DPP v Weinberg [2025] VCC 526

1. You have also pleaded guilty to related summary offences being:

(a) one charge of unlicenced driving contrary to s 18(1)(a) of the Road Safety Act 1986, which carries a maximum penalty of 6 months imprisonment (Summary Charge 11);

(b) one charge of unlawful assault contrary to s 23 of the Summary Offences Act 1986 ('Summary Offences Act'), which carries a maximum penalty of 3 months imprisonment (Summary Charge 13);

(c) one charge of contravene conduct condition of bail, contrary to s 30A(1) of the Bail Act 1977, which carries a maximum penalty of 3 months imprisonment (Summary Charge 17);

(d) three charges of unexplained possession of property reasonably suspected to be stolen, contrary to s 26(1) of the Summary Offences Act, which carries a maximum penalty of 12 months imprisonment (Summary Charges 44, 45 and 46); and

(e) one charge of possession of a schedule 4 poison contrary to s 36B(2) of the Drug, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units (Summary Charge 52).

1. A prosecution opening was tendered on the plea and may be summarised as follows:
2. You were born in November 1993 and were 30 years old at the time of the offending. You had no fixed place of abode and lived a transient lifestyle.
3. The victim in this matter is Ashlea Cox, who was aged 26 years old and resided at an address in Ferntree Gully.

1. At the time of the offending, you and the victim had known each other for approximately three-months and were previously in an intimate partner relationship which lasted for approximately two-weeks.
2. You were on bail at the time of offending, having been bailed from Lilydale Police Station on 24 October 2023, to appear before the Ringwood Magistrates' Court on 17 April 2024. As part of your bail conditions, you were required to reside at an address in Boronia.
3. You are charged with 17 offences that arise from offending that occurred on three dates between the 3 and 10 January 2024.
4. Two-weeks prior to the offending, you moved all of your possessions into the victim's residence, where you continued to reside up until your arrest (Summary Charge 17).

1. On 3 January 2024, you ripped the front dashboard off of the victim's vehicle, which exposed the vehicle's wirings. You believed the victim's ex-partner had put a tracker in her vehicle and you wanted to use a scanner to try and locate any tracker (Charge 1).

1. On 5 January 2024, you attended the victim's address at approximately 2:00am and began accusing her that she was tracking your whereabouts. You and the victim had an argument, which escalated, before you demanded the victim's car keys. The victim refused to hand over her keys, so you walked out of the residence and threatened to throw a brick through her window if she didn't hand over the keys (Charge 2).
2. The victim told you that she would contact police. You became angry and you chased the victim back into the house.

1. You both remained inside for some time before the victim walked with you to the front door of the residence to let you out. At this time, you made a demand for the victim's mobile phone. You and the victim engaged in a struggle, before you forcefully took her phone (Charge 5).
2. As you were driving away from the property, you used the victim's vehicle to push your own vehicle out of the way and onto the street, causing damage to your own vehicle.

1. Later that day at approximately 5:34pm, you and the victim attended the BP Service Station on Burwood Highway in Ferntree Gully. At the time, you were driving the victim's vehicle being a grey Mitsubishi Outlander Wagon.
2. The victim exited the vehicle and filled up the car with petrol. You then drove the vehicle to outside the service station where you watched the victim pay for the fuel. You then began honking the horn in an attempt to hurry up the victim.
3. The victim entered the BP Fuel Station and stated to the service station attendant, Fardin Ansary, 'call the police, take his rego he's driving recklessly'. Mr Ansary asked, 'can you repeat that?'. The victim then said, 'don't look at me like that, call the police, he might kill me.'
4. The victim paid for the fuel with cash, before returning to the vehicle where she had a verbal altercation with you as you were questioning her as to who she was talking to in the store. You also accused the victim of knowing the customer who was standing behind her in line, which was Neda Kuzmic.
5. You raised your fist towards the victim. In response, the victim leant back out of the passenger door which was still open and attempted to exit the vehicle. You grabbed the victim by her arm and her hair, dragging her back into the vehicle. You then rammed the victim's head into the vehicle gear stick in the centre of the vehicle, before driving away whilst the passenger door was still open (Charge 3; Summary Charge 13).
6. The assault was witnessed by Mr Ansary and Ms Kuzmic and was further captured on the fuel station's CCTV cameras. Mr Ansary wrote down the vehicle registration plate on the fuel receipt, before he and Ms Kuzmic contacted triple zero. CCTV footage depicts the vehicle turning left out of the service station and travelling east on Burwood Highway (Summary Charge 11).

