R v Sulayman Khalid; R v Jibryl Almaouie; R v IM; R v Mohamed Rashad Al Maouie; R v Farhad Said

Supreme Court of NSW|2017-10-06|Before: Bellew J

64; [2006] NSWSC 691 R v NP [2003] NSWCCA 195 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 R v PB [2008] NSWCCA 109 R v Qutami (2001) 127 A Crim R 369; [2001] NSWCCA 353 R v Rahman; R v Mohammed [2008] 4 All ER 661; [2008] EWCA Crim 1465 R v Sharrouf [2009] NSWSC 1002 R v Thomas (2016) 315 FLR 31; [2016] VSCA 237 R v Thomson; R v Houlten (2009) 49 NSWLR 383; [2009] NSWCCA 309 R v Touma [2008] NSWSC 1475 R v Tran (2002) 4 VR 248; [2002] VSCA 52 R v Zerafa [2013] NSWCCA 222 Tyler v R; Chalmers v R (2007) 173 A Crim R 458; [2007] NSWCCA 247 Wong v R (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina - Crown Sulayman Khalid - Offender Jibryl Almaouie - Offender IM - Offender Mohamed Rashad Al Maouie - Offender Farhad Said - Offender Representation: Counsel: N Robinson QC and M England - Crown R van de Wiel QC - Sulayman Khalid I D Temby QC and G Scragg - Jibryl Almaouie G R James QC - IM M Ramage QC - Mohamed Al Maouie M Pickin - Farhad Said

Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown Zali Burrows Lawyers - Sulayman Khalid Kings Law Group - Jibryl Almaouie Lawyers Corp - IM Lawyers Corp - Mohamed Al Maouie Lawyers Corp - Farhad Said File Number(s): 2014/376821, 2015/363150, 2015/362628, 2015/376727, 2015/362992, 2016/161972 Publication restriction: There is to be no publication of the name of the offender referred to as IM.

The offenders Sulayman Khalid, Jibryl Almaouie and IM

Sulayman Khalid ("Khalid"), Jibryl Almaouie ("Jibryl") and a third offender to whom I shall refer as "IM", have each pleaded guilty to an indictment in the following terms: Between about 7 November 2014 and 18 December 2014, at Sydney in the State of New South Wales, did conspire with each other and Mohamed Al Maouie, Ibrahim Ghazzawy, Farhad Said and diverse others to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act (or acts).
That offence is contrary to ss 11.5 and 101.6(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) ("the Code") and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. It should be noted at the outset that the Crown did not submit that a life sentence was warranted in the case of any of these three offenders.
In addition, Jibryl has pleaded guilty to a separate indictment containing the following counts: 1. On or about 18 December 2014, at Condell Park in the State of New South Wales, did possess a firearm, namely, .303 British calibre ENFIELD model 4, repeating bolt action riffle, serial number 59L0792, not being authorised to do so by a licence or permit (count 1). 2. On or about 18 December 2014, at Condell Park in the State of New South Wales, did possess a shortened firearm, namely, a shortened 12 gauge COOEY model 840 break open action single shot, shotgun, serial number 72538, that was not a pistol, without being authorised to do so by a permit (count 2). 3. On or about 18 December 2014, at Condell Park in the State of New South Wales, did possess a firearm that was not registered, namely, .303 British Calibre ENFIELD model 4, repeating bolt action riffle, serial number 59L0792 (count 3). 4. On or about 18 December 2014, at Condell Park in the State of New South Wales, did possess a firearm that was not registered, namely, a shortened 12 gauge COOEY model 840 break open action single shot shotgun, serial number 72538 (count 4).
Each of counts 1-4 are offences contrary to the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) ("the FA") and the respective maximum penalties, are as follows: 1. count 1 (FA s. 7A(1) - maximum penalty of imprisonment for 5 years; 2. count 2 (FA s. 62(1)(b)) - maximum penalty of imprisonment for 14 years; 3. counts 3 and 4 (FA s. 36(1)) - maximum penalty of imprisonment for 5 years.
At Jibryl's request, I have also taken into account the following matters contained in a Form 1 all of which were committed on 19 December 2014: 1. possess unauthorised firearm, namely a 12 gauge LAMBER break open action double barrel under and over shotgun, not being authorised to do so by a licence or permit, contrary to s. 7A(1) of the FA; 2. possess unregistered firearm, namely a 12 gauge LAMBER break open action double barrel under and over shotgun, contrary to s. 36(1) of the FA; 3. possess ammunition for a firearm without holding a licence or permit for a firearm which takes that ammunition and without being authorised to possess that ammunition by licence or permit, contrary to s. 65(3) of the FA; and 4. not keeping a firearm safely, contrary to s. 39 of the FA.
Jibryl's commission of the various offences contrary to the FA are part of the conspiracy to which he has pleaded guilty. In these circumstances, the Crown and senior counsel for Jibryl agreed that any sentences imposed in respect of those offences should be wholly concurrent with any sentence imposed in respect of the conspiracy. There is some difficulty in giving effect to this agreed position, arising from the fact that Jibryl was taken into custody in respect of the charges contrary to the FA on 23 December 2014. He has remained in custody since that time and accordingly, any sentences imposed for those offences can, and should, be backdated to commence on that day. However, he was not charged with the conspiracy offence until 10 December 2015, almost 12 months later. It is not possible to backdate the sentence for the conspiracy to commence on 23 December 2014 because Jibryl was not, at that time, charged with that offence.
Following the conclusion of the sentence proceedings, the Crown filed written submissions in relation to this issue and suggested that the result which the parties agreed was appropriate could be achieved by: 1. firstly imposing sentences for the offences contrary to the FA; 2. then imposing the sentence for the conspiracy and in doing so, making an allowance for the sentences imposed in (i) and imposing a total aggregate sentence.
No submissions were received on behalf of Jibryl which took issue with that approach. I have adopted the Crown's suggestion of imposing sentences for the offences contrary to the FA first. Whilst those sentences cannot, in the circumstances, be made wholly concurrent with the sentence to be imposed in respect of the conspiracy, I have endeavoured to structure the sentences in a way which imposes a total sentence giving effect to what the parties agree is appropriate.

The offenders Mohamed Al Maouie and Farhad Said

Mohamed Rashad Al Maouie ("Mohamed") and Farhad Said ("Said") have each pleaded guilty to separate indictments in the following terms: Between about 17 December 2014 and 18 December 2014 at Sydney, in the State of New South Wales, did intentionally make a document and the document was connected with the preparation for a terrorist act, knowing of that connection.
That offence is contrary to s. 101.5(1) of the Code and carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment.

THE SENTENCE PROCEEDINGS

I heard submissions on behalf of the Crown and each of the offenders on 3, 4, 5 and 6 October 2017, in the course of which the Crown tendered a separate statement of facts in respect of each offender. Some parts of the facts tendered against one offender were common to those tendered against some others. Rather than unnecessarily repeat parts of the facts, I have indicated where this principally arises.
It should also be noted that although the facts were tendered by consent in each case, some specific issues were taken on behalf of Jibryl as to discreet parts of them. I have identified where those issues arose and have expressed by conclusions in relation to them.

FEDERAL SENTENCING PROVISIONS

I am required to sentence each of the offenders in accordance with Part 1B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ("the Act") [1] . There are a number of provisions within that Part to which I should make reference.
Section 16A of the Act provides (inter alia) as follows: 16A Matters to which court to have regard when passing sentence etc.--federal offences (1) In determining the sentence to be passed, or the order to be made, in respect of any person for a federal offence, a court must impose a sentence or make an order that is of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence. (2) In addition to any other matters, the court must take into account such of the following matters as are relevant and known to the court: (a) the nature and circumstances of the offence; (b) other offences (if any) that are required or permitted to be taken into account; (c) if the offence forms part of a course of conduct consisting of a series of criminal acts of the same or a similar character--that course of conduct; (d) the personal circumstances of any victim of the offence; (e) any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence; (ea) if an individual who is a victim of the offence has suffered harm as a result of the offence--any victim impact statement for the victim; (f) the degree to which the person has shown contrition for the offence: (i) by taking action to make reparation for any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence; or (ii) in any other manner; (fa) the extent to which the person has failed to comply with: (i) any order under subsection 23CD(1) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 ; or (ii) any obligation under a law of the Commonwealth; or (iii) any obligation under a law of the State or Territory applying under subsection 68(1) of the Judiciary Act 1903 ; about pre-trial disclosure, or ongoing disclosure, in proceedings relating to the offence; (g) if the person has pleaded guilty to the charge in respect of the offence--that fact; (h) the degree to which the person has co-operated with law enforcement agencies in the investigation of the offence or of other offences; (j) the deterrent effect that any sentence or order under consideration may have on the person; (ja) the deterrent effect that any sentence or order under consideration may have on other persons; (k) the need to ensure that the person is adequately punished for the offence; (m) the character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition of the person; (n) the prospect of rehabilitation of the person; (p) the probable effect that any sentence or order under consideration would have on any of the person's family or dependants. ...
Under s. 17A, I may only impose a term of imprisonment if I am satisfied that this is the only appropriate sentence. I am satisfied that this is the case in respect of each offender.
Section 19AG applies to each of the federal offences to which the respective offenders have pleaded guilty [2] . It requires that I fix a single non-parole period for each of the federal offences which is at least three quarters of the head sentence which is imposed.
In accordance with s. 16F of the Act, I must explain the sentence imposed upon each offender. I must also warn each offender, pursuant to s. 105C of the Code, that an application may be made for a continuing detention order, requiring the offender to be detained after the completion of any such sentence.

SENTENCING PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO IM

As discussed further below, IM is currently 17 years of age and was aged 14 at the time of his offending. He is therefore a "child" within the meaning of s. 20C(1) of the Act which is in the following terms [3] : 20C Offences by children and young persons (1) A child or young person who, in a State or Territory, is charged with or convicted of an offence against a law of the Commonwealth may be tried, punished or otherwise dealt with as if the offence were an offence against a law of the State or Territory.
The effect of s. 20C(1) of the Act is to allow me to sentence IM having regard to those options for which provision is made in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) ("the CCPA") and the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW). However as previously noted, I have come to the view that a term of imprisonment is the only appropriate sentence.
Section 6 of the CCPA sets out a number of principles which must be taken into account when exercising functions under that Act. Senior counsel for IM urged that I have regard to those matters. To the extent that they are relevant to IM, I have done so, although they are essentially a reflection of common law principles governing the sentencing of young offenders which I have discussed further below.
Pursuant to s. 19 of the CCPA, I may make an order directing that that IM serve any term of imprisonment as a juvenile offender beyond the age of 18 years and up to the age of 21 years. To make that order I must be satisfied that there are special circumstances within the meaning of s. 19(4) of the CCPA. Senior counsel for IM submitted that I would be satisfied that there are special circumstances within the meaning of s. 19(4)(b) and/or (c). The Crown made no submissions to the contrary. I am satisfied on the evidence in IM's case, which I have discussed more fully below, that if he were committed to a correctional centre before turning 21 years of age there would be an unacceptable risk of him suffering physical or psychological harm. I am therefore satisfied that there are special circumstances within the meaning of s. 19(4)(c) of the CCPA allowing me to order that he serve any sentence of imprisonment as a juvenile offender after he has attained the age of 18 years, and up to attaining the age of 21 years. I will give effect to that finding in the orders that I make in IM's case.

General sentencing principles

There are obviously individual considerations which impact upon the cases of the respective offenders, both objectively and subjectively. Equally, there are also a number of principles which are of general application to sentencing for offences of this nature. Those principles, which I have applied in determining an appropriate sentence in the case of each offender, may be summarised as follows.
The primary considerations on sentence in matters of this nature are the protection of the community, the punishment of the offender, the denunciation of the offending, and deterrence, both general and specific [4] . Subjective circumstances and mitigating factors, including considerations of rehabilitation, are to be given less weight [5] .
The religious and/or ideological motivation of an offender is relevant to the issue of community protection, as well as to the assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending [6] . Consequently, where it is not established that an offender has resiled from previously held extremist views, the element of community protection will assume even greater importance [7] . As previously noted, weight must be given to the need for general deterrence. This remains so, even if the force of ideological or religious motivations and considerations are such that deterrence may not be effective [8] .
Matters relevant to assessing the objective seriousness of offending of this nature will include: 1. the degree of planning, research, complexity and sophistication involved, together with the extent of the offender's commitment to carry out the act(s) of terrorism; 2. the period of time involved, including the duration of the involvement of the particular offender; 3. the depth and extent of the radicalisation of the offender as demonstrated (inter alia) by the possession of extremist material and/or the communication of such views to others; and 4. the extent to which the offender has been responsible, by whatever means, for indoctrinating or attempting to indoctrinate others, and the vulnerability or otherwise of the target(s) of the indoctrination, be it actual or intended [9] .
In light of the charge to which Mohamed and Said have pleaded guilty, the following additional factors are relevant: 1. the volume, detail and accuracy of the information contained in any document(s); 2. the nature and extent of the harm capable of being caused by the act(s) described within the document(s); 3. the nature and extent of the publication of the document(s); and 4. the state of mind of the offender [10] .
I turn to consider the cases of each individual offender.

SULAYMAN Khalid

The following evidence was tendered in Khalid's sentence proceedings [11] : 1. statement of facts [12] ; 2. criminal history [13] ; 3. an affidavit of Glen Piazza, the Manager of Security at the High Risk Management Centre, Goulburn Correctional Complex [14] ; 4. literature identified by the witness Abdul Saleh [15] ; 5. copies of photographs identified by Mr Saleh [16] ; 6. court attendance notices and a statement of facts pertaining to Mr Saleh [17] ; 7. excerpts of footage of Khalid's appearance on the "Insight" program [18] ; 8. transcript of the footage in (vii) above [19] ; 9. a disc containing footage published by Khalid on "YouTube" [20] ; 10. a transcript of one part of the footage in (ix) above [21] ; 11. two volumes of transcripts of intercepted telephone conversations and text messages [22] ; 12. a list of prison lock-ins [23] ; 13. extracts from the Qu'ran [24] ; 14. a report of Dr Nielssen, psychiatrist [25] ; 15. an Australian Federal Police phone extract [26] ; 16. a transcript of an interview between Khalid and Neil Mercer [27] ; 17. a statement of David Victor [28] ; and 18. a transcript of a telephone intercept of 21 November 2014 [29] .

