R v Mansour [2008] VSC 226

2 The offences to which you have pleaded guilty and the maximum penalties applicable to each offence are firstly Count 1, trafficking large commercial quantity methylamphetamine at Melbourne between January 1 2006 and June 5 2007, life imprisonment and 5000 penalty units. Count 2, trafficking commercial quantity of cocaine at Melbourne between 1 January 2006 and 5 June 2007, 25 years' imprisonment. Count 3, dealing with approximately $4.2 million knowing it was proceeds of crime at Melbourne, between July 5 2006 and June 6 2007, 15 years' imprisonment. Count 4, trafficking MDMA at Melbourne between 3 May 2007 and 5 June 2007, 15 years' imprisonment. Count 5, knowingly contravening a property restraining order at Melbourne, on May 29 2007, 10 years' imprisonment. Count 6, dealing with property knowing it was proceeds of crime at Melbourne, on 5 June 2007, 15 years' imprisonment and a Level 5 fine.

3 The Crown have presented a lengthy opening which I have made Exhibit 6 and I do not intend to repeat all of the material contained in that document which was quite helpful. Unfortunately it does not in my view clearly set out the structure, which is the organisation referred to as the company, or how it actually came into being and operated at least as far as your involvement is concerned. Although one thing is clear and that is that the major beneficiary of this organisation was Antonios Mokbel. He was clearly the man in charge and the person who dictated how this organisation worked.

4 As I describe my findings, I will not be referring to your alleged co-offenders as alleged, but I will certainly be intending at this stage that they are persons who have not been convicted and are merely alleged, but this is on your description their involvement. You together with Bartholomew Rizzo were what were described by the Crown as the principal organisers of the company. The company was involved in the manufacture and distribution of very large quantities of methylamphetamine, the trafficking of cocaine, MDMA and money laundering. There are at least 10 people that have been identified as being members of the company, being Antonios Mokbel, Bartholomew Rizzo, George Elias, Chafic Issa, Christopher Ferraro, David Tricarico, Andrew Ryan, Robert Benedetti, Jamie Saro and yourself.

5 The material that the authorities have been able to access indicates that you and Rizzo were involved in this business, from at least 1 January 2006 until your arrest together with your other co-accused in Australia and Mokbel in Greece, on 5 June 2007. The reading of the statements that you have made to the police indicate quite clearly a number of matters which include:

• That at the time that you first met Mokbel in September 2005 you were aware of who he was and his reputation in respect of drug trafficking.
• By the end of 2005/the beginning of 2006, you were, as you described it, good friends with Mokbel, his brothers, his girlfriend Danielle McGuire, his children and his friends.
• You were also aware that he was on bail for cocaine charges.
• You were warned by your aunt, a solicitor, in January of 2006 that you should have nothing to do with Mokbel or any of his dealings, when you sought to purchase an apartment owned by Mokbel in Noosa.
• Your first trafficking with him involved you and Rizzo purchasing two pounds of methylamphetamine and then on-selling it to people who, together with Rizzo, you had sourced as persons who would wish to purchase the drug. That occurred in January/February of 2006.
• You were also aware that Mokbel was about to abscond from his trial two days before he failed to appear.
• That you continued purchasing drugs from the connection "Freddy" that you had made through Mokbel, even after Mokbel had absconded from his trial.
• That you and Rizzo were moving about two to three pounds of amphetamine a week after Mokbel absconded.
• That for the time between March and October of 2006 you had no contact, whatsoever, with Mokbel, but continued trafficking the methylamphetamine in large amounts and increasingly large amounts.
• That in October 2006 you had your first renewed contact with Mokbel whilst he was on the run from authorities. It was originally via a telephone call organised by Freddy. This contact occurred to sort out a 10 pound bad batch of amphetamine that you had purchased from Freddy.

During that call Mokbel asked that you provide him with $100,000 in cash in a week's time. You were taken with the money to the area where Mokbel was hiding, being Bonnie Doon, Victoria, and gave him the money.

• That it was from that time on that you once again had direct contact with Mokbel and you then assisted in the provision of money to enable Mokbel to flee the jurisdiction and to maintain himself while overseas.