1. You then drove the victim to a bushland area and intentionally drove her vehicle into a tree. This caused damage to the front of the victim's vehicle, and the front bumper to fall off as a result. You instructed the victim to exit the vehicle and collect the bumper and put it back on the vehicle. The victim initially agreed, however, you instead collected the bumper bar yourself (Charge 4).
2. You then continued to drive around. The victim described you to be extremely paranoid, constantly asking her who every person was that you both passed. You believed that either the victim knew the people passing or that they were following you both.
3. A short time later you drove the victim to an unknown friend's house. The victim entered the house and sat in the lounge room where she witnessed you and your friends leave the address.
4. After you left, the victim slowly left the address and walked out of the driveway. The victim used an unknown neighbour's phone to call a taxi, however when it arrived it would not take her as she did not have any money to pay. Instead, the victim walked to the Doveton Avenue shops and used a pay phone to contact Knox Police Station to obtain her mother's phone number. The victim then contacted her mother, Corelle Cox, who came and collected her.
5. Later that evening, the victim's sister Jaimi Cox contacted her mother Corelle Cox to inform her that Victoria Police detectives were at her address looking for the victim.
6. The victim arranged to meet with investigators from the Yarra Ranges Crime Investigation Unit at the Forrest Hill Police Station. Detective Leading Senior Constable Danielle Flemming and Senior Constable Ben Ehrenberg attended the Forrest Hill Police Station and met with the victim. At that time, the Forest Hill Police Station was not open to facilitate a victim statement, so the victim drove to the Box Hill police station with DLSC Flemming and SC Ehrenberg. The victim made a statement to police, however left the Box Hill Police Station prior to signing the statement. The victim signed the statement later in the day on 6 January 2024 in the presence of Detective Acting Sergeant Ross Williams.
7. The victim's Mitsubishi vehicle was recovered by Senior Constable Luke Yeatman and Constable Bradley Dean on 8 February 2024, outside an address in Mitcham. Photographs were taken of the vehicle, which depict substantial damage to the front of the vehicle. Photographs from inside the vehicle also show damage to the front and centre consoles being ripped apart, exposing the vehicles dashboard wiring.
8. On 10 January 2024 at approximately 8:00am, members of the State Surveillance Unit (SSU) were deployed to assist locating you.
9. Shortly after, a 2015 Toyota 86 bearing stolen registration plates 86F UJI was observed in the vicinity of Brunswick Road, Mitcham. This address corresponded to the address of a known associate to you. The Toyota vehicle was followed by members of the SSU where it was observed stopping at an address in Ringwood East. You were observed exiting the vehicle alone.
10. At approximately 9:45am, you were arrested by members of the Special Operations Group outside the Ringwood East address while you were working on the Toyota vehicle. You attempted to flee police and resisted arrest by members of the Special Operations Group, resulting in you being tasered.
11. You were provided a caution and read your rights by Senior Constable David Rayner, before being conveyed to the Ringwood Police Station for interview. Prior to being placed in the police vehicle, Senior Constable Zak Ryan activated his police issued mobile IRIS device. Whilst on route to the Ringwood Police Station, you said that you had last taken drugs shortly before police arrived, and that '[the] kidnapping's bullshit. But as soon as they drop it down to false imprisonment or whatever, I'll plea'. These comments were captured on the recording.
12. The Toyota was identified by its VIN number to be reported as stolen during a burglary in Doncaster between 10 and 19 December 2023. The Victorian registration plates on the vehicle being 86F UJI were also reported as stolen from Melton West between 8 and 9 January 2024.
13. Victoria Police members conducted a search of the Toyota which located the following items:

(a) a black Samsung Mobile Phone;

(b) a gold Apple iPhone, belonging to the victim;

(c) a clear zip-lock bag contacting four coloured tablets, later confirmed to be MDMA; (Charge 6 - Possess drug of dependence)

(d) a set of Falcon keys; (Summary offence 44)

(e) a set of Victorian Registration plates '1SE 4TD'; (Summary offence 45)

(f) a lanyard with two keys attached; (Summary offence 46)

(g) a set of stolen Victorian Registration plates 'ZCV 685'; (Charge 7)

(h) black sunglasses cover with a clear zip-lock bag containing a clear crystal substance; (Charge 8)

(i) a set of cloned Victorian Registration Plates '1BU 8GA'; (Charge 9) and

(j) 16 tablets of Paroxetine in the name of Kate Strachan; (Summary offence 52).

1. You refused to be interviewed in relation to the offending and became aggressive and threatened to spit on a police member.
2. You were remanded to appear at a Filing Hearing on 11 January 2024.