The facts

The statement of facts tendered by the Crown against Khalid was in the following terms: BACKGROUND A. Ideology 1. Sulayman Khalid ("the offender"), "IM" and Jibryl Almaouie (together, "the conspirators") adhere to the religious ideology of violent jihad. Specifically, they adhere to the religious ideology of Wahhabi-Salafism. This is the ideology that inspires ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), Al-Qaeda and like‑minded groups and their supporters. [30] 2. The cause that was to be advanced in the proposed terrorist act or acts was that of violent jihad. The essential feature of the cause, which the conspirators believed to be a religious obligation, was to engage in violence to advance what they considered to be the interests of Islam. They believed Islam to be under attack from various Western countries, in Syria and the Middle East, and also in Australia. They also believed that those who died pursuing violent jihad were martyrs, who would be rewarded in paradise. 3. During the conspiracy period (that is, between about 7 November 2014 and 18 December 2014), each of the conspirators was committed to Islam and they often spoke about it and included it in their daily lives. Whilst the word "jihad" is used and understood amongst the wider Muslim community to mean "spiritual struggle", the conspirators used the term (and possessed material that used the term) to mean "violent jihad". 4. During the period of the conspiracy and for some time before, the offender was active in seeking to advance Islam. He had actively proselytized for Islam in the street and posted videos of those activities online. His activity was known to his friends, including (amongst others) "IM", who had a video on his phone of the offender preaching Islam in the street. 5. The offender had publicly displayed his support for the violent jihad espoused by ISIS. One way he did so was by obtaining and wearing clothing with badges and adornments of ISIS. When police executed a search warrant at his premises on 18 December 2014, the items they found included clothing bearing identifiable ISIS markings and a series of printed A4 sheets which, when placed together, formed an almost complete ISIS banner. 6. Furthermore, the offender had appeared on the "Insight Program" (which was televised nationally) on 12 August 2014 [31] , and supported the violent jihadi ideology of ISIS including by wearing the ISIS flag on his sleeve. His comments on that program included the following: "Look, ISIS, they - they - they do not want to bring anything but justice, ISIS. They don't wanna bring anything but justice. ... Well, the Australian government is bringing - they're bringing harm to themself and they're bringing harm to the Australian citizens here - - - ... Well, they're bringing physical - you know, like, whatever - anything. If they get - If they're - if they're gunna leave their troops in Iraq, for example - ... if they're not gunna do anything about this, what's happening to the Muslims, then something's gunna happen here." 7. The offender had also made a YouTube video [32] which he had posted on the internet, titled "A Direct Message to the Secret Services, A call to Taweed, Millatu Ibrahim". [33] In that video, which features an ISIS emblem, the offender makes a thinly veiled threat against various Western security services, including those of Australia. The "message" the offender delivered included the following: "To all of the Muslims out there in the world, and um, I would like to forward the message, um to the secret services of our time, MI5, MI6, MI7, FBI, CIA, ASIO, um all of, the rest of the secret services, in each and every one of the countries. ... Accept Islam as your salvation. Because, I swear to you, I swear to you, that a day will come when it will be too late. ... You will regret, the day, you will regret the day that when Allah, he orders his angels to drag you on your faces to the pits of hell fire. This is, this is the day you will regret it. ... In Islam, we cannot obey man-made law. We cannot obey a man that's not ruling with the Sharia. ... And no matter, how many, no matter how many Muslims is in prison, no matter how many Muslims are killed, no matter how many Muslims you rape, no matter how many Muslims is bombed, on top of the skies, is bombed from the skies, no matter how many things yous do to the Muslims, Islam, at the end, will become victorious. ... Us Muslims, we know that you know the history of Islam. Us Muslims, we know that yous know that Islam is spread by the swords. That is Islam is spread by the sword. Yes or no. It did. It did spread by the swords. How can a religion not spread without using the swords? How can the religion spread without using the swords? ... Yous come to our lands and yous bomb and rape and kill. And butcher our, and butcher the Muslims. When yous take over, and then yous calls the Muslims terrorists. Think about it, use your heads. Use your heads. Who's the terrorists? What is the meaning of terrorism? Who are the terrorists? Are the terrorists, are the terrorists the ones that want to establish the, the, the, the law of God and get man out of this democracy, get man out of the, the chains and shackles of the democracy, out of the man-made law system, out of the injust system. ... The Islamic State. And if yous look, if you actually just look, at the Islamic law and the Sharia law, then yous will find, yous will find there is wisdom behind it. ... But yous will not be able to distinguish the light of Allah and those secret services, I will leave you with one thing and I will give you one more message. ... Its either you will become a Muslim, and you will believe in Allah, or you will die by the sword. ... [indistinguishable] Islam will be victorious. Victory is for Islam. Victory is for the Muslims." 8. The "Direct Message to the Secret Services" video was one of 25 published online by the offender between 25 May 2013 and 7 December 2014, the majority of which show the offender preaching and discussing Islam. 9. The offender was also the conspirator who sent religious advice and sayings to the other conspirators. For example, on 26 November 2014, the offender a message to a number of recipients that said "TIME TO WAKE UP AND TASTE THE SWEETNESS OF IMAN [34] ", which he signed off as "Abu Bakr". 10. The offender promoted violent jihad as the leader of the group during many telephone communications with "IM", during which they spoke about martyrdom and committing some form of terrorist act. He also had coded telephone conversations with Jibryl Almaouie, during which they referred to ammunition. B. Outline of the conspiracy 11. The offender and the other conspirators agreed with each other and Mohamed Al Maouie, Ibrahim Ghazzawy and Farhad Said (all of whom, with others, were under investigation by the Joint Counter Terrorism Team from May 2014) to do acts in preparation for, or planning of, a terrorist act or acts. The terrorist act was to involve firearms and was to be a religiously inspired act of terrorism, namely violent jihad. The nature of the act or acts and the proposed target or targets were unresolved, but included the killing of a member or members of either the New South Wales Police Force or Australian Federal Police and/or attacks upon government buildings. 12. The conspiracy coalesced between about 2 November 2014 and 18 December 2014. The conspirators began planning the attacks outlined in documents located at the offender's house on 18 December 2014. 13. The overt acts of the offender and his co-conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy are summarised in the Table of Overt Acts, annexed at "B". Put briefly, the conspiracy involved, amongst other actions, the following: a) Considering, orally and in writing, various possible forms of terrorist act including ways to carry out the act or acts (including using firearms in a direct attack or using guerrilla tactics); b) Considering possible targets for a terrorist act or acts, such as individual members of the New South Wales Police Force or the Australian Federal Police, and the Australian Federal Police headquarters building; c) Sourcing, obtaining and retaining firearms and ammunition; d) Numerous telephone communications (by text message and by telephone conversations) about impending martyrdom, training for a domestic terrorist attack, planning a domestic terrorist attack and firearms and ammunition; and e) Meeting at the offender's premises at 13 Berry St Regents Park during the evening and early morning of 17 and 18 December 2014 for the purpose of considering documents the conspirators had made in preparation for a terrorist act. 14. Some of the code words used by the conspirators, including the offender, were as follows: a) Banana = Firearms b) Motorbikes = Firearms c) Party = Meeting/terrorist attack d) Wedding date = Date of (terrorist) attack e) China = Overseas, fighting with ISIS f) Wombat = Khalid's residence g) Over Pools = Overseas h) Tony = Ghazzawy As well as being used during the conspirators' and others' coded conversations, some of these words were located on terrorist planning documents found at the offender's home on 18 December 2014 (which are described in detail below). 15. The content of the planning documents, together with Jibryl Almaouie's possession of firearms and ammunition and "IM"'s sourcing of four firearms (each of which is addressed in further detail below), confirm that the terrorist act or acts in respect to which the conspirators engaged in acts of preparation and planning was an act or were acts of terrorism by using firearms to kill those targeted by the act or acts. The conspirators' intention was that the terrorist act or acts would intimidate the Australian Federal Government and State governments, or the public. C. Roles of conspirators (i) The offender 16. The offender was the leader of the group. He was a self-appointed preacher and used the name "Abu Bakr". He gave advice, including religious advice, to other conspirators over the period of the conspiracy. He expressed strong views about the correctness of extremist ideology in a number of intercepted conversations. He also organised meetings at his premises that were attended by other members of the group. 17. The offender, who was 20 years old at the time of the conspiracy (having turned 20 on 11 November 2014, four days into the conspiracy period) and is now 22 years old, had a large number of intercepted telephone communications with the much younger "IM", who was 14 years old at the time of the conspiracy. 18. The offender's telephone communications with "IM" indicate that the offender and "IM" had a strong desire to engage in a terrorist act, including an act of martyrdom. In a number of telephone communications between him and "IM", the offender urged "IM" not to go to Syria but to stay and pursue a terrorist act in Australia instead. 19. The offender was careful to use code words and at various times made it clear in intercepted conversations that he would not speak about certain matters on the phone, believed his phone calls to be under surveillance and that he was under physical surveillance by police. 20. The offender called members to attend at his premises and issued instructions to group members. He also retained the planning documents at his premises. (ii) "IM" 21. "IM" was born on 12 September 2000 and is now 17 years old. At the commencement of the conspiracy, he was 14 years 11 weeks old. "IM" had a high level in the group. 22. "IM" was a strong adherent of the jihadi ideology and had a significant amount of extremist material on his telephone. He often expressed a strong desire to engage in a terrorist act and expressed an urgent desire for martyrdom. A number of the conversations he had with the offender involved the offender urging "IM" not to go to Syria but to stay and pursue a terrorist act here in Australia. 23. "IM" was involved in a significant number of intercepted SMS and telephone conversations with the offender. In addition to those communications described above, "IM" also asked when a terrorist act or acts would be committed here in Australia in his telephone communications with the offender. "IM" often spoke about the desire for weapons, in respect of which he and the offender used code words such as "bananas", and he said that if he was not able to train for any terrorist act he would not take part. "IM" also spoke to the offender in code about places and events. 24. As part of "IM"'s role in the conspiracy, he sourced four firearms at his uncle's house and sent photographs of himself posing with the firearms to the offender. [35] "IM" sourced these firearms so the group had information on another possible source of firearms, by taking them without the uncle's knowledge or consent. "IM" located the firearms and ascertained the nature of each, and confirmed his uncle's possession of them to the offender. (iii) Jibryl Almaouie 25. Jibryl Almaouie was born on 9 October 1993 and is now 23 years old. At the commencement of the conspiracy, he was 21 years old, having turned 21 on 9 October 2014. 26. Jibryl was involved in intercepted telephone conversations with the offender. He was an adherent of the violent jihadi ideology. He had coded telephone conversations with the offender about firearms, ammunition and martyrdom. 27. Jibryl was high up in the group. He was in possession of three functional firearms, ammunition including 12 gauge shotgun shells, jihadi documents, an SAS survival guide and a black flag with Arabic writing when his premises were searched by police on 18 December 2014. The firearms were a bolt action rifle with a loaded magazine attached, a double barrel shotgun and a shortened "over and under" shotgun. [36] 28. Jibryl was the author of the "torn up motorbike" document and the "We will break the ice here in Aus" document (which are addressed in further detail below). The first of those two documents contains images and descriptions of three firearms referred to as "motorbikes", which confirms previous coded references to "motorbikes" during conversations to which Jibryl was a party. The second of those documents talks about the Sydney Siege in the CBD (the Lindt Cafe Siege) and says "the earlier we do things the better" and "The time is NOW!!!" (iv) Ibrahim Ghazzawy 29. Ibrahim Ghazzawy was born on 13 October 1995 and is now 21 years old. At the time of the conspiracy, he was 19 years old, having turned 19 on 13 October 2014 [37] . 30. Ghazzawy was an adherent of the violent jihadi ideology. He attended meetings with the other members of the group in furtherance of the conspiracy, and had a mid-level role in the group. 31. Three of the six handwritten documents found in the offender's home (each of which is addressed further below) contain Ghazzawy's handwriting. Those documents demonstrate an active and real consideration of the type of terrorist act contemplated and its target. The documents were handed to others apart from Ghazzawy, and were read, discussed and added to as the discussion continued. 32. On the "AFP Building" document, Ghazzawy wrote "If we are gna do the istishadi [Arabic for "martyrdom", "death of a martyr" or "heroic death"] the AFP building is a good target, its in parra or the city." On the "Gorilla Warfare" document, Ghazzawy wrote "The plan is gorilla [sic] warfare ... we are going to go to the woods and attack the dogs there, Blue Mountains and the surrounding forests." On the "Lithgow Jail" document, Ghazzawy's writing included the following: "Im gna speak to the group of 5 and tell them to immobilize as soon as we do our attack or even before. So it will confuse the enemy, and insha Allah [Allah willing] more brothers will arise and do something as soon as it sparks." (v) Mohamed Al Maouie 33. Mohamed Al Maouie is Jibryl's brother. He was born on 30 October 1995 and is now 21 years old. At the time of the conspiracy, he was 19 years old, having turned 19 on 30 October 2014. 34. Mohamed was an adherent of the violent jihadi ideology. His telephone contained a significant amount of extremist material, and images of him firing a pistol at a pistol range. When he was questioned about this material, he said he downloaded the material to show people "How stupid it was over there", but denied that he was a supporter. 35. He attended meetings with the other members of the group in furtherance of the conspiracy, and had a mid-level role in the group. 36. His handwriting was on one of the six documents found at the offender's premises, the "Gorilla Warfare" document. His fingerprints were on three of the documents, namely the "Gorilla Warfare" document, the "We will break the ice here in Aus" document and the "Blue Mountains" document. 37. In the "Gorilla Warfare" document, Mohamed wrote the following: "* Hijra [migration] out of NSW - 7 * Abo land * Dawah [proselytizing or preaching of Islam] to Abos = Army * Army = Buildings, Fortresses, Plans etc * Start Slowly ( under cover ) * Own world * Start small = HUGE" (vi) Farhad Said 38. Farhad Said was born on 30 January 1992 and is now 25 years old. At the commencement of the conspiracy, he was 22 years old, having turned 22 on 30 January 1994. 39. Said was an adherent of the violent jihadi ideology. His telephone contained a significant amount of extremist material. He attended meetings with the other members of the group in furtherance of the conspiracy, and had coded telephone conversations with the offender. He had a mid-level role in the group. 40. Said's handwriting was on two of the six documents found at the offender's premises, the "AFP Building" document and the "Lithgow Jail" document. In the "AFP Building" document, Said's writing included the following: "Helicopters and all that so we are going to fight till shahada anyway so we might as well do something major". In the "Lithgow Jail" document Said's writing included the following: "Why don't we target like a big organisation eg: headquarters of police force, ASIO etc but something massive ... If we are want to go all out them istishhad goes in then the rest go in to finish things off". THE DOCUMENTS A. Overview - documents' purpose and circumstances of creation 41. The offender agreed to and in his many intercepted messages, encouraged, the preparation and planning of a terrorist act as manifested in the handwritten planning documents prepared by the other conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy. The documents were connected with the preparations for a terrorist act or acts both on their face, and in the circumstances of their creation. The documents record a form of discussion and they were read, discussed and added to as the discussion continued. The forensic evidence shows that the documents were handed to others, apart from the author. In some cases, writing was added to the documents by someone other than the original author. The documents demonstrate an active and real consideration of the type of terrorist act contemplated, and its target. They outline different methods for the commission of one or more acts of terrorism and set out possible targets. 42. The documents also demonstrate that the terrorist act or acts contemplated involved the use of firearms. They demonstrate that the type of acts being planned involved the killing of police - referred to disparagingly at times as "dogs" - and government officials. The documents demonstrate the religious inspiration for the act of terrorism contemplated, and reflect the violent jihadi ideology of the group (including by express references in the documents to jihad, religious obligation and the defence of Islam). 43. In total, six handwritten planning documents were located at the offender's premises at 13 Berry St Regents Park when a search warrant was executed on 18 December 2014. Most of them were found in the garage that the offender used as his bedroom, and one was torn and rolled up in the kitchen. 44. The results of forensic examination of the documents are as follows: a) Document 1, Item I370, the "Torn Up Motorbike" document: Jibryl Almaouie wrote this document and his and the offender's fingerprints have been identified on it; b) Document 2, Item I371c/d, "We Will Break the Ice Here in Aus" document: Jibryl Almaouie wrote this document and his fingerprints, together with those of the offender, "IM", Mohamed Al Maouie and Said have been identified on it; c) Document 3, Item I372, the "AFP Building" document: this document was written by Ghazzawy and Said and the fingerprints of an unknown person have been identified on it; d) Document 4, Item I373: "Gorrilla Warfare" document: this document was written by Ghazzawy, Mohamed Al Maouie and an unknown person and the fingerprints of Mohamed Al Maouie and a third person have been identified on it; e) Document 5, Item I375, the "Lithgow Jail" document: this document was written by Ghazzawy and Said and the fingerprints of an unknown person have been identified on it; and f) Document 6, Item I374, the "Blue Mountains" document: the author of this document has not been identified and the fingerprints of Mohamed Al Maouie have been identified on the document. In summary, the offender handled Documents 1 and 2 but his writing was not identified on any of the documents. B. Contents of documents (i) DOCUMENT 1, Item I370: "The torn up Motorbike" document 45. Item I370, the "torn up motorbike" document, contains images and descriptions of three firearms referred to as "motorbikes". It confirms previous coded references to "motorbikes" during conversations between the offender and another person. 46. The note was found on the kitchen floor of the offender's home, ripped into four strips and rolled into a ball. It was torn up immediately before police entered the premises to execute the search warrant. It reads as follows: " About 350 litres of fuel for 3 motorbikes. Two long ones & one short one. Two long ones 2 litres, 1 short one 1 litre - About 100 litres of fuel for another motorbike but it finishes quickly. 10 litres at a time will finish in a day or less - About 300 litres of fuel for another motorbike but it only takes 1 litre at a time. It has its advantages like 2 x Long ones $2500 $4000 Short one Fast one Slow one $5,000 $25,000 $30,000 $40,000" 47. A reproduction of item I370 the "Torn Up Motorbike" document is on the next page. (ii) DOCUMENT 2, Item I371c/d: "We Will Break The Ice Here In Aus" document 48. This document was located inside a backpack which was found in a garage adjoining the offender's family home. The offender used this garage as his bedroom. Document examination has confirmed that this document was written by Jibryl Almaouie. It reads as follows: Page 1 "1 - Security precautions is all wrong!!! A brother I wont name who, had ASIO following his family the next day after Georges River. We should know we are all on red hot flaming heat & we shouldn't be in the public to start with 2 - Lower your voice in public because it just brings more heat & attention. 3 - We just saw what happened the next day, at the Sydney Siege in the CBD which means they will be on us 24/7 & I told you the earlier we do things the better. What are we waiting for the enemies to collect more info & we all cop it sideways. An example is salat [38] is a fard [39] right, can we say have sabr akhi [40] & wait till its time to pray & make tarbiyyah before praying, NO!!! Allah says about the prayer being delayed, woe to those who pray. Which was because of them delaying the prayer. And we are delaying Jihad. Jihad is a fard ayn on every Muslim. No permission is needed just as no permission is needed to pray. Both are a fara "id. Weve been waiting for years, ARE WE STILL GOING TO WAIT!!! Enough is enough, these pigs ( Australians ) are fighting our brothers in Ash - Sham [41] & here in Aus & yous still want want to wait. Read, An - Nisa [42] : 84 [43] & tell me what excuse do we have after this Read, An-Nisa; 75 [44] as well & tell me. The time is NOW!!! We are down we even came earlier to Revesby because we want to humiliate these dogs, that's how keen we were. - 4- Show us a visual recording or hardcore evidence that the Khalifah [45] chose you to be the Amir Otherwise I will give the bay ah [46] myself. Just as the brothers in prison did without an Amir. -5 - We have no weapons that's why we came to yous to get our hands on them so you cant tell us NO!!! NOT NOW!!! THEN WHEN ? After we get slaughtered one by one? 6- Im not a fool and I will make sure how to give the bay ah and who to give it too & the conditions & so on. So I won't give it blindly 7- We --- are going to do our own things & we will break the ICE here in AUS. Instead of being sitting headless ducks with no - direction were (sic) to go or look. And by that everything will start Here which will make yous walk your talk instead of talking your talk" 49. A reproduction of Item I371 is on the following pages. (iii) DOCUMENT 3, Item I372: "AFP Building" document 50. A further handwritten document, Item I372, was also located in a backpack in the garage, identified as the offender's bedroom. It reads as follows: "If we are gna do the istishadi [47] the AFP building is a good target, its in parra or the city. Like the brother said, they will catch up with us anyway so same thing. Helicopters and all that so we are going to fight till shahada [48] anyway so we might as well do something major" 51. A reproduction of Item I372 is on the next page. (iv) DOCUMENT 4, Item I373: "Gorrilla Warfare" document 52. This document was found in a suitcase in the garage that the offender used as his bedroom. It reads as follows: "The plan is gorilla (sic) warfare (illegible) we are going to go to the woods and attack the dogs there, Blue Mountains and the surrounding forests. Who are we going to find there? * Hijra [49] out of NSW - 7 * Abo land * Dawah [50] to Abos = Army * Army = Buildings, Fortresses, Plans etc * Start Slowly ( under cover ) * Own world * Start small = HUGE" 53. A reproduction of Item I373 is on the next page. (v) DOCUMENT 5, Item I375: "Lithgow Jail" document 54. This document was located inside a suitcase in the garage, used as the offender's bedroom. It reads: Page 1 "Near by theres lithgow jail, insha Allah if we make progress we will attack it. So All of us gorila warfare? Yes, but I would prefer the birthday cake orries more but if not then I'll go with what the rest of yous think Im gna speak to the group of 5 and tell them to immobilize as soon as we do our attack or even before. So it will confuse the enemy, and insha Allah more brothers will arise and do something as soon as it sparks. Why are they going to immobilize Why don't we target like a big organisation eg: headquarters of police force, ASIO etc but something massive that would get them shocked and stuff up there organisation. If we are want to go all out them istishhad goes in then the rest go in to finish things off On Sunday Abu bakr will tell him the Amir the 2 plans most preferably the Gorrilla warfare first then the istishhadi plan. Abu Azzam will lay (illegible) conditions. [word crossed out; illegible] As soon as we take out a dog, they will attack." 55. A reproduction of I375 in on the following pages. (vi) DOCUMENT 6, Item I374: "Blue Mountains" document 56. This item was located inside a suitcase that was located in the garage, used as the offender's bedroom. It was written on the back of a notepad, and reads as follows: "Blue Mountains Bush Buildings/protections" 57. A reproduction of Item I374 is on the following page. FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION A. Firearms in Jibryl Almaouie's possession 58. During the execution of the search warrant at Jibryl Almaouie's residence on 18 December 2014, firearms (each of which was operational) and a large quantity of ammunition were located in his bedroom. These items were found amongst items identified as his and were seized: a) 1 x bolt action rifle (modified .303) with magazine containing rounds attached; b) Ammunition; c) Two "12 gauge" shotgun shells; d) Bag containing 21 large calibre (sic) rounds; e) Two bags containing small calibre (sic) rounds; f) Black bag containing around 20 shotgun rounds; g) Wooden stock for a shotgun; h) Shotgun barrel and single round of ammunition; i) Five boxes of shotgun and other .22 gauge ammunition; j) 6.5mm rifle ammunition; and k) Double barrel shotgun barrel. Jibryl Almaouie's DNA was found on the shotgun and shotgun stock. Photographs of the firearms and some of the ammunition found and seized during this search will be tendered on sentence. B. Firearms sourced by "IM" 59. At about 8.00pm on 6 December 2014, "IM" went to his uncle's house with the intention of ascertaining what firearms were there. "IM" took possession of these firearms for the purpose of posing for photographs and sending these to the offender to check how they were housed and to generally assess if those firearms might be seized and used by the group. Over the next couple of hours he posed for photographs in various positions with three of the firearms, which he sent to the offender. 60. The firearms sourced by "IM" at his uncle's house were: a) A Marlin 336 Rifle; b) An under over double barrel shotgun; c) A Carl Gustaf 96 Rifle; and d) A Thompson Centre Rifle. Copies of photographs found on "IM"'s phone showing him posing with these firearms, including those sent to the offender, will be tendered on sentence. 61. "IM" was later charged and pleaded guilty to possession of firearms. INTERCEPTED TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS 62. The offender's telecommunications service was lawfully intercepted from 7 November 2014 to 24 December 2014. Monitoring of this service confirmed that the offender was in regular contact with the other conspirators. At the time, the services used by each were: a) The offender: 0405215760 - subscribed in the name of Suleiman HALID; b) "IM": 0420404974 - subscribed in the name of Adam STEVENS; c) J. Almaouie: 0421937701 - subscribed in the name of Lady Nho TRAI; d) M. Almaouie: 0428815371 - subscribed in the name of Mr Abdallah ALMAOUIE; e) Ghazzawy: 0420298595 - subscribed in the name of Ms Amira GHAZZAWY; f) F. Said: 0404222303 - subscribed in the name of Farhad SAID; and g) F. Said: 0434914040 - subscribed in the name of Fred JOHNSON. 63. With the exception of one of Said's services and that of Ghazzawy and Mohamed Al Maouie, these names were intentionally false. Whilst recognising that in some cases the service was in a parent's name, the use of obviously false names is relied upon by the Crown as supporting the existence of the conspiracy, the purpose of subscribing in a false name being to make it more difficult to track or identify the subscriber if the call was overheard. 64. The offender and "IM" had a large number of telephone communications. In many of these intercepted communications, code words were used. The offender and "IM" knew that their activities had to be kept secret from the authorities, and attempted to cloak the true meaning of their conversations. 65. A significant amount of the contact between the conspirators occurred by telephone, either by text messages or telephone conversations. The majority of the hundreds of telephone communications during the conspiracy period were between the offender and "IM". Accordingly, the transcripts of each of the intercepted communications will be tendered on sentence. 66. The key topics of discussion between the offender and "IM" were the desire to die, in particular to die as martyrs together, "IM"'s questions about whether it was better to do a terrorist act here in Australia or to go overseas - apparently to Syria - and to engage in fighting there (to which the offender responded it was better to do so here, and that they would do so) and coded discussions about firearms and ammunition. 67. Examples of telephone communications between the offender and "IM" follow. 68. On 7 November 2014, they had the following conversation: "IM": "I'll be with, I'll be with the virgins of Paradise, with the permission of Allah, the Most High ASAP." ... OFFENDER: "... (Singing) O Garden (of Paradise), O Garden (of Paradise), O Garden (of Paradise), I swear by Allah I cannot wait ..." "IM": "I swear by Allah I cannot wait." OFFENDER: "Come on our boys, come on our beloved. Come on, come on, come on, (sounds). Let's do... Allah willing, Isaac, you'll be running to the Garden (of Paradise). (Indistinct conversation in the distance - males) O Garden (of Paradise). O Garden (of Paradise). O Garden (of Paradise), I swear by Allah I cannot wait. Come on, Abdul Malik, let us run to the Garden (of Paradise)." "IM": "Run to mart ... martyrs" 69. At 5:54pm on 9 November 2014, "IM" sent the offender an SMS message saying "But allhamdulilah [51] it is 9 brothers including me". 70. On 10 November 2014, "IM" called the offender. During their conversation "IM" told the offender that he had sought his father's permission to travel overseas to fight, however, his father refused. "IM" discussed martyrdom and wanting to go to "Jannah." [52] 71. From 2:16pm on 10 November 2014, "IM" and the offender had the following conversation by way of SMS messages: "IM": "Allhamdulilah!!!! So we have 9 Shabab [53] try to get more?" OFFENDER: "Can't see you today 9 shabab meaning 9 chefs cause in shall ah [54] were going to be cooking lots of nice food" OFFENDER: "We have a big kitchen as well" "IM": "And do we have lots of supplies and you heard me if I don't go cooking training I'm not coming" OFFENDER: "We're gonna try to get in the master chefs competition" "IM": "Look Abu [55] are we gonna train" OFFENDER: "It depends what the master chefs conditions are cause there a lot of mad chefs out there that know how to cook pasta then u got chicken lam sheep all kinds of nice tender foods" OFFENDER: "I love my stomach and you know every chef has to love his stomach" "IM": "Yeah if there is a lot of good cooks I don't care about if there good I want to train so I can be good if I don't train with the materials we need I'm not coming. 72. At 8:44am on 11 November 2014, the offender and "IM" had the following conversation by way of SMS messages: OFFENDER: "(IM) guess what today I turned 20 years old" "IM": "Praise be to Allah brother I'd say happy birthday but it's religiously forbidden so happy 20th" OFFENDER: "Thanks my beloved just know that we are getting closer to death everyday." 73. During a telephone call at 7.12pm on 14 November 2014, the offender and "IM" had the following conversation: "IM": "About over pools and stuff." OFFENDER: "Pools?" "IM": "Yeah, over pools." OFFENDER: "What's pools?" "IM": "Your area." OFFENDER: "My area?" "IM": "Where you from?" OFFENDER: "Like yeah, man, what are you - what are you talkin' about?" "IM": "Brother, the State of Islam has been established." ... "Yeah, I'll tell him it's - is like what he recommend, there or here, like" ..."No, not about - not about here. There, ask him what he recommends. No, yes." ... "Bananas over there. Not over here." ... "I want to ask him. I want to ask him, what do you recommend about me bananas there." The reference to "over pools" was a reference to overseas, and the reference to "bananas" was a reference to firearms. 74. A few minutes later, at 7.17pm on 14 November 2014, "IM" again called the offender. "IM" said "I'm goin' to ask him if he recommend that I do banana there or here". 75. In a further telephone conversation between the offender and "IM" at 11.58am on 29 November 2014, there was the following discussion of a "party": "IM": "The brother that you're gunna meet, are we getting to the party - him? Like, you know what I mean?" OFFENDER: "Yeah, he's gunna have a party, yeah." "IM": "With us?" OFFENDER: "Yeah. Do you want me to send the greetings to him?" "IM": "Yeah. Have I ever met him?" OFFENDER: "No." "IM": "Can I know his name?" OFFENDER: "Abu ZAKARIA." [Wassim FAYAD] ... "IM": "How old's his son?" OFFENDER: "He's old enough." "IM": "Like?" OFFENDER: "I don't know, probably twenty, twenty-one." 76. At 10:47pm on 2 December 2014, the offender and "IM" had a conversation by way of SMS messages: OFFENDER: "(IM) don't leave my side please" "IM": "What the hell? Why am I going to leave your side why you talking like this stop" OFFENDER: "Sometimes I think to myself if I die now what's going to happen to that someone that is dear to me" 77. At 7:48pm on 3 December 2014, "IM" and the offender had the following conversation by way of SMS messages: "IM": Tomatoes and bananas is our patience brother in al islam make supplication" [56] The offender later sent the following SMS messages to "IM": OFFENDER: My love I ask Allah to allow us to leave this world together together together me and you this is what I wish for this is what I want and this is what I ask Allah everyday for to leave to depart from this world with my little brother with my love as I'm writing this to you I'm crying (IM) I want you to stick by me stand with me together we will leave this life" OFFENDER: "I don't want to leave this life by myself I don't want to" OFFENDER: "I will make supplication for you my young little brother I swear I'm here for you all I ask Allah Glorified and Exalted is He to allow me and you to leave to the Garden (of Paradise) together ..." 78. On 5 December 2014, "IM" sent a text message to the offender as follows: "Glory be to Allah I had a dream that we did bananas here". 79. On 6 December 2014, "IM" sent a text message to the offender as follows: "Do you know how my dad got he's bananas licences anyway me and him are going to check some bananas out at hes brothers cause he's has some." ("IM"'s father was the holder of a firearms licence.) At the time "IM"'s uncle was also the licensed owner of the four firearms that are described above. 80. During the evening of 6 December 2014, "IM" sent the offender a text message as follows: "Like what time ,,, do you want me to send you a pic of me holding the banana". The offender replied: "No show me the banana tomoz so I can eat it as well". 81. At 3.06pm on 8 December 2014, the offender and "IM" had a half an hour conversation during which they continually referred to the word "banana". For example: "IM": "How long do you reckon, um, we're gonna get the - the bananas in because I've ordered the green ones, they're too small but." OFFENDER: "I don't like green bananas." "IM": "Yeah, how long you reckon the full bananas will come in?" OFFENDER: "Don't forget there's oranges and there's, um..." "IM": "Um, throwers. I call the oranges throwers, yeah?" OFFENDER: "No, no, no, fruits." "IM": "Everything? ... Have you been told what bananas and fruits ...(indistinct)...?" OFFENDER: "Yeah ...(indistinct...) they're bananas. Anyway look - - -" ... "IM": "Listen to me. Do you know when we're goin' to get the bananas? ... Did you call about it yet? ... Did you call about it yet because I'm dying in temptation, bro? I'm dying." Later in the conversation "IM" said: "I'm thinking of takin' my phone away ... I'm thinkin' of chuckin' my phone, bro". The conversation continued: OFFENDER: "What the heck, man? ... Would you eat a - would - would you eat a banana with me?" ... "IM": "I'm bein' serious. I don't want ..(indistinct)..." OFFENDER: "Ah no, I'm - I'm serious. An actual banana. Would you eat an actual banana with me?" "IM": "Yeah." 82. On 10 December 2014, "IM" sent the offender an SMS that included the words: "I think Allah willing I am going to get the Garden of Paradise through that banana. God is great, no god but Allah is the Most Great there is no god but Allah O Abu Bakr". The offender responded "Praise be to Allah are you going to stand and stay beside me ?" and "IM" replied "Allah willing yes." 83. At 10.41pm on 15 December 2014, Osman and the offender had a coded conversation about firearms. The offender said "I mean once we give the marriage contract then - then, um, then we'll be able to get our hands on those motorbikes". Osman said "I'm not really sure what you're talking about exactly, brother, but I tell you what I do, tomorrow I'm gunna come see my brother, ah, my brother's step kid". Osman later said "I'll go through everything in detail with you if I'm - I'm a hundred per cent what we're talking about tomorrow, Allah willing". When the term "motorbikes" is used out of context, as it was here, it had a coded meaning of "firearm" (as it did in the "Torn Up Motorbike" document found in the offender's kitchen on 18 December 2014.) 84. At 10.45pm on 15 December 2014, "IM" asked the offender what was up. The offender said "you told him - you told him about the --the marriage contract and the motorbikes". The offender asked what made "IM" tell him about this. "IM" said that he would tell the offender tomorrow when he saw him. "IM" said he and "Tony" (that is, Ghazzawy) "are thinking of going to Bankstown and crossing the roads". The offender asked what is in Bankstown. "IM" was not going to tell the offender. The offender asked if "IM" was going to buy some clothes in Bankstown. "IM" said that they were going to cross the roads, "[t]hen go a different area, like I mean not Bankstown. Different area you understand?". 85. At 2:47pm on 16 December 2014, the offender and Jibryl Almaouie had a conversation relating to firearms. This conversation referred to the Lindt café siege. Immediately after this they spoke in Arabic and Jibryl said "I need to get married bro, straight out". The offender replied, "we need to all get married". Later in the conversation the offender said: "Bro, I looked at the flamin' - the flippin', um, what's it called, the contract you gave me yesterday." Jibryl laughed and said, "Straight flame, bro". This coded conversation relates to the firearms found at Jibryl's home on 18 December 2014 (which are referred to above). 86. At 2:53pm on 16 December 2014, the offender and Jibryl had a further conversation during which they used code, and referred to food in place of ammunition; for example: cake, apricots, marshmallows, apples, grapes, strawberries, sponges, and other terms. 87. At 2:17pm on 17 December 2014, the offender and "IM" had a telephone conversation. In this call "IM" was becoming impatient and wanted to know when the terrorist attack would happen. He asked the offender "Tell me now, good news or bad?". The offender stated that he would tell "IM" after, when he saw "IM". The offender said "Now don't give me a headache!". The offender said that the news is "Um, ah, in the middle". "IM" asked "So does it mean we're taking a step or we're not gonna take a step? ". The offender said that it was not about that. "IM" asked if "he" changed the "wedding date", and the offender said that "it is but it's not. It's nothing about the day or anything", and that he needed to speak to "IM" and ask him a question. "IM" guessed it was about "John". The offender said that it was not about John. "IM" guessed that John wanted in on the "marriage", "Like my supplication has been answered and everything, man, glory be to Allah". MEETINGS OF THE CONSPIRATORS AND OTHERS 88. On 2 November 2014, the offenders and three others visited a prisoner called Wisam Fayad at Goulburn jail. During the visit, in response to a question from one of the men "Is Paradise real or not", the offender answered "100%". He later said "I'm the only one with balls". 89. After that jail visit, the conspiracy commenced. The offender was responsible for arranging meetings of the conspirators and others, and encouraged them to meet at his premises at 13 Berry St Regents Park. They also met at other places such as parks, and from time to time to pray. 90. The offender increased the frequency of meetings with the conspirators and others from 29 November 2014 until the execution of a number of search warrants on 18 December 2014 (further details of which are set out below). The offender and the others used coded language to arrange the meetings, for example referring to the offender's premises as the "wombat hole". The conspirators and met regularly at the offender's house in Regents Park during the first part of December 2014 and leading up to 18 December 2014. 91. Surveillance and telephone intercept material confirms that a number of the group, including the offender, Jibryl Almaouie, Mohamed Al Maouie and unidentified others, attended 13 Berry Street Regents Park on the evening of 17 December 2014 and the early morning of 18 December 2014. Jibryl had been under observation by police from earlier on 17 December 2014 and was seen to drive his vehicle ALK-45X into the city. A short time later the vehicle was seen to leave and travel to where it was parked and unattended in the vicinity of 13 Berry Street Regents Park from 10.45pm on 17 December 2014 until 1.55am on 18 December 2014, when a male was seen to enter the vehicle and travel to Jibryl Almaouie's residence at 73C Clarence Street Condell Park, where the vehicle was left parked. At 11.40am on 18 December 2014, the offender was seen to leave his residence, enter his vehicle and drive away. ARREST AND CHARGING 92. On 10 December 2015, the offender, "IM", Jibryl Almaouie and Ghazzawy were arrested and charged. Mohamed Al Maouie was arrested on 23 December 2015. Farhad Said was arrested on 26 May 2016. Each was provided with their legal rights under Part 1C of the Crimes Act 1914 and declined to participate in a record of interview. 93. The offender has been in custody since 23 December 2014 for this offending.
The statement of overt acts tendered by the Crown [57] is as follows: Date Overt Act Exhibit Call No. Accused No. Preparation documents

                 1. Writing identified part of Document 1: 1370, Torn Up Motorbike Document           N/A       Jibryl Almaouie

                 2. Keeping Document 1: 1370, Torn Up Motorbike Document                              N/A       Khalid

                 3. Handling Document 1: 1370, Tom Up Motorbike Document                              N/A       Khalid

                 4. Writing front and back of Document 2: 1371, Break the Ice Document                N/A       Jibryl Almaouie

                 5. Keeping Document 2: 1371, Break the Ice Document                                  N/A       Khalid

                 6. Writing Document 2B: 1371, Break the Ice Document                                 N/A       Jibryl Almaouie

                 7. Keeping Document 2B: 1371, Break the Ice Document                                 N/A       Khalid

                 8. Handling Document 2B: 1371, Break the Ice Document                                N/A       "IM"

                 9. Keeping Document 3: 1372, AFP Building Document                                   N/A       Khalid

                 10. Keeping Document 4: 1373, Gorilla Warfare Document                               N/A       Khalid

                 11. Keeping Document 5: 1375, Lithgow jail Document                                  N/A       Khalid

                 12. Keeping Document 6: 1374, Blue Mountains Document                                N/A       Khalid

Date Overt Act Exhibit Call No. Accused No. Firearms 13 Acquiring and retaining three firearms (a) A shortened 12 gauge shotgun, (b) A bolt action modified 303 rifle, and N/A Jibryl Almaouie (c) A 12 gauge double barrel over under shotgun, and ammunition thereof 14 Identifying the whereabouts of four firearms (a) A Marlin 336 Rifle, 1 6/12/14 (b) An under over double barrel shotgun, N/A "IM" (c) A Carl Gustaf 96 Rifle, and (d) A Thompson Centre Rifle, at the address of Nasser "IM" Planning conversations (intercepted conversations and text messages) Various, between 15 Conversations about impending martyrdom Various (eg, CSN 18, CSN 496, CSN 490) Khalid and "IM" 7/11/14 18/12/14 10/11/14 16 Coded and guarded conversation about training for a domestic terrorist attack CSN 437 Khalid and "IM" Various, between 7/11/14- 17 Coded and guarded conversations about planning a domestic terrorist attack Various (eg CSN 3179, Khalid and "IM" 18/12/14 CSN) 5, 6, 8 & 18 Coded and guarded conversations about firearms CSN 4042, CSN 4179, Khalid and "IM" 15/12/14

Date1 Overt Act Exhibit Call No. Accused No. CSN 4207, CSN 4208, CSN 4407, CSN 6456 16/12/14 19. Coded and guarded conversations about firearms and ammunition CSN 6648, CSN 6649 Khalid and Jibryl Almaouie Meeting The night of 17 & 18/12/14 20. Meeting at Khalid's premises at 13 Berry Street Georges Hall for the purpose of considering the documents made in preparation for a terrorist act. N/A Khalid and Jibryl Almaouie

Khalid's criminal history

Khalid's criminal history records a finding of guilt in the Local Court in September 2015 for a charge of stalk/intimidate in respect of which he was given the benefit of a bond under s. 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) for a period of 12 months [58] . There are no other entries.

The evidence of Mr Piazza

The affidavit of Mr Piazza [59] deals with a number of matters which are generally common to all offenders (with the exception of IM, in whose case affidavits from other persons [60] were tendered which go, broadly speaking, to the same issues).
Khalid is held in the High Risk Management Correctional Centre ("HRMCC") at Goulburn which houses offenders who have been determined to represent a significant risk to the security of both the centre and the wider community, and who therefore require a higher level of supervision than the general prison population [61] . Khalid is currently classified as an AA Extreme High Risk Restricted Inmate [62] . He is permitted legal visits between Wednesday and Sunday of each week. All such visits are "non-contact" [63] , and correctional staff are positioned in the general vicinity of where the visit takes place [64] . A person may only visit an offender of Khalid's classification if he or she has been approved by the Commissioner. Since being taken into custody Khalid has had a number of visits with relatives. Those too are "non-contact" visits. He currently has five approved personal visitors and one approved psychologist/psychiatrist. He has also had the telephone numbers of various family members approved to allow him to have conversations with them [65] .
Khalid has reached Stage 2 of what Mr Piazza described as his "behaviour management level". As he progresses through further levels, his privileges will be greater, particularly in terms of access to funds and amenities. The amenities to which he currently has access include basketball courts, running tracks and exercise yards. His ongoing access to those (and other) facilities will be dependent upon the particular behavioural level at which he is assessed at a given time [66] .
It is open to Khalid to access all medical and mental health services offered at HRMCC, irrespective of his classification and designation [67] . The Proactive Integrated Support Model ("PRISM") has been established to support the rehabilitation of offenders who have expressed certain religious or political views, or who have previously acted in a way that may be considered radical or extreme. The program is managed by a multidisciplinary team which includes a psychologist and a religious co-ordinator. When an offender engages with the program he is required to undergo an assessment of his psychological and social needs, following which a plan is developed to assist him in improving his life. Thus far, Khalid has made no application to enrol in the program [68] . Mr Piazza stated that there is presently no information to suggest that Khalid has renounced any extremist ideology [69] .
Annexed to Mr Piazza's affidavit were a number of case notes to which I was taken in the course of submissions. A case note of 15 June 2016 prepared by Mohammad Al Halabi made reference to concerns being expressed about Khalid "screeming (sic) in the middle of the night and saying strange things". Mr Halabi noted that Khalid appeared to be "hostile and very disturbing" and he said that Khalid had indicated to him that he would like to learn more about "Islamic jurisprudence", something Mr Halabi thought was a positive sign [70] . A further case note of 13 July 2016 prepared by James Poulos made further reference to Khalid's "keen interest in Islamic juresprudence (sic)" which had apparently given rise to his being monitored on account of what were considered to be his extremist views [71] . The note also made reference to the fact that Khalid had been informed that concerns had been raised by a number of persons with whom he interacted about his "unsettling comments and behaviour" [72] .
A further case note of 3 August 2016 prepared by Vicki Walcott [73] made reference to Khalid expressing an interest in receiving a visit from a Rabbi because he "wanted to learn as much as possible about all things". A further case note prepared by Ms Walcott on 7 September 2016 made reference to Khalid being visited by the Imam, who reported that Khalid had told him that he (Khalid) was "under pressure by a belief he had a demon in his body directing him to think and act in a manner not comfortable to (him)", and that he was under "pressure to manage the unwelcome thoughts/voices in his head" [74] . The Imam expressed the view that such a presentation, if left untreated, was capable of leading to "serious mental health or self-harm behaviour". It was noted that there was a plan to refer Khalid for mental health assessment. The evidence before me is silent on what (if anything) eventuated in that respect.
Having been taken to those case notes, I drew the attention of senior counsel for Khalid to the conclusion expressed by Dr Nielssen (whose report was tendered and relied upon in Khalid's case), namely that Khalid was not thought to require any specific psychiatric care or counselling. In response, it was submitted that Khalid had deliberately chosen not to give a complete history to Dr Nielssen because he did not want anyone to know of his condition [75] .
Mr Piazza was called to give oral evidence in the sentence proceedings of Mohamed. Whilst some of his evidence touched specifically upon the circumstances of Mohamed's incarceration, other parts of it were of a more general nature, and applied to the conditions of custody of each of the offenders (again, with the exception of IM). Strictly speaking, Mr Piazza's oral evidence does not form part of the evidence in the proceedings of any offender other than Mohamed but in the circumstances, and to the extent that it applies generally, I have taken it into account in the cases of each of Khalid, Jibryl, Mohamed and Said.
Mr Piazza explained that Mohamed (and by inference, Khalid, Jibryl and Said) were each housed in a cell measuring approximately 2m x 3m, which had no fresh air and limited exposure to natural light [76] . He said that access to sporting areas is limited to 1 hour at any one time, and must be booked in advance [77] . Mr Piazza explained that the behavioural level reached by an offender will determine the extent of access to personal telephone calls, which must in any event be conducted in English and which are limited to 6 minutes in duration [78] . Family visits are limited to one per week, are "non-contact" (such that the inmate is physically separated from the visitor) and must also be conducted in English [79] . Mr Piazza explained that the PRISM program is available to sentenced offenders, although he said that "technically" this was not so until the final 12 to 18 months of an offender's sentence [80] .
A list of "lock-ins" [81] was tendered in Khalid's case setting out occasions on which he had been detained in his cell for periods of up to a full day. Mr Piazza accepted that the list was generally accurate [82] . He also accepted that the frequency of complete lock-ins (i.e. where inmates are detained in their cells for a full day) had increased to up to two times each week. He confirmed that one of the consequences of a lock-in is that all legal visits are cancelled [83] .