6 It would appear that it was at that stage that you had more involvement in what has been referred to as "the Company" this was due to Mokbel leaving the jurisdiction and being not as available to control and personally distribute the money and the directions to those involved in the manufacture and trafficking of the amphetamine.

7 As far as I've been able to ascertain in relation to the business of this so-called Company, the principal was, as I indicated, Antonios Mokbel. You and Rizzo were the trusted confidants of Mokbel. However, it would appear that Mokbel also gave orders and directions, independently, to the others involved in the Company, as well as through you and Rizzo.

8 Mokbel organised through you and Rizzo and also independently, as I indicated, through other members of this organisation for the manufacture of methylamphetamine. The manufactured methylamphetamine was then sold to you and Rizzo, who then had to on-sell the drug to various people, and to account for the money that was made.

9 The profits made from the on-selling of the drug were to be divided between yourself and Rizzo alone. There is no doubt that the idea was to make as much profit on each sale of methylamphetamine that was possible.

10 The contact that you had with Mokbel was initially in person before he was a fugitive, then later by telephone whilst he was a fugitive. You would be given instructions by Mokbel, and you were either to carry out these instructions yourself or pass them on to another member of the organisation for that person to carry them out.

11 You and other company members ran that company as if it were a legitimate business, in that you either assisted with the manufacture, by giving directions or paying money out on behalf of Mokbel to others, to whom he had given orders.

12 Then when the manufacturing process was complete you bought the finished product and other available drugs, and you, with other members of the Company, monitored the quality of those drugs, stored the drugs until sold, you cut and repackaged the drugs, marketed the drugs and, through Rizzo, kept a book of account on the Company's customers and monies flowing in and out.

13 You paid money to various members which are itemised as expenses, and undoubtedly sought to make large profits. The roles of the other members of the Company, as outlined by the Crown in brief detail, are:

• George Elias, he was a confidant of Mokbel and spoke to him directly. His role was to receive and convert P2P to methylamphetamine and return the finished product to you, Rizzo or Ferraro for distribution or safekeeping. He was paid in cash from the proceeds of the drug sales by you or Rizzo.
• Chafic Issa, the brother of Elias, his role was to receive and also convert the P2P to methylamphetamine and return the finished product to you, Rizzo or Ferraro. The Company's accounts which were known as the Raymond Weil, as prepared by Rizzo, indicate that Issa received $1,236,500 from the proceeds of the drug sales since July 2006.
• Christopher Ferraro had been involved in the Company from 1 January 2006, and he was a drug dealer and courier. He provided the safe houses to store the large quantities of drugs, chemicals and drug money. Ferraro was paid in drugs and cash for his role in the Company.
• David Tricarico was a drug manufacturer and confidant of Mokbel, and it would appear he also received instructions directly from Mokbel on occasions. Tricario's role was to convert phenylacetic acid to P2P or oil, which would be delivered to you or Rizzo, to then transfer to other members of the Company to continue with the remainder of the manufacturing process.

Tricarico took over this role of manufacturing when his father, Max, died in February 2007. Tricarico received cash payments in excess of $40,000 on each occasion that he completed this procedure.

• Andrew Ryan was a student at university studying engineering. He was also a confidant of Mokbel and dealt directly with him on occasions. Ryan was what was referred to as the consultant to the Company in relation to the quality of the methylamphetamine produced by Tricarico, Elias and Issa.

Ryan undertook the role of improving the quality of the methylamphetamine received by you, and offered to supply better quality chemicals to Mokbel, in particular methylamine gas. Ryan received large quantities of methylamphetamine as payment for his role in the Company.

• Robert Benedetti was the supplier of cocaine to the Company.
• Jamie Saro assisted the Company by providing an on-call service for the safe storage and delivery of drug trafficking paraphernalia. He also assisted with the cutting and repackaging of large quantities of methylamphetamine.

