were not the main offender. You went along with things and you got into this trouble that way. It was stupid behaviour which could have led to a lot more harm than it did, although of course, the victims were very severely frightened.
28. You and the others were very young. You are still a young person and you exercised very poor judgment. Part of the reason for that is because of what we call "impaired mental functioning." In your case, you find it hard to consider the outcome of your behaviour and you tend to act impulsively. The law says that that means that your particular case should not be used as an example to other people who might be tempted to offend in the way you did.
29. Putting it another way, your criminality is a bit less than someone else's who might do the same thing, and so you should be punished less severely than that other person, and if you were sent to prison, you would find it harder than some other people. So I must take that into account in deciding what the sentence should be.
30. Another point is that you have pleaded guilty, and that is important because it means a trial has been avoided and witnesses do not have to come to court to give evidence. It also tells me that you are sorry for what you did.
31. Mr Jackson said in his report that if you had activities to do each day instead of just hanging out with your friends, you would be less likely to reoffend, and that if workers could assist you with this, your progress would be much better.
32. Because of all these reasons, the prosecution does not oppose the community order that I am going to impose.
33. The other young people, apart from Ms Teryaki, were dealt with in the Children's Court and so it is not possible to make meaningful comparisons with their sentences, which otherwise I would do.
34. Would you stand, now, please, Ms Woolard, and I will explain to you the details of the Community Correction Order? It will begin today and it will last for

12 months. There will be convictions recorded and you will be under supervision.

35. You must perform 50 hours of unpaid community work and you must have treatment for drug abuse.
36. Mr Kenny, I have just noticed that I did make that a condition of the CCO, so that will mean that Ms Woolard can have those drug screens. And you will also be assessed to see if you need any other treatment for any mental health problems.
37. You must also have what is called judicial monitoring. That is, you will have to come to court from time to time to see me, and I will hear about your progress. That means when you do come, there do not need to be any lawyers here. There will be no-one else here, just your case manager and you, and it might even be done by video link. We will see about that.
38. There is also a condition that you abide by the Justice Plan and that will be explained to you when you go along to your appointment with Corrections next week. When you do attend these appointments for treatment, the time you spend doing that can be credited against the 50 hours of work that you have to do. So that will be helpful towards your efforts to complete the order successfully.
39. Do you agree to this order being made?
40. OFFENDER: Yes, I do.
41. HER HONOUR: Good. It means that if you breach it by not complying with your obligations, or by further offending of any sort, you will have to come back to court and be re-sentenced.
42. You must go to the Broadmeadows Corrections office, which is at

24-27 Dimboola Road in Broadmeadows, before 4 o'clock next Tuesday

20 November. So you have got today and you have got all of Monday and Tuesday to get there. Do you understand that?

43. OFFENDER: Yes, I do.
44. HER HONOUR: All right. In a moment, you will be asked to sign that,

45. MR KENNY: May it please Your Honour.
46. HER HONOUR: Mr Kenny, can I just ask you whether the 464ZF is consented to or not opposed?
47. MR KENNY: I don't seek to be heard in relation to that, Your Honour.
48. HER HONOUR: Thank you. The final thing, Mr Kenny, is that there was an application by the prosecution for an order under s.464ZF. So perhaps I will explain that quickly to Ms Woolard.
49. MR KENNY: Yes.
50. HER HONOUR: Ms Woolard, what I have just been telling Mr Kenny is that that I have made an order so that the police can take a very small scraping of saliva from your mouth, so you will need to go along to the police station to do that.
51. OFFENDER: When do I do that?
52. HER HONOUR: That will be explained to you, and I am sure Mr Kenny can explain to you about when you need to go within a certain number of days of today.
53. OFFENDER: Okay.
54. OFFENDER: Okay.
55. HER HONOUR: And so that is something you must comply with. Do you understand that?
56. OFFENDER: Yes, Your Honour.
57. HER HONOUR: Thank you. Now, I think Ms Woolard can go. You may be excused, Mr Kenny, if you wish to.
58. MR KENNY: May it please Your Honour.
59. (At a later stage.)
60. HER HONOUR: Ms Teryaki, you can stay seated for now. I will ask you to stand later.
61. Heba Teryaki and Kayla Woolard have each pleaded guilty to a number of charges which all arose out of two episodes of offending over a two-day period. Ms Woolard pleaded guilty to one charge of attempted aggravated carjacking and three charges of theft, and I sentenced her this morning to a Community Correction Order with a Justice Plan.
62. Ms Teryaki has pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated carjacking, a charge of theft, a charge of attempted carjacking, and a charge of attempted aggravated carjacking.
63. She also pleaded guilty to four related summary charges: failure to stop while driving when directed to by the police, unlicensed driving, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, and, as a detainee, possessing an item without authority.
64. The most serious of the offences involved are what is known as carjacking; that is, the robbing a person of a car.
65. The maximum penalties for the offences are as follows. For aggravated carjacking, 25 years' imprisonment. For attempted aggravated carjacking, 20 years. For attempted carjacking, ten years. For theft, ten years. For failure to stop on police direction, 60 penalty units or six months' imprisonment. For unlicensed driving, 25 penalty units or three months' imprisonment.

For committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, 30 penalty units or three months' imprisonment. For detainee possessing a thing without authority, ten penalty units.

1. Although I have already read out the details of the offending when sentencing Ms Woolard, it is necessary to repeat that because each accused person is entitled to be sentenced separately and individually and in a complete sense.
2. The offending began on the evening of 14 July 2017, when Ms Teryaki was with a group of three young people. She and one of the males from that group approached Jessica Wallace, who was unlocking her car, a Hyundai 120, in a car park near her workplace.
3. As she got into her car, she heard someone say, "Give us your keys", and she noticed a male and a female beside her car. She saw that the male had a small knife in his hand, which he pointed at her and said, "Give me the keys or I'll hurt you." He said this a couple of times. Ms Wallace told them that she needed her house keys, and the male told her she could keep her house keys but not her car keys.
4. Ms Wallace handed over her car keys, grabbed her bag, and got out of the car. Ms Teryaki was blocking her exit, but moved out of the way. Ms Wallace went straight back to her office and called the police. Ms Teryaki and the male drove away in the car. That is Charge 1, aggravated carjacking, a charge against Ms Teryaki to which she has pleaded guilty.
5. At some stage after this, Ms Woolard was picked up from her home by Ms Teryaki in the stolen Hyundai. This is the second incident. Later that night, someone in the group drove the Hyundai to a Coles petrol station in Roxburgh Park. CCTV footage shows one of the males getting out of the car and filling it with petrol, while both Ms Teryaki and Ms Woolard were in the car. None of the occupants of the car attempted to pay for the petrol, and the car was then driven away. This charge of theft is Charge 2 against Ms Teryaki and was Charge 1 against Ms Woolard.
6. Incident three. At about 4 pm the next day, the stolen Hyundai was driven to a BP service station in Warrenheip on the Western Highway. Ms Woolard got out of the car and filled the petrol tank with petrol worth $34.57, which was not paid for. This is Charge 2, the theft charge against Ms Woolard.
7. Incident four. That evening, at about 6.30 pm, the stolen Hyundai was driven to a BP petrol station on the Burwood Highway in Burwood East by one of the males, and again, Ms Woolard filled the tank with petrol worth $28.85, which was not paid for. And that is Charge 3, of theft against Ms Woolard.
8. Incident five. About ten minutes later, the second carjacking was attempted. Alison Todd was driving her red Toyota Yaris along a suburban street in Mooroolbark and pulled over to check the house numbers. She noticed the Hyundai drive past erratically and pull into a driveway about 20 metres from her. It then quickly reversed and sped past Ms Todd.
9. Ms Todd then continued driving her car towards her friend's house, which was another 15 metres up the road. The Hyundai again sped past her, pulled into another driveway, and reversed back to her location, stopping on the road opposite Ms Todd. She saw two women get out of the car and approach her vehicle. She was frightened. The gears of the car were in park and the doors were locked.
10. Ms Teryaki banged on the window on the driver's side door and yelled and gestured at Ms Todd to get out of the car. One of the younger women was banging on the passenger side window, yelling and hitting the mirror. Ms Todd started sounding her car horn in an effort to deter the others, but this was unsuccessful.
11. She then drove away with two of the offenders initially hanging on to the mirrors. She drove about three to five metres when the driver of the Hyundai drove at her car and smashed into the right-hand front light. The two offenders then ran back to the Hyundai, and they drove off. That is Charge 3 against Ms Teryaki, attempted carjacking.
12. The sixth incident was about 10 pm that night, when Ms Truong Nguyen drove her black Honda Civic from her home to the Keilor Downs shopping centre. She parked outside the gym and took her keys from the ignition. As she opened the car door, she was approached by Ms Teryaki and two of the younger offenders. Ms Woolard remained in the Hyundai, parked nearby.
13. One of the offenders demanded the car keys, and Ms Nguyen told her no, it was not her car, and she closed the car door. One of the co-accused, Miller, produced a knife and managed to grab the door handle as the victim struggled to shut it from inside. Ms Nguyen could hear demands being made for her keys. Miller lunged at her and stabbed her in the right thigh, causing a small laceration.
14. The victim jumped out of the car and another co-accused, Williams, got in and tried to start it. The victim still had the chip on her person so the car would not start. She ran towards another car, seeking assistance, and she heard Woolard call out from the Hyundai: "Quick, let's go." That is Charge 4 against both accused, attempted aggravated carjacking.
15. The seventh and final incident. At about 3.05 am the following day, 16 July, Ms Teryaki was driving the stolen Hyundai out of a car park at Federation Square. Police followed the car and activated their lights and sirens in an effort to intercept it. Ms Teryaki did not pull over as directed, and police ended the pursuit. That is summary Charge 13 against Ms Teryaki, failure to stop a vehicle on police direction.
16. Police later saw the car in East Melbourne, blocked by traffic. They approached her in the car and arrested her and the co-accused, Andriopoulos, whom Ms Teriyaki had picked up from Federation Square. At that time, Ms Teryaki was unlicensed to drive and this is summary Charge 15, unlicensed driving.
17. Ms Teryaki was also charged with committing indictable offences whilst on bail. That is summary Charge 16.
18. While being interviewed by the police, she took a paperclip from the table in the interview room, and at 4.45 am she used it in her cell to deliberately cut her arm, drawing blood. That is summary Charge 19, possessing a thing without authority in a police gaol.
19. I now turn to your personal background and circumstances, Ms Teryaki. When you were interviewed by the police, you admitted to stealing Ms Wallace's car in Moonee Ponds and that you had been using ice. It was only the second time you had driven a car. You could not remember any of the other allegations.
