R v Ingrey

Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270

Category: Sentence

Parties: Rex (Crown)
Clifford Ingrey (Offender)

Representation: Counsel:
I Vizintin (Offender)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Legal Aid, NSW (Offender)

File Number(s): 2023/00428055
2024/00095108

Publication restriction: None

JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. Clifford Ingrey (the offender) appears for sentence after pleading guilty to the following offences:

| Count | Offence | Maximum Penalty/ SNPP | | Count 3 | Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV) contrary to s 59(1) Crimes Act 1900 | 2 years imprisonment | | Count 6 | Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm contrary to s 13(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 | 5 years imprisonment | | Count 7 | Intentionally choke etc person without consent (DV) contrary to s 37(1A) Crimes Act 1900 | 5 years imprisonment | | H96903742/7 on a s166 Certificate | Contravene prohibition in ADVO (Domestic) contrary to s 14(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 | 2 years imprisonment |

2. The offender also consents to being called up on a breach of a 12 month Community Corrections Order imposed on him in the Local Court on 7 September 2023 for an offence of take and drive conveyance (H78206771/4). The offender admitted that the bond was breached by the commission of the offences for which he is to be sentenced.

3. The call-up matter involved the offender taking a motorcycle from the University of New South Wales on 21 June 2023 after using a pair of scissors to start it. The motorcycle was recovered the following day and sustained damage to the ignition barrel. The offender told the police that he was worried that he was being followed and just needed to get away.

Approach to Sentencing

4. 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.

5. The offender entered pleas of guilty to the charges in the indictment in the District Court and is entitled to a 10% discount on sentence: s 25D(2)(b) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. He entered a plea to the related matter in the Local Court and is entitled to a 25% discount for that matter.

6. 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

7. The parties tendered an Agreed Statement of Facts. I have taken the entirety of the 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.

Background

8. In about August 2023 the offender and the victim entered into a domestic relationship. They lived at the victim’s residence in Maroubra and have a nine month old daughter together. The victim also has a son from a previous relationship.

9. During the first three months of the relationship the offender was often paranoid about people entering the victim’s residence. He was concerned about his safety and the victim cheating on him. The victim regularly tried to calm him down when he got in these states.

Count 3: Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV)

10. On 4 March 2024 the offender and the victim were at home. The victim decided to end their relationship because of the offender's mental health issues, including his paranoia. When she told the offender that she wanted to end the relationship the offender kicked her in her left knee causing her to fall to the ground.

11. The victim suffered bruising to the inside of her left knee from the kick and bruising to her inner right arm around the elbow from the fall.

12. While the victim was lying on the ground the offender went into the kitchen and returned with a 25cm knife. He then walked up to the victim and yelled “Is this what you want?” whilst about 30cm away from her face.

13. The victim de-escalated the situation by telling the offender she would not leave him.

Count 6: Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm (domestic)

Count 7: Intentionally choke etc person without consent (DV)

14. At about 4:00am on 12 March 2024 the victim was sleeping in the living room with the offender and her son. The offender woke the victim while on top of her. He grabbed her throat for about 10 seconds and accused her of making hand signals out of the window. The victim struggled to breathe.

15. The victim tried to get the offender off by kicking and screaming for help, but he covered her mouth. The offender continued to ask who the victim was cheating with.

16. Shortly after the offender again grabbed the victim by the throat. He made her struggle to breathe for about 15 seconds.

17. The victim tried to convince the offender that she was not cheating. The offender said he would hurt her and would give her 15 minutes to name who she was cheating with.

18. The offender claimed someone was coming into the house and repeatedly accused the victim of cheating. He also claimed someone was in a van and that there were cameras around. The victim begged the offender to believe that she was not cheating but the offender would not and threatened her with violence.

19. The victim was scared for her life and for her son who was asleep during the offences.

20. In the morning of 12 March 2024 the victim left the apartment and called 000.

21. Police located the victim on a nearby street in her vehicle. While walking to the victim, a passerby advised police that he saw a man jump the back fence of a property close to the victim’s residence.

22. Police later located the offender nearby. The offender was arrested and conveyed to Maroubra Police Station.

23. The offender declined to participate in an ERISP.

H96903742/7: Contravene prohibition/restriction in ADVO (Domestic)

24. The offender was subject to a Provisional Apprehended Domestic Violence Order dated 26 November 2023 during the commission of these offences, including that the offender was not to contact the victim.

