"After everyone ran away I was around there for about ten minutes" [I think this is a considerable overstatement and was probably no more than two or three minutes] "looking for the gun. I wasn't gunna leave until I had it because it's got my best mate's prints on it. I found a couple of bullets lying in a bag on the side of the road. That was about five or ten minutes after the incident. I grabbed it and went and stashed it. I grabbed the gun and the shells and started running. I chucked the shells in some fella's garden and I dropped the gun off down near the train station, just threw it in the grass. I've seen the police drive down here, so I've gone, tried to find the gun, I couldn't find it. I couldn't find that, so I jumped back over and cut myself on the way over, then I was running along through backyards and I fell in a big ditch here, full of water and mud.
I went back to Michael's and tried to forgot about it. I changed my clothes and washed my hands because I had blood on my hands from where I jumped over the fence. When I got back to the unit there was only Melanie and Stephanie and Jasmine. Michael was next door. I told the girls what happened and I said 'Someone's been shot and he's probably not alive'."
8 The offender described his state of intoxication as moderately affected adding "I was not staggering or nothing, I could still walk straight, I still knew what I was doing". During the interview, the offender drew a map showing where he had thrown the gun and the ammunition, which was used by police to locate them. As I have already mentioned, the offender concealed the gun in order to prevent his friend Irvine from being identified as the person that had shot Mr Mason and when he was first spoken to by the police at the flat at about 1pm on the afternoon of the shooting, he denied seeing what had happened. He was then arrested and brought to the police station. He then gave a voluntary statement to the police in which he told them what had occurred, including the involvement of Irvine and Clifford. Thus the offender voluntarily desisted in the continuation of his offence at a very early stage.
9 The maximum term of imprisonment for the offence of being an accessory after the fact to murder is twenty five years. This penalty is aimed, of course, for cases of the most serious kind. It is unnecessary for me to consider what elements might be involved in a case of such gravity, since this case does not remotely fall into this class. Objectively, the circumstances have some serious features. Not only did the offender attempt to conceal the guilt of a person who had committed a very serious crime by hiding evidence but that evidence was itself a shotgun and ammunition. On the other hand, the offender himself brought his offence to an end and assisted the police by both identifying the principal offender and telling them where the gun and ammunition might be found. Furthermore, the offender was not motivated by personal gain or hope for reward. I have concluded that the offender's attempt to conceal the weapon and ammunition arose from an impulsive and instinctive desire to help his closest friend, whose extraordinary behaviour he was at that time unable to consider with any level of emotional detachment. At a later point in time, he also thought that he should place the weapon where Irvine would not be able to retrieve it to do some more damage. I am satisfied that the offender had been frightened by what he had witnessed and resolved his emotional and moral turmoil by the relatively straightforward, though illegal and foolish, action of helping a friend. I am also satisfied that, by the time he came to be interviewed, he had come to his senses and decided that he would cooperate with the police investigation. This provides cogent evidence of contrition.
10 Let me then deal with the subjective circumstances of the offender. These have been extensively set out in reports by Mr Otto, a Juvenile Justice Officer with the Department of Juvenile Justice, and Dr Robert Delaforce, a forensic psychiatrist. The offender's family background is unremarkable. Like many children, he became rebellious in early teenage years. Unfortunately, he started using cannabis and this, as is so often the case, not only adversely affected his behaviour and mental health but also his education. He and Irvine grew up together and Irvine was his closest friend. He had also known Clifford for many years and thought of him as a friend. He knew that both could become violent when affected either by cannabis or alcohol but obviously lacked the maturity to maintain his distance from them. The offender told Dr Delaforce that another friend of his had been diagnosed with cannabis induced schizophrenia in about 2002 and he had tried to help him. It is indeed troubling that the offender apparently has not learned from this that significant mental illness can be caused by chronic cannabis use. He has been a heavy user of cannabis from the age of fifteen. Although he started to reduce his use shortly before the commission of this offence and managed to keep to this until some weeks ago, I am prepared to accept that his re-commencement resulted from stress arising from the impending sentence proceedings. However, it is obvious that the offender needs to stop using cannabis all together, not only because of the criminal law but also for the sake of his health and welfare.
11 The offender started Year 10 studies at TAFE in 2003 without any application, contributed to significantly by his heavy cannabis use with associated depressed feelings and misbehaviour. However, the substance of the matter is that he took no responsibility for himself and, I think, refused to acknowledge his parents' concern. Generally speaking, it appears that the offender's behaviour has improved in recent months, although he still has some way to go and still very much needs the continuing support and guidance of his parents. Aside from some relatively minor occasions, the offender has not demonstrated any violent behaviours. He is plainly capable of benefiting from further education.
12 All in all, I think that the criminal conduct that has brought this offender into this Court should be regarded as an aberration. The offender, as I have mentioned, confessed to the police when he was first formally interviewed and pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity. The case against him, if the confessions to the police were not admitted into evidence, was far from strong and, as his counsel rightly advised him, the failure by the police to comply with the relevant statutory regime would have been likely to have resulted in their exclusion, with the result that, had the case gone to trial his acquittal was certainly on the cards. The offender's decision to plead guilty nevertheless, taken in consultation with his parents, is strong evidence of remorse and contrition, a conclusion which is supported by other evidence which it is unnecessary to detail. It also shows a willingness to acknowledge his responsibility for serious wrongdoing.
13 Not surprisingly, the killing of Mr Mason has shocked many people in the district and the offender has been verbally and physically abused, although as I have mentioned, he was not involved in this offence except as an accessory after the fact for a short time. There are suggestions in the evidence that there was a racial motive involved in Mr Mason's murder. Whatever the truth about this, there is no evidence at all that anything that the offender did was affected by racist attitudes or, for that matter, that he has any. Moreover, it appears there is good reason for thinking the contrary.
14 Having regard to both the objective and subjective circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the offender's prospects of rehabilitation are good, although continuing support will be necessary. Courts of the highest authority and by which I am bound have said many times that, in dealing with young offenders, the public interest - quite apart from the interest of the offender, requires that considerable weight be given to their prospective rehabilitation, bearing in mind, of course, the public interest in punishing serious crimes. These considerations are reflected in the provisions of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 which, in section 6, requires the court to have regard to the following principles -
"That children who commit offences bear responsibility for their actions but, because of their state of dependency and immaturity, require guidance and assistance,
That it is desirable, wherever possible, to allow the education or employment of a child to proceed without interruption, and
That it is desirable, wherever possible, to allow a child to reside in his or her own home."