20. You were remanded in custody at the time of your arrest and you have remained there. I have heard and read a lot about your experience there, and I shall have more to say about that later.
21. As to your background, your parents are of Lebanese descent and they observe strict religious doctrine and tradition. You are the youngest of their six children, and you are now aged 23. You were 22 at the time of the offending.
22. In early primary school, you were identified as having cognitive difficulties, and you went to a special school although your parents at that time did not accept that you had this problem. There were difficulties at home with conflict between you and your parents, including physical abuse and bullying from your sisters.
23. The Department of Health and Human Services became involved and with their support you began living independently from your family in 2013 when you were 18. But this transition was not easy due to ongoing family conflict, and it negatively affected your early employment prospects.
24. You no longer have contact with your father, and only occasional contact with your mother and siblings. But having said that, they were both here in court and are still here in court today to support you.
25. You have a very long criminal history, but much of your offending appears to be directly related to your condition of mental impairment, which has been taken into account in sentencing you in the past. You have been sentenced many times to short prison sentences, which appear, perhaps unsurprisingly, to have had no impact in terms of deterrence.
26. In 2016, you were dealt with in this court for armed robbery and placed on a two-year Community Correction Order with a Justice Plan, but you breached that and it appears you later served five months in prison.
27. In 2013, you were accepted for Disability Services support and have been provided with case management since then. In 2015, you were seen by a neuropsychologist, Ms Lofthouse, who assessed your IQ at 56 which means you have a mild intellectual disability, and as well, also diagnosed was a possible borderline personality disorder.
28. Ms Lofthouse said that because of this, you are at risk of impulsive actions with sometimes inappropriate and aggressive responses. It follows that you have limited skills to cope on a daily basis, and your capacity for reasoned and informed problem-solving is affected.
29. By 2014, you had had several admissions to Origin Youth Health and eventually began living at Furlong House. At the time of the offending, you were living at Perry House, part of Jesuit Social Services.
30. At the time that I first heard the plea material you were being treated with antipsychotic and antidepressant medication, and that was following an incident when you attempted suicide in your cell, although apparently, you had already been prescribed an antipsychotic before the offending.
31. You said that you had tried to hang yourself because you have been very upset about your cousin's murder, several months before that. After that, you had been held for two months in Marrmak, the psychiatric unit at Dame Phyllis Frost Centre, and since then, you have been in the Swan 2 unit where you have been seen periodically by psychiatric nursing staff.
32. Your behaviour there has been described as "acting out" in such ways as to cause significant disruption to staff and to other inmates, to the extent of causing what is called "staff burnout."
33. Ms Hosking, who is the Acting Assistant Commissioner of Corrections Victoria, provided an affidavit describing the circumstances in which you are being held in prison. It is a long document in which Ms Hosking sets out the details of your management and the types of incidents which have required management.
34. You are endorsed as a long-term management prisoner because of your challenging behaviour, and that has resulted in, for example, the handcuff regime to which you are subject from time to time. Ms Hosking described instances of very disturbing self-harming behaviour by you, and assaults and threats towards staff and prisoners, as well as repeated destruction of walls, radios, television sets, and other items.
35. In recent times, your behaviour was managed somewhat better, perhaps because of weekly and later daily visits by a worker from Jesuit Social Services, a service which apparently cannot continue once you are sentenced and no longer a remand prisoner. There has been no explanation for this or for why this may be the case.
36. You were seen by a forensic psychiatrist, Dr Fiona Best, in April 2018 and more recently in August this year. You told her that you had smoked ice since you were 18, when people gave it to you, and that you had been drinking alcohol since then. You said you wanted to stop using both.
37. You told Dr Best that you had committed the offences when the friends you were with told you to get the lady's car keys, and that you knew it was wrong and did not want to do it, but they told you to.
38. Dr Best proffered her opinion in a report dated 9 May 2018 that there are effective strategies in place for the management of what is described as your "challenging behaviour" in the unit. She thinks you would benefit from ongoing psychiatric support, with a supportive therapeutic program and social skills training tailored to your intellectual capacity, to assist you to develop better ways to manage interpersonal relationships.
39. Dr Best gave some examples of those challenging behaviours that she referred to as including those things that I mentioned from Dr Hosking's affidavit: physically threatening or assaulting staff, and turning your frustrations onto yourself with self-harming behaviour.
40. Dr Best said you need help in managing relationships because you are easily led by others, particularly when affected by ice, and at such times, you are unable to think through the consequences of your behaviour, and your judgment is significantly impaired.
41. It led you to committing these crimes, which are very serious. The victims were very badly frightened, and the community deserves and needs to be protected from such behaviour. You yourself, and others who might also offend in a similar way, need to be deterred from doing so. Therefore, this offending warrants a prison sentence, and I have given very careful consideration to this.