14 In respect of the matters that you dealt with on behalf of the Company, the process that would occur in relation to the manufacture was the Company's methylamphetamine was manufactured in two parts. First, Max would chemically convert phenylacetic acid to phenyl-2-propanone which is P2P. As indicated, when Max died in February of 2005, Tricarico's son took over and continued that process. Subsequent to that process, Elias and Issa would do the conversion of that material by the process termed "gassing". The product produced would be given to either you, or Rizzo, or Ferraro, and then stored for safe keeping until on-sold to the buyers. There was a plan for the Company to make $6000 profit on each one pound deal of methylamphetamine at a selling price of $48,000. More money than that may well have been made in respect of each pound produced but I am not in a position to find that as a fact.

15 The Crown state in their outline that the very generous profits generated by the Company's drug manufacturing activities were largely distributed to Mokbel or for the benefit of Mokbel through various avenues. You directly distributed moneys realised from the activities of the Company to Mokbel's interests, including Mokbel, Mokbel's immediate family and associates. However, some of the profits I understand to be the on-selling of the manufactured drugs and other drugs that were purchased were distributed to you and Rizzo.

16 It is not clear if you received any of the profit related to the manufacture of the methylamphetamine, and accordingly I will not act upon the basis that you have received any profit from that avenue. The downfall of the Company came about as a result of a person who is referred to as Registered Human Source 7953030 in April 2007. That occurred as a result of him approaching police and indicating his willingness to provide information about the activities of the Company. He acted as an ongoing informant for the police and enabled them to gain further evidence and intelligence which permitted the police to, firstly, identify people involved in the Company's business, identify places, houses, hotels, storage facilities, cars utilised in the business, identified the financial institutions, the properties acquired with illegally obtained gains, and meeting places relevant to the Company's activities.

17 Also they were able to monitor some of the activity of the Company by using covert police surveillance operatives, they were able to use recording and listening devices in cars, houses and storage locations to gain evidence. They were able to use telephone intercepts to capture relevant conversations or communications between you and your co-accused, and they were successfully able to introduce covert police operatives into the periphery of the Company to enable them to gather evidence surreptitiously, and this all ultimately led to the location and successful apprehension of Mr Mokbel in Greece, and the identification and arrest of his co-offenders in Australia including you.

18 Like many others involved in this type of criminal activity, you and your alleged co-offenders utilised various techniques to avoid the attention of the police, including the use of code terms for drugs, people, places, changing mobile phones and SIM cards on a very regular basis, hiring motor vehicles for transportation purposes, using motels, hotels to cut and repackage drugs, using anti-surveillance techniques particularly when driving around with drugs or drug paraphernalia, the use of different storage facilities and places to store drugs, drug money and drug paraphernalia, choosing places for transactions where there was no known surveillance or video devices recording it and conspiring with others to conceal the existence of properties acquired by Mokbel from drug money.

19 Your counsel referred to the fact that RH3030 is not charged in respect of these activities, which is not surprising as a number of these activities that he undertook were at the behest of the police to gather evidence, and his assistance in identifying and breaking this very large conspiracy could be described as invaluable.

20 Turning to the individual offences. In relation to Count 1, that of trafficking in a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, the circumstances of your involvement are as I have outlined above. You together with Rizzo are the principals in the on-selling of the methylamphetamine that was produced by Mokbel initially and then the Company after his absconding. You were also involved from at least October 2006 until your arrest in June 2007 in the manufacture of methylamphetamine as the persons responsible for the day-to-day control of the manufacturing process and payment of expenses.

21 I do not intend to list all the matters that the Crown have put forward to indicate the level of your activity, but I will refer to some of those as examples of your involvement. I have also referred to the amounts that you were on-selling according to your own statements, but I do know that you also said you received approximately 20 pounds from Freddy between January and July 2006, although that is not consistent with what you said earlier about selling two to three pounds a week in your statement at p.12. What it may mean is that you and Rizzo were heavily cutting the amphetamine received, which would of course increase your profit margin considerably.

22 I intend to deal with this count on the basis that you and Rizzo made a considerable profit from the drugs that you on-sold between January 2006 and June 2007. Although I am not able to be satisfied of the precise amount that you sold, it is clear from your plea and the undisputed Crown summary, that your involvement related to at least 42 kilograms or more than 92 pounds of methylamphetamine. The wholesale value of this amount of methylamphetamine is approximately $4.2 million. The street value of the methylamphetamine would be many, many times that value and would have been in the tens of millions of dollars.