Breach of Parole Reports

25. The Court received two breach of parole reports dated 29 November 2023 and 14 March 2024. The content of these reports can be summarised as follows.

26. The first report noted that after his release on 7 September 2023 his compliance with supervision by Community Corrections was satisfactory and that he had engaged with treatment for his mental health and addictions. He showed some insight into his risk factors and had set appropriate goals. The report noted that the offender had made progress and that he was assessed as suitable for further supervision in the community. The author also noted a decline in the offender’s mental health and that he would be encouraged to seek appropriate treatment.

27. The second report noted that the offender had committed the offences for which he is to be sentenced. The report recommended that his supervision be terminated because of the escalation in his offending behaviour on the basis that his risk factors could not be mitigated in the community, despite his positive progress.

Offender’s Case on Sentence

28. The offender tendered the following documents:

(a) psychiatric report by Dr Richard Furst dated 23 May 2025; (b) affidavit of solicitor, Helen Shaw, dated 7 August 2025; (c) a copy of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal Ingrey v R (2016) NSWCCA 31; and (d) report on Institutionalisation by Dr Robyn Shields, AM and Dr Andrew Ellis, Psychiatrist dated 2024.

29. The following is a precis of the evidence relied upon by the offender.

30. The offender is 32 years of age and indigenous. His brothers are also in custody.

31. The offender has had numerous periods of incarceration as a juvenile and an adult. Dr Furst had available to him reports from earlier sentence matters and the CCA decision that made findings about the offender’s background.

32. The offender was disadvantaged and traumatised from an early age. He grew up on an aboriginal mission in La Perouse. He was regularly exposed to drug use, heavy drinking, crime and violence. His mother died when he was age 13.

33. He was sexually abused on multiple occasions from age 11 and 14 in the local area and in juvenile justice facilities. He was also regularly assaulted. He reported difficulties with relaxation, sleep and trust in others.

34. The offender started binge drinking alcohol at a young age. He smoked cannabis when he was age 13 and later used MDMA pills, methylamphetamines and heroin.

35. The offender left school in Year 7 and is illiterate. He has never worked in paid employment.

36. The offender has spent only about 16 months in the community since he turned 18. In earlier sentences he has completed the Violent Offenders Therapeutic Program and the EQUIPS courses in addiction and aggression. On his release he reported for VOTP maintenance sessions with Community Corrections. The offender has maintained regular work in prison and been an Aboriginal delegate.

37. He described feeling anxious when he was released from custody on 6 June 2023. He felt like people were following him and that they intended to kidnap him. He took and rode a motorbike that did not belong to him. He was arrested and sent back to prison before being released on the CCO on 7 September 2023.

38. The offender lived with the victim until he was arrested on 26 November 2023. He reported that things were going better for him. He had not been taking drugs, but he still felt anxious and had difficulty sleeping. He was feeling paranoid. He thought that people were going to break into the house to kill him and that his partner was cheating on him. He presented himself to the mental health unit at Prince of Wales (POW) Hospital on 20 November 2023 and was admitted between 20 November 2023 and 22 November 2023. He was noted to be experiencing paranoia and was discharged with an anti-depressant medication. He was not demonstrating the signs of a psychotic illness or a major mood disturbance.

39. On 26 November 2023 the offender was taken back to POW Hospital after he was arrested because had been banging his head against the wall at the Police Station. He was despondent and reported paranoia and hypervigilance. He was not thought to be suffering from a psychotic illness or a major mood disturbance.

40. Dr Furst opined that the offender is institutionalised. The offender finds it more comfortable in custody and gets anxious when he is due for release. Dr Furst opined that that prolonged incarceration will make it more difficult for the offender to reintegrate into the community.

41. Dr Furst opined that the offender’s presentation at the time of assessment was consistent with the following diagnoses:

(a) Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder – Complex Type (C-PTSD) (b) Substance Use Disorder (Methylamphetamines, Opiates) (c) Personality Disorder (Borderline and Antisocial features) (d) Effects of Opiate Withdrawal.

42. Dr Furst opined that the offender, as a result of the conditions of his childhood, has been emotionally and socially dysfunctional from a young age. He copes poorly with stress and has developed maladaptive coping strategies including angry outbursts, emotional instability, drug addiction and self-harm. His coping skills are insufficient to deal with a relationship and young children and this inability to cope with the pressures of his life in the community caused him to act aggressively towards the victim.

