The Queen v Seckold [2014] VSC 441

1 Brok Seckold you are to be sentenced today in relation to two separate indictments and a summary offence. Though they are separate, the subject matter of the charges on the indictments is directly connected.

2 First, on 10 October 2013 after a trial lasting for some four weeks, you were found guilty by a jury in this Court of the charges of kidnapping and murder of Yengo Faugere. Those offences were alleged to have been committed by you on 20 October 2011.

3 Second, on 22 April 2013 you pleaded guilty to all charges on a separate indictment ('the drug and firearms indictment') and which included the following charges:

Between 16 May 2011 and 7 February 2012, trafficking two or more drugs of dependence not less than a large commercial quantity.

On 8 July 2011, possessing an unregistered Category D longarm.

On 8 July 2011, possessing an unregistered Category A longarm.

On 7 February 2012, possessing an unregistered general category handgun.

On 7 February 2012, possessing an unregistered Category B longarm.

On 7 February 2012, possessing an unregistered Category A longarm.

On 7 February 2012, possessing an unregistered Category A longarm.

4 In addition, on 15 August 2014, you pleaded guilty to a summary charge that on 7 February 2012 you possessed a prohibited weapon without an exemption under s 8B or an approval under s 8C of the Control of Weapons Act 1990. The weapon was a stun gun.

5 It is now my responsibility to sentence you for all of these offences. The maximum penalty for murder is life imprisonment.[1] The maximum penalty for kidnapping is 25 years' imprisonment.[2] The maximum penalty for trafficking in a large commercial quantity is life imprisonment.[3] The maximum penalty for possessing, carrying or using an unregistered category C or D longarm, is four years' imprisonment or 240 penalty units.[4] The maximum penalty for possessing an unregistered category A or B longarm, is two years' imprisonment or 120 penalty units.[5] The maximum penalty for possessing an unregistered general category handgun is seven years' imprisonment or 600 penalty units;[6] and for possessing a prohibited weapon, two years' imprisonment or 240 penalty units.[7]

Circumstances of offending - drugs and firearms

6 As the prosecutor put it, you were the head of a joint criminal enterprise to manufacture a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. You started the business, financed it and coordinated the activities of the other participants to ensure that equipment and chemicals were obtained for the purpose of producing methylamphetamine.

7 Other members of your enterprise were the deceased man Yengo Faugere, Scott Frankland, Matthew Lowe, Daniel Martin and Kris Kaje. Frankland, Martin and Kaje have been sentenced by me in relation to their roles. Matthew Lowe stood trial separately before Macaulay J and was found guilty of murder. He has not yet been sentenced for that offence or the drug offences.

8 You were born in New South Wales and lived there until you moved to Melbourne in mid to late 2010. Frankland and Faugere were associates of yours in New South Wales and they both moved to Melbourne at about the same time. In 2010, you were introduced to Daniel Martin. He was then a user of methylamphetamine and had a science degree. You wanted to develop a formula that would enable you to successfully manufacture large quantities of methylamphetamine.

9 In March 2011 you invited Martin to your home in Kew and showed him 10 litres of phenylacetone which is a precursor chemical used to make methylamphetamine. You wanted Martin to help you find a technique for making methylamphetamine from phenylacetone.

10 Martin eventually discovered a successful technique for doing that and he taught the technique to you. You, in turn, taught the deceased man Yengo Faugere. At your instigation, Faugere leased premises at 3/51 Rochester Road, Canterbury using a false name and by May 2011 a clandestine laboratory at those premises was under way. That laboratory operated for two to three months producing methylamphetamine.

11 By chance, police discovered this laboratory on 8 July 2011 when local police went to the premises with a real estate agent who was concerned about unpaid rent.

12 When they examined the premises, among other things, police located 14 glass jars which contained liquid methylamphetamine. It was later found on analysis that the liquid contained methylamphetamine in a total quantity of 976.8 grams. A large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine is 750 grams pure.

13 In the roof of those premises the police located two firearms and ammunition. One firearm was a Norinco 7.62 calibre semiautomatic centre fire rifle, which is charge 2 on the drugs and firearm indictment, and a .22 calibre rim-fire rifle which is charge 3.

14 The discovery of this laboratory apparently received significant publicity which you saw. As a result of the police involvement, you decided that Scott Frankland should go overseas because it was thought that his fingerprints would be in the flat as he had not worn gloves on at least one occasion. He went to the Philippines and whilst there you arranged for $58,617 to be transferred to him via Western Union money transfers. After Frankland left for the Philippines, Matthew Lowe replaced him as your driver and right-hand man. He was also being trained as a pilot and on at least one occasion flew a light plane carrying drugs for you so as to avoid detection at commercial airports. You also planned to establish a laboratory in the Philippines and to have Matthew Lowe fly drugs into Australia from the Philippines.

