• Lawyers in Sydney
• Lawyers in Melbourne
• Lawyers in Brisbane
• Lawyers in Perth
• Family lawyers
• Employment lawyers
• Criminal lawyers
• Wills and estates lawyers
• Find a lawyer

Publication restriction: None

JUDGMENT

1. Rita Barbour (the offender) appears for sentence after pleading guilty in the Local Court to the following offences:

| Sequence H80644451 | Offence | Maximum Penalt****y | | 1 | Ongoing supply (147 supplies, totalling 53.6 grams of methylamphetamine) contrary to s 25A(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 | 20 years imprisonment | | 2 | Ongoing supply (142 supplies, totalling 55.3 grams of methylamphetamine) contrary to s 25A(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 | 20 years imprisonment |

2. The offender also asks the Court to take into account a further account of ongoing supply, contrary to the same section, on a Form 1.

Approach to Sentencing

3. I have taken into account the purposes of sentencing set out in s 3A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and the matters set out in s 21A of that Act.

4. The offender entered pleas of guilty in the Local Court and is entitled to a 25% discount on sentence: s 25D(2)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

5. To the extent that I make findings of fact adverse to the offender, I am satisfied of that fact beyond reasonable doubt. To the extent that I make findings of fact favourable to the offender, I am satisfied of that fact on the balance of probabilities: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 at [27] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Hayne and Callinan JJ).

Facts

6. The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts. I have taken the entirety of that document into account in coming to an appropriate sentence. What follows is a brief summary of the facts relevant to the offender to permit an understanding of the sentence imposed.

7. In June 2023 the police commenced Strike Force Wipeout, an investigation into the supply of methylamphetamine in Sydney’s Inner West. During the investigation the offender was identified as a street-level dealer supplying between 0.1 gram and 3.5 grams of methylamphetamine to a network of around 30 customers. Some of these customers were drug-users while others were street-level suppliers.

8. Customers generally contacted the offender via phone to discuss an amount and price. The offender then directed them to a location near her house at XXXX. These locations included the Hurlstone Park McDonalds, the Hurlstone Park Baptist Church and from the residence of the co-offender Amy Ross-Smith at XXXX. Occasionally the offender used a “runner” or rideshare service to deliver the methylamphetamine.

9. The offender generally supplied in small quantities and charged $50.00 for 0.1 gram.

10. Ahmad Dabboussi and Costakis Michael were the offender’s upline suppliers. The offender brought between 3.5 grams and 7 grams from Mr Dabboussi on each occasion and between 0.2 grams and 3.5 grams from Mr Michael on each occasion.

Sequence 1

11. Between 4 July 2023 and 4 August 2023, the offender supplied a total of 53.6 grams of methylamphetamine on 147 separate occasions. On average there were five transactions in a day and 30 unique customers in this period.

12. During this period the offender bought methylamphetamine from the co-offenders: Mr Dabboussi on six occasions totalling 28 grams, and Mr Michael on five occasions totalling 8.9 grams. She generally paid $20 per 0.1 gram.

13. During this period the offender supplied generally less than one gram for each supply, however occasionally she supplied up to 3.5 grams. She charged approximately $50 dollar per 0.1 gram.

Sequence 2

14. Between 6 August 2023 and 5 September 2023, the offender supplied a total of 55.3 grams of methylamphetamine on 142 separate occasions. On average there were 4.3 transactions in a day and 32 unique customers in this period.

15. During this period the offender bought methylamphetamine from the co-offenders: Mr Dabboussi on seven occasions totalling 24.5 grams, and Mr Michael on 10 occasions totalling 19.25 grams. She generally paid $20 per 0.1 gram.

16. During this period most supplies were less than one gram, however on one occasion the offender supplied up to 3.5 grams.

Further account – on Form 1, attached to Sequence 2

17. Between 8 September 2023 and 20 September 2023, the offender supplied a total of 15.05 grams of methylamphetamine on 44 separate occasions. On average there were 3.4 transactions in a day and 18 unique customers in this period.

18. During this period the offender bought methylamphetamine from the co-offenders: Mr Dabboussi on 6 September 2023 for an unknown amount and again on 14 September 2023 for 3.46 grams, which was subsequently seized by police; and Mr Michael on eight occasions totalling 12.25 grams.

19. During this period the offender supplied approximately 1.16 grams per day.

Arrest on 21 September 2023

20. On 21 September 2023, police executed a search warrant at the offender’s residence. The offender’s bedroom was searched, and police located many clear resealable plastic bags, a drug ledger, scales and calculators.

21. The offender was conveyed to Campsie Police Station where she agreed to participate in an electronically recorded interview. She answered “no comment” throughout the interview.