43. Dr Furst opined that his severe anxiety and paranoia were caused by his severe institutionalisation and it is likely that they worsened due to the reduction of his dose of methadone in 2022 and 2023 and that at the time of the offences the offender was suffering from an undiagnosed opiate withdrawal syndrome.

44. Dr Furst found no indications of psychosis or a major mood disturbance. His level of intelligence appeared to be well below average.

45. Dr Furst noted that the offender has been unsuccessfully treated in the past with a number of antidepressant and antipsychotic medications, but he thought that he should be treated with sertraline with a view to reducing his impulsivity and anxious distress. He recommended the Personality and Behaviour Disorder Unit in Corrective Services NSW to provide individual counselling and support for the offender. Dr Furst opined that the offender will probably require opiate substitution therapy for a considerable period.

46. Dr Furst opined that the offender will need considerable support in the community in relation to his mental health and drug addiction issues. At present his institutionalisation makes him feel more comfortable in custody because he has more self-worth and status in prison than he does in the community.

47. Dr Furst assessed the offender as a moderate to high risk of re-offending.

48. Ms Shaw has been representing the offender since late January 2024. She is aware of the offender’s background of extensive incarceration and institutionalisation. In her affidavit Ms Shaw expressed concerns about a significant deterioration in the offender’s presentation and ability to communicate since his transfer to Mid North Coast Correctional Contre on 3 May 2025. Ms Shaw deposed that the offender needs urgent psychiatric or medical attention given his history of self-harm.

Consideration

Objective seriousness

Count 3: Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV)

49. The offence consisted of a single kick to the knee causing the victim to fall to the ground. The offender’s use of violence occurred in response to the victim trying to end their relationship. The victim sustained bruising to her knee and inner arm. The use of the knife was a surrounding circumstance of the offence but not alleged by the Crown to have been a part of the assault, or an aggravating feature of it.

Count 6: Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm

50. The offence involved repeated threats to hurt the victim. The threats were made in connection with an allegation that the victim was cheating on him. The threats were made following the choking incident in circumstances where the victim could reasonably expect the threats to be carried out. The threats were made in the early hours of the morning. The conduct occurred in close proximity to the victim’s son who was asleep. The victim feared for her life and her son’s life.

Count 7: Intentionally choke etc person without consent (DV)

51. The offender placed his hands on the victim’s throat and restricted her breathing on two occasions, which were close in time, while he was on top of her. The conduct took place early in the morning when the victim’s son was asleep nearby. The victim struggled to breathe. The victim screamed for help and the offender placed his hands over her mouth. The victim feared for her life and her son’s life.

H96903742/7: Contravene prohibition in ADVO (Domestic)

52. The offender was the subject of an ADVO protecting the victim. The order prohibited him from assaulting her or having any contact with her. The victim had clearly made the choice to allow the offender to live with her at the time of the offences, despite the existence of the order.

53. I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offender’s conduct in Counts 3, 6 and 7 were intended by him to control the victim’s behaviour, which is a usually prominent feature of domestic violence offences. At the time of these offences, the offender was suffering severe anxiety and paranoia to the extent that he was experiencing and acting on irrational thoughts, in particular that he was being watched, that he was in danger, that the victim was cheating on him and that she was making hand signals to another person out of the window at 4.00am in the morning. There was a direct casual connection between these irrational thoughts and his offending conduct, which significantly reduces his moral culpability for the offences.

54. I have had regard to the maximum penalty for the offences.

Deterrence

55. General deterrence is of significance to the offences before the Court. Domestic violence is prevalent in the community. The penalty imposed must signal to others intending to commit similar crimes that they will be met with significant punishment.

56. General deterrence may be afforded less weight where an offender suffers from a mental condition, because they are not an appropriate person to be made an example of. This is such a case. The offender had a deprived childhood that led to complex post-traumatic stress disorder, personality disorders and substance abuse. He was incarcerated from a young age and sexually abused. He continued to commit offences and is now institutionalised. At the time of the offences, the offender was suffering from an undiagnosed opiate withdrawal syndrome which caused him significant paranoia and anxiety. There was a direct causal connection between the offender’s irrational paranoia and the offences. In all of the circumstances, the offender’s moral culpability for the offences is substantially reduced.