1. As summarised in the prosecution opening, your offending related to four separate incidents where the victim was your previous intimate partner. While some of the charges when viewed in isolation are not of a high order of seriousness (such as Charge 2 - threatening to damage the victims property), when considered together with the surrounding circumstances, they are all offences that arise in the context of family violence, and when viewed together, your offending can only be described as very serious. It involved conduct by you of a controlling, paranoid and violent nature towards the victim.
2. The third incident that incorporates the charge of false imprisonment is objectively the most serious. It is self evident that you were behaving in such a way towards the victim that she alerted the service station attendants conveying that she was in fear that you might kill her. What follows can only be viewed as controlling and violent behaviour by you towards the victim leading ultimately to you grabbing her by the hair and arm, dragging her into the vehicle, ramming her head into the gear stick and then driving off with the door still open. While the timeframe of the false imprisonment is unable to be determined with any accuracy, what seems to occur is that you then drive the victim to a bushland area before intentionally driving her car into a tree, damaging her vehicle. You then drove the victim to an unknown friend's house where the false imprisonment seems to end.
3. While no victim impact statement was tendered, in her statement to police the victim articulated that she was in fear, and once you had driven to the bushland area, the victim notes that she thought she was going to die.
4. The seriousness of your conduct is heightened by the fact that you were on bail at the time of the offending. It was submitted by the prosecution that the objective gravity of your offending can be categorised as medium level seriousness for this type of offending. In the circumstances I agree with that categorisation.

1. Your personal circumstances were set out in some detail in the sentencing remarks of his Honour Judge Moglia in DPP v Weinberg[1] which counsel relied on. You were sentenced in that matter in relation to reckless conduct endangering life and other related offences. In combination with the new materials tendered on the plea, your personal history may be summarised as follows:
2. You are now 31 years old. You were 30 at the time of offending.
3. You were born prematurely and had to spend six months in hospital before going home. You required the assistance of a speech therapist in your early years, to overcome a lisp. You attended Mooroolbark and Emerald Primary Schools and report that you attended further education after grade 4. You state that you are illiterate and recall that you struggled academically in school and that you were harassed by your peers because of your intellectual difficulties. You report that you have not been able to sustain consistent employment since you were about 15. I note that a Statement of Disability was tendered dated 19 March 2010 confirming you suffer from an intellectual disability within the meaning of the Disability Act 2006.
4. From around age eight, you were taken into care by welfare services. Your biological parents both struggled with substance abuse and the home was violent. You recall being placed in more than five different residential units over time and that while you developed some trust with workers, you remained feeling isolated and unsupported.
5. You state that your foster mother died towards the end of 2014. You report that two days after your foster mother died, your half-brother was killed in a motorcycle accident and that one of your half-sisters took her own life in 2018. In 2016, whilst you were in custody, your mother died of a stroke. You state that you had never met your father until your mother's funeral and he has since passed away. You state that your father is aboriginal.
6. You report that you were in a motor vehicle accident at around age 13 and that you remained in hospital for several weeks due to an acquired brain injury. You also report being in a motorcycle accident soon after your release from hospital, in which you sustained fractures to your arms and legs and internal bleeding.
7. You were introduced to cannabis at a very young age. By age 12 you were also using pills such as Xanax and continued to do so until you were 18. You were introduced to methamphetamine following your release from custody in your early 20's. You report that your methamphetamine use has become a major problem for you and that you were using daily prior to being remanded for these matters. You have attended various rehabilitation programs and have managed abstinence throughout these periods although you report that you have not felt they have been particularly helpful until recently.
8. At age 16, you met your partner in residential care. You have two children together who are now about eight and 10 years old. You report that this first relationship was positive, and your partner was supportive of you however you recognise that you often became hostile and angry which ultimately had a negative impact on your relationship. You report that you also have twins from another relationship.
9. A psychological report of Warren Simmons dated 3 November 2024 was tendered on the plea and states that your turbulent childhood has left you vulnerable to substance use. He opines that your limited repertoire of adaptive strategies has impacted your ability to manage your emotional state and that this offending is a continuation of a pattern that has been present for some time. It is noted that you are now receiving support from the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and that you would benefit from structures and practical assistance that can be made available to you by the NDIS. Mr Simmons suggests that treatment focused on developing coping strategies will enable you to better manage your triggers.
10. A bundle of certificates of programs completed in custody were also tendered on the plea and attest to your willingness to engage in support services, particularly in relation to your substance use. I acknowledge that, upon your release from custody, you have been accepted into the 5-week Intensive Program at East Side Recovery.
11. Following the plea hearing, further materials have been tendered including certificates in relation to courses conducted in custody and two reference letters from a long term friends, one of whom who has offered you accommodation upon your release.