Criminal history and drug treatment

22. The offender has a long history of drug addiction as evidenced by her criminal history of similar offences. In 2019 the offender was sentenced to a two-year Intensive Corrections Order (ICO) which was conditioned on her seeking drug treatment. She previously attempted residential rehabilitation on one occasion before but did not find it helpful. In 2023 she participated in a three-month residential rehabilitation program with We Help Ourselves (WHOS). She successfully completed the program and a year of outpatient care. She recently graduated from the program but maintains ongoing support as needed.

Change in personal circumstances

23. Following her completion of residential rehabilitation, the offender noticed that her mother's mental health had declined. The offender’s mother has subsequently been diagnosed with dementia, and the offender has become a full-time caregiver for her mother, assisting with for all her mother's daily activities.

Sentencing Assessment Report

24. The Court received a Sentencing Assessment Report (SAR) dated 11 June 2025. The salient points in the SAR can be summarised as follows.

25. The offender resides with her parents and brother in XXXX. The offender’s brother appears to provide support and prosocial modelling.

26. The offender has been unemployed for several years, receiving a Carer Payment to care for her mother.

27. At the time of the offences, she was addicted to methylamphetamine which she used as a means of avoiding and suppressing her emotions. The offender stated that she became involved in supplying drugs as a secondary source of income as her JobSeeker Centrelink payment was insufficient to cover her substance use expenses. She justified her actions by stating that she was selling small quantities to friends to supplement her income.

28. The offender demonstrates a prosocial attitude and insight into the impact of her offending on those around her and expressed regrets for her behaviour. However, she has not shown a full understanding of the broader consequences of drug supply on the wider community. Nevertheless, the offender appears motivated to pursue a law-abiding lifestyle.

29. Historically, the offender’s responses to supervision have been mixed:

30. From 30 August 2019 to 29 August 2021 the offender was subject to an ICO during which she was breached on three occasions due to reoffending.

31. More recently from 3 August 2022 to 2 May 2023 the offender was subject to a Community Correction Order which she completed without any breaches.

32. The offender is willing to abide by intervention, directions and supervision expectations and to comply with a community service work order. She has taken significant steps towards addressing her offending behaviour:

(a) currently engaged in an outpatient drug rehabilitation program and intends to continue her participation moving forward; and (b) has demonstrated compliance with current supervision requirements and has engaged with the interview process in a satisfactory manner.

31. The offender has been assessed as a “Medium to Low” risk of reoffending according to the Level of Service Inventory – Revised (LSI-R). If the Court makes a supervised order, Community Correction:

(a) will monitor the offender for any indicators of increased risk; and (b) considers that engaging with drug rehabilitation and abstaining from drugs unless prescribed by a medical professional would assist in managing the identified risk factors.

32. The offender has been assessed as suitable to undertake community service work. Community Corrections can provide the equivalent of up to 21 hours of work per month.

The Offender's Case on Sentence

33. The offender relied on the following documents:

(a) letter of Leanne Ross, Team Leader of WHOS dated 9 October 2025; (b) letter of Dr Samantha Thirunavukarasu, Geriatrician, dated 20 September (year unknown); (c) email from Roberto Luis, Physiotherapist, to Rita Barbour dated 23 September 2025; (d) psychological report from Mindways, under the hand of Melissa Leto dated 26 June 2025; and (e) addendum to psychological report from Mindways, under the hand of Melissa Leto dated 11 July 2025.

34. The following is a precis of the evidence relied upon by the offender. I will try not to repeat matters already stated.

35. The offender is 38 years of age. Her parents migrated to Australia together 38 years ago to flee the war in Lebanon. Her father worked as a taxi driver before his retirement seven years ago. Her mother has been diagnosed with dementia and the offender assists in the daily care of her mother. The offender has one younger brother who works in waterproofing.

36. The offender's father was physically and verbally aggressive with a streak of unpredictable violence. The offender reported that she experienced harsh physical discipline throughout her childhood until she was approximately 16 years old when an Apprehend Violence Order was issued against her father. The offender noted that she continues to experience intrusive thoughts about these events in her childhood.

37. The offender attended numerous schools in Punchbowl, Marrickville and Dulwich Hill. Throughout her school years the offender experienced challenges academically and her behavioural issues led to suspensions and expulsions. She was expelled halfway through Year 8, the same year she first ran away from home, and was expelled again at the end of Year 9.

38. The offender reported that she enjoyed the social aspects of school life liked sport. She played netball, soccer and volleyball and was selected as the captain of these teams.

39. Following her secondary education, the offender commenced a course in childcare but did not complete it. She held various casual jobs on and off until she completed a traffic control course at the age of 24. She then secured employment in traffic control and remained in that role for approximately four years. She reported that she left this position as her substance use began to increase.