42. Dr Best also said that a custodial sentence would be more difficult for you than for other people, and may have an adverse effect on your mental health, as has perhaps already been demonstrated by your suicide attempt. She said your intellectual disability makes you more vulnerable to developing a mental illness.
43. I mentioned before that Dr Best saw you again and provided an updated report, dated 8 August, and she said in that report that you told her that you are usually locked down for 23 hours a day with perhaps sometimes only one hour in the open air. You said you would like to return to Perry House and live independently.
44. Dr Best was informed by Corrections officers that in the previous two weeks, you had again attempted to harm yourself twice and mental health staff told her that your mental state was "changeable minute-to-minute", with poor impulse control and poor emotional regulation. This results in those behavioural outbursts against staff and self-harm in the context of boredom, isolation, and overstimulation.
45. During your plea hearing last time, Dr Best gave evidence, and her recommendation was that you be referred to the Disability Forensic Assessment and Treatment Service, which is known as DFATS, a state-wide disability forensic service that delivers time-limited treatment, support and residential services for people with disabilities such as yours who are involved in the criminal justice system.
46. A service like this could enable you to take part, in theory at least, in a therapeutic treatment program that addresses offence-related needs, and to learn skills to improve internal control and understand your behaviour.
47. I have now been informed that although such a residential service is available for male offenders who are eligible, there is no provision for women, so there is no place there for you. That is a sorry state of affairs, because other options for sentencing you effectively are limited.
48. The DFATs clinician who made the assessment, Ms Natayla O'Keefe, provided a very detailed and helpful report dated 26 October 2018 in which she provided recommendations in relation to assisting you with self-management and with obtaining appropriate support. Ms O'Keefe gave evidence today about these strategies and explained that DFATS could help, if requested by the prison authorities to do so, by assisting your case manager to plan strategies, but also by having their clinicians attend the prison to provide drug treatment and problem-solving therapy.
49. As has been described by others who have had contact with you in prison, you were handcuffed to a table throughout the interview with Ms O'Keefe and you were dressed in white, prison-issue clothing which may well have been the white canvas suit you wore when your counsel, Ms Woodward, visited you there.
50. Ms O'Keefe said you engaged well in the interview, and in her report she identified a number of positive things about you which she said were protective factors for your future progress. For example, she said you liked playing sport and going to the gym. People have said you are good-humoured and likable, and that you try your best and have a good work ethic.
51. These are things that have helped you to cope in various ways over the years, and perhaps they will do so in future. At the same time, there are a lot of problems you face which make the risk of reoffending a high risk. I have already referred to some of those, and I do not need to repeat them.
52. Ms O'Keefe summed up by saying that offending might have given you a sense of achievement and control over your life, unfortunately. The recommendations she made for your management are directed at providing you with a high level of support to assist you in engaging in services which will address this need.
53. Your counsel, Ms Woodward, was left with a limited submission as to sentence, because apart from a Community Correction Order, there is no treatment regime which can be imposed by the court. A Community Correction Order would likely be unmanageable as it is tailored for those with better capacity for compliance.
54. It is a great concern that when you committed these offences, you had been released from custody only three days earlier, and the risk of similar decline into renewed offending is high.
55. It is not part of my judicial role to consider the likelihood of you being eligible for parole if given a non-parole period as part of a prison sentence. However, the evidence I have heard suggests a high likelihood of therapeutic services being offered to you in prison which would assist you in progressing towards eligibility for parole.
56. You have the benefit of having pleaded guilty and avoided a trial, and you deserve credit for that in terms of a discount on your sentence, together with the implied remorse that accompanies the plea. You have limited insight into what you did, and I accept that as a limitation on the extent of any remorse you may have.
57. You are still a youthful offender for whom rehabilitation is most important, and because of your disabilities, the principle of general deterrence applies in a somewhat limited way. This is an unusual case, and your moral culpability is considerably reduced. It is also clear that the experience of prison is for you very difficult, more so than for other people.
58. Section 10AD of the Crimes Act requires the court to fix a non-parole period of not less than three years, unless there is a special reason. Impaired mental functioning allows for this finding, and the prosecution has conceded that a special reason exists in this case. Accordingly, I am not bound by the requirement under s.10AD.
59. Now, Ms Teryaki, would you please stand and I will read out the sentence to you?
60. For Charge 1 on the indictment, aggravated carjacking, two years' imprisonment.
61. For Charge 2, theft, six months.
62. For Charge 3, attempted carjacking, 18 months.
63. For Charge 4, attempted aggravated carjacking, two years.
64. For the summary charge of failing to stop while driving when directed to by the police, one month.
65. For unlicensed driving, one month.
66. For committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, one month.
67. For possessing an item without authority as a detainee, I find that charge proven, but dismiss it under s.76 of the Sentencing Act.
68. The sentence for Charge 1 is the base sentence for purposes of cumulation.