23 As I indicated, there were many examples of your involvement, the first being early January when you and Rizzo received two pounds and one ounce of methylamphetamine from Freddie. That was given on the directions of Mokbel, a cost of $45,000 per pound. The ounce was your sample to give to buyers or potential buyers. You broke the methylamphetamine up into ounce lots and sold it. In around early October 2006 you and Rizzo collected ten pounds of methylamphetamine from Freddie. You paid $47,500 for each pound. It was stated that the quality of these drugs was poor, although it does appear that you were able to sell the drugs after gaining some assistance in rectifying the problem. In May you with Ferraro received from Elias six pounds of methylamphetamine, together with a package containing $140,000 cash.

24 In late May of 2007 you became involved whilst Ryan was actually in the process of improving the poor quality of the methylamphetamine. You at the time also arranged for the supply of sophisticated and highly sought after glassware, which was very difficult to acquire legally, to Ryan specifically for the manufacture of amphetamine. You occasionally assisted others in the cutting of the raw methylamphetamine product and the repackaging of the methylamphetamine for resale although that was not your major role.

25 You then had many telephone contacts and at least one physical contact with Mokbel after he became a fugitive to discuss the Company business, including arranging a meeting and then meeting with Mokbel, in a secret location near Bonnie Doon in October 2006, to deliver money, $100,000 cash, to arrange for special phones to enable future contact, to seek guidance on the quality of the methylamphetamine, and for Mokbel to advise you that Freddie would no longer be supplying methylamphetamine to the Company.

26 Around mid-October 2006 Mokbel directed you and Rizzo to obtain about 200 litres of acetone for the manufacture of methylamphetamine from a specific place that he nominated. Between mid-December 2006 and mid-February 2007, at the direction of Mokbel you met with Max on several occasions and handed to Max approximately 15 pounds of methylamphetamine, and received from Max approximately $675,000 cash and about five litres of P2P oil. You were then directed also to hand over that oil to Issa for him to gas.

27 On 23 February 2007 you contacted Mokbel by telephone and informed Mokbel of the death of Max. Mokbel asked you to arrange contact between Mokbel and Max's son, David Tricarico. As a result of subsequent telephone contact between Mokbel and Tricarico he agreed to take over his father's methylamphetamine manufacturing role in the Company. In mid-March 2007 Mokbel directed you to purchase through his brother, Horty Mokbel, the chemicals for the methylamphetamine manufacturing process. The chemicals were valued at $625,000. Mokbel directed you to pay Horty Mokbel $325,000 cash as part payment.

28 Around mid-April 2007 at Mokbel's direction Rizzo collected $500,000 to be sent to Mokbel. That money was seized by the police and within a short time you gathered together a further $500,000 in cash to be sent to him. You would regularly update Mokbel as to the state of how much money there was in the till (to use your description). Rizzo predominately looked after the keeping of the accounts, but you assisted him in that matter. A set of accounts was kept on a computer and was called the "Raymond Weil". You organised that various moneys from the manufacture of the drugs be paid out on the direction of Mokbel and you attended to those matters personally.