15 Before police discovered the Canterbury laboratory, you apparently already suspected that the deceased Faugere had been stealing some precursor chemicals from you and making his own methylamphetamine. Once the Canterbury laboratory had been discovered you concluded, wrongly, that Faugere had stolen the jars of liquid methylamphetamine that had been successfully manufactured at that laboratory. As I understand it that was because you did not see those jars in the media publicity about the discovery. You also concluded that having done that, that is to steal the chemicals, Faugere then informed the police about the laboratory. That reasoning formed a significant part of the motive you had to murder him and I will deal with that in due course.

16 You were, however, undeterred by the discovery of the Canterbury laboratory by police and you wanted to recommence manufacturing methylamphetamine. The difficulty was that you only had a small amount of phenylacetone left. You got Martin to experiment making ephedrine from benzaldehyde with the intention of then using the ephedrine to make methylamphetamine.

17 Your plan was to establish another laboratory and in relation to your accomplice Kris Kaje you arranged for him to lease virtual offices under a false name so that he could arrange for precursor chemicals and glassware to be delivered to those addresses without the items being able to be traced back to your names. You and Martin had a machine for making false identification papers and they were used to produce false driver's licences, bank statements, as well as references to allow Kaje to lease properties and virtual offices under false names.

18 With your approval, Kaje located premises at unit 2/111 Barkers Road, Kew and entered into a lease for those premises using a false name on 16 June 2011. A clandestine laboratory was then established at that address.

19 Once the Kew laboratory was established, Martin continued to try to make ephedrine using benzaldehyde but he was only able to make a small amount of methylamphetamine.

20 Becoming aware of that laboratory, on 16 November 2011 the police executed a covert search warrant at the Kew laboratory and they also installed an optical surveillance device at the premises which enabled observation of what was occurring.

21 By 12 December 2011, when police executed a further covert search warrant at the premises, the flat was completely vacant. That was because you suspected the police or someone else had been inside the Kew laboratory in your absence.

22 The next venue for your enterprise was at 3/11 Childer Street, Reservoir and when the police subsequently entered those premises they again found a large and sophisticated clandestine laboratory which was ready for use. There was also a large quantity of precursor chemicals in the flat. On 30 December 2011 the police again executed a covert search warrant at the premises and observed that the clandestine laboratory was still set up ready for use.

23 The police installed a listening device in that laboratory. On this occasion, a sample was taken from three liquids. Subsequent scientific analysis revealed that two of the liquids contained ephedrine and one contained benzaldehyde.

24 Towards the end of 2011 Martin had some success and was able to manufacture 7 grams of ephedrine which you took to Newcastle to see if your contacts were happy with it. Martin said that you were intending to make ephedrine to sell to your contacts in Newcastle so that they could use it to make methylamphetamine.

25 After Christmas 2011, Martin made a further 100 grams of ephedrine for you to take to Newcastle, but on this occasion the ephedrine was of a poorer quality as Martin had little time within which to make it. During this period you were still able to obtain small amounts of phenylacetone from your overseas sources and Martin used that to make methylamphetamine using the earlier technique. Money from the sale of that methylamphetamine was used to finance experiments with benzaldehyde and methyl alanine.

26 A new laboratory was then established at 172-210 Manifold Road, St Leonards. On 10 January 2012, whilst you were at the Reservoir laboratory with Martin, Lowe and Kaje, you told the others that they would be able to move everything to St Leonards during the week and be able to cook for eight days straight.

27 There were discussions about what further equipment and chemicals they would need for the new laboratory. You talked about making three to four kilograms at the new laboratory and selling that whilst making more. You said you hoped to walk away with approximately $10 million.

28 On 10 January 2012 you purchased a Mercedes SLK 2000 for $42,350. You paid a $500 deposit on that day and returned the following day with $41,850 in cash to pay the balance. The car was purchased in the name of your girlfriend.

29 On 14 January 2012 the police executed a covert search warrant at the St Leonards premises. They observed an extremely large and sophisticated clandestine laboratory being set up inside the premises and also located large quantities of chemicals. The police also installed optical and listening devices at the premises.

30 Martin and Kaje returned to the laboratory in the early hours of 21 January 2012. They were heard to continue with the manufacturing process and at one stage Martin told Kaje that the meth was crystallising. Martin also told Kaje that on Monday you were going to get paid for the one kilo and that if the buyer liked the product there would be an order for another five. He told Kaje that when the order for five was placed that you would then pay them.