I order that six months of each of the sentences for Charges 3 and 4 be served in cumulation upon the base sentence. All other sentences are to be served concurrently, taking into account the principle of totality and the need to avoid the sentence being crushing upon you.

69. This results in a total effective sentence of three years.
70. I order that you be eligible for parole after serving two years.
71. You have been in custody now in pre-sentence detention for 488 days.

I declare that time to be reckoned as already served.

72. I order that any driving license or permit that you hold is cancelled, and you are disqualified from obtaining any new permit or licence for five years.
73. If you had not pleaded guilty to these charges, I would have sentenced you to five years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.
74. Just be seated now, thank you, for a moment, Ms Teryaki. Is there anything I have omitted or neglected?
75. COUNSEL: No, Your Honour.
76. HER HONOUR: Thank you. Ms Woodward?
77. MS WOODWARD: No, Your Honour.
78. HER HONOUR: Nothing?
79. PROSECUTOR: There is a disposal order, Your Honour.
80. HER HONOUR: Yes. I have signed that.
81. PROSECUTOR: Thank you.
82. HER HONOUR: Yes, I make that disposal order which is in respect of a list of items, and that is here. Thank you, officers. You may take Ms Teryaki now.

I wonder if you would convey my thanks to Ms Churchill, please, for her assistance during this case.

83. PROSECUTOR: Yes, Your Honour. I will.
84. HER HONOUR: Thank you. And thank you for your assistance, too, Ms Woodward.
85. MS WOODWARD: Thank you, Your Honour.