His Honour sentenced Meier to imprisonment for three years for entering a dwelling house with intent to commit an indictable offence therein, to imprisonment for five years for armed robbery in company, to imprisonment for two years for unlawful use of a motor vehicle without a circumstance of aggravation, and to imprisonment for three years for each offence of unlawful use of a motor vehicle with a circumstance of aggravation. He recommended that she be considered for parole at the expiration of 18 months of the sentence for armed robbery.

His Honour sentenced Stawicki to imprisonment for three years for entering a dwelling house with intent to commit an indictable offence therein, to imprisonment for five years for armed robbery in company, and to imprisonment for 12 months for unlawfully using a motor vehicle. His Honour recommended that Stawicki be considered for parole at the expiration of 12 months of each of the first two sentences.

Meier, a former prostitute, Stawicki and the others devised a plan to steal cannabis from Mr Grainger, a pensioner aged 32 years who was known to Meier. Mr Grainger suffered from impaired vision in both eyes and brain damage caused in a motor vehicle accident. His disabilities were known to Meier before the attack on him.

Meier went to Mr Grainger's flat at about 7 p.m. on 15 August 1995. He let her in and they had a conversation for about five minutes after which there was a knock at the door and Stawicki, Van Hoek and Hiki entered the flat. With them they brought a piece of wood and a knife. Mr Grainger was assaulted and threatened. Van Hoek menaced him with a knife holding it at various times to his throat, chest, and stomach. Hiki hit Mr Grainger with the piece of wood a number of times. Van Hoek and Hiki threatened to kill him. The intruders then left taking the property I have referred to. Meier left before the others.

Mr Grainger was treated in the Gold Coast Hospital for injuries which included a laceration and bruising.

The last offence of unlawful use of a motor vehicle to which Meier pleaded guilty was committed soon after her release from custody on 24 October 1995. She took the vehicle in Tweed Heads and then returned to Queensland intending to pick up her child and then leave Queensland. The other offences of unlawful use of motor vehicles were committed soon before and soon after the robbery.

Meier was born on 11 April 1975 and so was 20 years old when the offences were committed. She is the mother of an infant child. At the time of the robbery she was the de facto spouse of Van Hoek. Her mother was a drug addict and her father was an alcoholic. Prior to the commission of these offences she had been convicted of a number of offences: shop lifting (in New Zealand), and prostitution offences, drug offences, and stealing (all in Queensland).

Stawicki was born on 2 October 1974 and so was also 20 years old when the offences were committed. He was single and unemployed. He is a talented athlete, a champion sprinter. He had been previously convicted of unlawful assault.

His Honour took into account the youth of both applicants, the fact that they cooperated with the investigating police officers, and their early pleas of guilty. His Honour also accepted that neither used a weapon, but observed that violence was an almost inevitable consequence of the plan. He sentenced them on the basis that they were parties to an enterprise involving the use of weapons by others. His Honour took the view that the deterrent aspect of punishment was important in this case, particularly as Mr Grainger was disabled and was the victim of a cowardly attack by the four.

One of the important purposes for which a sentence may be imposed on an offender is, as section 9(1)(d) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 provides, to make it clear that the community, acting through the court, does not approve of the sort of conduct in which the offender was involved. That is a particularly important purpose to bear in mind in a case like this, in which a vicious attack was made on a disabled man. In my view, His Honour gave full weight to the mitigating factors urged upon us, as is demonstrated by his recommendations for early consideration for parole.

All things considered I should dismiss the applications.