The "Insight" Program

On 12 August 2014 Khalid was a member of the audience at a taping of an episode of a program called "Insight". He was accompanied on that occasion by his solicitor, Ms Burrows. The episode was entitled "Joining the Fight", and involved a discussion between the compere, Ms Jenny Brockie, and those present regarding the conflicts in Iraq and Syria, and the involvement of Australians in those conflicts. Khalid appeared on the program dressed in a shirt bearing what Ms Brockie described as "the ISIS flag" on the left sleeve. He was addressed by Ms Brockie as "Abu Bakr".
Before considering what was said by Khalid on that occasion, I should note that senior counsel for Khalid submitted that the circumstances surrounding Khalid's appearance on the program were unfair because "he had been invited to speak about the fact that his passport had been taken off him [84] , and "in the course of him being there they then asked him about his support for ISIS" [85] . As I understood it, the effect of what was put was that any statements made by Khalid on that occasion should be assessed in that light, and should be afforded limited weight. No evidence was adduced in Khalid's case about any of the matters to which senior counsel referred. The Crown made it clear that it relied on this footage, not as evidence establishing that Khalid appeared on the program to promote ISIS, but as part of the evidence which established his ideology at the time of the offending [86] .
I have approached and assessed this evidence bearing in mind the purpose for which the Crown relied on it. However I should also make it clear that I am unable to accept the submission that anything said by Khalid on that occasion was said in the context of any underlying unfairness. Leaving aside the absence of evidence to support such a submission, the simple fact is that Khalid was accompanied by his solicitor at the time. Moreover, the footage demonstrates his solicitor periodically intervening, and advising Khalid not to make particular statements, or answer particular questions. One some occasions that advice was heeded by Khalid, and on other occasions it was ignored. It is, to say the least, difficult in those circumstances to make good a submission that statements made by Khalid in the course of the program were somehow tainted by unfairness.
One extract from the footage of the Insight program appears in the statement of facts [87] . However there are other parts of the footage which are also relevant. For example, at an early stage of the program, the following exchange took place between Ms Brockie and Khalid [88] : BROCKIE: Okay. Abu BAKR, you're nineteen. You were born here. You grew up in Sydney. What do you think about Australians going over to fight with ISIS and I see you're wearing the ISIS flag on your shirt? BAKR: It doesn't really come down to what sort of flag 'cause this flag - this - this flag here, yeah, is, you know, it's - it's - people might say, oh, you're a supporter of Jabhat ai-Nusra and this flag here that you - people might say you're a supporter of ...(indistinct)... Islam and ISIS, you know, but these flags are all one. They're all - they're - they're all the same flags. One Muslim nation and that's it. BROCKIE: Okay. Tell me about that connection that you feel to Iraq and to what's going on in Iraq and Syria and the connection to that flag. Where does that connection come from in you? BAKR: Well, firstly, it comes from me being a Muslim, me standing up for my faith and an - and - and, you know, it's - it's mentioned in the Koran in numerous spots in the Koran where the Muslims - the Muslims - it is an obligation upon them to go and help the needy. BROCKIE: Is that an obligation to fight as well? BAKR: This is - this is a personal choice of anyone - whoever wants to go and fight they - they - they - they go for. This is a personal choice and this is up to anyone that wants to go or doesn't wanna go. BROCKIE: M'hm. You were born in Australia. BAKR: Yeah. BROCKIE: How connected do you feel to the values here in Australia? BAKR: Well, the Australian Government, you know, in order for me to be connected to the values here of Australia the Australian Government needs to stop picking on the Muslims here and they need to stop picking on, for example, you know, the - the - the - the sisters wearing a burqa, for example, or - or whenever you wanna voice your opinion on something and expose an oppression of a tyrant then you are subjugated to being a terrorist or, you know, you are being subjugated to being a national threat of a country. BROCKIE: Okay. Tell me what you think of ISIS. I'm interested in what you think of ISIS as an organisation.
At that point, Ms Burrows, Khalid's solicitor, intervened and said: Okay. Don't answer it
The conversation proceeded: BAKR: Look, ISIS, they - they - they do not want to bring anything but justice, ISIS. They don't wanna bring anything but justice. BROCKIE: And what do you think justice is? BAKR: Justice is giving the - the - the giving the right of the people, giving the rights to the people, feeding the people, sheltering the people, clothing the people. BROCKIE: Okay. BAKR: This is what ISIS is trying to bring - justice, peace and humanitarian aid to the people.

The YouTube footage

The Crown tendered YouTube footage consisting of 25 separate files on which Khalid appeared [89] , although File 12 was the only footage upon which the Crown relied. It was played in the course of the sentencing hearing. At the request of senior counsel for Khalid I have also had regard to a number of other files, which were not played in the hearing. It was senior counsel's submission that those other files place, into a proper context, that upon which the Crown relied.
File 25 contains footage entitled "A direct message to the Secret Services - a call to Tawheed" [90] . It depicts Khalid engaging in what might be described as a monologue which he specifically directed to law enforcement, and quasi law enforcement, agencies. Relevant extracts from that footage appear in the statement of facts [91] . I have viewed that footage on several occasions. As I have concluded below, the text of what Khalid said, and his demeanour, were both confronting and threatening. On some of the remaining files to which I was directed by senior counsel for Khalid, the content was more moderate, and Khalid's demeanour less threatening. Those files contained, by way of example, statements to the following effect: 1. "By all means defend yourself from non-Muslims if you are attacked physically, but if attacked using words, smile and do not swear … even Australian laws give you the right to defend yourself … do not support fights but stop them immediately … when a policeman approaches you and is respectful, showing them disrespect will put a stain on Islam" [92] ; 2. "Muslims should deal with peaceful non-Muslims justly … I make it clear. I do not encourage radicalisation or extremism and I do not encourage any sort of violence and I do not encourage any sort of killing or rape. I do not encourage any of this. This is for the 'secret people'. What I encourage is Muslims to wake up to themselves" [93] ; and 3. "Islam is a religion of salvation and not terrorism, bombing, killing and raping" [94] .

The oral evidence

A number of witnesses were called to give oral evidence in Khalid's case.
Xiang Qing Jong Meng gave evidence that Khalid had been his neighbour from 2007 to 2013 [95] . He described Khalid as "polite, quiet and nice" [96] . He said that Khalid helped his (i.e. Mr Meng's) parents by wheeling their rubbish bin and that Khalid had offered to help him to wash his car [97] . He said that "neighbour to neighbour" his relationship with Khalid and his family was "quite good" and that there had been no trouble from anyone in Khalid's family [98] .
Neil Mercer gave evidence that at the beginning of 2014, when he was a freelance journalist, he had been asked by the NSW Community Relations Commission to become involved in a project concerning young Australian men going to Syria. For that purpose Mr Mercer interviewed a number of people, including Khalid [99] . He spoke to Khalid a number of times between March 2014 and June 2014, including one occasion on which he interviewed him on camera [100] . He described Khalid as "young", "perhaps angry" and "naïve" [101] . He said that he remembered thinking that Khalid was a "young man with a little bit of knowledge but not a lot" and that Khalid "certainly didn't strike (him) as sophisticated" [102] .
Abdul Raham Saleh gave evidence that he had known Khalid for about 6 years [103] . Whilst their association stemmed in part from Mr Saleh's volunteer community work, Khalid had also worked for a period as a labourer in Mr Saleh's plumbing business [104] . The community work in which Mr Saleh and Khalid had engaged involved the distribution of literature to members of the public in the conduct of what Mr Saleh described as an "Islamic awareness program" which was designed to "educate the general people about Islam, the moderate Islam" [105] . Khalid was involved in the distribution of that literature, a sample of which was tendered [106] . It is not necessary to summarise its contents. Its general nature can be ascertained from the titles, which include "Islam is not a religion of extremism" and "About Islam - a brief introduction". Mr Saleh explained that Khalid had also assisted him in helping disadvantaged youth, the homeless and other persons who needed assistance [107] .
When asked whether he had ever seen any violent tendencies in Khalid, Mr Saleh emphatically stated that he had not [108] . He also confirmed that between July and December 2014 he was a frequent visitor to Khalid's home, and said that on none of the occasions on which he visited did Khalid ever speak about violence in terms of Islam [109] . In cross-examination, Mr Saleh told the Crown that in the period of time over which he knew him, Khalid had never spoken to him, at any time, about violent jihad [110] .
Sueha Belani, a primary school teacher, gave evidence via audio-visual link from the United Kingdom. She said that she had known Khalid for a period of about 9 years and that before moving to England in 2012 she had been good friends with him for about 4 to 5 years [111] , although it is apparent that she has had limited contact with Khalid since about 2013 [112] . When asked her opinion of Khalid, Ms Belani said that he was a person for whom she had "so much admiration and respect" [113] , describing him as a "really, really lovely young man" who "wouldn't hurt a fly" and a person in whom she had never observed any violent tendency [114] . She said that she understood the charge to which Khalid had pleaded guilty and was familiar with at least some of the underlying facts. When asked how those facts fitted with the person that she knew, Ms Belani responded that she "wholeheartedly disagree(d)" that Khalid's commission of the offence was consistent with his personality in her experience of him [115] . In cross-examination, Ms Belani stated that she was "absolutely" shocked at the charge to which Khalid pleaded guilty [116] . She also said that at no stage had Khalid ever spoken to her about violent jihad [117] .
Maryam Khalid, Khalid's sister, also gave evidence. She described Khalid as being "the quiet one" in the family [118] and said he was a person who had problems fitting in at school because of "trust issues" [119] . She said that as a youth Khalid was never violent, and never spoke in terms of aggression, hatred or confrontation with others [120] . She said that in 2014 her parents were essentially living separate lives and that this had been the situation, on and off, for many years [121] . She said that her parents' separation had impacted adversely upon Khalid psychologically [122] . She described him as a person who was "passionate" about helping disadvantaged youth [123] and who was "disappointed, upset, (and) confused" when his passport was cancelled in 2013 [124] . She said that he had never discussed the concept of violent Islam with her and that she had never seen any violent tendency in him [125] .
Ahmad Thaher, Khalid's cousin, also gave evidence. He described having had a close relationship growing up with Khalid [126] , but said that in more recent years they had had less contact [127] . Mr Thaher said that as a youth Khalid was a "sensitive boy…very soft, very gentle, warm hearted" [128] , and that these attributes led to Khalid being "a little naïve, a little vulnerable and gullible, and easily manipulated" [129] . He described Khalid as a person who was "always very helpful" to others, and who wanted to lead others along the right path to becoming a better person [130] . When asked whether he had ever known Khalid to express aggression, anger or violence towards others, Mr Thaher responded by saying that Khalid "wouldn't hurt a fly" [131] . He described Khalid's involvement in the conspiracy as "very surprising" because Khalid's main purpose was to help people and not harm them [132] .
Zaher El-Cheikh gave evidence that he met Khalid's father in late 1990, and soon after met Khalid and the remaining members of his family [133] . He described Khalid as a "lovely boy" and "quiet" as a child [134] . He said that as a youth, Khalid was "polite" and "lovely to be around" although Mr El-Cheikh conceded that his primary relationship was with Khalid's father [135] . Mr El-Cheikh said that he had seen the Insight program and that in a subsequent discussion he had advised Khalid that "this kind of debate should be left" [136] . He said that Khalid had never expressed violence in terms of his (i.e. Khalid's) perception of Islam, nor had Khalid ever suggested embracing the concept of violent jihad [137] . He described Khalid as a person "who had a passion to call people to Islam" [138] and expressed the view that Khalid had pleaded guilty "out of desperation" [139] .
Finally, Mouminah Khalid, Khalid's elder sister, gave evidence. She said that on a number of occasions on which she had visited Khalid in custody he had expressed disagreement with the underlying philosophies of ISIS [140] . In cross-examination, she said that Khalid had not previously supported ISIS but that she had understood from him that he thought that ISIS was "helping the people …" [141] .

The documentary evidence

The report of Dr Nielssen [142] followed two interviews with Khalid in custody on 25 August 2017 and 20 September 2017. In terms of the offending Dr Nielssen reported [143] : When asked about the nature of the conspiracy, Mr Khalid said "we were planning terrorist acts ... guerrilla warfare ... to attack a government building ... just something of this nature you know". When asked if he had any specific plan, he said "it was just a discussion ... but obviously my situation is a bit different to the others because they are alleging I am the leader... but I wasn't the leader... there was no leader to start with ... I was the leader of preaching the religion ... but not of terrorist acts". He said "there was no agreement with regards what they were going to do". … When asked about access to means to commit terrorist acts, Mr Khalid said "there was knowledge of firearms but there was no agreement they were going to be used ... I did not have any intention of using any weapons ... one of my co-accused did have two or three firearms ... but they were not going to be used in this alleged conspiracy". He said that the building that was discussed was the Australian Federal Police (AFP) building, but he said that he did not know which building or where the building was located, and said "there was no specific one". He said "I would never allow any one (sic) to get hurt... I did not want anything like that to happen". Mr Khalid confirmed the discussion of code words to be used, as he said "I knew a million percent I was under surveillance ... I have been under surveillance since I was sixteen". When asked about his role in the conspiracy, Mr Khalid said "my part in this was I had a garage ... it was like an inside outside place I turned into a bedroom and used it as a sort of a youth centre drop in". He said "it was to talk to the talk ... to gain their trust ... to stop the boys from harming themselves and others ... exercising my experience with troubled youth ... I was just going with the flow with the boys ... I would inform Danny Mikati if something would happen.
Dr Nielssen said that in the course of the second interview Khalid told him that if he "knew for certainty that an attack was going to take place (he) would inform Danny Mikati" [144] (Mr Mikati was a member of the NSW Police with whom Khalid apparently had some social association). Dr Nielssen then recorded Khalid as saying [145] : I fully understand my charge ... I deeply regret for being involved although it was not my intention for anyone to be harmed. …. I am going to work towards my rehab and help others towards the good and communicate peacefully with the authorities and understand one another's frustrations.
In terms of Khalid's background, Dr Nielssen recorded that he was the third of six children whose father had come to Australia from Iraq in 1987, whose mother had originated from Sicily, and whose older siblings had worked in a number of varied occupations. Khalid attended Auburn West Public School and Birrong Boys High School to the end of Year 10 but left school to start a TAFE course in landscaping from which he withdrew after a few months. He then worked as a removalist for 8 months, then in a convenience store in the city, and later with Mr Saleh. Khalid told Dr Nielssen that his family were "normal" and "followed the basics of Islam" [146] .
In the course of a mental state examination, Dr Nielssen observed that Khalid did not appear to be especially anxious or depressed and that his concentration was unimpaired. He said that Khalid was a person of average intelligence [147] . Dr Nielssen expressed the view that Khalid did not meet the accepted criteria for the diagnosis of any kind of developmental disorder, acquired brain injury, psychotic illness, severe mood disorder or any other major psychiatric disorder, and that it seemed that Khalid had adjusted to his strict conditions of custody [148] . Dr Nielssen also reported that Khalid had maintained that he was against violence and that he would have intervened to prevent any acts of violence had there been a specific plan [149] . Dr Nielssen concluded by stating [150] : Mr Khalid was very young when these offences took place, and it seems that some of his attitudes were influenced by the idealism associated with his young age, including some indignation at perceived discrimination and mistreatment of Muslims. He would be expected to mature in his attitudes over time, and hopefully become more concerned with his own career and the care of his own family as he grows older. Mr Khalid was not thought to require any specific psychiatric care or counselling at this stage.
The statement of Det. Victor set out the circumstances of Khalid's arrest and search of his premises on 18 December 2014 [151] . Paragraph 23 recorded the following: During the search warrant Sulayman Khalid and I had a number of conversations about why we were created and current events in the media. Sulayman Khalid said: That guy was insane, he killed two innocent lives. The Quran says if you take one innocent life you take all of humanity. I was created to worship Allah.
It is apparent that the incident to which Khalid was referring when making that statement was the siege at the Lindt Café in Sydney which had occurred only a matter of days before.
The list of "lock-ins" [152] records occasions on which Khalid has been detained in his cell for periods of between half a day and a day between September 2016 and August 2017.
The list of references from the Qur'an was tendered following submissions regarding that part of the YouTube footage upon which the Crown relied [153] . I have dealt with those references further below.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown submitted that the factors set out at [23] and following above were relevant to assessing the objective seriousness of Khalid's offending. The Crown also emphasised that the gravamen of a conspiracy is the agreement to participate in organised criminal activity, and submitted that the objective seriousness of Khalid's offending was to be primarily assessed by reference to the criminality of the enterprise of which he, and the other conspirators, had agreed to be a part.
The Crown acknowledged that the period of the conspiracy was a relevant factor. However, it was submitted that even if a conclusion were reached that such period was relatively short, the evidence nonetheless established that there had been a considerable degree of planning in that time. In this regard, the Crown pointed to the content of the documents retained by Khalid at his home, parts of which were expressed in heavily coded language. The Crown also emphasised that Khalid took steps to conceal his involvement in the conspiracy by using coded language in text messages and phone calls, and by using a telephone service which was operated in a name other than his own.
The Crown submitted that Khalid's offending was "not much less serious than the worst case situation". It was submitted that Khalid, along with his co-conspirators, had a strong commitment to carry out an act or acts of terrorism as evidenced by the fact that specific acts, and specific targets, were discussed. The Crown further submitted that a matter of critical significance was the fact that the conspirators had acquired firearms and thus had available to them the means to carry out the acts which were being discussed. In this respect, the Crown pointed specifically to Jibryl's possession of firearms and ammunition, and IM's sourcing of further firearms for use by the group. It was submitted that this elevated the seriousness of the conspiracy to a significant extent.
Finally, the Crown submitted that Khalid was the leader of the group and in that capacity had given advice to other conspirators, and had organised meetings at his premises. The Crown also pointed to Khalid's urgings to IM that he not to go to Syria, but that he remain and commit terrorist acts in Australia instead. Equally, the Crown acknowledged that attempting to establish a hierarchy within the conspiracy, in circumstances where each of the conspirators was committed to a common cause and had played a significant role, was of limited assistance in determining the objective seriousness of the offending in each case.

Submissions of behalf of Khalid

Mr van de Weil QC, on behalf of Khalid, submitted that the evidence did not establish a recognisable plan to commit any terrorist act. He submitted that much of the material relied upon by the Crown to prove the conspiracy had the appearance of being "naïve" and "fanciful". In this regard, he drew particular attention to the "Blue Mountains" and "Gorilla Warfare" documents, although he did acknowledge that other material such as the "Lithgow Gaol" document was of greater concern.
Senior counsel took specific issue with the Crown's submission as to the level of objective seriousness of Khalid's offending. He submitted that the conspiracy amounted to a discussion of a wide spectrum of ideas that fell substantially short of perfecting any plan. He further submitted that the conspiracy was properly regarded as unsophisticated, infantile and seriously undeveloped. He submitted that Khalid's role was that of a person engaged in discussions with like-minded individuals in circumstances where he was "one … of equals" [154] . He also emphasised that Khalid had access, through Mr Saleh's business, to items such as gas bottles which could easily be converted to bombs, and that there was no suggestion that Khalid had, at any time, availed himself of such access.
Senior counsel also took particular issue with the proposition that Khalid was properly regarded as the "leader" of the group. He submitted that the evidence established nothing more than the fact than Khalid was a religious advisor to others, and that merely providing a venue for gatherings did not establish that Khalid had any leadership role at all. He submitted that there was no evidence that Khalid had any knowledge of explosives, military tactics, training exercises, or the use of firearms, that he had no access to firearms, and that he was not the author of any of the documents that were found at his premises.
It was further submitted that when viewed as a whole, Khalid's appearances on the YouTube footage and the Insight program did not promote extremist ideology. It was submitted that this evidence amounted to nothing more than Khalid's expression of his own religious views, and his exhortations to follow the Islamic faith. Senior counsel described Khalid as "not a very educated man" who "spouts a form a religion as he perceives it" [155] . He submitted, in particular, that many of the statements made on that part of the YouTube footage upon which the Crown relied were generally consistent with the teachings expressed in the Qur'an [156] . He further submitted that I should accept the evidence of the various witnesses called on Khalid's behalf, and conclude that Khalid was a peace-loving and non-violent man, whose commission of this offence was properly regarded as an aberration.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown emphasised that the offence to which Khalid had pleaded guilty was a conspiracy to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act. It was submitted that in circumstances where some of the documents in question pointed to the killing of police officers and martyrdom attacks on Government buildings, the fact that there was no evidence that Khalid had attempted to obtain possession of items such as gas bottles was of little or no significance.
To the extent that it was submitted that the offending was unsophisticated, the Crown submitted that shooting people with firearms (which was, on the evidence, a part of what was being discussed) did not require a highly developed or highly analytical plan, and that all that was needed was firearms, accompanied by an ability and willingness to shoot people or property. Whilst the Crown accepted that there was no evidence that Khalid had any particular skill or training in the use of firearms, it was submitted that discharging a firearm was not difficult, and that somebody with little training could cause great harm if given access to one. It was submitted that the availability of firearms was of considerable concern, and served to increase Khalid's objective criminality.
The Crown accepted that the evidence fell short of establishing that any particular target had been selected as the site of an attack. However, the Crown emphasised that the conspiracy obviously involved discussions about possible targets, attacks on which would obviously involve the use of firearms, the destruction of property, and the possible killing of police officers.
Finally, the Crown submitted that the majority (if not all) of those who gave oral evidence in Khalid's case were obviously completely unaware of his level of adherence to, and the strength of his belief in, violent ideology. The Crown emphasised that almost all of them had given evidence that Khalid had not discussed that issue with them at any time. It was submitted that in light of the evidence, it was obvious that Khalid had kept his extreme views from each of those witnesses. It was submitted that the evidence as a whole did not support the conclusion that Khalid was a person of the peace loving character that each of the witnesses had described. Whilst the Crown accepted that it would be open to me to find that each of those witnesses had done their best to give honest and truthful evidence, it was submitted that it was clear that none of them knew of Khalid's adherence to violent ideology, and that their various opinions of his character necessarily fell to be assessed in that light.

Consideration

It is both artificial and contrary to the concept of a conspiracy to attempt to precisely dissect the physical acts of each of the conspirators, and to then sentence each of them for those acts alone. Such an approach amounts to a negation of the complex inter-connection between the various participants, and the organisational nature of a conspiracy. That is not to say that the physical acts of an offender whose sentence is under consideration are irrelevant. However, the fundamental act of any conspirator is that he agreed with the other conspirators, in this case to commit acts in preparation for a terrorist act or acts. Whilst the identification of Khalid's role (and the role of any other participant) may be relevant and important, the fact of the agreement, and its subject matter, are not to be put aside in favour of concentrating upon his physical acts. It follows that I am not confined to sentencing Khalid on the narrow basis of what he physically did [157] .
The present conspiracy extended over a period of six weeks and that is obviously a relevant factor. In comparison with other cases of this kind, that period might be regarded as short. However, it was nevertheless a substantial period. Moreover, giving primacy to the length of the period of the conspiracy reflects a somewhat artificial approach to the assessment of the nature and circumstances of the offending. It is obviously necessary to consider a number of other factors, including what was actually done in that period.
In the present case, what was done was both significant and wide ranging. Targets were discussed. The methods by which attacks on those targets might be perpetrated were also discussed. Parts of those discussions were reduced to writing in the course of which extremist views were expressed. Numerous firearms, along with a substantial quantity of ammunition, were acquired. It is also relevant that on the evidence before me, the conspiracy ended, not because the conspirators decided to desist, but because the authorities intervened and arrested them.
Moreover, Khalid's admitted act of being part of that criminal conspiracy was committed against a background of, and was inextricably linked to, an ideology which advocates violence towards people and property, and which extolls the virtues of martyrdom. Khalid's fundamental adherence to that ideology is evident from, amongst other things, his plea of guilty. The depth of that adherence is informed by a number of other factors.
For example, in his conversations with IM, Khalid repeatedly advocated acts of martyrdom. His statements that he "could not wait" to "reach the garden of Paradise", and his expressions of a desire that he and IM be permitted to be martyrs together, are self-explanatory.
The various statements made by Khalid on the Insight program many months before his offending are equally telling. They included an unequivocal threat to the Australian Government that "something's gunna happen here" unless action were taken to remove Australian military forces from Iraq.
Statements made by Khalid on the YouTube footage relied upon by the Crown are even more significant. The tone in which he delivered his "message", and his general demeanour, were both confronting and threatening. He warned those who chose to reject Islamic teachings that they would "regret it", and would have their faces "dragged through the pits of hell fire". His statements also contained what was, in effect, a demand to reject what he described as the "chains and shackles of democracy" in favour of Sharia law, a direct attack on the democratic freedoms that Australian citizens are fortunate to enjoy. What he said cannot be explained, much less excused, on the basis that some of it is said to have been expressed in terms consistent with what appears in the Qur'an. Moreover, his statements on that occasion must be assessed in the context of his having expressly directed them to law enforcement and/or quasi law enforcement agencies, both in Australia and overseas. Even accepting that some of the statements made by Khalid on the other footage advocated more peaceful methods of resolving differences, there can be no doubt whatsoever that at the time of his offending, and for some period prior to that, Khalid had an unwavering devotion to the ideology to which I have referred. His various statements on the YouTube footage make that clear. In making them as he did, Khalid was simply masquerading as a preacher of peaceful religious philosophy.
I accept that the opinions expressed by the various witnesses about what they saw as Khalid's generally non-violent character were earnestly and honestly given. I also accept that there have been some occasions in the past when Khalid has acted in a manner consistent with what is expected of law abiding members of the community. However, what is significant is that the majority of those witnesses who gave evidence confirmed that Khalid had never discussed with them the subject of violent jihad, in circumstances where the evidence establishes that adherence to violent jihad was part of Khalid's fundamental philosophy. The witnesses who gave that evidence were clearly unaware of the true facts, and specifically of Khalid's devotion to violent jihad, he having not discussed it with any of them. Similar observations may be made in respect of the evidence given by Mr Mercer, who saw Khalid as, amongst other things, "unsophisticated". Even accepting that such opinion was genuinely formed, it remains the case that Khalid's offending demonstrated, in my view, a not insignificant level of sophistication. In all of these circumstances, I do not accept the submission that Khalid was an otherwise peace-loving member of the community, whose participation in the conspiracy should be viewed as an aberration.
As I have noted, it was also submitted on behalf of Khalid that any plan was undeveloped and imperfect, to the point where there was really no plan at all. It is true that the target of any proposed attack, or the method by which such an attack might be carried out, had not been precisely determined, although such matters had obviously been discussed. However, even accepting that the plan under discussion was undeveloped in that sense, it involved, at the very least, the use of firearms for the purposes of attacking property and people. Moreover, the fact that the plan may have been at an embryonic stage does not mitigate the seriousness of the offending. This Court must respect the legislative policy of the Parliament to create offences where an offender has not decided precisely what he or she intends to do. In doing so, the Court must also recognise the legislative policy that the prevention of terrorism requires that criminal responsibility arise at an earlier stage than is usually the case for other forms of criminal conduct [158] .
It follows that notwithstanding that the conspiracy, and Khalid's participation in it, did not give rise to any imminent (let alone actual) threat of personal injury or damage to property, a substantial sentence is nevertheless required. It does not follow that merely because the plan may have been in its infancy that the criminal culpability of those involved must be low. The focus must remain upon Khalid's conduct at the time that the offence was committed [159] . Like all of the participants in the conspiracy, Khalid does not does not stand to be sentenced as though he had committed the acts which were being discussed. However, those acts must necessarily inform the nature and gravity of his offending.
I do not accept the submission that the acts which were being discussed are properly described as naïve or fanciful. Such appellations are not apt to describe: 1. discussing the Australian Federal Police building as being a "good target" [160] for an attack; 2. expressing the view that "something major" should be done [161] ; 3. targeting the headquarters of a police force or intelligence organisation for the purpose of doing "something massive that would get them shocked and stuff up there (sic) organisation" [162] ; or 4. discussing the process of "taking out a dog", a clear reference to injuring or killing a police officer [163] .
The fear and concern which these expressions would necessarily instil in any right-thinking member of the community need no further elucidation. It is also to be borne firmly in mind that those expressions were uttered in circumstances where firearms and ammunition had actually been acquired.
I also do not accept the suggestion, inherent in the submissions made on Khalid's behalf, that the conspiracy was amateurish. There is nothing amateurish about a proposal that firearms be used for the purposes of (inter alia) carrying out a terrorist attack, particularly in circumstances where firearms and ammunition were actually acquired. Such actions reflect a considerable degree of planning as to the method by which such an attack might be carried out. In any event, even the most amateurish and ill-conceived plan has the capacity to cause death to innocent persons, damage to property, and general fear in the community [164] .
The fact that Khalid may have had little or no expertise in firearms is not to the point, for two reasons. Firstly, as the Crown submitted, the discharge of a firearm with the intention of destroying property, or killing or injuring another member of the community, requires little expertise. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, this is not a case in which the use of firearms was simply discussed as a method by which an attack could be perpetrated. As I have pointed out, it is a case in which firearms and ammunition were actually acquired.
The submissions of the parties debated whether Khalid was properly described as the "leader" of the conspiracy. I have already set out [165] the approach to be taken in sentencing for the offence of conspiracy. There is limited utility in attempting to establish, with absolute precision, a gradated hierarchy amongst the offenders [166] . Adopting terms such as "leader" may be apt to confuse. I am satisfied that Khalid was responsible for the co-ordination of many aspects of the conspiracy. So much is clear from his conduct in arranging meetings at his home at which the other conspirators attended [167] , issuing instructions to other conspirators [168] , reiterating his extremist views and promoting violent jihad in conversations with IM [169] , speaking with Jibryl in code about ammunition [170] and retaining documents at his premises [171] . Whilst all of the conspirators obviously played an important role, Khalid's actions place him at a level above the others. His various self-serving statements to Dr Nielssen concerning his offending are deserving of no weight.
Khalid was an admitted participant in a criminal conspiracy to engage in acts in preparation for terrorism, in which he occupied a co-ordinating role. In offending as he did, Khalid demonstrated that he was a devout terrorist. He was corrupted by a dangerous, violent and perverted ideology to which he unequivocally subscribed, which he wore as a badge of honour, but which has no place in any civilised society. His offending falls towards the higher end of the scale of objective seriousness. Considerations of general deterrence assume particular significance in determining an appropriate sentence [172] .