29 These are just some of the payments that were made:

• Early July 2006, $30,000 cash paid to Danielle McGuire.
• 10 July 2006 another $30,000 cash paid to Danielle McGuire.
• 24 August 2006, $3500 cash for the purchase of acetone.
• 2 September 2006, $20,000 cash to be paid to Auntie.
• September 2006, $2000 cash paid to Carmel Mokbel.
• 22 and 25 September 2006, $140,000 cash transferred to an account for the benefit of Mokbel.
• 27 September 2006, $20,000 cash to Renate Mokbel.
• October 2006, $100,000 cash to Mokbel.
• Between early October 2006 and late October 2006, $100,000 cash was given to Issa to assist in the flight overseas of Mokbel.
• December 2006, $100,000 cash, in excess of $100,000 to Issa.
• 24 December, $50,000 cash to Carmel Mokbel.
• 25 December, $10,000 cash to Mokbel's mother.
• 27 December 2006, $50,000 cash transferred to an account in Greece for Mokbel.
• 4 January 2007, $40,000 cash to an account in Greece for Mokbel.
• 8 January 2007, $40,000 cash to an account in Greece for Mokbel.
• 13 January, $1000 cash paid to Joan Madin the mother of Danielle McGuire.
• 24 January 2007, $40,000 cash transferred to an account in Greece for Mokbel.
• January 2007, $10,000 cash paid to Aunty Gloria.
• Early February 2007, $120,000 cash to Issa and a current Australian passport, knowing that it was going to be sent to assist Mokbel in some manner.
• 14 February 2007, $2000 cash to Aunty Gloria.
• 14 February 2007, $3000 cash to Renata Mokbel.
• 21 February 2007, $50,000 cash telegraphically transferred to Greece for the benefit of Mokbel.
• Between March and June 2007 $4000 cash to Jade Mokbel.
• 2 March 2007, $20,000 cash to Renate Mokbel.
• 15 March 2007, $100,000 cash exchanged for euros and handed on to other people for the benefit of Mokbel.
• By mid-March 2007, you have provided between $30,000 and $40,000 cash to Horty Mokbel to pay for Renate Mokbel's legal fees, associated with her imprisonment for Mokbel's breach of bail security.
• 3 April 2007, $10,000 cash to Horty Mokbel for legal fees.
• 11 April 2007, Joan Madin, $2000 cash as a birthday gift for her from Mokbel.
• April/May 2007, $5000 cash to Mokbel's money.
• Mid-April 2007, $15,000 cash.
• 5 May 2007, $499,950 cash to Issa. This money was the money that was ultimately seized by the police on 5 May.
• 23 May, you together with Rizzo, handed $80,000 cash to Tricarico, payment for his services in the manufacturing process.
• May 2007, $19,500 cash to Zaharoula Mokbel.

30 Over the course of the dealings with the Company in which you were involved, Rizzo was the person who looked after the cash and receipts of the organisations, and at the time of arrest police found some drug related items including cash, diamond ring and motor bikes, as well as specialist glassware at either your premises or that of your parents.

31 It was at Rizzo's home that they found the larger quantities of money. At his premises they located almost $200,000 in cash, together with quantities of drugs.

32 In relation to Count 2, the trafficking in commercial quantity of cocaine. The trafficking in cocaine sale of the Company's business was almost exclusively conducted by Rizzo who purchased cocaine from Benedetti, and then on-sold it to others.

33 Between December 2005 and May 2007, Benedetti supplied Rizzo with over 40 ounces of cocaine. The vast majority of this cocaine was purchased by Rizzo on behalf of the Company. A smaller amount was acquired by Rizzo as his personal side business.

34 The Company would pay Benedetti between $7,000 and $8,000 an ounce of cocaine. It would be on-sold, after being mixed, for $8,000 an ounce approximately. Ferraro would also assist in the sale of cocaine. Mr Rizzo kept accounts of the purchased and sold cocaine quantities.

35 The amount involved was approximately half to a kilogram of cocaine with a wholesale value of approximately $245,000.

36 Count 3, dealing with approximately $4.2 million, knowing it was the proceeds of crime. The Crown in the summary presented to the court, stated "During the period 1 January 2006 and 5 June 2007, the company's gross turnover for all of its drug trafficking activities is incalculable. However, a conservative estimate of the monies which exchanged hands in order just to purchase the raw products is in excess of $4.2 million." I agree.

37 You, together with the various members of the Company, dealt with the proceeds of the drug dealing business in various ways, and I have dealt with those matters earlier in these remarks.

38 In relation to the trafficking of MDMA at Melbourne, when it was difficult to source cocaine from Benedetti, the Company sought to expand its business by offering to its customers another drug, ecstasy.

39 On 5 June 2007, when police arrested you and other members of the Company, and searched and seized property, the police located amounts of the Company's MDMA or ecstasy at Ferraro's sister's residence in Mill Park. They were located in four different locations and it ended up being approximately half a kilo of MDMA, the wholesale value of approximately $90,000.