57. There is a need for specific deterrence. The offender has an extensive criminal history and has been incarcerated for the majority of his adult life. His continued offending behaviour makes him a danger to the community. The offender needs to understand by the imposition of the sentence in these matters, that if he continues to commit offences, he will continue to receive condign punishment.

Aggravating factors

58. The offender has a record of previous convictions: s 21A(2)(d) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender’s criminal record is extensive.

59. The offences were committed in the home of the victim: s 21A(2)(e) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

60. The offences were committed while the offender was on conditional liberty: s 21A(2)(j) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The offender was on parole and subject to the CCO.

Mitigating factors

61. The offender has some prospects of rehabilitation. On the last occasion he was released from custody he made positive progress. He engaged with Community Corrections, sought appropriate treatment and remained abstinent. There was a marked decline in his mental health that was the most direct cause of his offending behaviour. The offender is seriously institutionalised and that will not improve by continuing his incarceration. He needs significant support in the community to break the cycle and on the most recent occasion he demonstrated that he is willing to try to help himself. I am satisfied that the offender will be assisted with more intensive mental health treatment and that will improve his prospects of rehabilitation.

62. I have taken into account the conditions imposed on prisoners in New South Wales in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which I accept may continue to be imposed for some time into the future. I am satisfied that the offender’s time in custody was made more onerous by the restrictions imposed to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.

63. I am satisfied that his mental decline, that was apparent at the time of the offences, has continued whilst he has been in custody for these offences. He has been under observation for his mental condition in a dry cell, his presentation has deteriorated and he has lost a considerable amount of weight. At the sentence hearing he appeared to be despondent. It is unclear as to what mental health treatment he has been receiving in custody and I understand that he was recently moved to the Long Bay Hospital. I accept that his time in custody has also been made more onerous as a result of his mental condition.

Other matters

64. The offender was arrested in relation to H79452033, separate allegations involving the victim on 26 November 2023. He was then granted conditional bail on 6 February 2024 following a period of 73 days in custody. The charges were withdrawn as part of the resolution. Given the charges were joined on the same Indictment as the subject offending, to which the offender has pleaded guilty, it is accepted he should be afforded full credit for his 73 days on remand in relation to H79452033.

65. The offender was arrested in relation to the subject offending on 12 March 2024. He has remained in custody since that date.

66. The offender's subsequent arrest resulted in the revocation of his parole by the State Parole Authority for the offence of robbery while armed with dangerous weapon. The revocation order resulted in the offender serving the balance of his parole from 12 March 2024 to 20 December 2024.

67. I have a discretion to backdate the sentence imposed. I note that the revocation of his parole was solely referable to the commission of these offences. Taking into account the offender’s criminal history a breach of parole by the commission of further offences should usually result in some additional punishment. However, in all of the circumstances of this case, it is appropriate to keep that additional punishment to a minimum of the 73 days between 26 November 2023 and 6 February 2024.

68. I will back date the imposition of the sentence to 12 March 2024.

Call-up matter

69. I note that the offender did comply with the conditions of the CCO while he was at liberty until the commission of these offences. The CCO has now expired. In all of the circumstances, it is appropriate to take no action on the breach of the CCO.

Penalty

70. Clifford Ingrey is convicted.

71. 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.

72. The Crown urged that I should not make a finding of special circumstances because the offender has no prospects of rehabilitation and a lengthy parole period would set him up to fail. For the reasons given, I am satisfied that the offender has some prospects of rehabilitation and that he cannot overcome his institutionalisation, mental health and addiction without a longer period of supervision on parole and for those reasons it is appropriate to make a finding of special circumstances.

73. This is an appropriate matter to 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:

| Indictment/ Count | Offence | Indicative Sentence | | Count 3 | Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV) contrary to s 59(1) Crimes Act 1900 | 8 months | | Count 6 | Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm contrary to s 13(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 | 22 months | | Count 7 | Intentionally choke etc person without consent (DV) contrary to s 37(1A) Crimes Act 1900 | 22 months | | H96903742/7 | Contravene prohibition in ADVO (Domestic) contrary to s 14(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 | 6 months |

74. I impose an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year and 9 months to date from 12 March 2024. The non-parole period will expire on 11 December 2025 and the head sentence will expire on 11 March 2027.

75. The offender is to be released on parole on 11 December 2025.

**********