40. The offender has a history of illicit substance use from the age of 16 starting with cannabis and progressing to methylamphetamine at the age of 28. At the time of the arrest, the offender reported daily use of approximately half a gram of methylamphetamine.

41. Shortly before her 21st birthday the offender was diagnosed with Bell's Palsy, and she abstained from substance use for seven years. The offender reported to the psychologist that she experienced significant psychological and social impacts following the diagnosis including the onset of depressive symptoms including low mood and social withdrawal. These symptoms persisted over several years. The offender reported that at the age of 28 she was introduced to methylamphetamine by an acquaintance and began using it out of a desperate hope to improve her symptoms of Bell's Palsy.

42. The offender reported that she eventually began selling methylamphetamine to support her own use. She stated that her intention was never to profit financially, but rather that she believed, at the time, that she was helping others in similar situations. In retrospect, the offender now recognised that her actions contributed to further negative outcomes. She expressed remorse, regretted ever using the drug and acknowledged the significant impact it had on the course of her life and those around her.

43. The offender reported to the psychologist a problematic pattern of gambling that occurred specifically in the context of methylamphetamine use. She noted that she would often spend any spare money on poker machines, at times this would occur daily with her spending between $100 and $400 in a single session, but she did not gamble when abstinent.

44. The offender is not currently in a relationship. Her two prior long-term relationships involved drug use and violence.

45. The offender reported to the psychologist that she has abstained from drug use for approximately eight months. She attended the We Help Ourselves (WHOS) Day Program as a voluntary participant.

46. A letter of Ms Ross, team leader of WHOS, dated 9 October 2025 confirmed that the offender had completed the program on 25 July 2025. She had been their client since 23 February 2024 and was in WHOS New Beginnings residential service for three months. The program includes group work and individual case management. The offender actively participated in all program groups, displayed insights into her substance dependence and related issues and engaged in regular case management appointments to identify goals. In her letter Ms Ross stated that the offender became more proficient in setting boundaries, identifying internal and external triggers and emotional regulation, as well as building support networks outside of WHOS.

47. Ms Ross stated in her letter that the offender initially planned on attending TAFE Community Services and Development Certificate 4, but she began spending more time caring for her mother, waiting on the Home Care Package, and liaised with national dementia support organisations, RPA hospital and GPs to help organise her mother's care. The letter of Dr Thirunavukarasu, a geriatrician, confirmed that the offender's mother had been experiencing significant functional and cognitive decline, needing assistance with her personal cares. Mr Luis, physiotherapist, opined in his letter that the offender's mother would benefit from 24/7 supervision in the home due to her recurrent falls.

48. The psychologist opined in her report that the offender meets the criteria for the following diagnoses:

49. F15.21 Stimulant Use Disorder, Amphetamine type substance (methylamphetamine), severe, in early remission.

50. F F33.1 Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, moderate.

51. F43.1 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

52. The psychologist opined that the offender's trajectory towards criminal behaviour developed within the context of complex mental health vulnerability. The offender's PTSD symptoms appeared to stem from chronic exposure to trauma, including childhood physical and emotional abuse, domestic violence and subsequent abusive adult relationships. The psychologist opined that these experiences likely contribute to persistent hypervigilance, emotional dysregulation and relational instability, that the offender may have turned to substance use as a maladaptive coping strategy.

53. In addition, the psychologist opined that the offender may have met the criteria of Oppositional Defiant Disorder in her developmental years based on her patterns of behavioural challenges and educational history. On the same grounds, the psychologist opined that it was reasonable to consider attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as a likely formulation, noting the offender's report of a previous diagnosis in around January 2020. The features consistent with ADHD may also have increased the offender's vulnerability to substance use and high-risk behaviours and this warrants further assessment.

54. The psychologist stated in her addendum dated 11 July 2025 that the offender's sustained rehabilitation engagement, demonstrated insight and future-oriented goals indicated a capacity for change and responsiveness to treatment. Given her progress to date and the presence of protective factors the psychologist opined that the offender's prospects for rehabilitation are considered favourable. The offender's likelihood of reoffending is assessed as moderate but reducible with sustained therapeutic engagement.

Consideration

Objective seriousness

52. The offences are objectively serious.

53. The offences took place over about three months. The offender’s involvement consisted of purchasing the drug, coordinating directly with customers, and completing the deliveries.

54. The methylamphetamine supplied was over 289 times the indictable quantity of 108.9g.

55. The offender’s actions were partially influenced by the conduct of a controlling and abusive partner.

56. I have taken into account the maximum penalty for the offences.

Deterrence

57. General deterrence is a fundamental consideration in serious drug offences. The sentence must be of such a severity to deter others from engaging in drug related activities. The sentence must signal to would be participants in drug offences that the financial and other rewards will be neutralised by the risk of severe punishment.