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown acknowledged that Khalid had pleaded guilty, but pointed out that the plea had been entered at a late stage, after lengthy case management, and following the completion of all pre-trial arguments. Whilst the Crown did not suggest that Khalid was not entitled to some discount to reflect his plea, the effect of the Crown's submissions was that taking all matters into account, any discount should be minimal.
The Crown accepted that Khalid was 20 years of age at the time of his offending and that he is now 22 years of age. Whilst acknowledging that youth can operate as a mitigating factor, the Crown submitted that where countervailing considerations such as the gravity of the offending played a part, any significance to be given to youth was significantly reduced. The Crown submitted that when sentencing for matters of this nature, considerations of community protection, general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation and incapacitation must take precedence.

Submissions on behalf of Khalid

Senior counsel submitted that Khalid was a youthful offender, who had pleaded guilty in circumstances where the evidence against him was far from overwhelming. It was submitted that in these circumstances, his plea should be seen as one which had facilitated the course of justice and had saved the community the considerable expense of a trial. It was submitted that the plea should be regarded as being particularly significant in circumstances where the trial process could have provided Khalid with a "platform" on which to express his views and ideologies.
It was submitted that I should conclude, principally on the basis of the case notes annexed to the affidavit of Mr Piazza to which I have referred, that Khalid was a "troubled man in prison" [173] , whose inherently harsh conditions of custody had been exacerbated by regular "lock-ins", and the limitations placed upon the availability of further education. It was submitted that despite these factors, the evidence of Mr Piazza supported a conclusion that Khalid was properly described as a "good prisoner".
Whilst senior counsel accepted that general deterrence was obviously of importance in determining an appropriate sentence [174] he submitted that in circumstances where Khalid's demonstrated behaviour in custody had been positive, and where there was some likelihood that his movements would be monitored even after he had concluded his sentence, the need for personal deterrence was lessened. In terms of any adherence to extremist ideology, senior counsel repeated his submission that I should accept the general tenor of the evidence given by those witnesses called in Khalid's case, and conclude that Khalid was not, and is not, a person of violence. In this regard, senior counsel drew particular attention to the evidence of Khalid's sister Mouminah, to whom he is said to have expressed disagreement with the philosophies of ISIS. Whilst expressly accepting that this did not constitute evidence of a full renunciation of any previously held ideology, senior counsel submitted that this evidence, together with Khalid's plea and his expressed desire to speak to a Rabbi, established, at the very least, that Khalid had distanced himself from the ideology which underpinned his offending.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

In terms of Khalid's conditions of custody, the Crown submitted that the evidence established nothing more than the unsurprising fact that Khalid was "doing it hard" [175] . The Crown also emphasised that notwithstanding the case notes, the opinion of Dr Nielssen (upon whose report Khalid relied) made it clear that he was suffering from no psychiatric illness.
The Crown relied on its previous submissions regarding the evidence of those witnesses called in Khalid's case. To the extent that evidence was given by Khalid's sister Mouminah that Khalid had made statements to her whilst in custody disassociating himself from the philosophies of ISIS, the Crown submitted that such evidence was of little weight. Even accepting that the statement was in fact made, the Crown submitted that it amounted to nothing more than a self-serving statement made to a third party which was not subject to cross-examination. In all of these circumstances, the Crown submitted that the entirety of the evidence, even when taken at its highest, fell substantially short of establishing any renunciation of extremist ideology, and that this necessarily had a bearing on my assessment of any expressed remorse, and the prospects of rehabilitation.

Consideration

Some aspects of the Khalid's subjective case (and indeed the subjective cases of each of the offenders) are to be considered by reference to s. 16A of the Act. However, s. 16A is not exhaustive, and that there are, in the case of each offender, relevant factors which fall outside that specific provision.

The plea of guilty: s. 16A(2)(g)

Khalid entered a plea of guilty on 31 July 2017, which was the day fixed for his trial. There is some conflict of authority as to whether, in sentencing a federal offender, a Court is entitled to have regard to the so-called "utilitarian value" of a plea of guilty. The prevailing view in this state has been that the utilitarian value of a plea of guilty is not to be taken into account in such a case [176] . That position has also been taken in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory [177] . A different view has been taken by the Court of Appeal in Victoria [178] .
In R v Ghazzawy [179] I summarised the principles which presently govern the position in this state: 1. the decision of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in R v Thomson; R v Houlton [180] does not apply to sentencing for federal offences [181] ; 2. it is not permissible to apply a discount to a sentence for a federal offender on the objective basis that the plea has saved the community the expense of a contested hearing and, as a consequence, the range of utilitarian discount identified in Thomson, namely 10% to 25%, has no application to the sentencing of a federal offender [182] ; 3. a federal offender can obtain a discount in recognition of a plea of guilty if the Court concludes that such a plea demonstrates the subjective mitigating factors of genuine remorse, and/or acceptance of responsibility and/or a willingness to facilitate the course of justice [183] ; 4. a guilty plea does not entitle a federal offender to a discount on sentence unless one of the three subjective findings referred to in (iii) above is made, or agreed to by the prosecution, so as to warrant some reduction in sentence; 5. a significant factor relevant to the extent of any discount or reduction in sentence is the timing of the plea, and whether it was entered at the first reasonable opportunity [184] ; 6. there is no scope for an automatic discount of 10% for a late plea of guilty. Subjective findings must justify any discount given, especially for a late plea, and in some cases it may be appropriate that there be no discount at all because there is only an objective utilitarian benefit; 7. the court may specifically quantify the discount which is applied although providing it is taken into account, there is no obligation on the court to do so [185] ; 8. the strength of the Crown case may be taken into account in assessing the subjective value of a guilty plea, and the Court may consider whether the offender's plea was motivated by a willingness to facilitate the course of justice, or was simply a recognition of the inevitable. It follows that a guilty plea entered in the face of a strong Crown case should not be afforded as much weight as a plea entered in circumstances where the prosecution case was weak [186] :
In the present case, I am satisfied that Khalid's plea may be some evidence of contrition and acceptance of responsibility. I did not understand the Crown to argue to the contrary. Equally, the plea was entered at a late stage, after considerable case management, and in the face of what, in my view, was a strong circumstantial case. In all of the circumstances, and applying the principles to which I have referred, the appropriate discount is one of 10%.

Personal deterrence: s. 16A(2)(j)

I have dealt below with the issue of Khalid's prospects of rehabilitation. Having regard to the conclusions that I have reached as to that matter, there is in my view a strong need for any sentence to reflect considerations of personal deterrence.

Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition: s. 16A(2)(m)

As previously noted, Khalid is presently 22 years of age and was 20 at the time of the offending. He has a single entry on his criminal history which was of a comparatively minor nature and which did not result in the imposition of a conviction. I accept that he has no history of violent offending. I also accept that he has worked in various community capacities. I have taken all of those factors into account. I have already referred at length to the evidence given by a number of witnesses as to what they considered to be Khalid's prior good character. Generally speaking they expressed surprise and shock at his admitted involvement in the offending. I have already set out my assessment of that evidence, and how it should be treated.
The principles governing the sentencing of youthful offenders have been discussed on many occasions. Those cited by McClellan CJ at CL in KT v R [187] may be summarised as follows: 1. considerations of general deterrence and principles of retribution are, in most cases, of less significance than they would be when sentencing an adult for the same offence. In recognition of the capacity for young people to reform and mould their character to conform to society's norms, considerable emphasis is placed on the need to provide an opportunity for rehabilitation (at [22]); 2. the law recognises the potential for the cognitive, emotional and/or psychological immaturity of a young person to contribute to their breach of the law. Accordingly, allowance will be made for an offender's youth and not just their biological age (at [23]); 3. where the immaturity of the offender is a significant factor in the commission of the offence, the criminality involved will be less than if the same offence was committed by an adult (at [23]); 4. although accepted to be of less significance than when sentencing adults, considerations of general deterrence and retribution cannot be completely ignored when sentencing young offenders. There remains a significant public interest in deterring antisocial conduct (at [24]); 5. the emphasis given to rehabilitation rather than general deterrence and retribution when sentencing young offenders may be moderated when the young person has conducted him or herself in the way an adult might conduct him or herself, and has committed a crime of violence or considerable gravity (at [25]); 6. in determining whether a young offender has engaged in "adult behaviour", the Court will look to various matters including the use of weapons, planning or pre-meditation, the existence of an extensive criminal history and the nature and circumstances of the offence. Where some or all of these factors are present the need for rehabilitation of the offender may be diminished by the need to protect society (at [25]); 7. the weight to be given to considerations relevant to a person's youth diminishes the closer the offender approaches the age of maturity. A 'child offender' of almost eighteen years of age cannot expect to be treated substantially differently from an offender who is just over eighteen years of age. However, the younger the offender, the greater the weight to be afforded to the element of youth (at [26]).
In BP v R [188] Hodgson JA accepted the correctness of those principles set out by McClellan CJ in KT [189] before emphasising [190] that Courts should not be "over-ready" to discount the relevance of an offender's youth on the basis that the offender has engaged in adult behaviour or acted as an adult. In the same case Johnson J, having set out the principles in KT said [191] : [75] [T]he law recognises the potential for the cognitive, emotional and/or psychological immaturity of a young person to contribute to their breach of the law. The law considers youth and not just biological age. Where immaturity of an offender is a significant contributing factor to the commission of the offence, the criminality involved will be less than if the same offence was committed by an adult."
In JM v R [192] Simpson J (as her Honour then was), having reviewed the authorities, said: [108] It seems to me that the weight of authority is that the seriousness of an offence is relevant to the emphasis that can be given to the youth of an offender. That does not mean that youth is not an important consideration; but retribution and deterrence cannot, in a case as serious as the present, give way entirely or even substantially to the interests of rehabilitation…
In R v Tran [193] Callaway JA observed that in the case of a youthful offender, rehabilitation is usually far more important than general deterrence. At the same time, his Honour emphasised that there are cases where just punishment, general deterrence, and other sentencing objectives carry at least equal importance. In Azzopardi v R [194] it was observed that whilst, as the level of seriousness of the criminality increases there will be a corresponding reduction in the mitigatory effect of an offender's youth, it is only in the circumstances of the gravest criminal offending, and where there is no realistic prospect of rehabilitation, that the mitigatory consideration of youth is viewed as being all but extinguished. More recently in HJ v R [195] Garling J (with whom Hoeben CJ at CL and R S Hulme AJ agreed) observed: [56] It is undoubted that the youth of an offender is a relevant factor to be considered in assessing what sentence ought be imposed. The Court makes an allowance for the youth of the offender because immaturity is usually involved. Where that immaturity is a significant contributing factor to an offence, then it may fairly be said that the criminality involved is less than it would be in the case of an adult of more mature years: R v Hearne [2001] NSWCCA 37 at [25].
Finally, DPP v MHK (A Pseudonym) [196] was a case of a 17 year old offender who had pleaded guilty to doing acts in preparation for, or planning, a terrorist act. In terms of his youth, the Court made the following relevant observations [197] : As the authorities, to which we have referred, make plain, while youth is relevant in determining the weight to be given to general deterrence and denunciation in the sentencing equation, its weight is diminished, quite measurably, in cases such as this, in which a youthful offender either participates in, or plans to carry out, actions of extreme violence. The protection of our society, and the upholding of its most fundamental values, necessitate that in cases such as this the sentencing considerations of general deterrence and denunciation must be given primacy above the ameliorating effect of youth.
Khalid's offending was obviously of the utmost seriousness. His act of agreeing with the other conspirators to commit acts in preparation for a terrorist act is properly regarded as adult-like behaviour. It involved considerable planning, and detailed discussions about the nature of a proposed act of terrorism and the possible targets upon which it might be perpetrated. The agreement also involved the acquisition of firearms and ammunition. Those circumstances highlight a need to protect society. They serve to reduce the significance of issues of rehabilitation.
Further, and although he might be regarded as youthful in relative terms, Khalid was substantially beyond the age of 18 at the time of his offending. As McClellan CJ at CL pointed out in KT, the weight to be given to youth diminishes the closer an offender approaches the age of maturity.
I have made reference [198] to the opinions expressed by Dr Nielssen as to Khalid's youth, and its connection with his offending. Those opinions are expressed in somewhat equivocal terms. Having made reference to the fact that Khalid was "very young" at the time of his offending, Dr Nielssen said that Khalid would be expected to "mature in his attitudes over time". One of the attitudes apparently presently held by Khalid was said to stem from his "indignation at perceived discrimination and mistreatment of Muslims". Dr Nielssen did not state, in specific terms, that Khalid was suffering from any cognitive or psychological immaturity at the time of (and which contributed to) his offending. In any event, his opinions are based, at least in part, upon accounts given to him by Khalid which are not the subject of sworn evidence. As a result, those opinions are deserving of limited weight. It follows that the evidence does not support a conclusion that immaturity was a significant contributing factor to Khalid's offending. In all of these circumstances, Khalid's youth is of little weight in determining an appropriate sentence.
Finally, and irrespective of the case notes annexed to Mr Piazza's affidavit to which I was taken in the course of submissions, I do not accept that Khalid is suffering from any relevant mental condition. Notwithstanding the submissions made on his behalf regarding the incomplete history said to have been provided to Dr Nielssen (a proposition completely unsupported by the evidence) it remains the position that the report of Dr Nielssen was tendered, and relied upon, in Khalid's case. Dr Nielssen expressed the unequivocal view that Khalid was not thought to require any specific psychiatric care or counselling.

The prospect of rehabilitation: s. 16A(2)(n)

Khalid expressed his "deep regret" to Dr Nielssen, and his intention to work towards his rehabilitation with a view to "communicating peacefully" with the authorities [199] . His sister gave evidence that he made statements in which he disagreed with the philosophies of ISIS [200] . Lengthy submissions were made regarding how this evidence ought be viewed and assessed. The resolution of that issue requires reference to some authorities.
In R v Qutami [201] Smart AJ (with whom Spigelman CJ and Simpson J (as her Honour then was) agreed) said that considerable caution should be exercised in relying upon statements made by an offender to third parties, including psychiatrists and psychologists, when no sworn evidence is given by that offender. That is not to say such statements are deserving of no weight at all. However, his Honour expressed the view that in many cases, only very limited weight can be given to them.
Smart AJ's observations assume considerable significance in the present case. The rehabilitation of an offender who pleads guilty to an offence such as this is necessarily dependent, at least in part, upon the offender renouncing previously held extremist views [202] . If a sentencing court is satisfied that such an offender has resiled from such views, the prospects of rehabilitation are enhanced, and the Court must make an appropriate allowance for that fact on sentence [203] .
The onus of establishing the abandonment of a previously held extremist ideology is on the offender, and is to be established on the balance of probabilities [204] . Whilst an offender is under no obligation to give sworn evidence on sentence, it may be open to a court to conclude that the failure to do so means that the onus has not been discharged [205] . In the present case Khalid has chosen not to give evidence. As I have said, the decision in Qutami is not authority for the proposition that statements made to third parties are deserving of no weight at all. However, in the absence of sworn evidence, the weight to be attached to such statements made by Khalid to Dr Nielssen and to his sister is necessarily limited.
Senior counsel emphasised that Khalid had expressed a desire to see a Rabbi. I do not attach the significance to that factor which was urged upon me by senior counsel. In terms of assessing the prospects of rehabilitation, the bare fact that Khalid has made that request is of limited import in the absence of any evidence as to the underlying reason for it.
I accept that Khalid's plea of guilty may be some evidence of contrition. It may also be taken as some indication of stepping away from his previously held views. To that limited extent, such factors may point favourably towards rehabilitation. However, I can put it no higher than that, and I express those views with caution [206] . It must also be remembered that issues of rehabilitation assume less significance in sentencing for offending of this kind [207] .

Other factors

Submissions were made regarding Khalid's conditions of custody, an issue which does not fall squarely within s. 16A but which is nevertheless relevant on sentence. Dr Nielssen formed the impression that Khalid seemed to have adjusted to his custodial conditions. That said, there can be no doubt that those conditions are harsh, and I have proceeded on the basis that they are likely to prevail for the duration of any sentence I impose. It is open to me to make some allowance for Khalid's conditions of custody and I have done so. However, that allowance is neither mathematical nor, in the circumstances, substantial [208] .
Khalid has been in custody since 23 December 2014 [209] . Any sentence imposed should commence on that date.

JIBRYL ALMAOUIE

The following evidence was tendered in Jibryl's sentence proceedings [210] : 1. statement of facts [211] ; 2. a bundle of documents relevant to the firearms offences including photographs of the firearms [212] ; 3. an affidavit of Glen Piazza sworn 14 September 2017 [213] ; 4. further photographs of the firearms [214] ; 5. Jibryl's criminal history [215] ; 6. a tender bundle containing [216] : a. a testimonial from Jibryl's mother; b. a copy of a handwritten document relating to an unrelated incident in which Jibryl was involved; c. a report of Dr Stephen Allnutt dated 18 August 2015; d. a report of Dr Walid Ahmad, psychologist dated 20 August 2014; e. a report of Dr Phillip Emder, paediatrician dated 26 November 2009; f. a mental health care plan prepared by Dr Hawi of the Chullora Medical Centre dated 9 June 2008; g. documentation confirming a youth allowance paid to Jibryl's mother; h. a transcript of Jibryl's academic record in respect of his TAFE studies; i. copies of reports from Belmore Boys High School, the Australian International Academy and the Noor Al Houda Islamic College; j. copies of proficiency certificates in Senior First Aid, Road Safety, Swimming and Lifesaving, Fire Safety and Cadet Leadership issued to Jibryl by St Johns Ambulance Australia; k. copies of correspondence passing between Jibryl's solicitor and the Department of Corrective Services regarding Jibryl's admission to the PRISM program; and l. character references; and 1. a report of Dr Richard Furst dated 3 October 2017 [217] .

The facts in relation to the conspiracy offence

The statement of facts tendered by the Crown against Jibryl in respect of the conspiracy [218] was in the following terms [219] : BACKGROUND A. Ideology 1. The offender Jibryl Almaouie ("the offender"), Sulayman Khalid and "IM" (together, "the conspirators") engaged in the conspiracy whilst adherents of the ideology of violent jihad. This is the ideology that inspires ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), and like‑minded groups and their supporters. [220] ISIS clothing, flag and images including giving the ISIS salute were among the material seized from the conspirators. 2. The cause that was to be advanced in the proposed terrorist act or acts was that of violent jihad. The essential feature of the cause, which the conspirators believed to be a religious obligation, was to engage in violence to advance what they considered to be the interests of Islam. They believed Islam to be under attack from various Western countries, in Syria and the Middle East, and also in Australia. They also believed that those who died pursuing violent jihad were martyrs, who would be rewarded in paradise. 3. During the conspiracy period (that is, between about 7 November 2014 and 18 December 2014), each of the conspirators was committed to Islam and they often spoke about it and included it in their daily lives. Whilst the word "jihad" is used and understood amongst the wider Muslim community to mean "spiritual struggle", the conspirators used the term (and possessed material that used the term) to mean "violent jihad". 4. During the period of the conspiracy and for some time before, Khalid was active in seeking to advance Islam. He had actively proselytized for Islam in the street and posted videos of those activities online. His activity was known to his friends, including (amongst others) the offender, who had a video on his phone of Khalid preaching Islam in the street. 5. Khalid had publicly displayed his support for the violent jihad espoused by ISIS. One way he did so was by obtaining and wearing clothing with badges and adornments of ISIS. When police executed a search warrant at his premises on 18 December 2014, the items they found included clothing bearing identifiable ISIS markings and a series of printed A4 sheets which, when placed together, formed an almost complete ISIS banner. Furthermore, Khalid had appeared on the "Insight Program", which was televised nationally, and supported the violent jihadi ideology of ISIS. 6. Khalid had also made a YouTube video which he had posted on the internet, titled "A Direct Message to the Secret Services, A call to Taweed, Millatu Ibrahim". In that video, which features an ISIS emblem, Khalid makes a thinly veiled threat against various Western security services, including those of Australia. The video was one of 25 published online by Khalid between 25 May 2013 and 7 December 2014, the majority of which show Khalid preaching and discussing Islam. 7. Khalid was also the conspirator who sent religious advice and sayings to the other conspirators. 8. The offender shared the other conspirators' adherence to extreme Islamic views and violent jihad. When police searched his premises at 73C Clarence Street Condell Park on 18 December 2014, they found the following items (amongst others) in his bedroom: a) A black flag with Arabic writing; b) A book titled "SAS Survival Guide"; c) A black shirt with Islamic writing and various headscarfs; d) Two jihadi books titled "Milestones" by Sayyid QUTB (an Islamic radical who is regarded as an inspiration for groups such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS). B. Outline of the conspiracy [221] … DOCUMENTS A. Overview - documents' purpose and circumstances of creation 39. The offender wrote two of the relevant documents connected with preparation of terrorist acts. The six relevant documents were connected with the preparations for a terrorist act or acts both on their face, and in the circumstances of their creation. The documents record a form of discussion and they were read, discussed and added to as the discussion continued. The forensic evidence shows that the documents were handed to others, apart from the author. In some cases, writing was added to the documents by someone other than the original author. The documents demonstrate an active and real consideration of the type of terrorist act contemplated, and its target. They outline different methods for the commission of one or more acts of terrorism and set out possible targets. 40. The documents also demonstrate that the terrorist act or acts contemplated involved the use of firearms. They demonstrate that the type of acts being planned involved the killing of police - referred to disparagingly at times as "dogs" - and government officials. The documents demonstrate the religious inspiration for the act of terrorism contemplated, and reflect the violent jihadi ideology of the group (including by express references in the documents to jihad, religious obligation and the defence of Islam) [222] . … FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION A. Firearms in the offender's possession [223] … B. Firearms sourced by "IM" [224] ... INTERCEPTED TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS 60. Khalid's telecommunications service was lawfully intercepted from 7 November 2014 to 24 December 2014. Monitoring of this service confirmed that Khalid was in regular contact with the other conspirators and Mohamed Al Maouie, Ghazzawy and Said. At the time, the services used by each were: a) KHALID: 0405215760 - subscribed in the name of Suleiman HALID; b) "IM": 0420404974 - subscribed in the name of Adam STEVENS; c) THE OFFENDER J ALMAOUIE: 0421937701 - subscribed in the name of Lady Nho TRAI; d) M. ALMAOUIE: 0428815371 - subscribed in the name of Mr Abdallah ALMAOUIE; e) GHAZZAWY: 0420298595 - subscribed in the name of Ms Amira GHAZZAWY; f) F. SAID: 0404222303 - subscribed in the name of Farhad SAID; and g) F. SAID: 0434914040 - subscribed in the name of Fred JOHNSON. 61. With the exception of one of Said's services and that of Ghazzawy and Mohamed Al Maouie, these names were intentionally false. Whilst recognising that in some cases the service was in a parent's name, the use of obviously false names is relied upon by the Crown as supporting the existence of the conspiracy, the purpose of subscribing in a false name being to make it more difficult to track or identify the subscriber if the call was overheard. 62. In many of the intercepted telephone communications between the conspirators, code words were used. The conspirators knew that their activities had to be kept secret from the authorities, and attempted to cloak the true meaning of their conversations. 63. The transcripts of the intercepted communications between the conspirators and others during the charge period will be tendered on sentence. 64. Intercepted conversations between the offender and Khalid include a conversation at 2:47pm on 16 December 2014, when Khalid and the offender had a conversation relating to firearms. This conversation referred to the Lindt café siege. Immediately after this they spoke in Arabic and the offender said "I need to get married bro, straight out". Khalid replied, "we need to all get married". Later in the conversation Khalid said: "Bro, I looked at the flamin' - the flippin', um, what's it called, the contract you gave me yesterday." The offender laughed and said, "Straight flame, bro". This coded conversation relates to the firearms found at the offender's home on 18 December 2014 (which are referred to above). 65. At 2:53pm on 16 December 2014, Khalid and the offender had a further conversation during which they used code, and referred to food in place of ammunition; for example: cake, apricots, marshmellows, apples, grapes, strawberries, sponges, and other terms. The offender also referred to the Lindt Cafe siege immediately after talking about "sponges". The conversation included the following exchanges: J. ALMAOUIE: "Mate, unbelievable. Like, you can't find that proper ingredient. Like, that dessert is, like, best served cold - - -" ... KHALID: "Or the flippin' - I mean for the - for the cake, no way, bro. It beats every cake." J. ALMAOUIE: "(Laughs) Worst thing on top, bro." KHALID: "Well, what - what did you put in the cake, bro?" J. ALMAOUIE: "In the cake?" KHALID: "... (indistinct) ... a lot of ingredients to put in the cake." J. ALMAOUIE: "Yeah, like fruits and like apricots, marshmallows, ah, apples, grapes, strawberries, sponges in between." ... J. ALMAOUIE: "I call it sponges 'cause it looks like - ah, I don't know, it looks like a sponge but it's not." KHALID: "Yeah, I know. Made out of - - -" J. ALMAOUIE: "No, you know this thing on TV, friggin' I can hear people talking downstairs about it. It's drivin' me nuts. That's it. End of story. Flippin' the guy got popped. He died. He had the hostages, friggin' end of story. I don't want to hear it. Fuck, they drove me nuts. They just brag and brag about it." KHALID: "Yeah." 66. The bulk of the intercepted calls and messages were between Khalid and "IM". Examples of telephone communications between Khalid, "IM" and the offender follow [225] . … MEETINGS OF THE CONSPIRATORS AND OTHERS [226] … ARREST AND CHARGING 89. On 10 December 2015, Khalid, "IM", the offender and Ghazzawy were arrested and charged. Mohamed Al Maouie was arrested on 23 December 2015. Farhad Said was arrested on 26 May 2016. Each was provided with their legal rights under Part 1C of the Crimes Act 1914 and declined to participate in a record of interview. 90. The offender has been in custody since his arrest on 10 December 2015.

The facts in relation to the firearms offences

The Crown tendered a separate statement of facts in respect of the firearms offences [227] in the following terms: 1. About 12.50pm on 18 December 2014, the offender Jibryl ALMAOUIE was approached by both New South Wales and Federal police as he neared his vehicle, which was parked on level 9 of the Bankstown Centro Shopping Centre. 2. A Search Warrant (person) was executed upon the offender with the conversation between FA JESSEP and the offender recorded on a hand held digital recorder. During this search, an Apple brand iPhone 5 was seized. During this recording, the offender indicated he resides at 37 Robinson Street, Wiley Park and the Wiley Park address is where he slept last night. This is contrary to physical surveillance, who had the offender stay at 73c Clarence Street, Condell Park. 3. About 1.30pm on 18 December 2014, police executed a search warrant upon the residential address of 73C Clarence Street, Condell Park. At the time, the house was occupied by three juveniles, being the younger siblings of the offender. 4. The premises is a two storey, brick veneer town house consisting of a kitchen, lounge room, dining room, laundry, toilet and a single garage on the ground floor. The upstairs area consists of two bedrooms, a third room used as a bedroom/study, a bathroom and linen cupboard. 5. About 2.10pm, Raowa HADDAD the occupant and mother of the offender arrived at the house. The search warrant was explained to her by police. This conversation was recorded on audio and video. 6. During the search, Raowa HADDAD indicated she usually resides at the premises with her three younger children. However since she recently had surgery, her two adult sons being Mohamad ALMAOUIE and the offender have also been staying over to help manage her younger children. 7. Raowa HADDAD indicated her and her daughter sleep in the main bedroom and both the younger boys sleep in the second bedroom. She further indicated that Mohamed has been staying in the garage and she had setup the upstairs spare room (bedroom/study) for the offender to stay in while she recovers from the surgery. 8. The upstairs bedroom/study contained two mattresses stacked on top of one another on the floor with no sheets or covers, a desk, a filing cabinet and built-in wardrobe with two sliding mirrored doors. 9. During the search of the built in wardrobe in the room occupied by the offender, police located a small black leather bag containing a number of live rounds of ammunition at the back of the top shelf on the right hand side behind a number of other items. Also at the back of this shelf on the right hand side, police located a bolt action rifle (303) "ENFIELD", which was wrapped in floral fabric material. This rifle had a magazine inserted with a number of live rounds contained in the magazine. The chamber of the rifle was empty. 10. Raowa HADDAD was questioned about the rifle, stating she had never seen it before. Raowa also confirmed the offender stayed in this room the night before. 11. About 6.55pm, police located a 12 gauge double barrel, under/over style barrel from a shotgun "Lanber", wrapped in a pillow case. This barrel was located at the back of the top shelf on the left hand side. Each barrel contained one live round of .12 gauge ammunition. 12. About 7.40pm in a black coloured suit case found in the bottom left of the wardrobe, police located a black toiletries bag which contained x 21 large calibre live rounds of ammunition, x2 bags each containing small calibre rounds of live ammunition. 13. About 7.43pm in a black coloured suitcase with the name 'Jibryl ALMAOUIE', written on it, an address of '9 Stiller Place, Greenacre' and a mobile phone number '0405 949116', police located a wooden stock for the 12 gauge double barrel, under and over shotgun "Lanber" located on the shelf above. This stock was wrapped in a black coloured pillow case and found in the lining of the suitcase. 14. About 9.20pm police forced open a locked filing cabinet/drawer in the same room. Within this filing cabinet police located a black bag containing approximately x20 12 gauge live rounds of ammunition. 15. About 9.45pm in the same filing cabinet police located a shortened 12 gauge barrel, sawn off timber stock "COOEY" and x1 live 12 gauge round of ammunition. Also located within this locked drawer, police located various documentation in the name of Jibryl ALMAOUIE. These documents included Tax File documents, Bank documents, an Australian Passport and various other documents in the name of the offender. The DNA profile and fingerprints of the offender were located on the shortened 12 gauge barrel "COOEY". 16. Also located in this locked filing cabinet/drawer, police located a Bandolier which contained a quantity of live ammunition. 17. Located taped to the inside rear wall of the filing cabinet / drawer directly behind the bottom drawer, police located x5 boxes of 'Champion' brand Super GL live 12 gauge rounds of ammunition, x2 'Winchester' branded 6.5mm x 55 'Swedish* rifle ammunition, x1 long round of ammunition, x1 'Dynmint Nobel 0.22 calibre box, x4 0.22 calibre 'Bushman' brand long rifle hollow point live rounds of ammunition, x2 ammunition clips with x1 clip containing x1 live round of ammunition. 18. After finding a number of the firearms and ammunition both Raowa HADDAD and Mohamed ALMAOUIE were cautioned and questioned about those items. Both replied with 'No Comment'. 19. On Saturday 20 December 2014, the three firearms were fingerprinted and DNA tested, with the fingerprint technicians able to locate a single un-identified fingerprint on the shortened 12 gauge shot gun. 20. On Saturday 20 December 2014, the firearms were examined by a ballistic expert and all three firearms were certified as a 'Firearm' under the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). All of the ammunition cartridges seized were certified as "ammunition" in accordance with the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). The ballistics expert also found that the exhibit cartridges of ammunition were suitable for use in each of the three firearms seized. 21. The Crime Scene Fingerprint Examination Report prepared by Ana LAIC dated 16 March 2015, identified the right palm print of the offender on the barrel of the "COOEY" shortened firearm. 22. The Crime Scene Fingerprint Examination Report prepared by Ana LAIC dated 6 October 2015, identified a finger print of the offender on the tape used to hold the boxes of ammunition located inside the rear wall of the filing cabinet / drawer directly behind the bottom drawer. 23. The DNA analyst report of Ms Gita LALA dated 6 July 2015 identified the DNA profile of the offender upon the stock area of the "COOEY" shortened firearm, the computer keyboard and iPhone belonging to the offender. In addition, the DNA profile of the offender was identified on the boxes of ammunition marked "Dynmint Nobel .22 gauge box"; "Bushman Hollow Point" box; and on the inside and the outside of the black toiletries bag containing 21 x large calibre rounds and 2 bags containing small calibre rounds (which was found in the bottom left of the wardrobe). The major component of the DNA profile located on the items were found to be at least 100 billion times more likely if the major component of the observed DNA profile originated from Jibryl ALMAOUIE than if it originated from another unknown, unrelated individual selected at random from the Australian Caucasian sub-population. 24. The police were unable to locate the offender between the 19 and 23 December 2014. The police applied for first instance warrants for these offences on 23 December 2014. 25. On 9 January 2015, the offender attended Sydney Police Centre in the company of his solicitor and police arrested him. The offender was offered the opportunity to participate in an electronically recorded interview, however he declined.