40 Count 5, knowingly contravening a property restraining order. On 24 August 2001, the County Court of Victoria, at Melbourne, made an order, pursuant to s.18 of the Confiscation Act 1997 restraining Mokbel, all his servants or agents, from dealing with various properties and money as well as after acquired property. In late January/early February 2007 you were fully aware of the existence and implications of such a restraining order. This matter is still under investigation and it is inappropriate for me to go into any of the details save that it concerns an apartment in Kavanagh Street, Southbank, for which you were trying to obtain payment for and on behalf of Mokbel.

41 Count 6, dealing with property obtained with the proceeds of crime. During the period 1 January 2006 and 5 June 2007 you received profits from the sale of the methylamphetamine and you and Rizzo had agreed to go 50/50 in respect of the profits realised from the on-selling. I am unable to say precisely how much was involved but I have no doubt that it was considerable. You do not have a great deal that can be physically pointed to as a result of that activity. That is not the concern of this court. There is no doubt that you did, at the least, enjoy an improved lifestyle. You purchased numerous items from the proceeds of the Company's business including laptops, an entertainment system, furniture, mobile phones, motorbikes, motor vehicle, jewellery.

42 One of the matters that should be noted in respect of all of these offences is that this was not an amateurish affair. The various members of the Company were very police savvy, you managed to avoid detection for a considerable length of time despite being involved in moving large and extensive amounts of drugs. The police had what I would describe as a strong case against all of those involved in these matters with the evidence of RHS3030 together with the surveillance, the telephone intercepts, seizure of the Raymond Weil financial records and the assorted cash moneys, drug paraphernalia seized when you were all arrested.

43 Despite the strength of the case against you it must be noted in your favour, as I have already pointed out, you have no prior convictions for any matters and when arrested on 5 June you participated in a record of interview which could best be described a "no comment" interview. However, soon thereafter you indicated to police the willingness to provide them with evidence as to the Company's drug dealing business and other related activities.

44 After some fairly lengthy discussions with police on 6 July 2007 you made and signed a 52-page statement concerning the large scale drug dealing activities of the Company and those involved. On 27 February 2008 you made five statements in relation to the activities of the Company and others involved in it. The statements are a 53-page statement which was a repeat of the statement made in July 2007, a 34-page statement, and three statements each containing two pages.

45 On 28 February you gave evidence on oath in this court where you promised to give evidence in any criminal or civil proceeding against any person arising out of and in accordance with the contents of your statements. That is a matter of some significance and the factor that will attract a significant discount on the sentence that the court would otherwise imposed. The courts have said many times it is most important to destroy any aspect of criminal loyalty that may linger in those arrested in respect of joint participation in crimes, and those who are prepared to give evidence against fellow criminals must be positively encouraged to do so and I will in this case.

46 In relation to your personal circumstances: You are now aged 29 years. You are one of two children. Neither your parents nor your sibling have ever been in trouble with the law. Your parents are both of Lebanese descent, your mother having been born there, and your father migrating to Australia when aged about seven years, your sibling is a year older than you and you could be described as having a very happy home life, attending St Charles Primary School in Templestowe and Marcellin College in Bulleen. When the family moved to Warrandyte you attended Whitefriars College where you met and became friends with Rizzo and others who later became involved in the Company. You completed Year 12 but obtained a low TER score and you were regarded as a somewhat slow learner at school. You then commenced a business marketing diploma course at Box Hill TAFE, you completed one of the two years of the course and left because you did not enjoy it. You then worked for your mother part-time at her restaurant.

47 At the age of 19 you commenced working as a kitchen hand at a restaurant for some six months, then commenced an apprenticeship as a chef at that restaurant. Eighteen months into your apprenticeship you developed chronic and severe dermatitis and you had to cease that employment. You then purchased a café with your maternal uncle in Flinders Lane and you sold that some two years later. Prior to the sale you and your uncle opened a café at a Bunning store in Epping. After the sale of the business in Flinders Lane you subsequently opened a further store in Broadmeadows and one at Sunshine both in Bunnings stores. Your uncle continues to operate those stores. You informed Mr Cummins, a clinical psychologist, that you were working/managing those stores up until the time of your arrest.