1. I first take into account your plea of guilty. Your plea was entered at the time of a contested committal hearing but before any witnesses were cross examined. Your plea has therefore promoted the course of justice saving the court time and expense and importantly, saving the witnesses from having to give evidence at a trial.
2. I note however that when this matter came on for sentence in December last year you indicated that you wished to seek further advice in relation to the prosecution summary of facts. The matter was adjourned for you to obtain new lawyers ultimately resulting in considerable delay. You have now accepted the prosecution summary. As noted, during the delay you have completed further courses in custody.

1. Ms Marcs who appeared on your behalf, submitted that your exposure at an early age to neglect and violence together with your disrupted childhood including your removal from the home into foster care, gives rise to the application of Bugmy principles. I accept that the principles are enlivened in a general way and can be afforded some weight in the sentencing discretion.
2. Turning to Verdins principles. As a result of your confirmed intellectual disability, Verdins principles 1 and 3 were relied on. I accept that your intellectual disability is a constant in your life and impacts you on a day to day basis. However, as Mr Simmons noted, your offending occurred in the context of you relapsing into drug use and I note that you admitted you were using daily leading up to the offending. Mr Simmons also noted that you have some insight into your tendency to relapse into substance use when struggling to manage your emotional state, as was the case in this instance. Thus, while your intellectual disability is a matter I take into account pursuant to Verdins 1 and 3, I note that you were substance affected at the time which also influenced your conduct. In the circumstances I also accept that Verdins principle 5 is able to be given some weight in the sentencing discretion.

1. Ms Marcs submitted on your behalf that given your extensive criminal history, your prospects of rehabilitation can only be considered as guarded. Mr Wilson who appeared on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions submitted that your prospects can only be described as poor, highlighting your extensive criminal history that includes 13 terms of imprisonment and five community correction orders, all of which have been breached. You have also battled with substance use for a significant period of your life which you have not been able to overcome despite being offered service and supports as part of previous sentencing dispositions.
2. In my view, you do have some insight into the matters that motivate your criminal conduct and how substance use contributed to your offending. Your intellectual disability will always be a matter that you will struggle with in terms of regulating your emotional responses. What must occur is a complete cessation of substance use and a genuine focus on accepting the supports offered to you in custody and upon your release. The NDIS support offers an additional opportunity for you to move on with your life. Thus while in my view your prospects are relatively poor, they will undoubtedly improve if you engage with the supports offered to you.

1. Deterrence, both general and specific, are prominent sentence considerations. Denunciation of your conduct and protection of the community are also relevant sentencing matters. Your conduct occurred in the context of family violence where you demonstrated controlling and frightening behaviour toward your ex partner. Further, it appears that your criminal history contains other family violence related offending. You and others must be deterred from such conduct. As the Court noted in Pasinis v The Queen[2]:

General deterrence is of fundamental importance in cases of domestic violence. The victims of such violence are often so enveloped by fear that they are incapable of either escaping the violence or reporting it to the authorities. The key to protection lies in deterring the violent conduct by sending an unequivocal message to would-be perpetrators of domestic violence that if they offend, they will be sentenced to a lengthy period of imprisonment so that they are no longer in a position to inflict harm.

1. Mr Weinberg, would you please stand.
2. Grady Weinberg, on Charges 1 and 4, damaging property you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment on each charge. On Charge 2, make threat to damage property, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment. On Charge 3 false imprisonment you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. On Charge 5 theft, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment. On Charges 6 and 8, possession of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment on each charge. On Charge 7, handle stolen goods you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment. On Charge 9, negligently deal with the proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment. On Charge 10, theft of the motor vehicle, you are convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment. Charge 3 is the base sentence.
3. On Summary Charge 11, unlicenced driving, Summary Charge 13, unlawful assault, Summary Charge 17 contravene a conduct condition of bail, you are sentenced to 1 month imprisonment on each charge. On Summary Charges 44, 45 and 46, unexplained possession of property reasonably suspected of being stolen, you are convicted and sentenced to an aggregate of 1 month imprisonment. On Summary Charge 52, possession of a Schedule 4 poison, you are convicted and fined $250.
4. I direct that 1 month of the sentence on Charges 1, 4 and 10 be served cumulatively on each other and on Charge 3, making for a total effective sentence of 21 months imprisonment. I direct that you serve 15 months before becoming eligible for parole.
5. Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991 ('Sentencing Act'), I declare that 475 days be reckoned as the period of imprisonment already served under the sentence I have imposed. That does not include today.
6. Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, if not for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a period of imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months with a non parole period of 2 years and 6 months.

[1] [2023] VCC 1074, at [24].

[2] [2014] VSCA 97, [57].