Jibryl's criminal history

Jibryl has no prior convictions [228] .

The evidence of Mr Piazza

The evidence of Mr Piazza [229] establishes that Jibryl is currently classified as an AA Extreme High Risk Restricted Inmate. The restrictions about which Mr Piazza spoke in respect of Khalid [230] and about which he spoke in the evidence he gave in Mohamed's proceedings [231] apply generally to Jibryl. Specifically, Jibryl presently has three approved personal visitors and one approved psychologist/psychiatrist [232] . He is at stage 3, level 3 of his behaviour management level and, like all other inmates, will have greater access to amenities as he progresses [233] . At the time of Mr Piazza swearing his affidavit, Jibryl had not sought to enrol in the PRISM program [234] although it is apparent that he has since done so [235] . According to Mr Piazza, there is no information to suggest that Jibryl has renounced any extremist ideology [236] .
Mr Piazza's affidavit annexed a number of case notes to which I was taken in the course evidence. A note prepared on 17 March 2015 recorded that Jibryl had enrolled in a welding course [237] . A further note prepared on 15 May 2015 by Ahmed Kilani, a prison Chaplain, recorded that Jibryl had expressed his concerns about a search of his cell that morning and had reported to Mr Kilani that he had lost more than 20 kilograms in weight over a period of time [238] . Mr Kilani formed the view that Jibryl was "struggling in adjusting to gaol life".
On 18 May 2015 Jibryl was spoken to by Fatima Al Sibai, a psychologist [239] . He told her that he had commenced to exhibit "pervasive OCD type behaviours" at the age of 15, had attended four different schools, and had thereafter had several jobs, each lasting 2 to 3 months. He said that during that period he wanted to be alone and would tend to isolate himself. As a result, he was provided with tasks to address his anxiety related issues.
On 29 May 2015 Mick Marshal prepared a case note in which he made reference to Jibryl having worked in the prison metal shop for approximately 4 months [240] . Mr Marshal described Jibryl as being "always polite and co-operative". He confirmed that Jibryl had enrolled in a welding certificate course through TAFE and that all reports indicated that Jibryl was "doing well" in that course. Mr Marshal described Jibryl as a "key worker" and a person in respect of whom there were "nil issues". He prepared a similar note on 16 September 2015 in which he confirmed that Jibryl continued to do well and was responsible for overseeing one of the gaol's biggest outside contracts in metal work [241] . He described Jibryl as a person who "excels in fabrication logistics" and he again confirmed that Jibryl was an inmate in respect of whom there were "nil issues". A case note of 18 November 2015 confirmed that Jibryl had completed the welding course [242] .

THE EVIDENCE TENDERED BY JIBRYL

Jibryl's mother described him as a "kind, compassionate and gentle soul" who, as a child, suffered from growth deficiencies which were monitored by a paediatrician for a number of years [243] . She said that during most of his school years Jibryl had been teased and bullied by his peers, a situation brought about by the fact that he was physically much smaller than the majority of them. As a consequence, he suffered from low self-esteem as an adolescent. She said that her divorce in 2008 had had a traumatic effect on Jibryl because he had been required to assume responsibility for a number of additional roles within the family, at a time when he was personally struggling to deal with the hardship of the divorce.
Ms Haddad also explained the circumstances in which Jibryl had been engaged on two separate occasions. The first was in 2013 when the relationship was terminated by his then fiancée. The second was in 2014 when, the engagement having been announced in August, it was terminated by his second fiancée's family in November over a dispute concerning the amount of a promised dowry. Ms Haddad said that the impact upon Jibryl of these circumstances caused him to become depressed.
Ms Haddad said that Jibryl's offending was not reflective of his peaceful and harmless nature, and that he was known for his love, empathy and kindness. She described him as being "profoundly remorseful", and expressed confidence that he had learned from what he had done [244] . She said that he would, when given the opportunity to do so in the future, lead a meaningful life.
Dr Allnutt saw Jibryl on 6 August 2015. On the basis of the history provided, and the other material made available to him, Dr Allnutt said that Jibryl had manifested a variety of psychiatric symptoms from a young age which had attracted various diagnoses including anxiety, OCD, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia spectrum disorders [245] . He said that at the time of the examination, Jibryl had manifested a "constellation of psychiatric conditions, predominately anxiety, depressive and psychotic symptoms" [246] . Dr Allnutt was unable to reach a diagnosis of bipolar affected disorder and he did not suggest that any of Jibryl's symptomology was casually related to his offending. He said that Jibryl was preoccupied with the fact of his incarceration, and experienced associated anxiety about the sentence proceedings and the impact upon his family [247] .
Dr Furst saw Jibryl in custody on 29 September 2017. In terms of his offending, and with particular reference to his authorship of documents, Dr Furst recorded Jibryl as saying [248] : I was angry at the time. It's just a piece of paper. I was upset about Muslim brothers being killed overseas.
Jibryl told Dr Furst that he "wanted to let his anger out on a piece of paper". He claimed that he was "a bit naïve" and did not appreciate how seriously his actions could be taken [249] . Dr Furst then recorded the following [250] : He regretted his actions, stating "I should not have written it" … put people into harm. My family in harm, Financial burden. This paper was a moment of anger. However, his assertions in this respect about his role in the conspiracy and his thinking at the time being driven by a 'moment of anger' would appear to be at odds with the tone of the writing, possession of firearms, use of code, and apparent preparations made by (him) and his co-offender to prepare for or plan a terrorist act.
Dr Furst said that Jibryl was suffering from high levels of stress and anxiety and that he met the criteria for diagnoses of [251] : 1. obsessive compulsive disorder (which was the primary disorder); 2. generalised anxiety disorder; 3. panic disorder; and 4. substance use disorder.
Dr Furst said that there was no causative link between any of these disorders and Jibryl's offending [252] . However, he expressed the view that Jibryl's anxiety, general psychopathology and impaired psychosocial function, all of which had developed as a consequence of his chronic anxiety and depression, had left him in an angry, irritable, disenfranchised and vulnerable state at the time of his offending. He described Jibryl's prospects of being successfully rehabilitated as "moderate" [253] .
The report of Mr Ahmad, which was prepared on 20 August 2014, was the result of a referral from a Dr Hassan. On the basis of the information provided to him, Mr Ahmad identified a number of "diagnostic possibilities" including schizophrenia, a major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, social phobia, paranoid personality disorder and schizotypal personality disorder [254] .
Dr Emder examined Jibryl following referral from his general practitioner in November 2009 when he was 16 years of age. He described Jibryl as a person who had "some problems with his growth and also significant psychological difficulty" [255] . His said that Jibryl had recently been commenced on Zoloft (an anti-depressant) and was suffering from low self-esteem, partly because of his short stature [256] .
The academic records which were tendered establish that Jibryl was assessed as "competent" in his TAFE studies [257] . His school reports were generally positive [258] .
On 25 September 2017 Jibryl's solicitor wrote to the Commissioner for Corrective Services seeking admission to the PRISM program [259] . On 28 September 2017 he was advised that no specific information regarding Jibryl's request could be provided. It was recommended that Jibryl express his interest in being included in the program to prison staff. It was also pointed out that all inmates were eligible to engage with psychological and counselling support services, both of which could assist in supporting Jibryl's "stated interest in commencing the process of disengagement" [260] . As previously noted [261] , Mr Piazza gave evidence that "technically" entry into the PRISM program is not available until the latter stages of a sentence.
The testimonial material variously described Jibryl as well-mannered, kind and well behaved. The authors of a number of the testimonials confirmed the adverse effect upon Jibryl of the separation and divorce of his parents. A number of them also included statements to the effect that with proper guidance, Jibryl's prospects of rehabilitation were favourable.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

In terms of the general nature of the conspiracy, and the approach to be adopted in sentencing in such cases, the Crown relied on the submissions made in the case against Khalid. In terms of matters specific to Jibryl, the Crown submitted that he too had occupied a position of seniority, albeit at a level under that of Khalid. The Crown pointed, in particular, to: 1. Jibryl's possession of three functional firearms and a large amount of ammunition; 2. his authorship of the "Torn Up Motorbike Document" which contained images and coded descriptions of three firearms; and 3. his authorship of the "We will break the ice here in Aus" document, in which he spoke about the Lindt Café siege and in which stated that "the time is NOW!!!", a reference, the Crown submitted, to what Jibryl saw as the importance of an immediate terrorist attack.

Submissions on behalf of Jibryl

Mr Temby QC, who appeared on behalf of Jibryl, emphasised that Jibryl had not come under investigation until November 2014 and that his involvement in the conspiracy had not commenced until some time after 7 December 2014. He submitted that his contact with the other co-conspirators was limited to contact with Khalid which had first occurred on 7 December 2014, and that the content of the conversation on that day was consistent with Jibryl having not interacted with Khalid for a lengthy period of time. It was submitted that in these circumstances, not only was the period of the conspiracy short, Jibryl's involvement was even shorter.
It was submitted that there was no evidence that Jibryl had agreed to any nominated target. In terms of specific parts of the statement of facts, it was submitted that the conversation with Khalid on 16 December 2014 did not encompass discussions about martyrdom or planning for a terrorist attack [262] , and that the evidence did not establish that Jibryl had attended the meeting at Khalid's premises during 17 and 18 December 2014 [263] .
Senior counsel took particular issue with the Crown's submission that Jibryl occupied a position "high up" in the conspiracy, and submitted that Jibryl was properly described as a "late joiner" [264] . It was submitted that in circumstances where the evidence established that Jibryl had had little, if any, contact with Khalid for a considerable period of time prior to December 2014, the conclusion urged by the Crown that Jibryl occupied a senior role in the conspiracy could not be made out [265] .
Finally, to the extent that the Crown relied on references to a "wedding" as being a form of code, senior counsel pointed to the evidence that Jibryl was in fact engaged to be married on two separate occasions, and that neither marriage eventuated. It was submitted that in these circumstances any reference by Jibryl to a "wedding" [266] was legitimate and not coded.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown submitted in reply that the objective seriousness of Jibryl's offending was reflected, at least in part, in the nature of what was being considered in terms of a terrorist act. The Crown again acknowledged that no particular target had been identified, but submitted that the broad nature of appropriate targets was clearly being discussed, in the context of the use of firearms. The Crown also pointed to the fact that in conversations between Khalid and IM, and in one or more of the documents, the killing of police, and martyrdom, were both discussed, and that this reflected the objective seriousness of the offending.
The Crown accepted that the earliest contact between Jibryl and Khalid had occurred on 7 December 2014. However, the Crown submitted that this did not alter the fact that Jibryl occupied a high position in the conspiracy, and that what had been done in the period in which he was involved was significant. The Crown pointed, in particular, to the fact that Jibryl had possession of firearms and ammunition, and was the author of two separate documents. It was submitted that the inference to be drawn from Jibryl's actions was that he was encouraging the discussion of what act(s) might be taken in pursuit of the conspiracy. In all of these circumstances, the Crown submitted that individual factors such as whether Jibryl had engaged in the use of particular coded language, or whether he attended the meeting at Khalid's premises on 17/18 December 2014, were of little significance.

Consideration

One of the principal submissions advanced on behalf of Jibryl was that the nature and circumstances of his offending were less serious on account of the fact that the conspiracy itself was short, and that Jibryl's involvement was even shorter. It was submitted, in effect, that these (and other) factors supported a conclusion that the objective seriousness of Jibryl's offending was substantially lower than that of Khalid. As I have already observed in dealing with Khalid's case, the duration of the conspiracy is an obviously relevant factor, although not the only one.
I accept the submission advanced on Jibryl's behalf that he is properly described as a "late joiner". I also accept that prior to joining the conspiracy, Jibryl had had little (if any) contact with Khalid. I also accept that evidence falls short of establishing that he attended the meeting at Khalid's premises on 17/18 December 2014. However, there are other factors relevant to a determination of the nature, circumstances and objective seriousness of Jibryl's offending.
Like Khalid, Jibryl's offending was supported by an unequivocal adherence to violent ideology. The strength of that adherence is demonstrated by the very fact of Jibryl's offending, as well as by his plea. Given the object of the conspiracy, any comment about the significance of Jibryl's possession of firearms and ammunition would be superfluous.
Moreover, Jibryl was responsible for writing two documents. The "Torn Up Motorbike Document" was heavily coded in its references to firearms and reflected a considerable degree of planning and premeditation. It was obviously directed towards the fundamental consideration of what firearms would be required in order to carry out the type of attack which was being contemplated.
The "We will break the ice hear in AUS" document was even more significant. In referring to the fact that surveillance may have been increased as a consequence of the Lindt Café siege, Jibryl stated that "the earlier we do things the better" [267] . Having referred to members of the Australian military forces fighting overseas as "pigs", he exclaimed that "the time is NOW!!!" before stating that "we are going to do our own things and we will break the Ice here in AUS" and that, as a consequence, "everything will start here" [268] . I am satisfied that those various statements were references to the attack which was being contemplated and that Jibryl saw a need to commit such an attack sooner rather than later. So much is clear from the language that he adopted. Like Khalid, Jibryl does not stand to be sentenced as though he committed the acts about which he wrote and which were obviously being contemplated. Equally however, such acts necessarily inform the nature and gravity of his offending.
Jibryl told Dr Furst that he was "angry" at the time, and "a bit naïve", and that it was "just a piece of paper". For the reasons I have already expressed, such statements are deserving of little weight in the absence of sworn evidence. Moreover, they seriously understate the seriousness of Jibryl's offending. What Jibryl wrote in those documents would instil fear and trepidation in any person who read it. In my view, his authorship of them reflects an unequivocal commitment to violent jihad, and an equally unequivocal commitment to the conspiracy of which he was an admitted part.
Further, I am unable to accept the submission that Jibryl's first conversation with Khalid on 16 December 2014, and in particular his reference to "getting married", should be construed as an innocent reference to his own personal situation. The conversation must be viewed in the context of that which immediately followed it, which was heavily coded in an obvious attempt to obscure the fact that what was being discussed was firearms.
For all of these reasons Jibryl's offending was of considerable objective seriousness. It falls towards the upper end of the scale, although it is slightly lower than that of Khalid. That said, and like Khalid, Jibryl was also a committed terrorist, and similarly corrupted by the ideology to which he adhered. Once again, considerations of general deterrence assume considerable importance in determining an appropriate sentence.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown acknowledged Jibryl's plea but pointed out that it had been entered at a late stage. As with Khalid, the Crown did not suggest that the plea was not deserving of some discount, but submitted that any discount should be at the lower end of the scale.

Submissions on behalf of Jibryl

Senior counsel emphasised that Jibryl had no criminal history and was therefore to be sentenced as a person of prior good character. Whilst accepting that subjective considerations generally played a lesser role on sentence given the nature of this kind of offending, senior counsel highlighted a number of factors which, he submitted, should be taken into account.
It was submitted that the evidence established that Jibryl had not previously displayed any tendency towards violence, and that his conduct in custody had been exemplary, productive and co-operative. It was further submitted that a positive feature of Jibryl's subjective case was the fact that he has been recorded as seeking, and being granted access to, "moderate" Islamic religious material, and had been engaging with Islamic clergy. It was submitted that these factors along with his plea of guilty, the accompanying acknowledgement of wrongdoing, and his relative youth, supported a conclusion that his prospects of rehabilitation were generally favourable. Senior counsel acknowledged that there was no evidence from Jibryl himself regarding the renunciation of any previously held extremist ideology, but submitted that the other factors relied upon were generally supportive of him. It was submitted that any period of imprisonment to be imposed would see Jibryl emerge as an older and wiser person, who was strongly disinclined to follow any path of violence.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown emphasised that the nature of Jibryl's offending carried with it an adherence to the cause of violent jihad. Whilst accepting that Jibryl's plea of guilty could be seen as some step towards the abandonment of such a cause, the Crown submitted that the onus of establishing that fact was firmly upon an offender, such that the best evidence of abandonment would necessarily be from Jibryl himself. The Crown submitted that at its highest, the plea of guilty, the inquiry about the PRISM Program and Jibryl's behaviour in custody, may support a conclusion that he may be willing to step away from the ideology.

Consideration

As with all offenders, Jibryl's subjective case is to be considered by reference to applicable provisions of s. 16A(2) of the Act along with any other identified factors which are relevant.

The plea of guilty: s. 16A(2)(g)

Jibryl entered a plea of guilty to the conspiracy offence on 31 July 2017 which was the day fixed for his trial. He pleaded guilty to offences contrary to the FA on 3 October 2017. I have previously set out those authorities which bear upon the assessment of the discount in respect of a plea of guilty in the case of a Federal offender [269] .
To the extent that I am required to apply a discount in respect of the offences contrary to the FA, the applicable range to reflect the utilitarian value of the pleas is 10%-25%, the timing of the pleas being the predominant consideration [270] .
Taking all of those circumstances into account, the appropriate discount in the case of each of Jibryl's pleas of guilty is 10%.

Personal deterrence: s. 16A(2)(j)

I have dealt with the issue of Jibryl's prospects of rehabilitation below. There are some favourable aspects, although there remains a need for any sentence to reflect considerations of personal deterrence.

Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition: s. 16A(2)(m)

Jibryl is now 24 years of age and was 21 at the time of the offending. He has no previous criminal history and the testimonials speak highly of him. I have taken those factors into account.
I have already set out the principles governing the sentencing of youthful offenders [271] . I attach little weight to Jibryl's self-serving assessment to Dr Furst that he was naïve. His offending reflected considerable planning, and involved the possession of firearms and ammunition. There is no evidence that he was suffering from any degree of cognitive or psychological immaturity which contributed to his offending, the objective seriousness of which I have concluded was in the upper range. Such offending was committed when Jibryl was substantially over the age of maturity. Further, whilst Dr Furst diagnosed Jibryl as suffering from a number of disorders, he was clearly of the opinion there was no direct correlation, or causative link, between any of those disorders and the offending. In all of the circumstances, and for the reasons expressed in Khalid's case, Jibryl's youth is deserving of little weight on sentence.

The prospect of rehabilitation: s. 16A(2)(n)

Jibryl expressed "regret" for his actions to Dr Furst. For the reasons expressed when dealing with Khalid's case, statements of that nature are of limited weight in the absence of sworn evidence [272] .
In terms of his prospects of rehabilitation, I have already canvassed the effect, in a matter such as this, of the absence of any sworn evidence renouncing a previous adherence to violent ideology [273] . Those observations apply equally in Jibryl's case. Jibryl's plea of guilty and the fact that he has obviously used his time in custody productively by (inter alia) gaining employment, are factors which operate in his favour. They point tentatively towards a conclusion that his prospects of rehabilitation are more favourable than not, although for the reasons I have already expressed when dealing with Khalid's case, any such prediction must be expressed with a considerable degree of caution in the absence of sworn evidence.

Other factors

I have made reference to Jibryl's conditions of custody which are obviously harsh. I have taken those conditions into account in the manner previously expressed [274] .
Jibryl has been in custody since 10 December 2014 [275] . Any sentence imposed should commence on that date.

The following evidence was tendered in IM's sentence proceedings [276] : 1. statement of facts [277] ; 2. criminal history [278] ; 3. an affidavit of Vicki May Arnold dated 14 September 2017 [279] ; 4. photos of IM with firearms (x4) [280] ; and 5. exhibit SK11 (2 volumes of telephone intercepts) [281] . 6. a report of Dr Woods of 27 September 2017 [282] ; 7. a report of Dr Tong of 11 September 2017 [283] ; 8. a report of Dr Jones of 18 February 2017 [284] ; 9. a report of Dr Allnutt of 1 October 2017 [285] ; 10. a statement of IM's mother [286] ; 11. a statement of IM's father [287] ; 12. medical records pertaining to each of IM's parents [288] ; 13. a report of Ms Ly and Ms Duckett of Juvenile Justice of 26 September 2017 [289] ; and 14. a number of character references [290] .

The facts

The statement of facts tendered by the Crown against IM was in the following terms [291] : A. Ideology 1. "IM" ("the offender"), Sulayman Khalid and Jibryl Almaouie (together, "the conspirators") adhere to the religious ideology of violent jihad. Specifically, they adhere to the religious ideology of Wahhabi-Salafism. This is the ideology that inspires ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), Al-Qaeda and like‑minded groups and their supporters. [292] 2. The cause that was to be advanced in the proposed terrorist act or acts was that of violent jihad. The essential feature of the cause, which the conspirators believed to be a religious obligation, was to engage in violence to advance what they considered to be the interests of Islam. They believed Islam to be under attack from various Western countries, in Syria and the Middle East, and also in Australia. They also believed that those who died pursuing violent jihad were martyrs, who would be rewarded in paradise. 3. During the conspiracy period (that is, between about 7 November 2014 and 18 December 2014), each of the conspirators was committed to Islam and they often spoke about it and included it in their daily lives. Whilst the word "jihad" is used and understood amongst the wider Muslim community to mean "spiritual struggle", the conspirators used the term (and possessed material that used the term) to mean "violent jihad". 4. During the period of the conspiracy and for some time before, Khalid was active in seeking to advance Islam. He had actively proselytized for Islam in the street and posted videos of those activities online. His activity was known to his friends, including (amongst others) the offender, who had a video on his phone of Khalid preaching Islam in the street. 5. Khalid had publicly displayed his support for the violent jihad espoused by ISIS. One way he did so was by obtaining and wearing clothing with badges and adornments of ISIS. When police executed a search warrant at his premises on 18 December 2014, the items they found included clothing bearing identifiable ISIS markings and a series of printed A4 sheets which, when placed together, formed an almost complete ISIS banner. Furthermore, Khalid had appeared on the "Insight Program", which was televised nationally, and supported the violent jihadi ideology of ISIS. 6. Khalid had also made a YouTube video which he had posted on the internet, titled "A Direct Message to the Secret Services, A call to Taweed, Millatu Ibrahim". In that video, which features an ISIS emblem, Khalid makes a thinly veiled threat against various Western security services, including those of Australia. The video was one of 25 published online by Khalid between 25 May 2013 and 7 December 2014, the majority of which show Khalid preaching and discussing Islam. 7. Khalid was also the conspirator who sent religious advice and sayings to the other conspirators. He had many telephone communications with the offender, during which they spoke about martyrdom and committing some form of terrorist act. The urgency with which the offender longed to commit a terrorist act and become a martyr is clear from those communications. 8. On 18 December 2014, when the offender's telephone was seized under warrant executed at his home at 67 Denman Road Georges Hall, it was found to contain the following extremist material: a) Violent jihad images, including stills of a beheading and images and documents in praise of mujahedeen [293] and jihad; b) Images of ISIS banners, weapons and persons giving the ISIS finger salute; c) Many images of the offender giving the same salute, including an image of the offender with Khalid and another person all giving the salute; and d) An image from Khalid's "Direct Message to the Secret Services" and a video of Khalid preaching in the streets. 9. Also during the search of the offender's premises on 18 December 2014, he was found to have the following material which was seized: a) Six CDs titled "Lives of the prophets"; b) Eleven CDs labelled "Anwar Al-Awlaki" (a jihadist cleric); c) Three CDs labelled "ways and means of devil", "The plot of the hypocrites" [294] and "Arabic/Syrian Anasheed [295] "; d) One hand written document entitled "Lover of Jihad"; and e) Document titled "the blood of the Shuhada". [296] B. Outline of the conspiracy [297] … 24. By his close association with Khalid, their talk of joint martyrdom, his strong urging that a terrorist act be done here in Australia and his sourcing of firearms, IM had a high role in the conspiracy. … DOCUMENTS [298] A. Overview - documents' purpose and circumstances of creation … FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION A. Firearms in Jibryl Almaouie's possession [299] … B. Firearms sourced by the offender [300] … INTERCEPTED TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS [301] … MEETINGS OF THE CONSPIRATORS AND OTHERS [302] … ARREST AND CHARGING 92. On 10 December 2015, Khalid, the offender, Jibryl Almaouie, and Ghazzawy were arrested and charged. Mohamed Al Maouie was arrested on 23 December 2015. Farhad Said was arrested on 26 May 2016. Each was provided with their legal rights under Part 1C of the Crimes Act 1914 and declined to participate in a record of interview. 93. The offender was in custody from 10 December 2015 to 14 January 2016 (a total of 35 days), when he was released on conditional bail by Adams J. The offender was again taken into custody on 31 July 2017 following his plea of guilty.

IM's criminal history

IM's criminal history contains an entry arising from his appearance at the Parramatta Children's Court on 26 August 2015 in respect of counts of possessing an unauthorised firearm. Each of those charges was dealt with pursuant to s. 33(1)(b) of the CCPA. The firearms which were the subject of those charges are the same firearms to which reference is made in the facts tendered [303] .

The report of Ms Arnold

Ms Arnold is an Assistant Manager at the Juvenile Justice Centre at which IM is presently held. IM has a custodial classification based upon the serious nature of the charge to which he has pleaded guilty, and what is viewed as his possible risk level. As a result, he is unable to mix with any other detainee who is charged with a similar offence. The risk he is considered to pose is monitored in a number of ways including by conducting background and intelligence checks on all of those who visit him, monitoring his phone calls, monitoring all incoming and outgoing mail and checking any books and other written material provided to him by any family member or associate.
He has been placed in a single room with a television, desk and his own amenities. The unit in which he is housed has a number of recreational facilities. His able to make telephone calls to his legal representative on any day of the week and is permitted to have legal conferences with the same frequency. He currently has 21 approved visitors, all of whom are members of his immediate or extended family. He has 7 telephone numbers approved for contact [304] .
IM is seen regularly by Justice Health for an asthma condition and is able to consult health services as and when the need arises. He has access to all the general amenities of the centre in which he is housed although due to his classification he is only able to access programs which are designated "low risk" [305] .
Ms Arnold stated that IM was generally very polite and well-mannered towards staff [306] . She described him as an intelligent young person who interacted well with others. His behaviour is managed through the Detainee Incentive Scheme, a program which rewards positive behaviour with incentives. He has achieved 5 out of 7 incentives since being taken into custody and has progressed to stage 2 of the program which gives him greater access to amenities [307] . However Ms Arnold did say that at times IM had displayed anti-social behaviour and a disregard for the rules and practices of the centre, as a consequence of which he had been issued with two reports for poor behaviour [308] . That said, she stated that IM had not been involved in any serious incidents since being taken into custody [309] .

The report of Juvenile Justice

The report of Juvenile Justice set out IM's background, the terms of which were generally consistent with what appeared in the various medical reports. The report stated that IM had identified negative peer associations, lack of consequential thinking, and immaturity as being factors that had contributed to his offending [310] . IM said that as he started to become acquainted with his co-offenders, he enjoyed their company and that in light of the fact that he had been a victim of bullying at school, he looked up to them because he felt safe and important. The report went on to state [311] : (IM) reports that due to his young age and immaturity, he was not aware that his actions at the time were wrong nor did he understand the legal consequences and the extent of his engagement in the offending behaviours. (IM) stated he was focused on pleasing his peers and gave little thought to the outcome. (IM) identified that over time his role in the offence increased and he had concerns about the depth of discussion but did not know how to extricate himself from the situation.
The report noted that IM was working closely with a psychologist in custody who had reported that he engaged well with counselling, and that he had focused upon his mental health and coping strategies [312] . In terms of IM's attitude and beliefs, the report stated the following [313] : Throughout his assessment, (IM) denied he was a supporter of ISIS or any acts of terrorism. (IM) stated that he does not want to die young and leave his family behind. In relation to today's matter, (IM) highlighted the importance for him to fit in with his peers at the time of the offence. (IM) stated that after his arrest, he felt that his co-offenders had used him due to his young age and immaturity. (IM) accepted responsibility for his part in the offence and considers his involvement is serious.

THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY IM

Dr Woods interviewed IM on 25 September 2017. For the purposes of his assessment he was provided with a number of documents including the facts tendered by the Crown (although not, it seems, the telephone intercept material). Under the heading "Executive Summary" Dr Woods said the following [314] : Assessment of (IM) has revealed he was in all "forensic" probability been (sic) targeted and groomed by the co-accused Sulayman Khalid; he was aged approximately fourteen (14) years at the time of being "groomed". Offender-Offence Linkage analysis has identified the following highly relevant factors:- • (IM) aged fourteen (14 years) at the time of meeting the co-accused, Sulayman Khalid, was socially and emotionally isolated. • Executive Functioning is only beginning to develop in early teens and does not generally reach full development in males until (approximately) early to mid twenties. • (IM) appears to have been targeted and groomed by Mr Khalid. Based on a nature of (IM's) disclosures regarding his behaviour that is the subject of the matter that brings him before the Court and noting his actions subsequent to Mr Khalid's arrest, I believe there is good forensic reason to believe that he (IM) was largely engaging in adolescent fantasy at all material times and arising from this gain (sic) a vicarious level of excitement.
Dr Woods said that IM "was never fully radicalised" and "that he now rejects such values" [315] . He expressly disagreed with the opinions of Dr Tong and Dr Jones that IM suffered from a significant level of cognitive impairment. He said, in particular [316] : The extent to which (IM) was "genuinely radicalised" as opposed to engaging in fantasy based hero like behaviour is questionable. In my opinion and having regard for a) (IM's) various disclosures and b) the speed at which he ceased all association with the co-accused and re-aligned himself with non-radicalised persons and organisations, I believe he was never genuinely radicalised.
Dr Woods made reference to IM's reported history of having been bullied and socially isolated in primary school [317] . He said that "fantasy based hero like behaviour" by young adolescents was not unusual, but was more likely to occur when the person in question did not enjoy broad peer based social acceptance, leading to a fragile "sense of self". Dr Woods went on to say [318] : Based upon (IM's) disclosures regarding a) the circumstances in which he met Mr. Khalid and other similarly slightly older young males, b) needs/desire for acceptance, c) the perceived increased social status, c) (sic) the increasing level of interest shown in him by the group of slightly older males and d) his lack of Arabic language skills and thus reliance on Mr Khalid to translate and interpret passages of the Quran, it appears highly probable that he (IM) had been "targeted" and was being "groomed". When challenged as to why he continued to maintain contact with the group after (eventually) becoming concerned about the possibility that a terrorist attack (as opposed to what he had initially viewed in terms of "just talking shit") (IM) stated that he felt "trapped".
Dr Woods concluded that IM's responses to testing were consistent with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder [319] . He said that IM had progressed in his rehabilitation and that continued detention represented the primary risk to IM's long term mental health and successful rehabilitation [320] .
Dr Tong examined IM on 31 August 2017. The history given to Dr Tong by IM included the following [321] : I met those people at the Mosque. I regret everything I done and now I know it was wrong. I was charged with firearms offences. I took a picture of my uncle's hunting gun. The Court says it didn't happen. I was not going to do anything either way. I never thought anyone was going to do anything. I knew for sure I wasn't going to do anything. I thought I was only talking about what was happening overseas, not here. I was being bullied at school and those people accepted me into their group. They were all older than me, all (aged) 18 and over. I never thought of the danger. It was a long time ago. I know about that "talk" because it's in the (legal) brief about a terrorist act here but … it's not here, its overseas, that's where the war is. I know nothing about it. I heard about the news overseas. They wanted to do an attack. I never thought it was serious. I thought they were talking like crap. I did say stuff. I just wanted to fit in. I thought it was a joke and I didn't know I was doing anything wrong.
Dr Tong noted that IM's clinical presentation did not exhibit symptoms suggestive of irrationality, agitation or psychomotor retardation [322] . She found, based on IM's responses to testing, that he was functioning within the borderline range of cognitive capacity [323] , and concluded that he suffered from impaired cognitive and social maturity [324] .
Dr Jones assessed IM over a period of three days on 14, 15 and 17 November 2016. He concluded that IM was suffering from a major depressive disorder of a moderate severity [325] . He concluded that whilst IM exhibited some deficiency in conceptual and cognitive functioning, he was not suffering from any intellectual disability. He also said that IM's depressive disorder was likely to have manifested itself as a result of the alleged offending, the current proceedings and the inevitable social ramifications, both for himself and his family [326] .
Dr Allnutt assessed IM on 21 August 2017. The history taken by Dr Allnutt included references to the telephone intercept material. IM told Dr Allnutt that he thought his interaction with Khalid was "weird". He said, in effect, that he did not think that Khalid meant what was being discussed in at least some of their conversations. In terms of his association with firearms, IM told Dr Allnutt that he had photos taken of himself with a gun to "show off" [327] . Dr Allnutt thought that IM manifested "a constellation of anxiety and depressive symptoms" [328] and that differential diagnoses would include chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and a Panic Disorder. Dr Allnutt formed the impression that IM's involvement in the offending had emerged in the context of a relationship with older males, when he was emotionally vulnerable and felt a need for a sense of belonging, identity and personal validation. He concluded [329] : …based on his account, his involvement in the planning and preparation was naïve, he would have been vulnerable to having a naïve view, given his age.
Dr Allnutt went on to say [330] : At the time I saw your client he expressed remorse regarding his offending. He said he had stopped associating with his co-accused or people who maintained the ideology. He regarded himself (sic) relatively innocent participant in the offending behaviour at the time, on the one hand, but at the same time, now appreciates the seriousness of his offending.
IM's mother said that her separation from her husband had had a negative effect upon IM [331] and that his arrest for this offence had rendered him quieter than was previously the case [332] . She expressed a belief that IM "just fell under the spell of the other adults in this case" (who) "made him feel accepted and loved" [333] . She placed the blame for IM's current predicament upon herself, expressing a belief that her separation from her husband had made IM feel vulnerable [334] . She described the circumstances arising from the current proceedings as being "a nightmare for (her) family" [335] .
IM's father said that his separation "took a toll" on IM, as a consequence of which IM had become withdrawn [336] . He too sought to place blame upon himself, and described the present circumstances as having "rocked (his) family profoundly" [337] . He said IM was "only a kid" who "certainly would not have entertained the thoughts of the conspirators had he been older and more mature", describing him as a "really a gentle boy who wouldn't harm a fly" [338] .
The medical records pertaining to IM's parents confirm that the mental health of IM's mother has been adversely affected as a consequence of the stress and anxiety arising from IM's current circumstances [339] . The records pertaining to IM's father confirm that he is also suffering from medical issues. However, they are of a different nature to those being suffered by IM's mother, and do not appear to be causally related to IM's current circumstances.
The testimonials tendered on IM's behalf variously described him as honest, quiet and kind, and a person in respect of whom the present offending was uncharacteristic. All of those providing testimonials expressed their ongoing support.

Submissions of behalf of the Crown

In terms of the general nature of the conspiracy and its objective seriousness, the Crown relied on the submissions made in respect of Khalid and Jibryl. Specifically in terms of IM, the Crown submitted that he too occupied a high role in the group. The Crown emphasised that IM was a strong adherent of jihadist ideology, as evidenced by his participation in the offending. The Crown also pointed to the fact that in the course of recorded conversations with Khalid, IM had often expressed a strong desire to engage in a terrorist attack and become a martyr. The Crown also emphasised that in those same conversations, IM often spoke about weapons in a coded form.
The Crown also emphasised that as part of his role in the conspiracy, IM had sourced four firearms from his uncle's premises and had sent photographs of himself posing with the firearms to Khalid. This, it was submitted, highlighted the significant role that IM had played.

Submissions on behalf of the offender

Mr James QC, who appeared on behalf of IM, accepted that the facts tendered by the Crown set out the extent of the conspiracy, and the role played by IM. However, he emphasised that IM was 14 years and 11 weeks old at the commencement of the conspiracy and submitted that his involvement in the group should be viewed as "apparently as an active disciple of Khalid" who, when told that IM sought to go to Syria to fight, had urged him to stay in Australia and perform a terrorist act in this country. He described IM's offending as a "burst of 14 year old enthusiasm".
Senior counsel took issue with the Crown's submission that IM's role was a prominent one. He submitted that the use of such an all-encompassing approach had the tendency to obscure a proper assessment and appreciation of the actual role which IM had played. Whilst accepting that the offending was objectively serious, senior counsel submitted that the period of conspiracy was short, and that there was no basis on which to assert that IM had played an "adult" or primary role. He submitted that IM was obviously immature, and that there was an air of unreality about his participation. Whilst senior counsel did not suggest that IM's offending was other than serious, he submitted that the act of participating in a conspiracy was not as culpable, nor as objectively serious, as committing a completed offence. This, it was submitted, was particularly so where the agreement did not extend beyond planning, and where there was no specific terrorist act in mind.
It was submitted that it was not IM's primary focus to commit any terrorist act in Australia, but rather to go and fight in Syria, and that his expressions of "enthusiasm" were illustrative of how a young person could be recruited and radicalised. It was submitted that IM was a child, in respect of whom sentencing principles in respect of young persons were applicable.
It was submitted that when determining IM's objective criminality, I should find that he was an "enthusiastic" 14 year old [340] who was taking a religious stance at the insistence of, or at least amongst, others who were much older and much more influential. Senior counsel went so far as to say that I should find that IM was "recruited" by Khalid into joining the conspiracy and remained under his influence thereafter, seemingly envisaging himself as some kind of religious hero who was able to obtain martyrdom [341] . He submitted that I should find that IM entered the conspiracy as a "follower", and had participated under the influence of others in circumstances where he was eager to obtain their acceptance. It was submitted that I should find that IM did not have a fixed state of mind concerning his own radicalisation, and that any apparent adherence to violent jihad was a creature of his youth, immaturity and the other influences on him.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown did not take issue with the proposition there was some influence exercised by Khalid over IM. However, the Crown submitted that the evidence did not support a conclusion that IM had been "recruited or "groomed" by Khalid in the sense of being enticed into becoming involved [342] . It was submitted that the entirety of the evidence, and particularly the telephone intercept material, reflected a readiness and a willingness on the part of IM to become involved, absent any enticement whatsoever. In that regard, the Crown emphasised, in particular, that IM had engaged in coded conversations about martyrdom.

Consideration

Viewed objectively, IM's offending was obviously serious. He has admitted to being a participant in a criminal conspiracy which had, as its objective, carrying out acts in preparation for a terrorist act. I am satisfied that during the period of the conspiracy, IM was an adherent to the ideology of violent jihad. The offending to which he has pleaded guilty supports that conclusion. Such conclusion is fortified by the statements made by IM in his conversations with Khalid about becoming a martyr, as well as by the nature of the material which was found on his telephone, and which included images of a beheading, images of ISIS banners and weapons, and an image taken from the YouTube footage which was relied upon by the Crown against Khalid.
It is particularly significant that as part of his participation in the conspiracy, IM sourced a number of firearms. He was then photographed holding those firearms and sent the photographs to Khalid. In one of them, he appeared to be adopting what might be described as a "combat" pose. In another he was gesticulating with a salute generally accepted to be of a kind exhibited by devotees of ISIS.
All of these circumstances fly in the face of IM's assertion to Dr Tong that he "thought it was a joke". Such an assertion is at odds with acquiring firearms, and professing a desire to become a martyr. I am also unable to accept that IM's offending can be properly regarded as a burst of teenage enthusiasm. On the contrary, his conduct was serious, sustained and multi-faceted.
Dr Woods concluded that it was "questionable" whether IM was ever "genuinely radicalised". Precisely what was meant by that latter term was not explained, although it would appear that Dr Woods was seeking to contrast "genuine radicalisation" with what he referred to as "fantasy based hero like behaviour". To the extent that Dr Woods was expressing the view that IM's offending fell within the scope of the latter, I do not accept that to be the case. IM did a great deal more than engage in imaginative behaviour in which he fantasised about a terrorist attack. Actually acquiring firearms, in the context of discussions which were taking place about terrorist attacks and martyrdom, is not imaginative in any sense of the term. It is real.
Moreover, and leaving aside what may have been meant by the term "genuinely radicalised", not only is the suggestion that IM was engaging in fantasy inconsistent with his plea of guilty, his actions reflected an unwavering commitment to the cause of violent jihad, as well as martyrdom. There is an important distinction to be drawn between being young and making poor decisions which a person of more mature years may not make, and engaging in fantasy. What IM did was not the latter. Whether it was the former is an issue I have considered further below.
It was submitted that I should find that IM was not simply a follower of Khalid, but that he had been (to use the phrase adopted by Dr Woods) "targeted and groomed" by Khalid to join the conspiracy. There is no doubt that for the period of the conspiracy, Khalid and IM had a close association. So much is evident from the nature of their recorded telephone conversations. I am satisfied that Khalid had some influence over IM. However, exerting influence over a person does not, of itself, lead to the conclusion that such a person has been targeted and groomed. Accepting for present purposes that the expression of such an opinion is within the province of an expert, I do not accept that IM was targeted and groomed in the present case. Quite apart from any other consideration, Dr Woods' opinion is based, to a large extent, upon the history provided to him by IM regarding the circumstances in which he came to meet Khalid and others. For the reasons I have already expressed, such statements are deserving of limited weight.
All of that said, IM's age is an obviously important factor. Of all of the offenders before the Court, the principles which govern the sentencing of youthful offenders are of the greatest significance in his case. The authorities establish that the weight to be given to youth diminishes the closer an offender approaches the age of maturity. However the corollary of that proposition is that the weight to be given to youth must increase the further away an offender is from the age of maturity at the time of his offending. Johnson J pointed out in BP that the law recognises the potential for the cognitive, emotional and psychological immaturity of a young person to contribute to his or her breach of the law, such that where immaturity of an offender is a significant contributing factor to the commission of an offence, the criminality involved will be less than if the same offence was committed by an adult. In the present case, Dr Tong expressed the view that IM suffered from impaired cognitive and social maturity. Dr Allnutt said that IM was vulnerable at the time of the offending in light of his age. Whilst those opinions are based, at least in part, on the histories provided by IM, they are also underpinned by the fundamental fact that IM was 14 years of age at the time of his offending.
Viewed objectively, IM engaged in what is properly regarded as adult like behaviour. However I am satisfied on the evidence that IM's immaturity contributed to his offending. It follows that his youth is a mitigating factor in the sense explained in the authorities. However, in a case of offending as serious as this, youth does not mean that considerations of community protection, general deterrence and denunciation are rendered entirely irrelevant [343] .

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown acknowledged IM's plea of guilty but again submitted that it was entered at a late stage. The Crown further submitted that whilst the plea might be some evidence of contrition, and some evidence of a stepping away from previously held beliefs, it was difficult to be definitive about IM's prospects of rehabilitation.

Submissions on behalf of IM

Senior counsel for IM stressed the principles applicable to the sentencing of youthful offenders. At the same time, he expressly recognised that the youth of an offender does not automatically lead to a reduced sentence and that the greater the objective gravity of an offence, the less likely it is that retribution and general deterrence will cede to the interests of rehabilitation. However, senior counsel emphasised that at the time of the offending IM was barely above the age of statutory responsibility and that accordingly, the considerations relative to his youth, particularly as they impacted upon IM's prospects of rehabilitation, loomed larger.
Senior counsel submitted that the evidence established a capacity for rehabilitation in IM's case, and emphasised that achieving rehabilitation was a matter which operated for the greater protection of the community. He submitted that the Juvenile Justice Report was entirely favourable to IM, and positive as to his prospects of rehabilitation. It was submitted that the report gave no indication that during his period in custody, or on remand, IM had been "radicalised".
In terms of the various reports which are before the court and which record statements made by IM in relation to his offending and related matters, senior counsel submitted that authorities such as Qutami did not go so far as to conclude that such evidence is to be given no weight at all, but simply that it should be approached with caution. It was submitted that IM's plea was of considerable value, particularly when it was considered in the context of evidence relating to renunciation, rehabilitation, de-radicalisation and developing maturity. It was submitted that the plea reflected IM's willingness to facilitate the course of justice, as well as a willingness to take responsibility for his actions. In circumstances where the plea had avoided a long and complex trial, and in circumstances where it was properly regarded as evidence of remorse and a facilitation of the objectives of justice, it was submitted that a discount of at least 15-25% should be applied.
Senior counsel submitted that the goal of specific deterrence had already been substantially achieved in the case of IM by (inter alia) the long period he had spent awaiting trial subject to strict conditions of bail. Senior counsel urged me to take into account those conditions.
Finally, senior counsel drew attention to the evidence of the health issues presently being suffered by IM's parents. He particularly emphasised those of IM's mother, and their connection with IM's offending. It was submitted that this was a relevant factor under s. 16A(2)(p) of the Act.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown submitted that in terms of IM's rehabilitation, the issue was not whether IM had been "genuinely radicalised", but rather whether he had stepped away from his previous adherence to violent ideology, and if so to what extent. The Crown submitted that there was no evidence to support a conclusion that IM had done so, although the Crown accepted that the plea of guilty may be some preliminary indication in that regard. At the same time, the Crown drew attention to some of the recorded histories in the medical reports which, it was submitted, were at odds with a conclusion that IM had accepted the seriousness of his offending.

Consideration

The various aspects of IM's subjective case are to be considered by reference to (inter alia) the relevant provisions of s 16A(2) of the Act.

The plea of guilty: s 16A(2)(g)

The Juvenile Justice Report confirms that IM accepts responsibility for his offending and his plea is consistent with that. Equally, the plea obviously came at a late stage. I have already set out the principles which govern the assessment of any discount to be applied in recognition of that plea. In my view, the appropriate discount is 10%.

Personal deterrence: s 16A(2)(j)

The histories given by IM to some of the medical practitioners who provided reports on his behalf tended to downplay the seriousness of his offending. Although the Juvenile Justice Report indicates that IM now accepts responsibility for his offending, there remains a need for any sentence to have some regard to personal deterrence.

Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition: s 16A(2)(m)

I have dealt with the issue of IM's age, and have expressed my conclusions as to how it impacts upon consideration of an appropriate sentence.
IM's criminal history is limited to his appearance before the Children's Court in respect of the firearms offences. As I have already noted, those offences are part of the conspiracy.
I also take into account the opinions of Dr Jones and Dr Allnutt regarding IM's current depressive disorder.

The prospect of rehabilitation: s 16A(2)(n)

As with the other offenders, there is no direct evidence from IM himself as to his renouncement of the beliefs which I have found that he held at the time of his offending. In that respect, his position may be usefully contrasted with the offender in MHK, whose decision to give evidence, face cross-examination on his plea, and renounce and denounce his previously held beliefs, were found to be "significant mitigating circumstances" [344] .
The precise point which IM has reached in his rehabilitation remains somewhat clouded. His plea may be some evidence of his contrition. Whilst the histories recorded in some of the medical reports indicated a tendency on IM's part to downplay his actions, the Juvenile Justice Report indicates that he has now accepted responsibility for his part in the offending, and its seriousness. Further, accepting (as I have) that IM's offending was committed at a time when he was immature, the general tenor of the medical evidence supports a conclusion that with increased maturity will come an increased sense of responsibility. Those factors tentatively point to a conclusion that his prospects of rehabilitation are more favourable than not. However I express that conclusions with the same degree of caution about which I have already spoken in respect of Khalid and Jibryl.

The probable effect that any sentence or order under consideration would have any of the person's family or dependants: s 16A(2)(p)

I have already referred to the medical conditions suffered by IM's parents. That suffered by his mother appears to be in the nature of a reaction to IM's offending, and his subsequent arrest and incarceration, although that of his father does not. In R v Zerafa [345] the majority (Hoeben CJ at CL and Latham J; Beech-Jones J dissenting) concluded that the effect to which s. 16A(2)(p) refers must be in the nature of exceptional hardship. Subsequently, in Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Pratten (No. 2) [346] Basten JA raised the question whether the views of the majority in Zerafa should continue to be followed. Campbell J [347] thought that whilst there was "much to be said" for the dissenting view expressed by Beech-Jones J in Zerafa, it was not an appropriate occasion to depart from the long line of authority to the contrary. Adams J [348] expressed a not dissimilar view to that of Campbell J.
Accepting that the decision of the majority in Zerafa expresses the current state of the law in this regard, in my view it could not be said that the demonstrated effect, upon either of IM's parents, of his offending, arrest and incarceration, amounts to "exceptional hardship". Accordingly, s. 16A(2)(p) does not apply. However, I have taken those matters into account as part of IM's overall subjective case.

OTHER FACTORS

I have already made reference to IM's conditions of custody. Although not as rigid as those applying to the remaining offenders, they are restrictive to some degree and I have taken them into account in the same way as I have previously expressed [349] .
I was also asked to take into account the fact that prior to being detained in custody following his plea of guilty, IM had spent a considerable period of time subject to strict conditions of bail which significantly curtailed his liberty. It is open to me to take that into account but I am not obliged to do so [350] . The weight (if any) to be given to that factor in any case will depend upon a variety of matters. Less weight may be given to it in circumstances where the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment is required for the purposes of denouncing the crime and reflecting general deterrence [351] . In IM's case, although general deterrence remains a relevant factor, consideration of other matters stemming from his youth are to be taken into account.
I have had regard to IM's conditions of bail prior to the date on which he was taken into custody following his plea. However, like his conditions of custody, the weight to be given to that factor is neither the subject of mathematical calculation, nor substantial.
IM was arrested on 10 December 2015 and remained in custody until he was released on bail on 14 January 2016 (a total of 35 days). He remained at liberty 31 July 2017 when he was returned to custody following his plea of guilty. In determining his sentence I have taken into account the fact that he has already effectively spent 1 month in custody.

MOHAMED AL MAOUIE

The following evidence was tendered in Mohamed's sentence proceedings [352] : 1. statement of facts [353] ; 2. Mohamed's criminal history [354] ; 3. an affidavit of Glen Piazza dated 14 September 2017 [355] ; 4. a report of Tim Watson-Munro dated 25 September 2017 [356] ; 5. two reports of Dr Kearney dated 10 September 2009 and 28 March 2011 respectively; and 6. a series of character references [357] .