58. There is some need for specific deterrence, but it is significantly reduced. The offender has accepted responsibility for her actions and understands the impact of her conduct on the community and her family. The offender has demonstrated through her conduct, while she has been on bail, that she is committed to the rehabilitation.

Aggravating factors

59. The offender has a record of previous convictions: s 21A(2)(d) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender’s criminal record demonstrates a pattern of the same offending conduct.

Mitigating factors

60. The offender has good prospects of rehabilitation: s 21A(3)(h) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender has engaged in residential rehabilitation and completed it successfully and without relapse. She appears to be well settled back into the community. She has taken on the full-time care of her mother that has given her purpose. She has been under supervision for an extended period, a bail and a s 11 remand.

61. The offender has demonstrated remorse: s 21A(3)(i) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender expressed remorse to the psychologist. She has accepted responsibility for her actions, and I am satisfied that she is genuinely contrite.

62. I have had regard to parity. The co-offenders, Mr Dabboussi, Mr Michael and Ms Ross-Smith have all been sentenced for their involvement in this organisation. Of most relevance Mr Dabboussi and Mr Michael were sentenced to ICOs. Mr Dabboussi had a significantly worse criminal record that included sentences of full-time imprisonment, but the offender’s criminality in the present matters was more significant.

63. The offender was in custody from the date of her arrest on 21 September 2023 to 21 December 2023 and again on 7 December 2025. I will take this period of 95 days of pre-sentence custody into account in the sentence imposed. The offender has also undertaken residential rehabilitation for a period of three months, which I am satisfied amounted to quasi-custody. I will credit the offender further period of 42 days. (50% of the total period in pre-sentence custody)

Penalty

64. Rita Barbour is convicted.

65. I have considered s 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and I am satisfied that having considered all possible alternatives that no penalty other than imprisonment is appropriate.

66. I will impose an aggregate sentence: s 53A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The sentences I would have imposed after allowing for the appropriate discount, had separate sentences been imposed are:

(a) sequence 1 – 1 year and 8 months; (b) taking into account the matter on the Form 1 on sequence 2 – 2 years;

67. The appropriate aggregate term of imprisonment is 2 years and 6 months.

68. Having reached that conclusion, I must consider if the sentence can be served by way of an ICO.

69. I have had regard to s 66 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and I am satisfied that it is appropriate to order that the sentence be served by way of an ICO, for the reasons I have already given and the following additional reasons, including by returning to the purposes of sentencing in s 3A.

70. I have had regard to community safety as the paramount consideration. In this case the protection of the community is best secured by allowing the offender to continue her rehabilitation in the community. She is well settled as an outpatient in rehabilitation. I am satisfied that if she was sent back to prison, she would lose the progress she has made with her rehabilitation, after struggling for so long to make a positive start. Out of the two options of sending her back to prison or imposing an ICO, I am satisfied that the protection of the community will be best achieved by the offender serving the sentence in the community by way of an ICO: Mandranis v R [2021] NSWCCA 97 at [51].

71. It should also be noted that the offender has served a period of 95 days in full time custody for these offences and spent further time on strict bail conditions that have had a significant impact on her liberty. The imposition of an ICO for a further lengthy period will mean that the restrictions on her liberty will continue. I am satisfied by reference to her previous incarceration, onerous bail conditions and the imposition of the ICO that she will be adequately punished for the offences.

72. I will reduce the term of imprisonment to be imposed by 5 months (which I have rounded up) to take into account her pre-sentence custody, because an ICO cannot be backdated.

73. I impose a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 1 month.

74. Pursuant to s 7(1) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the sentence imposed is to be served by way of an ICO. The sentence will commence today (17 April 2026) and expire on 16 May 2028.

75. The offender must report to the Burwood Community Corrections Office on or before 4pm on 24 April 2026.

76. The standard conditions of the order apply:

(a) the offender must not commit any offence; and (b) the offender must submit to supervision by a Community Corrections Officer.

77. The following additional conditions apply:

(a) the offender must abstain from taking all restricted or prohibited drugs, except those prescribed by a medical practitioner; and (b) the offender must receive treatment for her mental health as reasonably directed by Community Corrections.

78. If the offender fails to comply with the conditions of this order, sanctions may be imposed by the Commissioner of Corrective Services or the State Parole Authority. Those sanctions may include a formal warning, imposing more stringent conditions, or a revocation of this order. If the order is revoked, the offender may be required to serve all or some of the period of the sentence in full-time custody.

79. The offender must attend the Registry to confirm her postal address so that a copy of the order can be sent to her.

**********