48 You are engaged and your fiancée like your parents, relatives and friends, knew nothing about your involvement in this criminal activity. You were tested in relation to your intellectual ability and Mr Cummins stated that you were functioning at a very low level. He assessed your IQ as being 80. He said that places you one point above the cut off point for borderline intellectual functioning. He said that you were depressed and anxious. I do not find it surprising that you are depressed and anxious as I would expect any person in your position to feel just that. You have been involved in very serious high level criminality and are about to face the consequences that flow from that conduct. It would be surprising if you were not depressed or anxious about your situation.

49 In his report Mr Cummins noted and I quote: "In terms of diagnostic considerations, he was not assessed as having a personality disorder. It was noted that his excessive anxiety and obsessive behaviour had to be taken into consideration in formulating any diagnosis." Further it was stated "in addition the possibility of a delusional disorder or paranoid personality should be evaluated. In terms of treatment considerations it was noted a primary focus of treatment related to self-doubts. Significantly the personality testing indicated he had a very high need to engage in activities in an attempt to reassure himself with a view to increasing his self-esteem."

50 In his final opinion Mr Cummins indicated nothing in the report about you suffering from any delusional disorder or paranoid personality. During the plea Mr Cummins was called to give evidence and said that, he was of the view that you probably did suffer from a condition called delusional disorder, in which you were totally under the spell of Tony Mokbel, that you were really incapable of breaking away from him due to your psychiatric dependence upon him, as he was lifting your self-esteem. He described it in this manner: "He's very naive. In my opinion he had put Mr Mokbel on a pedestal. He regarded his relationship with Mr Mokbel as being a very special relationship, so special that from his perspective it could be regarded as being out of touch with reality."

51 Mr Cummins stated that in his view you had been extremely traumatised as a result of being unable to pursue your chosen career of being a chef, and that from that time he said you had a chronic adjustment disorder with depression and anxiety included. He stated that you had been chronically feeling anxious and depressed and that those matters had been masked over the relevant time. I reject that evidence. It is firstly inconsistent with the written opinion given by Mr Cummins in his report which was dated and signed 18 March 2008. Secondly, because factually it is not consistent with the evidence of your involvement in this criminality. The evidence is clear that Mokbel had no contact with you between the period 20 March 2006 until October 2006, yet your trafficking during that time escalated, not decreased. You could have walked away at any time during that period and Mokbel had no way of stopping you or contacting you if you chose to do that. You may well have wanted to emulate your father who was a highly successful businessman, but his success was based on honest employment. Mr Cummins agreed that you clearly understood the difference between right and wrong, you had, in my view, an opportunity, you were in the position of co-owning three cafes that were obviously making legitimate money, that could have led to other legitimate career opportunities. But you chose the other path, that of trafficking in illegal drugs and the lifestyle attached to that.

52 Whilst I accept that you have a low IQ, it has not prevented you from being able to carry out this business and evade police detection for a lengthy period of time. You have been able to deal with the members of this organisation, Mokbel, purchases, manufacturers, et cetera, and ensure that healthy profits were made for all concerned.

53 Equally, you lived a lifestyle where you were very heavily involved in this criminality, yet were able to keep that information from any of your family, friends or fiancé over a quite lengthy period of time.

54 Whilst it may not demonstrate a high IQ, it does demonstrate that the lack of high IQ has not impeded you in the pursuit of your criminal objectives.

55 I do not accept that you suffer from any psychiatric illness, and as I stated the depression and anxiety that you currently feel is what I would expect in light of the serious charges that you face.

56 You are exceedingly fortunate in that your entire family, including your extended family, remains supportive, as does your fiancé and your friends.

57 Not every person who comes before this court has that level of support and it will certainly help increase your prospects of rehabilitation.

58 I received a number of character references which I have read, and take into account in your favour. I accept that you were previously a person of good character.

59 Your counsel, in his helpful submissions, indicated the matters that I should take into account in determining your sentence, and they include your plea of guilty, which he submitted indicated your remorse, together with the practical aspect that your plea has saved the community the time and expense of running a lengthy criminal trial. Also the fact that the plea was entered at an earlier time.