The facts

The facts tendered by the Crown against Mohamed [358] were in the following terms: BACKGROUND: 1. The offender, Mohamed Al Maouie, adheres to the ideology of violent jihad. [359] He associates with Khalid and others identified below as the Khalid group, who adhere to the ideology that inspires ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), Al-Qaeda and like-minded groups and their supporters. [360] 2. With the intention of advancing the religious ideology of violent jihad, the offender made a document connected with preparation of terrorist acts. Those proposed terrorist attacks were recorded in handwritten documents, described in the handwriting poster and in particular the offender's document as set out below. THE DOCUMENT: 3. The document the subject of the charge has been referred to in Crown documents concerning the related conspiracy charges as: • Document 4, Item I373, the "Gorilla Warfare" Document [361] . … … THE BACKGROUND TO THE DOCUMENTS' CREATION The investigation 6. On 8 May 2014, the Joint Counter Terrorism Team (JCTT) commenced an investigation named Operation Appleby to inquire into allegations that certain persons of interest had formed a group ("the Khalid group") who were conspiring to commit a terrorist act. This investigation remains ongoing. The offender was an associate of the Khalid conspirators group. Other members, who initially faced conspiracy charges in related proceedings and who have all pleaded guilty to ss. 101.6 or 101.5 offences, included: a. Sulayman Khalid; b. "IM"; c. Jibryl Almaouie (J. Almaouie); d. Ibrahim Ghazzawy; and e. Farhad Said; (together, "the offenders"). Meetings of the Khalid group 7. To facilitate the conspiracy's criminal objective, Khalid organised a number of meetings at his home address at 13 Berry Street, Regents Park with the other members of the Khalid group. Khalid occupied the garage at this address, using it as his personal bedroom and place to meet. 8. Lawfully intercepted telephone conversations between Khalid and other members of the Khalid Group show that Khalid was organising and planning meetings of the Khalid Group through the use of code words and demanding to meet members in person. The offender is only alleged to have attended one such meeting at Khalid's address. The interception of Khalid's mobile phone service showed he believed his calls were being monitored. 9. Between 2 November 2014 and 18 December 2014, the Khalid group coalesced. The Crown case is that the offenders began planning the attacks outlined in the documents located at Khalid's house on 18 December 2014. 10. On the 14 December 2014, surveillance captured a meeting between members of the Khalid Group and several associates at East Hills Park, Georges River. Ghazzawy was with those observed by surveillance. 11. In addition to the offender Mohamed Al Maouie, also present were: a) Hamdi Alqudsi; b) Abdullah Salihy; c) Ali Al-Talebi; d) Ahmad Saiyer Naizman; e) Milad Atai; f) Maywand Osman; g) Abdul-Rahman Tayba; h) Sulayman Khalid; i) Jibryl Almaouie; j) "IM"; And k) Ibrahim Ghazzawy. 12. The group was observed huddled together eating and engaged in conversation and praying. A short time later the group left East Hills Park and travelled in several vehicles to the car park on Prince of Wales Drive, Port Botany, arriving there about 4:48pm. After parking their vehicles, they walked to the beach at this location. Surveillance of the group was ceased some time later. Telephone interception of the Khalid group [362] … 15. Telephone intercept material and physical surveillance shows Khalid contacted each member of the Khalid group and arranged their meetings. Conversations between Khalid and "IM" often referred to their impending death. 16. Khalid increased the frequency of meetings with the members of the Khalid group from 29 November 2014 leading up to the execution of search warrants on 18 December 2014 (further details of which are set out below). Telephone intercept material shows coded and guarded conversations between each of the group's members that relate to planning a domestic terrorist attack and also to attempts to avoid detection by police. There are no recorded telephone conversations of the offender making or receiving coded telephone calls. 17. Some of the words used during the group's coded conversations were located on terrorist planning documents found at Khalid's home on 18 December 2014 [363] . … 18. Examples of calls and coded calls include: a) At 5:54pm on 9 November 2014, "IM" sent Khalid an SMS message saying "But allhamdulilah [364] it is 9 brothers including me"; and b) At 8:01am on 10 November 2014, Khalid sent a number of religious messages to "IM" with the end of the message saying "From your brother Abu Bakr". 19. At 8:39am on 11 November 2014 Khalid sent a number of SMS messages to Ghazzawy, including the following: KHALID: "You can't get married now and leave her completely" KHALID: "After you go and seek jannatul ferdous [365] " 20. From 2:16pm on 10 November 2014 "IM" and Khalid held a conversation by way of SMS messages [366] : … 21. At 6:18pm on 10 November 2014, "IM" called Khalid. During their conversation "IM" told Khalid that he had sought his father's permission to travel overseas to fight, however, his father refused. "IM" discussed martyrdom and wanting to go to Jannah. [367] 22. At 6:44pm on 10 November 2014, Khalid called Abdul-Rahman SALEH. During this conversation Khalid told SALEH that Khalid is under surveillance by ASIO as he had 15 brothers in his garage. 23. At 8:44am on 11 November 2014, Khalid and "IM" held a conversation by way of SMS messages [368] : … 24. At 7:12pm on 14 November 2014, "IM" called Khalid. The conversation relates to "IM" wanting to make a decision whether to fight overseas, or commit to a domestic terrorist attack in Australia. 25. At 7:17pm on 14 November 2014, "IM" called Khalid. "IM" told Khalid that "he" (Wisam Haddad) is right here and that "IM" wants to ask "him" whether he ("IM") should "make BANANA over there or here"? Khalid asked "where is he?", and "IM" replied that "he" is in front of "IM", across the road. Khalid wants to ask him "how is it down there, to do it there?" 26. On 17 November 2014 and 26 November 2014, Khalid sent a large SMS message containing religious ideology to his associates including Said. The messages were signed off by Khalid using the words "From your brother Abu Bakr" 27. At 3:41pm on 26 November 2014 Said who was with Ghazzawy at that stage, called Khalid: SAID: "Where are you ahki" KHALID: "I'm at home" SAID: "Um do you want us to come past I'm with Ibby". [Ibrahim Ghazzawy] KHALID: "Your with Ibby"... SAID: "Yeah at Regents Park... and Adam"... KHALID: "Seriously" SAID: "Seriously" KHALID: "Mmm do you have work today".. SAID: "Yeah I do" KHALID: "Auburn". SAID: "Yep..You're not gonna report"... KHALID: "What time are you working till, what time"... SAID: "About five o'clock I start work".. KHALID: "Ahhh another time" SAID: "Yeah yeah" KHALID: "Because I'm still in my pyjamas" SAID: "Ahki like we're here we're about to take a turn do we come or do we not" KHALID: "Give the phone to Ibby" (Ibrahim Ghazzawy) GHAZZAWY: "What's wrong with ya, like yes or no, it's simple" KHALID: "Ah because I'm still in my PJ's bro" GHAZZAWY: "............ Come see you at your house... if you wanna report" KHALID: "Yalla, come, come" GHAZZAWY: "You're just in the garage yeah" KHALID: "Yeah just in the garage come" . 28. At 3:12pm on 27 November 2014 Farhad Said called Khalid: SAID: "Where are you?" KHALID: "I'm at home" SAID: "Wombat" KHALID: "No, no, no, no, no, I'm busy" SAID: "Alright, he said, he said wombat, wombat." KHALID: "Yeh alright yalla, I'll see him, I'll wombat him tonight...." 29. At 2:19pm on 29 November 2014, Khalid called Ghazzawy. During this call Khalid said the word "WOMBAT" twice quickly. 30. At 2:22pm on 29 November 2014 Khalid sent Ghazzawy an SMS message: KHALID: "Hey I'm on my way to your "wombat hole". 31. Telephone intercept material on 29 November 2014 shows Khalid arranging and organising to meet with Ghazzawy (referred to as "Tony"), Osman (referred to as "George") and "IM". 32. At 2:54pm on 30 November 2014, Khalid organised a face to face meeting with "IM", Ghazzawy and Osman. Khalid used the word "PARTY" for the meeting. 33. At 10:47pm on 2 December 2014, Khalid and "IM" held a conversation by way of SMS messages: KHALID: "(IM) don't leave my side please" "IM": "What the hell? Why am I going to leave your side why you talking like this stop". KHALID: "Sometimes I think to myself if I die now what's going to happen to that someone that is dear to me" 34. At 7:48pm on 3 December 2014 2014 "IM" and Khalid had a conversation by way of SMS messages: "IM": Tomatoes and BANANAS is our patience brother in al Islam make dua [369] . KHALID: Habibi [370] I ask Allah to allow us to leave this world together together together me and you this is what I wish for this is what I want and this is what I ask Allah everyday for to leave to depart from this world with my little brother with my habeeb [371] as I'm writing this to you I'm crying (IM) I want you to stick by me stand with me together we will leave this life. 35. On 6 December 2014, the "banana" code was confirmed when "IM" told Khalid his uncle had a "banana" licence in reference to a firearms licence. 36. At the time "IM"'s uncle was the licensed owner of four firearms as follows: a) Marlin brand rifle: serial number MR69950C; b) double barrel shotgun: serial number 1131443; c) Carl Gustaf brand rifle: serial number 237907; and d) Thomson brand rifle: serial number TDY8142. 37. At about 8:00pm on 6 December 2014, "IM" went to his uncle's house with the intention of ascertaining what firearms were there, and of taking possession of these firearms for the purpose of posing for photographs and sending these to Khalid. Over the next couple of hours he posed for photographs in various positions with three of the firearms. After taking the pictures "IM" sent Khalid a further text message as follows: "Like what time, do you want me to send you a pic of me holding the banana?". Khalid replied: "No show me the banana tomoz so I can eat it as well". 38. At 5:49pm on 10 December 2014, Khalid called Said. During this call Khalid used the code name of "Tony" to refer to Ibrahim Ghazzawy: KHALID: "Are you with ahh Tony" SAID: "Na, no" KHALID: "Are you at work?" SAID: "What, na, he's, I'm at Bankstown" KHALID: "Where's Tony?" SAID: "Tony, Tony went home" KHALID: "Seriously" SAID: "Yeah he's gonna come back or something apparently" 39. On 10 December 2014, "IM" sent Khalid an SMS that included "I am going to get paradise though that Banana. God is great, no god but Allah. Khalid responded "are you going to stand and stay beside me" and "IM" responded "Inshalla [372] yes." 40. At 4:04pm on 11 December 2014 Khalid called Said: KHALID: "Hello" SAID: "Yeah I can hear you" KHALID: "How are ya" SAID: "Yeah not bad yourself" KHALID: "Bra I went for your frickin voice mail bro, I thought you'd answered" "Ibby said call him now" (Referring to Ibrahim Ghazzawy). SAID: "Alright, alright I'll call him" 41. At 4:08pm on 12 December 2014, Said called Khalid about meeting after work. During this conversation Khalid and Said spoke with strong Australian accents joking about meeting at the pub. Khalid agreed to meet Said after Said finished work after 9:00pm. 42. At 10:45pm on 15 December 2014, Khalid and "IM" spoke and "IM" asked Khalid what was wrong. Khalid said "you told him about the marriage contract and the motorbikes". Khalid asked what made "IM" tell him about this. "IM" said that he would tell Khalid tomorrow when he saw him. "IM" said he and "Tony" were "thinking of going to Bankstown and crossing the roads". Khalid asked what was in Bankstown. "IM" was not going to tell Khalid. Khalid asked if "IM" was going to buy some clothes in Bankstown. "IM" said that they were going to cross the roads. 43. At 2:47pm on 16 December, 2014 Khalid and J. Almaouie had a conversation relating to firearms. This conversation referred to the Lindt café siege. Immediately after this they spoke in Arabic and Khalid said, "we all need to get married". Later in the conversation Khalid said, "bro I looked at the flame (ind) the (ind) the contract you gave me yesterday." ALMOUIE laughed and said, "straight flame bro". Police allege this was in relation to the firearms found at Almaouie 's home on the 18 December 2014. (See below). 44. At 4:30pm on 16 December 2014, Ghazzawy called Khalid. During this call Ghazzawy confirmed they would meet. Khalid stated "I'm in someone's wombat hole" "I'm a wombat". This is the last identified meeting between Khalid and Ghazzawy at Khalid's home. 45. At 2:17pm on 17 December 2014, "IM" and Khalid had a conversation. In this call "IM" was becoming impatient and wanted to know when the terrorist attack would happen. "IM" asked Khalid whether he has good news or bad news. Khalid said he would tell "IM" after, when he saw "IM". Khalid said "don't give me a hard time now". Khalid said that the news is "in the middle". "IM" asked "I mean, are we going to be taking a step or not take a step". Khalid said that it was not about that. "IM" asked if "he" changed the "wedding date", and Khalid said that he needed to speak to "IM" and ask him questions. "IM" guessed it was about "John". Khalid said that it was not about John. "IM" guessed that John wanted in on the marriage. 46. At 11:31pm on 17 December 2014, Khalid and the offender had a conversation. During this conversation the offender confirmed he was with an associate, Abdul Tayba. Khalid was adamant he needed to speak with the offender urgently. Khalid said, "I need you to come here", "I need to have a long serious chat with you bro" and "I need to see you tonight". 47. At 00:12:40 on 18th December 2014, the offender rang Khalid and said "I am coming now ten minutes". 48. On the night of 17 December 2014 into the morning of 18 December 2014, members of the group met at Khalid's house in Regents Park, the offender attended the meeting. During the meeting, the offender wrote on item I373 which among those described in detail above, outlined the conspirators plans for a terrorist attack. SEARCH WARRANT OPERATION ON 18 DECEMBER 2014 49. On 18 December 2014, the Joint Counter Terrorism Team executed search warrants at the following premises occupied by members of the Khalid group: a) 13 Berry Street, Regents Park: the home of Sulayman Khalid; b) 73C Clarence Street, Condell Park: the home of J. Almaouie and M. Al Maouie; and c) 67 Denman Road, Georges Hall: the home of "IM". Khalid search warrant - 18 December 2014 50. At the time the search warrant was executed, Khalid was not at home. However, other members of his family were and Khalid arrived during the search. 51. A total of six handwritten documents that outline plans to commit an act of terrorism were located in Khalid's home. The first handwritten document (Item I370, "the torn up motorbike document") was located on the kitchen floor of Khalid's home. The other four handwritten documents (Items I372 to I375, "the planning documents") were located in Khalid's bedroom inside a black suitcase. 52. During the search of Khalid's home the following items together with a number of other items were seized: a) Handwritten document ripped into four strips (the "torn up motorbike document" - Item I370); b) Blue folder "Tajweed studies [373] "(Item I371); c) Notepad page with handwritten note [374] (Item I372); d) Notepad page with handwritten note [375] (Item I373); e) Notepad page with handwritten note [376] (Item I374); f) Notepad cardboard backing with notes [377] (Item I375); g) 17 x A4 pages Black & White flag image; h) A number of items of clothing with black & white badging; and i) Green A4 folder "Islam Topics". Item I370: "The torn up Motorbike" document [378] … Item I371c/d [379] … 58. During the course of the police search of the Khalid family home, Khalid returned to the residence. After being formally cautioned, Khalid was questioned about terrorist planning documents found inside the backpack and suitcase in his room. Khalid stated the following: a) He was the owner of the suitcase that was located in the garage; b) The garage was his room; c) He was the user of the backpack and it stayed in his room most of the time; d) He did not write the notes; e) Abu Bakr is his nickname; f) He had read the letters that were located in the backpack & suitcase; g) Just because he has read the letters does not mean he is going to do what is says on there; and h) He did not know the letters were located in the backpack. Almaouie Search Warrant: 18 December 2014 59. During a search warrant executed on the residence of Jibryl Almaouie, from Jibryl's bedroom, three firearms were seized: namely, a shortened shotgun, a double barrel over and under shotgun and a bolt action rifle (Modified .303) with magazine, together with many rounds of ammunition. Other items of interest were also seized, including: a) Black flag with Arabic writing; b) Black headband with red foreign writing; c) Handwritten notes referring to weapons Chemical Structure; d) Book titled "SAS Survival Guide"; e) Red bandana; and f) Black shirt with Islamic writing and various headscarfs. "IM" search warrant: 18 December 2014 60. During a search warrant executed on the residence of "IM" the following items of interest were seized: a) Mobile phone containing pictures of "IM" in possession of firearms; b) 2 bullets; c) 6 CD's titled "Lives of the prophets"; d) 11 X CD's labelled Anwar Al-Awlaki; e) 3 CD's labelled "ways and means of devil", "The plot of the hypocrites" [380] and "Arabic/Syrian Anasheed" [381] ; f) 1 hand written document entitled "Lover of Jihad"; and g) Document titled "the blood of the Shuhada". [382] Offender Mobile Phone 30 September 2014 61. In the early hours of 30 September - 1st October 2014, police examined the offender's mobile phone and found it to contain terrorist images and videos of the offender firing a pistol at a range. Included in the images were executions, ISIS flags, weapons and images of Australians publicly identified as supporters of terrorism who had gone to the Mideast to engage in conflict (namely Khalid Sharrouf and Mohammed Elomar). When after caution the offender was asked about the photos he initially made no comment then told police he downloaded them from the internet to show people "How stupid it was over there" and declined to say anything further. It is the Crown case that the answer was a false denial of his ideological position. "IM"'s Mobile Phone 62. Further, among the items seized was the mobile phone of "IM". Forensic examination of this mobile phone located four photographs that had been taken on the evening of 6 December 2014 and depicted "IM" posing with three of his uncle's guns. Fingerprint analysis of firearms and ammunition seized 63. Forensic examination of the firearms and ammunition seized identified the offender's fingerprint on the base of a carton of 20 rounds ammunition contained in a Winchester branded "Swedish" rifle ammunition box. DNA ANALYSIS RESULTS 64. Forensic examination of the five documents (items 1370-1375) seized at Khalid's home by AFP has identified the offender as the source of the major component of DNA identified on document 1374. 65. Forensic examination of the firearms, ammunition and a black baton seized from Jibryl Almaouie's bedroom has identified: a) The offender's DNA on the black baton. b) Jibryl Almaouie's DNA on: i. A black toiletries bag containing ammunition; ii. A black bag containing 20 shotgun rounds; iii. Assorted ammunition (identified in the report); and iv. The shotgun and shotgun-stock. FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS RESULTS 66. Forensic examination of the five documents (items 1370-1375) seized at Khalid's home by AFP Fingerprint and Document Examination experts has identified the following persons dealing with the documents through handwriting analysis and fingerprint identification. a) Fingerprint examination results - i. Item 1373: Fingerprints of the offender, Ibrahim Ghazzawy and Abdul Tayba; ii. Item 1374: the offender; iii. Item I370: Fingerprints of Jibryl Almaouie and Sulayman Khalid; iv. Item I371: Fingerprints of Jibryl Almaouie, "IM", Sulayman Khalid and Farhad Said; v. Item I372: Fingerprints Ibrahim Ghazzawy and of unknown person/s; and vi. Item I375: Unknown person/s. (b) Handwriting analysis results - In addition to the handwriting of the offender, the following has been identified on the documents: i. Handwriting comparison of known samples of Jibryl Almaouie's handwriting with the handwriting on Item I370 and 1371 has confirmed that the writer of this document is Jibryl Almaouie; ii. Handwriting comparison of known samples of Ibrahim Ghazzawy's handwriting has confirmed that he wrote on the document identified as I372, 1373 AND 1375; iii. Handwriting comparison of known samples of Farhad Said's handwriting has confirmed that he wrote the documents identified as I372 and I375; and iv. Item 1370, the torn up handwritten document located on the kitchen floor near a rubbish bin, refers on the Crown case to three firearms and ammunition. This document, written in code, relates to the firearms and ammunition seized from the Almaouie residence. ARREST AND CHARGING 67. On 23 December 2015, the offender was arrested and charged. He was given his rights and spoke by phone with his solicitor. Thereafter he declined to participate in an interview. He provided fingerprints and a buccal swab. 68. The offender has been in custody since 23 December 2015. 69. On 10 December 2015, Khalid, "IM", Jibryl Almaouie and Ghazzawy were arrested and charged. Farhad Said was arrested on 26 May 2016. Each was provided with their legal rights under Part 1C of the Crimes Act 1914 and declined to participate in a record of interview.
It will be apparent that the facts tendered by the Crown against Mohamed contained references to the conspiracy with which Mohamed is not charged. The facts tendered by Said [383] are in the same category. The Crown explained that any reference to the conspiracy in each of those statements of facts was included to demonstrate the knowledge of the respective offenders of the connection between the documents in question and the preparation for a terrorist act [384] . The Crown made it clear that this was the sole basis upon which those references were included.

Mohamed's criminal history

Mohamed's criminal history contains a number of relatively minor drug and driving offences in 2014 and 2015. There is no history of violent offending.

The evidence of Mr Piazza

The affidavit evidence of Mr Piazza was generally consistent with that relied upon by the Crown in the cases of the other offenders. As I have already noted Mr Piazza was called to give oral evidence in relation to matters specific to Mohamed and his conditions of custody [385] . Mr Piazza said [386] that there was no information to suggest that Mohamed had denounced any extremist ideology. In the course of cross examination, he was taken to a case note [387] which recorded that Mohamed had "denied any association with or interest in terrorism organisations". Mr Piazza said [388] that he was not aware of the contents of that note at the time of swearing his affidavit.

THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY MOHAMED

Mr Watson-Munro expressed the view that at the time of his examination, Mohamed was suffering high anxiety and a depressive disorder, although there was no indication of any major psychiatric disturbance. He reported that Mohamed had "expressed appropriate remorse" and required treatment" [389] . In terms of Mohamed's reported attitude to his offending, Mr Watson-Munro said [390] : I questioned (Mohamed) regarding his attitude towards his offending. He stated that he thinks about his behaviour on a daily basis with deep regret. He also demonstrated some insight in terms of the dynamics surrounding his behaviour stating "I hung out with the wrong people". He stated that he wished that he had spent more time at home and listened to his mother who evidently had concerned (sic) about his associations. He specifically stated that he will not reoffend. Attendant to this he described and improvement in his overall judgment since he has detoxified from drug use.
Mr Watson-Munro noted that Mohamed had been diagnosed with ADHD at the age of 13 [391] , a condition which he (Mr Watson-Munro) described as "highly debilitating" and which, in his opinion, had impacted upon Mohamed's self-esteem and vulnerability to potential peer group influence [392] . He said that it was "arguable" that Mohamed's judgment "in all likelihood was affected by the confluence of his ADHD and his associated symptomatology". However, he emphasised that in expressing that view he was suggesting only that Mohamed's judgement was impaired, not that he was unaware of his wrongdoing [393] .
The reports of Dr Kearney confirm that Mohamed was diagnosed with ADHD in or about September 2009, for which he was prescribed medication. He stopped taking that medication at some point in 2010 due to its side effects [394] . He was seen by Dr Kearney again in early 2011, at which time it was reported that there had been an improvement in his behaviour since he was originally diagnosed. At that time he agreed to resume taking medication. Dr Kearney's report of 28 March 2011 indicated a plan to review Mohamed in about 6 to 8 weeks' time. However there is no further report in evidence which assists in determining the level of any ongoing management of his condition after that time.
The character references attested to (inter alia) Mohamed's work with the Police Citizens Youth Club at Bankstown and the "Mission of Hope". Those involved in the administration of those organisations variously described Mohamed as "very compassionate" and a person who "engaged with respect" [395] .
The statement provided by Mohamed's mother, Raowa Haddad, confirmed the circumstances which led to Mohamed being diagnosed with ADHD. Ms Haddad also made reference to the fact that she had been divorced from her husband in 2008. She said that this had "traumatised Mohamed deeply", following which he suffered from anxiety and depression. She described her son as being "profoundly remorseful" and expressed a belief that he would not reoffend. Another testimonial described Mohamed as a "very sweet child" who had a "very caring and genuine personality" [396] .

THE NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF MOHAMED'S OFFENDING

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown submitted that Mohamed's offending was objectively very serious, and fell towards the higher end of the scale. In advancing that submission, the Crown pointed to the immediacy between Mohamed's making of the document, and its use by the conspirators in the conspiracy, and submitted that this use was a factor of which Mohamed was aware.
The Crown further submitted that the document made by Mohamed clearly recorded preparations for terrorist acts which were advanced, and that by virtue of his plea Mohamed had accepted that he knew of the connection between making the document the advancing the ideology of violent jihad. It was submitted that the document demonstrated an active and real consideration of the type of terrorist act which might be committed, as well as its target, as evidenced by (inter alia) the reference to "going … to the woods and attack the dogs…" [397] .
The Crown submitted that on the whole of the evidence the overwhelming inference was that Mohamed made the document knowing of its connection with the preparation for a terrorist act, in the sense that it was to be read, discussed and added to as the preparation continued. The Crown submitted that as a consequence, the offending was planned and not spontaneous.

Submissions on behalf of Mohamed

Mr Ramage QC, who appeared on behalf of Mohamed, submitted that any assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending was informed by the fact that what Mohamed wrote consisted of 25 words, the meaning of which he submitted was "unclear". It was submitted that there was no evidence to suggest that in writing what he did, Mohamed was doing anything other than "simply recording his own random thoughts". It was submitted that the words used could not properly be interpreted as any form of commitment to violent jihad, and that Mohamed's conduct could not, and did not, give rise to any imminent (let alone actual) threat of injury. Without seeking to minimise the seriousness of the offending, senior counsel submitted that the utility of the document written by Mohamed was minimal, that no person considering preparing for a terrorist act would have been aided by it, that there were no copies of the document made, and that there was no evidence that there was any actual or intended publication of it. It was further submitted that there was no evidence that Mohamed subscribed to, or supported, violent jihad at the time of his offending.
In all of the circumstances it was submitted that having regard to the volume, detail and accuracy of the information contained in the document, the nature and content of the harm which was capable of being caused by the acts described, the limited extent of the publication of the document, and Mohamed's state of mind, I should conclude that the offending fell at a very low level.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown took issue with the proposition that there was no evidence that Mohamed supported violent jihad at the time of the offending, and submitted that Mohamed's adherence to such ideology was demonstrated by (inter alia) the very fact of his plea. The Crown submitted that it was completely artificial to suggest the contrary, in circumstances where such ideology was inextricably linked to the commission of the offence. In support of the proposition that Mohamed adhered to such ideology at the time, the Crown pointed, in addition to the plea, to paragraph (61) of the statement of facts [398] which detailed images found on Mohamed's phone at the time of his arrest. It was further submitted that it was evident from the fact of his writing on the document that Mohamed knew the nature of what was being discussed amongst the conspirators.

Consideration

It should be emphasised at the outset that Mohamed is not charged with conspiracy. That said, the charge to which he has pleaded guilty has a number of serious aspects. The references to "gorilla (sic) warfare" and "going to the woods and attack the dogs there" [399] are, in terms of their violent nature, self-explanatory. They are not meaningless words. Rather, they are reflective of substantial consideration having been given, not only to the method by which a terrorist attack might be carried out, but also to the target at which such attack might be directed. It is self-evident that when speaking of conducting "warfare" and an "attack", Mohamed was referring to violent acts, the nature of which were obviously capable of inflicting considerable harm. It is also significant that in writing the words that he did, Mohamed was contemplating an attack on people. So much is clear by the use of the words "the dogs", which is a clear reference to killing police officers.
The fact that what Mohamed wrote amounted to 25 words is not to the point. The assessment of his offending is informed, not by the number of words used, but by the terms of what was said. What was said was unequivocal. It outlined a plan for an attack. Moreover, it is to be inferred from Mohamed's presence at Khalid's premises at the meeting on 17/18 December 2014 that he was aware that the document would be disseminated to others. All of this occurred in circumstances in which Mohamed has admitted, by his plea, knowing of the connection between his making of the document, and the preparation for a terrorist act or acts.
I am also satisfied that at the time of his offending Mohamed adhered to the violent ideology to which I have previously referred. Quite apart from his plea, the material found stored on his phone at the time of his arrest bespeaks no other conclusion. Once again, general deterrence is an important sentencing consideration.
In Ghazzawy I observed [400] that the document written by that offender reflected an unequivocal commitment to violent jihadist beliefs which were manifested in a documented plan to engage in a violent attack. The same observation can be made in respect of Mohamed's offending which in my view falls in the upper range of seriousness.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown acknowledged Mohamed's plea of guilty but repeated the submissions previously made regarding the extent of the discount which should be applied. The Crown further submitted that the need in Mohamed's case for personal deterrence was high.

Submissions on behalf of Mohamed

It was submitted on behalf of Mohamed that in circumstances where he was originally charged with conspiracy, his plea of guilty should be regarded as having been entered at an early stage. It was submitted that the plea was evidence of his contrition and his acceptance of responsibility, and that it would be appropriate to discount any sentence by 20% - 25%, bearing in mind that the plea carried with it the utilitarian benefit of avoiding a long and complex trial.
Mohamed's position, advanced through senior counsel, was that he did not subscribe to any violent ideology at the time of his commission of the offence. Accordingly, in terms of assessing prospects of rehabilitation, senior counsel submitted that there was no ideology from which Mohamed was required to resile. In any event, it was submitted that Mohamed's plea supported a conclusion that any belief in the legitimacy of any contemplated terrorist act or acts had been renounced.
Whilst it was acknowledged that Mohamed had a criminal record, senior counsel submitted that it was relatively minor, and was one which reflected his earlier difficulties with drug addiction. Senior counsel emphasised that Mohamed was only 19 years of age at the time of the offending, and was therefore a person to whom the sentencing principles regarding youthful offenders applied, such that emphasis should be upon rehabilitation rather than retribution, and specific and general deterrence. It was submitted, without seeking to minimise the gravity of the offending, that Mohamed had not conducted himself in the way that an adult might, and that he had not committed a crime of such gravity as would moderate the emphasis generally given to rehabilitation in the case of a youthful offender.
Senior counsel's submissions then turned to the conditions of Mohamed's custody. He submitted that those conditions were harsh, restrictive and severe, and would be likely to continue for the duration of any sentence which was imposed. It was submitted that to the extent that specific deterrence may be a relevant factor, it was apparent that any such requirement had been already met by the fact that Mohamed had already spent a significant period of time subject to such conditions.
Senior counsel further submitted that having regard to the contents of the report of Mr Watson-Munro, I should find that Mohamed is genuinely remorseful. He submitted that it was open to an offender to adduce evidence of remorse "in any of the usual ways, including through experts and third parties", and that there was no authority to support the proposition that an offender must give sworn evidence before such other evidence as he might adduce could receive favourable consideration. It was further submitted that the authorities did not support a conclusion that hearsay evidence of matters in mitigation was inadmissible, or was to be given no weight at all.
All of that said, senior counsel conceded that the probative value of Mr Watson-Munro's report was limited, and that its only real use was that it summarised aspects of Mohamed's background. Senior counsel went so far as to candidly describe the report as being "in some ways…an inadequate psychologist's report" [401] . However, it was submitted that on the whole of the evidence, I should be optimistic regarding Mohamed's prospects of rehabilitation.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown submitted that there was no evidence that Mohamed had renounced any previously held violent ideology and that any expressions to that effect which had been made to Mr Watson-Munro, or anyone else, were deserving of little weight. The effect of the Crown's submission was that the plea of guilty entered by Mohamed could be regarded as some stepping away from a previously held ideology but that it could be put no higher [402] . It followed, in the Crown's submission, that any assessment of Mohamed's prospects of rehabilitation would necessarily be cautious.
The Crown submitted that much of what was contained in the report of Mr Watson-Munro was lacking in any identifiable evidentiary foundation and that in any event, there was nothing in the report to support a conclusion that Mohamed was suffering symptoms of any illness at the time of his offending [403] . The Crown submitted that to the extent that the report provided information regarding Mohamed's background, and expressed a psychological view about his current position, these were matters that I could properly take into account, but that beyond that, the report was of little probative value.

Consideration

The various aspects of Mohamed's subjective case are to be considered by reference to (inter alia) the relevant provisions of s. 16A(2) of the Act.

The plea of guilty: s. 16A(2)(g)

Mohamed was originally charged with the conspiracy and pleaded guilty to the present offence on 19 July 2017. The principles applicable to the assessment of a plea of guilty, and the discount to be applied, are set out above [404] . However in light of the circumstances surrounding Mohamed's plea and the submissions made in relation to it, some further matters must be noted.
In R v NP [405] Hodgson JA observed (inter alia) that if a plea is entered a long time after a person is first charged, but at a time when lesser charges are substituted for a greater charge, the advantage is to the administration of justice are less, even though the plea may have been entered at the earliest opportunity [406] . In R v PB [407] Bell JA (as her Honour then was) observed that a plea entered on the day fixed for trial, in circumstances where an agreement had been reached between the parties that the accused would plead guilty to an offence other than that with which he had been initially charged, did not make the plea one entered at the first opportunity.
In all of these circumstances, and taking into account the principles to which I have earlier referred, the appropriate discount to reflect Mohamed's plea is one of 10%.

Personal deterrence: s. 16A(2)(j)

In view of the conclusions I have reached below regarding Mohamed's degree of contrition and his prospects of rehabilitation, there is a strong need in my view for any sentence to reflect considerations of personal deterrence.

Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition: s. 16A(2)(m)

Mohamed is presently 21 years of age. He was 19 years of age at the time of the offending. I have noted his criminal history. Although that history contains entries for some offences, none of them include violent offending. The testimonials speak highly of him.
I have previously set out the relevant principles regarding sentencing youthful offenders [408] . At the time of the offending, Mohamed was in excess of the age of maturity and his offending was obviously serious. There is no evidence that Mohamed's age or lack of maturity was in any way linked to his offending. His youth is therefore of limited weight.
Mr Watson-Munro expressed the view that Mohamed was suffering anxiety and depression. Whilst I have taken that into account, it is also noted that Mr Watson-Munro reported that there was no indication of any major psychiatric disturbance.

The prospect of rehabilitation: s. 16A(2)(n)

Mr Watson-Munro reported that Mohamed had expressed "appropriate remorse" for his offending. What he meant by "appropriate" remorse is not clear. The use of that word clouds rather than clarifies the issue, and is generally unhelpful. The weight to be attached to that expression made to Mr Watson-Munro is limited. However, I accept that Mohamed's plea is some evidence of remorse.
For the reasons expressed when dealing with the nature and circumstances of the offending, I do not accept that Mohamed did not adhere to violent ideology at the time of his offending. As is the case with the other offenders, his plea of guilty may be indicative of some movement away from that ideology but again, that view is one formed with some caution. The case note to which Mr Piazza was taken in evidence and which recorded Mohamed denying any association with, or interest in, terrorism organisations is, for the reasons I have already expressed, deserving of little weight in the absence of sworn evidence.

Other factors

Submissions were made regarding Mohamed's conditions of custody and I have set out the evidence relevant to that issue. I have taken that factor into account in the way I have previously expressed [409] .
Finally, Mohamed has been in custody since 23 December 2015 [410] and any sentence imposed should commence on that date.

FARHAD SAID

The following evidence was tendered in Said's sentence proceedings [411] : 1. statement of facts [412] ; 2. Said's criminal history [413] ; 3. an affidavit of Glen Piazza sworn 14 September 2017 [414] ; 4. a report of Tim Watson-Munro dated 25 September 2017 [415] ; and 5. a series of character references [416]

The facts

The facts tendered by the Crown against Said were in the following terms: BACKGROUND: 1. The offender, Farhad Said, adheres to the religious ideology of violent jihad. Specifically, he adheres to the religious ideology of Wahhabi-Salafism. This is the ideology that inspires ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), Al-Qaeda and like-minded groups and their supporters. [417] 2. On 26 May 2016, when the offender's telephone was seized under warrant on his arrest, it was found to contain the following extremist material: a. Various images of combatants and weapons; b. Images exhorting support for Muslims in custody and support for Salafi Islamic views; c. Images of young men making the ISIS finger salute; d. An image of a letter from the British Government, advising the recipient that their passport was cancelled and that he would not be permitted to leave the United Kingdom on the basis that he was believed to be intending to go to fight for Daesh (ISIS); and e. Many other images including what appeared to be images of Islamic preachers. During a search of his premises, amongst other material seven compact disks of Islamic lectures were seized under warrant. 3. With the intention of advancing the religious ideology of violent jihad, the offender made documents connected with preparation for terrorist acts. Those proposed terrorist attacks were recorded in handwritten documents, as set out below. DOCUMENTS: 4. The documents the subject of the charge have been referred to in Crown documents concerning the related conspiracy charges as: a. Document 3, Item I372, the "AFP Building" Document; and b. Document 5, Item I375, the "Lithgow Jail" Document [418] . … THE BACKGROUND TO THE DOCUMENTS' CREATION The investigation [419] Meetings of the Khalid group [420] Telephone interception of the Khalid group [421] 13. In each case, with the exception of one of the offender's services, false names were used to engage the services. While recognising that in some cases the service was in a parent's name, the use of obviously false names is relied upon by the Crown as supporting the existence of the conspiracy, the purpose of subscribing in a false name being to make it more difficult to track or identify the subscriber if the call was overheard. 47. During December 2014 and leading into 16 December 2014 and on the night of 17 December 2014 into the morning of 18 December 2014, members of the group met regularly at Khalid's house in Regents Park. During these meetings members of the Khalid group wrote out various documents including those described in detail above, outlining their plans for a terrorist attack. SEARCH WARRANT OPERATION ON 18 DECEMBER 2014 [422] DNA ANALYSIS RESULT [423] FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS RESULTS [424] ARREST AND CHARGING 63. On 10 December 2015, Khalid, "IM", Jibryl Almaouie and Ghazzawy were arrested and charged. Mohamed Al Maouie was arrested on 23 December 2015. Each was provided with their legal rights under Part 1C of the Crimes Act 1914 and declined to participate in a record of interview. 64. On 26 May 2016, the offender was arrested and charged and declined an interview after have had explained his legal rights. He provided his consent to a buccal swab. 65. The offender has been in custody since 26 May 2016.

Said's criminal history

Said has no prior convictions.

The evidence of Mr Piazza

The affidavit of Mr Piazza set out Said's conditions of custody which are, generally speaking, consistent with those of the other offenders.

THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY SAID

Mr Watson-Munro reported that Said presented as a "co-operative and repentant man" who "specifically chose the description of repentance to reflect his remorse" [425] . Mr Watson-Munro's report set out Said's background noting, in particular, that he had been born in Tanzania, that his parents had separated when he was 5 years of age, and that he had been sent to Australia at the age of 12 [426] . Mr Watson-Munro also reported that Said had told him that he was suffering from depression, with symptoms dating back many years, and that those symptoms had escalated since his incarceration [427] . Testing administered to Said confirmed Mr Watson-Munro's clinical impressions of a depressive disorder.
Mr Watson-Munro reported that Said had repeated "his sense of regret" [428] . He concluded that Said was suffering from a Depressive Disorder, an Anxiety Disorder and features of an Adjustment Disorder arising from his truncated developmental history [429] . He said that the "confluence of these issues" had impacted upon Said's judgment [430] .
A testimonial provided by Danielle Mahmoud, Said's guardian for the past 14 years, set out the difficulties that Said had experienced as a teenager after arriving to Australia. Those difficulties led Ms Mahmoud to make the decision to return Said to Zanzibar at the age of 18. After a period of 6 months, Said's mother contacted Ms Mahmoud following which Said returned to Australia. He found full time employment, following which he left Ms Mahmoud's premises to live elsewhere. Ms Mahmoud expressed her ongoing support for Said. Similar support was expressed in the testimonial of Ali Iddi Mahmoud.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

In a general sense the Crown repeated, as against this offender, the submissions made in respect of Mohamed. However, the Crown emphasised that Said had written both the "AFP Building" document and the "Lithgow Jail" document and submitted that: 1. in the first of those documents, Said had written (inter alia) "…so we are going to fight till shahada anyway so we might as well do something major" [431] ; and 2. in the second he had written (inter alia) "why don't we target a big organisation e.g.: headquarters of police quarters, ASIO etc but something massive that would get them shocked and stuff up there (sic) organisation" [432] .
The Crown submitted that Said's offence was committed in circumstances where he was obviously aware that others were to read, discuss and consider the documents that he had made, such that the only available inference was that Said had made the documents knowing of their connection with the preparation for a terrorist act.

Submissions on behalf of the offender

Counsel conceded that Said wrote the two documents knowing that they were left in the possession of Khalid, a man he knew to be involved in planning a terrorist act. Counsel also conceded that the nature of what was written by Said in the document had the capacity to influence, in a material way, any person who came into possession of them. That said, counsel submitted that there was no evidence that the documents were examined by any person other than Khalid, and that the potential for further dissemination of the documents was limited given the short time over which they were in existence.
Counsel further submitted that the practical utility of the document was limited in light of its brevity, generality, and the absence of any articulation of a specific methodology. He submitted that the significance of these matters was increased by the fact that Said did not have any expertise in the subject matter about which he wrote.
Having regard to these matters, counsel submitted that Said's offending could not properly be regarded as being at the higher end of the scale of seriousness, given the "non-specific and non-instructive nature of the documents". However, counsel accepted that the objective criminality was not "insubstantial", and had a real capacity to bolster others in their own potential acts of terrorism. Counsel expressly accepted the need for general deterrence.

Consideration

Said was the author of not one, but two separate documents. That serves to increase his criminality over and above that of Mohamed (and also that of Ghazzawy who was charged with a similar offence). What Said wrote in each case was significant. His references to doing "something major" and "something massive" indicate not only his level of pre-meditation and planning, but the extent of the harm which was capable of being done by the acts about which he wrote.
I accept that the nature and extent of the publication of the document appears to have been limited. However, it is evident from what he wrote that Said was a committed and violent jihadist. In these circumstances, the objective seriousness of his offending is high. Once again, general deterrence is an important consideration on sentence.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown

The Crown acknowledged that Said was a person with no prior criminal history. The Crown also acknowledged the plea of guilty but emphasised the circumstances in which, and the time at which, it had been entered.

Submissions on behalf of Said

Counsel for Said firstly submitted that the plea of guilty should be assessed as having been entered at an early stage and should thus "attract a substantial discount". Counsel also emphasised the absence of any criminal record, as well as Said's relative youth.
In terms of contrition and remorse, counsel pointed to those parts of Mr Watson-Munro's report in which such expressions were recorded. That said, counsel acknowledged that the weight to be attributed to that evidence was limited, given not only the broad terms in which it was expressed, but also the fact that it was (as counsel put it) "untested hearsay". Counsel in fact described Mr Watson-Munro's report as "not particularly helpful" [433] .
Counsel submitted that Said was unlikely to be a danger to the community when he was released, although he conceded that the evidence fell short of establishing that Said had renounced his previously held extremist views. He did however point to the affidavit of Mr Piazza, and the absence in the notes attached to that affidavit of anything to suggest that such extreme views were presently held. Counsel submitted that this evidence, together with the fact that Said had entered a plea of guilty, indicated some movement away from those views. It was submitted that in these circumstances the evidence pointed in a generally favourable direction towards rehabilitation.
Counsel also submitted, again by reference to the affidavit of Mr Piazza, that Said's conditions of custody were obviously strict. In submitting that this should be taken into account as a mitigating factor, counsel submitted that I should do so on the basis that those conditions would, in all likelihood, continue for the entirety of any sentence which might be imposed.

Submissions on behalf of the Crown in reply

The Crown submitted that the offence committed by Said required the existence of a particular ideology and that the absence of evidence of renunciation of that ideology necessarily had a bearing upon any assessment of Said's prospects of rehabilitation. In terms of the report of Mr Watson-Munro, the Crown did not take issue with Said's background and submitted that the evidentiary value of the report was limited.

Consideration

The various aspects of Said's subjective case are to be considered by reference to (inter alia) the relevant provisions of s. 16A(2) of the Act.

The plea of guilty: s. 16A(2)(g)

The relevant principles as to the assessment of the plea of guilty have been previously set out [434] . The additional observations made in respect of circumstances surrounding the entry of the plea by Mohamed are equally applicable to Said.
In all of the circumstances, the appropriate discount is 10%.

Personal deterrence: s. 16A(2)(j)

In light of the conclusions that I have reached regarding Said's prospects of rehabilitation, there is a strong need for any sentence to reflect the requirement for personal deterrence.

Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition: s. 16A(2)(m)

Said has no criminal history and the testimonials speak positively of him.
Said was 22 years of age at the time of his offending and is now 25. I have previously set out the principles relating to sentencing youthful offenders. However, Said was substantially in excess of the age of maturity at the time of his offending and there is no evidence that immaturity played any part in his offending. It follows that his youth has little role to play as a mitigating factor.
Clearly, Said has had a difficult personal background which has given rise to the disorders of which Mr Watson-Munro spoke. However, it does not appear that he is in any need of treatment and he retains the support of his guardians.

The prospect of rehabilitation: s. 16A(2)(n)

Mr Watson-Munro noted that Said had chosen to describe his level of remorse as amounting to "repentance". Counsel conceded, for the reasons that I have already discussed, that the weight to be afforded that part of Mr Watson-Munro's report is limited. Counsel also conceded that the evidence fell short of establishing that Said had renounced any previously held extremist ideology. As is the case with the other offenders, his plea of guilty may be seen as some movement away from such ideology but the matter can be put no higher than that.

Other factors

As with other offenders, submissions were made regarding Said's conditions of custody. I have taken those conditions into account in the manner to which I have previously referred [435] .
Finally, Said has been in custody since 26 May 2016 [436] and any sentence imposed should commence on that date.

SULAYMAN KHALID

In respect of the offender Sulayman Khalid I make the following orders: 1. The offender is convicted of the offence of conspiring to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act or acts. 2. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 22 years and 6 months, commencing on 23 December 2014 and expiring on 22 June 2037. 3. I specify a non-parole period of 16 years and 9 months imprisonment commencing on 23 December 2014 and expiring on 22 September 2031. 4. The total sentence is one of 22 years and 6 months imprisonment commencing on 23 December 2014 and expiring on 22 June 2037, and the offender will be eligible for release on parole on 22 September 2031. 5. Pursuant to s. 105C of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) I warn the offender that an application may be made for a continuing detention order requiring him to be detained after the completion of his sentence.

JIBRYL ALMAOUIE

In respect of the offender Jibryl Almaouie I make the following orders: 1. The offender is convicted of the offences contrary to the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) in each of counts 1, 2, 3 and 4. 2. In respect of count 1, the offender is sentenced to a fixed term of 6 months imprisonment, commencing on 18 December 2014 and expiring on 17 June 2015. 3. In respect of count 2, the offender is sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, commencing on 18 December 2014 and expiring on 17 December 2015. 4. In respect of count 3, the offender is sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, commencing on 18 December 2014 and expiring on 17 June 2015. 5. In respect of count 4, the offender is sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, commencing on 18 December 2014 and expiring on 17 June 2015. 6. Pursuant to s. 45 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) I decline to set a non-parole period in respect of any of the sentences imposed in respect of counts 1 to 4. 7. The offender is convicted of the offence of conspiring to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act or acts. 8. In respect of the offence in (vii) the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 18 years and 10 months, commencing on 10 December 2015 and expiring on 9 October 2034. 9. In respect of the offence in (vii) I specify a non-parole period of 14 years and 2 months imprisonment commencing on 10 December 2015 and expiring on 9 February 2030. 10. The total sentence commences on 18 December 2014 and will expire on 9 October 2034 and the offender will be eligible for release on parole on 9 February 2030. 11. Pursuant to s. 105C of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) I warn the offender that an application may be made for a continuing detention order requiring him to be detained after the completion of his sentence.

In respect of the offender IM I make the following orders: 1. The offender is convicted of the offence of conspiring to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act or acts. 2. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 13 years and 6 months, commencing on 31 July 2017 and expiring on 30 January 2031. 3. I specify a non-parole period of 10 years and 1 month imprisonment commencing on 31 July 2017 and expiring on 30 August 2027. 4. The total sentence is one of imprisonment for 13 years and 6 months commencing on 31 July 2017 and expiring on 30 January 2031, and the offender will be eligible for release on parole on 30 August 2027. 5. I am satisfied that there are special circumstances within the meaning of s. 19(4)(c) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) and I order, pursuant to s. 19(1) of that Act that the sentence that I have imposed upon IM be served by him as a juvenile offender up to his attaining the age of 21 years on 12 September 2021. 6. Pursuant to s. 105C of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) I warn the offender that an application may be made for a continuing detention order requiring him to be detained after the completion of his sentence.

MOHAMED AL MAOUIE

In respect of the offender Mohamed Al Maouie make the following orders: 1. The offender is convicted of the offence of intentionally making a document connected with the preparation for a terrorist act, knowing of that connection. 2. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 9 years, commencing on 23 December 2015 and expiring on 22 December 2024. 3. I specify a non-parole period of 6 years and 9 months imprisonment commencing on 23 December 2015 and expiring on 22 September 2022. 4. The total sentence is one of 9 years imprisonment commencing on 23 December 2015 and expiring on 22 December 2024, and the offender will be eligible for release on parole on 22 September 2022. 5. Pursuant to s. 105C of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) I warn the offender that an application may be made for a continuing detention order requiring him to be detained after the completion of his sentence.

FARHAD SAID

In respect of the offender Farhad Said I make the following orders: 1. The offender is convicted of the offence of intentionally making a document connected with the preparation for a terrorist act, knowing of that connection. 2. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 9 years and 6 months, commencing on 26 May 2016 and expiring on 25 November 2025. 3. I specify a non-parole period of 7 years and 1 month imprisonment commencing on 26 May 2016 and expiring on 25 June 2023. 4. The total sentence is one of 9 years and 6 months imprisonment commencing on 26 May 2016 and expiring on 25 November 2025 and the offender will be eligible for release on parole on 25 June 2023. 5. Pursuant to s. 105C of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) I warn the offender that an application may be made for a continuing detention order requiring him to be detained after the completion of his sentence.

Endnotes

In the case of the offences contrary to the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) to which Jibryl has pleaded guilty, sentences must be imposed having regard to the provisions of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Save for the offences contrary to the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) to which Jibryl has pleaded guilty
For that purpose a child is defined as a person who is under the age of 18 years: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s. 3; Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s. 4
R v Lodhi (2006) 199 FLR 364; [2006] NSWSC 691 at [92] ("Lodhi sentence"); Lodhi v R (2007) 179 A Crim R 470; [2007] NSWCCA 360 at [274] ("Lodhi appeal"); R v Khazaal [2009] NSWSC 1015 at [47]
Lodhi sentence at [89]; Lodhi appeal at [274]; Khazaal at [41]; DPP v Besim [2017] VSCA 158 at [112] - [113]
R v Kahar [2016] 1 WLR 3156; [2016] EWCA Crim 568 at [19]
Lodhi sentence at [82]-[83]; [88]; R v Elomar & ors [2010] NSWSC 10; (2010) 264 ALR 759 (Elomar sentence) at [93]; Benbrika v R (2010) 29 VR 593; [2010] VSCA 281 at [591]
Lodhi appeal at [87]-[88]; DPP (Cth) v Fattal [2013] VSCA 276 at [169]; Lodhi sentence at [91] - [92]; R v Barot [2007] EWCA Crim 1119 at [45]
R v Kahar [2016] 1 WLR 3156; [2016] EWCA Crim 568 at [19; Elomar sentence at [62]; Benbrika at [564]
Khazaal at [19]-[21]
(i), (ii) and (iii) were tendered by the Crown and the balance tendered on behalf of Khalid
Exh. SK1
Exh. SK2
Exh. SK3
Exh. SK4
Exh. SK5 - This exhibit along with SK6 related to charges brought against the witness which were subsequently dismissed. That material went to matters specific to the witness and is of little or no relevance to the determination of sentence against Khalid
Exh. SK6
Exh. SK7 (as to which see para. 6 of the Statement of Facts under the heading "Ideology")
Exh. SK8
Exh. SK9
Exh. SK10.
Exh. SK11
Exh. SK12
Exh. SK13
Exh. SK14
Exh. SK15
Exh. SK16
Exh. SK17
Exh. SK18
The last "s" of "ISIS" comes from the Arabic word "al-Sham", meaning the Levant, Syria or occasionally Damascus, depending on the circumstances. ISIS is also often referred to simply as Islamic State
The Crown tendered a Disc containing excerpts of footage from the program and an accompanying transcript (Exhs. SK7 and SK8 respectively). I have dealt with this evidence further below
The Crown tendered a Disc containing this (and other) footage, and an accompanying transcript of that part of the footage upon which it specifically relied. (Exhs. SK9 and SK10 respectively). I have dealt with this evidence further below
"Taweed" means the oneness of God
"Iman" means "faith"
Photographs found on "IM"'s phone depicting him posing with firearms are Exh. IM4
Photographs of the firearms and some of the ammunition seized from Jibryl's premises on 18 December 2015 are Exh. JA3
Although Ghazzawy is named as a co-conspirator, he in fact pleaded guilty to an offence contrary to s. 101.5 of the Code and has been sentenced: R v Ghazzawy [2017] NSWSC 474
Salat is one of the Five Pillars of the faith of Islam and an obligatory religious duty for every Muslim. It is a physical, mental and spiritual act of worship that is observed five times every day at prescribed times
Fardh is an Islamic term which denotes a religious duty commanded by Allah
Akhi means brother
A reference to Syria. (Al-Sham standing on its own can sometimes refer to the city of Damascus.)
An-Nisa is a sura (Chapter) in the Quran known as "The Women"
Sura An-Nisa 84 in, one translation, reads: So fight, [O Muhammad], in the cause of Allah; you are not held responsible except for yourself. And encourage the believers [to join you] that perhaps Allah will restrain the [military] might of those who disbelieve. And Allah is greater in might and stronger in [exemplary] punishment
Sura An-Nisa 75 reads: And what is [the matter] with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah and [for] the oppressed among men, women, and children who say, "Our Lord, take us out of this city of oppressive people and appoint for us from Yourself a protector and appoint for us from Yourself a helper?"
Khalifah is a name or title that means "successor" or "steward". It most commonly refers to the leader of a Caliphate, but is also used as a title among various Islamic religious groups and orders
In Islamic terminology bay'ah is an oath of allegiance to a leader
The Arabic word for "martyrdom", death of a martyr", or "heroic death".
Shahada is the Islamic creed. It is a declaration of belief in the oneness of God and the acceptance of Muhammad as God's prophet. In English, in its shortest form it reads "There is no god but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God". However, in the context of the note, the writer may have mistaken it for shahid which is an Arabic word meaning "witness" and is also used to denote a martyr. It is used to refer to Muslims who have died fulfilling a religious commandment, especially those who die in jihad. The act of martyrdom is istishad.

Arabic word for migration
Da'wah means the proselytising or preaching of Islam
All praise is due to God alone
Paradise
Boys
God willing
Abu used in this manner is Arabic slang for leader
In Islamic terminology dua, or supplication, is calling out to God or a conversation with God
Exh. SK1 at para. 13
Exh. SK2
Exh. SK3
Exhs. IM3 and IM13
Exh. SK3 at para. 4
Exh. SK3 at para. 11
Exh. SK3 at para. 23
Exh. SK3 at para. 24
Exh. SK3 at paras. 35-39
Exh. SK3 at paras. 47-50
Exh. SK3 at para. 53
Exh. SK3 at paras. 54-58
Exh. SK3 at para. 59
Exh. SK3 at p. 103
Exh. SK3 at p. 104
Exh. SK3 at p. 104
Exh. SK3 at p. 105
Exh. SK3 at p. 107
T116.13-T116.15
T196.12-T197; T198.19
T198.19-T198.31
T198.33-T199.4
T199.6-T199.40
T201.7-201.10
Exh. SK12
T197.37-T197.46
T197.20-T197.49
T102.39-102.41
Commencing at T103.3
Commencing at T103.40
Exh. SK1 at para. 6
Exh. SK8
Exh. SK9
'Tawheed' means "the oneness of God"
Exh. SK1 at para. 7
Exh. SK9, File 7
Exh. SK9, File 18
Exh. SK9, File 23
Commencing at T52.11
T52.27
T52.36-T52.38
T53.1-T53.3
T54.11-T54.23
T55.1-T55.4
T55.13-T55.16
T55.18-T55.25
T57.48
T57.19-T57.22; T57.47-T58.2
T57.18-T57.22; T63.10-T63.18
Exh. SK4
T64.17-T64.22
T65.44-T66.21
Commencing at T74.6
T74.42-T74.47
T76.41-T76.43; T79.12-T79.13
T79.12-T79.33
Commencing at T77.34
T77.44-T77.45
Commencing at T78.10
T78.30-T78.33
T78.46-T78.50
T80.34
T82.4-T82.12
T82.37-T82.42.
T84.11-T84.37
T84.39-T84.43
T85.20-T85.22.
T85.45-T86.6
T89.10-T89.16
Commencing at T93.43
T93.43-T93.49
T94.8-T94.9
T94.9-T94.10
T94.13-T94.16
T94.20-T94.23
T94.40-T94.43
T95.38-T98.40
T95.45-T96.2
T96.15-T96.17
T97.32-T97.34
T97.40-T97.46
T97.50
T101.18
T106.23-T106.35
T108.20-T108.26
Exh. SK14
Exh. SK14 at p.2
Exh. SK14 at p.4
Exh. SK14 at p.4
Exh. SK14 at p.6
Exh. SK14 at p.8
Exh. SK14 at p.8
Exh. SK14 at p.9
Exh. SK14 at p.9
Exh. SK17
Exh. SK12.
Exh. SK13
T128.22
T124.28-T124.29
Some of which are extracted in Exh. SK13
Tyler v R; Chalmers v R (2007) 173 A Crim R 458; [2007] NSWCCA 247 at [83]-[85]; Elomar sentence at [15]
Lodhi v R (2006) 199 FLR 303; [2006] NSWCCA 121 at [65]-[66] per Spigelman CJ, McClellan CJ at CL and Sully J agreeing
Lodhi appeal at [83]; [229]-[230]; Elomar v R [2014] NSWCCA 303; (2014) 316 ALR 206 ("Elomar appeal") at [782]
Exh. SK1 at para. 32
Exh. SK1 at para. 40
Exh. SK1 at para. 54
Exh. SK1 at para. 54
Lodhi sentence at [54]
At [80] above
Elomar sentence at [90]
Exh. SK1 at paras. 89-91
Exh. SK1 at para. 20
Exh. SK1 commencing at para. 68
Exh. SK1 at para. 10
Exh. SK1 at para. 20
General deterrence is expressly referred to in s. 16A(2)(ja) of the Act and see Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Besim [2017] VSCA 158 at [112]
T116.45
T118.34-T118.35
T132.7
See for example Tyler at [114]; Lee v R [2012] NSWCCA 123 at [58].
R v Harrington (2016) 11 ACTLR 215; [2016] ACTCA 10 at [126]-[132].
R v Thomas (2016) 315 FLR 31; [2016] VSCA 237
[2017] NSWSC 474 at [59]
(2009) 49 NSWLR 383; [2009] NSWCCA 309
Wong v R (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64
Cameron v R (2002) 209 CLR 339; [2001] HCA 6 at [11]-[14]; Tyler at [114]
Cameron at [14]
Cameron at [22]
Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 at 370; [24]; Tyler at [112]
Tyler at [114]; Cappis v R [2015] NSWCCA 138 at [57].
(2008) 182 A Crim R 571; [2008] NSWCCA 51 at [22] - [26]
(2010) 201 A Crim R 379; [2010] NSWCCA 159 commencing at [3]
At [22] - [26]
At [6]
At [75]
(2012) 223 A Crim R 55; [2012] NSWCCA 83 at [108]
(2002) 4 VR 248; [2002] VSCA 52 at [14]
(2011) 35 VR 43; [2011] VSCA 372 at [44]
[2014] NSWCCA 21 at [56]
[2017] VSCA 157
Warren CJ, Weinberg and Kaye JJA at [66]-[67]
At [63] above
See [61] above
See [59] above
(2001) 127 A Crim R 369; [2001] NSWCCA 353 at [58]
Elomar appeal at [744]; [815]-[818]
R v Touma [2008] NSWSC 1475 at [145]
R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 at [25] - [28]; Besim at [108]
Elomar appeal at [815]; Ghazzawy at [37]-[40] and the authorities cited therein
Touma at [144]-[145]; R v Sharrouf [2009] NSWSC 1002 at [49] - [50]
R v Martin (1999) 1 Cr App R 477 at 480; Kahar at [15]
Lodhi sentence at [88]
Exh. SK 1 at para. 93.
(i) to (v) were tendered by the Crown, and the balance tendered on behalf of Jibryl
Exh. JA4
Exh. JA1
Exh. JA2
Exh. JA3
Exh. JA5
Exh. JA6
Exh. JA7
Exh. JA4
There was a degree of duplicity in the facts relied upon by the Crown against Khalid and those against Jibryl. The majority of those parts which are common to both have not been repeated.
The last "s" of 'ISIS' comes from the Arabic word "al-Sham", meaning the Levant, Syria or occasionally Damascus, depending on the circumstances. ISIS is also often referred to simply as Islamic State.
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraphs (11) to (40) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraphs (43) to (57) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraph (58) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. The contents of that paragraph are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraphs (59) to (61) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. The contents of those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraphs (68) to (84) and (87) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
The facts tendered in Jibryl's case included paragraphs (88) to (91) of those tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Jibryl
Part of Exh. JA1
Exh. JA5
Exh. JA2
See [33] and following above
See [39] and following above
Exh. JA2 at para. 36
Exh. JA2 at paras. 46-47
Exh. JA2 at para. 57 although as previously noted it was Mr Piazza's evidence (at [40] above) that an inmate was "technically" not able to make such application until the latter stages of his sentence
Exh. JA6 at p. 71-72 and [145] below
Exh. JA2 at para. 58
Exh. JA2 at para. 80
Exh. JA2 at para. 81
Exh. JA2 at p. 82
Exh. JA2 at p. 82
Exh. JA2 at p. 83
Exh. JA2 at p. 84
Exh. JA6 at p.1
Exh. JA6 at p.3
Exh. JA6 at p.9
Exh. JA6 at p.10
Exh. JA6 at p.10
Exh. JA7 at p.6
Exh. JA7 at p.6
Exh. JA7 at p.6
Exh. JA7 at p.9
Exh. JA7 at p.12
Exh. JA7 at p.13
Exh. JA6 at p.15
Exh. JA6 at p.17
Exh. JA6 at p.18
Exh. JA6 at p.26-29
Exh. JA6 at p.32-63
Exh. JA6 at p.71-72
Exh. JA6 at p.73
At [40] above
Exh. JA4 at para. 65
Exh. SK1 at para. 13(e)
T35.17-T35.23
T35.25-T35.30
See, for example, Exh. SK1 at para. 85
Exh. SK1 at para. 28
See Exh. SK1 at para. 48
At [104] and following
R v Thomson; R v Houlton at 160 per Spigelman CJ
At [109] and following
Commencing at [119]
Commencing at [119]
At [124]
Exh. JA 1 at para. 90.
(i)-(v) and (xiii) were tendered by the Crown and the balance tendered on behalf of IM
Exh. IM1
Exh. IM2
Exh. IM3
Exh. IM4
Exh. IM5
Exh. IM6
Exh. IM7
Exh. IM8
Exh. IM9
Exh. IM10
Exh. IM11
Exh. IM12
Exh. IM13
Exh. IM14
Exh. IM1
The last "s" of 'ISIS' comes from the Arabic word "al-Sham", meaning the Levant, Syria or occasionally Damascus, depending on the circumstances. ISIS is also often referred to simply as Islamic State
Mujahedeen is the plural form of mujahid, which means one engaged in jihad
The "plot of the hypocrites" is a reference to the Quran in which there is described a plot to kill Muhammad
Anasheed are religious songs. They are heavily used in Islamic extremist propaganda.
Martyrs
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraphs (11) to (40) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraphs (41) to (57) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraph (58) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. That paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraphs (59) to (61) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraphs (62) - (87) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The facts tendered in IM's case included paragraphs (88) - (91) of the facts tendered in the case against Khalid. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against IM
The firearms are also depicted in Exh. IM4.
See Exh. IM3
Exh. IM3 at para. 49
Exh. IM3 at para. 53
Exh. IM3 at paras. 53-55
Exh. IM3 at para. 56
Exh. IM3 at para. 57
Exh. IM13 at p. 5
Exh. IM13 at p. 5
Exh. IM13 at p. 6
Exh. IM13 at p. 6
Exh. IM6 at p.3-4
Exh. IM6 at p.5
Exh. IM6 at p.24
Exh. IM6 at p.9
Exh. IM6 at p.11
Exh. IM6 at p.16
Exh. IM6 at p.26
Exh. IM7 at p.16
Exh. IM7 at p.9
Exh. IM7 at p.12
Exh. IM7 at p.15
Exh. IM8 at p.8
Exh. IM8 at p.9
Exh. IM9 at p.3
Exh. IM9 at p.8
Exh. IM9 at p.8
Exh. IM9 at p.8
Exh. IM10 at para. 5
Exh. IM10 at para. 12
Exh. IM10 at para. 19
Exh. IM10 at para. 20
Exh. IM10 at para. 21
Exh. IM11 at para. 6
Exh. IM11 at para. 15
Exh. IM11 at para. 16
Exh. IM12
T185.6
T150.20
T172.27-T172.30
MHK at [66]
At [68].
[2013] NSWCCA 222
[2017] NSWCCA 42 at [49]; [60]
At [162]
At [164]
At [124].
R v Webb [2004] NSWCCA 330 at [18]; R v SB; R v AE; R v MG [2015] NSWSC 659 at [127].
R v Fowler [2003] NSWCCA 321 at [242]
(i), (ii) and (iii) were tendered by the Crown and the balance tendered on behalf of Mohamed
Exh. MA1
Exh. MA2
Exh. MA3
Exh. MA4
Exh. MA6
Exh. MA1
The Crown relies inter alia on a YouTube video "Awarness (sic) Of The Muslims II Millatu Ibrahim" published 11 December 2013 in which Khalid is shown preaching by microphone in the street with the offender holding a black flag with foreign writing
The last "s" of "ISIS" comes from the Arabic word "al-Sham", meaning the Levant, Syria or occasionally Damascus, depending on the circumstances. ISIS is also often referred to simply as Islamic State
The details of this document are set out in paras. 52-53 of Exh. SK1. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Mohamed
These details appear commencing at para. 62 of Exh. SK1 and should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Mohamed.
These code words appear in para. 13 of Exh. SK1 and should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Mohamed.
All praise is due to God alone
The highest stage of paradise
This appears in Exh. SK1 at para. 71. It is not reproduced but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Mohamed.
Paradise
This appears in Exh. SK1 at para. 72. It is not reproduced but should be treated as forming pat of the evidence against Mohamed.
In Islamic terminology, dua is the act of supplication. It is calling out to God; it is a conversation with God
Habib or habeeb is an Arabic male name with the meaning "beloved" or "sweetheart"
See above
God willing
Tajweed refers to the rules governing pronunciation during recitation of the Qu'ran. (I371)
Referred to as "planning document I372"
Referred to as "planning document I373"
Referred to as "planning document I374"
Referred to as "planning document I375"
This is set out commencing at para. 45 of Exh. SK1
This is set out commencing at para. 48 of Exh. SK1
The "plot of the hypocrites' is a reference to the Quran in which there is described a plot to kill Muhammad
Anasheed are religious songs. They are heavily used in Islamic extremist propaganda
Martyrs
Exh. FS1
T193.23-T193.44
Commencing at [39] above
At para. 57 of Exh. MA 3
At page 71 of Exh. MA3
T204.46-T204.49
Exh. MA4 at p.2
Exh. MA4 at p.5
Exh. MA4 at p.7
Exh. MA4 at p.8
Exh. MA4 at p.8
Exh. MA5
Exh. MA6
Exh. MA6
See Exh. MA1 at para. 5
Exh. MA1
Exh. MA1 at para. 5
At [52]
T210.36
See T178.19 and following
See T218.49 and following
Commencing at [104]
R v NP [2003] NSWCCA 195 at [25]
Citing R v Dib [2013] NSWCCA 117
[2008] NSWCCA 109 at [30]
Commencing at [109]
At [124]
Exh. MA 1 at paras. 67-68.
(i), (ii) and (iii) were tendered by the Crown and the balance tendered on behalf of Said
Exh. FS1
Exh. FS2
Exh. FS3
Exh. FS4
Exh. FS5
The last "s" of "ISIS" comes from the Arabic word "al-Sham", meaning the Levant, Syria or occasionally Damascus, depending on the circumstances. ISIS is also often referred to simply as Islamic State
These documents are set out in Exh. SK1 at paras. 50-51 and 52-53 respectively. Those paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Mohamed
The facts tendered in Said's case included para (6) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. That paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
The facts tendered in Said's case included paras (7), (8) and (9) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. That paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
The facts tendered in Said's case included paras (13) and (15)-(47) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. That paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
The facts tendered in Said's case included paras (49)-(60) and (62) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. These paragraphs are not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
The facts tendered in Said's case included para (65) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. That paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
The facts tendered in Said's case included para (66) of the facts tendered in the case against Mohamed. This paragraph is not repeated but should be treated as forming part of the evidence against Said
Exh. FS4 p.1
Exh. FS4 p.2-3
Exh. FS4 p.4-5
Exh. FS4 p.5
Exh. FS4 p.6
Exh. FS4 p.6
Exh. FS1 at para. 6
Exh. FS1 at para. 7
T236.34-T236.36
Commencing at [104]
At [124]
Exh. FS1 at para. 65.

Amendments 08 November 2017 - Typographical corrections to paras. [36], [202], [231], [234] and [246]. 27 August 2021 - Amendments to [309] to correct dates. 27 August 2021 - Amendment to [275] to correct date. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 27 August 2021

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (114 paragraphs)

Legislation Cited (6)

Cases Cited (54)

Cited By (26)