60 All of those are matters I accept. The plea was entered by way of direct presentment, bypassing the committal process altogether.

61 It was submitted that I should take into account and ensure that you receive a substantial discount for your co-operation and assistance, which I shall ensure.

62 Counsel relied upon the significance of your co-operation and assistance, and relied upon the evidence of Mr Robertson, a member of the police force involved in this investigation. He stated the importance of your co-operation.

63 Equally, the consequence of your co-operation is that you may have to spend your time in prison in more difficult circumstances than the average prisoner, and I must also take that into account in your favour.

64 As indicated I find that you have relatively good prospects of rehabilitation, despite the level of your criminality.

65 I have to balance all of these matters to which I have referred with the circumstances of your offending, which was of long duration and of a very high level of criminality. Although you are not of the same level of criminality as Mokbel, your activities, together with those of your co-offenders, allowed this large drug trafficking organisation to continue and flourish, even after the departure of the person at the head of that organisation.

66 Without your assistance and that of your co-offenders over an 18 month period, Mokbel may well have been starved of the resources necessary for him to flee the country, and maintain a life on the run in relative comfort.

67 There would have been at least 42 kilos less of methylamphetamine on the streets of Melbourne, and less young persons corrupted by these drugs with their appalling consequences.

68 Parliament has imposed very high penalties for the offences to which you have pleaded guilty. In the case of large commercial quantities of methylamphetamine it is life imprisonment.

69 I am bound to have regard to the high terms that parliament say are appropriate for offences of this nature. This is not a worse case scenario, but it is one that certainly reaches towards the higher end of the range of cases within that category.

70 Equally, the offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime also comes into that category. When the absolute minimum figure involved is $4.2 million, the punishment imposed must be significant, whilst being moderated as required, by other factors to which I have earlier referred in mitigation.

71 I have no doubt that these offences are offences for which people would normally expect to receive exceedingly high levels of imprisonment.

72 In light of what occurred in this case, it is my view that I should say something about the role of the Director of Public Prosecutions. It is my view that the role of the Director of Public Prosecutions is not to suggest to the court an actual and specific term of imprisonment to be imposed upon the offender as was done in this case.

73 The Director may, if he thinks it appropriate, suggest a range of sentence or sentences that he believes would ensure the court did not, in his view, fall into a appealable error. For the Director to state actual specific sentences in my view usurps the role of the sentencing judge, and if that is the sentence that the judge ultimately concludes is the appropriate sentence, it may appear to the members of the community that the sentencing judge is obeying the orders or directions of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

74 The sentencing judge, like the Director of Public Prosecutions, is an independent legal officer of the courts, and must consider many matters that do not necessarily fall within the matters that the Director has to consider when making his decision in respect of prosecutions. Accordingly, in my view it is not appropriate for the Director to make submissions to the court as to what actual sentence should be imposed rather than a range of sentence.

75 Taking into account all of the matters to which I have referred and also considering the principle of totality I impose the following sentences:

• Count 1, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of eight years and six months;
• Count 2, trafficking in a commercial quantity of cocaine, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of two years;
• Count 3, dealing with the proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of four years;
• Count 4, trafficking in MDMA, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of nine months;
• Count 5, dealing with restrained property, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of three months;
• Count 6, dealing with the proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six months.

76 I direct that Count 1 is the base sentence, and that six months of the sentence imposed on Count 2 be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Count 1, that one year of the sentence upon Count 3 be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Counts 1 and 2, and that all other sentences be served concurrently with Counts 1, 2 and 3, making a total of 10 years' imprisonment. I direct that you are to serve a minimum term of seven years' imprisonment before being eligible for parole.

77 I make the forfeiture orders and the DNA orders that were sought. How many days has been spent in pre-trial?

MS BARBAGALLO: Three hundred and seven days, Your Honour, not including today.

HER HONOUR: I declare that you have served 307 days in pre-sentence detention, and that such be entered in the records of the court.

Mr Mansour, I have directed that you provide a forensic sample which will be a scraping of a cheek via swab. If you do not agree with that, those taking it can in fact use force if required. Do you understand?