31 On 23 January 2012, you and Lowe entered the laboratory and assisted Martin and Kaje with the chemical processes throughout the morning and the following day. Martin told you that they had two runs going and that they had completed five runs.

32 Lowe and Kaje were observed to cover the windows of the premises. In the course of the day they discussed scaling up their production of drugs. You and Lowe had extensive conversations about the manufacturing processes that they were undertaking and taking the product to Newcastle in New South Wales.

33 On 31 January 2012, Lowe hired a light aeroplane which he flew to Newcastle with you to sell to your contacts one kilogram of ephedrine that had been manufactured at the St Leonards laboratory but because it was of poor quality it was returned.

34 Martin again attended at the St Leonards laboratory on 3 February 2012 and between 5 and 7 February 2012 was observed to be engaged in manufacturing processes whilst at the laboratory. Matin left the laboratory at 3.51am on 7 February and was arrested by police at Sunshine at 5.02am. Police located a glass bottle in his car containing 250 mls of a yellow liquid. Later analysis showed the liquid contained 67.6 grams of methylamphetamine.

35 Police executed a search warrant at the St Leonards laboratory at 7.02am on 7 February 2012. They located a very large and sophisticated clandestine laboratory set up at the premises with substantial quantities of chemicals and other liquids commonly used in the manufacturing of methylamphetamine.

36 Among the items seized by the police at the laboratory were methylamphetamine 2.1 grams; pseudoephedrine 423.5 grams; ephedrine 117.9 grams; benzaldehyde 159 litres; nitromethane 12 litres; potassium iodide 25 kilograms; iodine 483.7 grams; mecuric chloride 90.3 grams; and alanine 240.6 grams. On 5 March 2012, police also seized 40 litres of hypophosphorous acid that the members of the enterprise had arranged to import into Australia under a false name.

37 The hypophosphorous acid was seized when the police executed a search warrant at Customs House at Tullamarine Airport. Methylamphetamine can be manufactured from ephedrine and pseudoephedrine in a number of ways including combining them with iodine and hypophosphorous acid. It would be expected that 540 grams of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine would be capable of producing about 250 to 400 grams of methylamphetamine when combined with other precursor chemicals.

38 According to the prosecutor, and not disputed by you, the scientific literature reveals that 150 litres of benzaldehyde could be expected to produce somewhere between 25 to 150 kilograms of pseudoephedrine/ephedrine depending on the method used. The quantity of methylamphetamine that could be expected to be produced from 25 to 150 kilograms of ephedrine is in the order of 19 to 112 kilograms. However, there were insufficient quantities of iodine and hypophosphorous acid at the laboratory to complete a conversion on that scale but there were sufficient quantities of both those chemicals to manufacture approximately six kilograms of methylamphetamine.

39 You were arrested on 7 February 2012. You were searched and Police found $1,100 in $50 notes in your wallet. In a blue bag, which you threw from your balcony to a neighbouring balcony before being arrested, there was $159,500 in cash.

40 After your arrest police executed a search warrant at your premises and located numerous firearms and a large quantity of ammunition. The police seized the following firearms belonging to you:

• A Lawson semiautomatic handgun found in a walk-in wardrobe in the main bedroom, which is charge 4;
• A .50 calibre black powder Italian Cabela brand rifle found in the wardrobe in bedroom 3 which is charge 5;
• A .303 British calibre Lithgow brand rifle found on the floor of the third bedroom, which is charge 6;
• A Deer brand air rifle found in the wardrobe in the third bedroom, which is charge 7; and
• A .32 calibre Browning semi-automatic pistol found on the kitchen bench which is the Browning that was carried at the time of the kidnapping of Yengo Faugere.

41 Police also seized an unbranded stun gun that was found in the wardrobe of the third bedroom. This is the firearm concerned with the summary matter to which I have referred and to which you have pleaded guilty.

Circumstances of offending - kidnapping and murder of Yengo Faugere

42 Against the background of your drug enterprise and the offending to which I have just referred, I will now deal with the kidnapping and murder of Yengo Faugere on Thursday 20 October 2011. This is an horrific narrative. On the charges of kidnapping and murder you pleaded not guilty and stood your trial. You did not give evidence. You have not admitted any involvement in the killing of Faugere but, of course, you must be sentenced consistent with the verdict reached by the jury.

43 As I have earlier described, Yengo Faugere became involved in your drug operation by being the cook for your methylamphetamine laboratory, having been shown the favoured method. He was a significant user of drugs. You believed that Faugere had been syphoning off precursor chemicals, in particular Phenyl-2-Propanone (P2P), to make his own profitable drug business in order to purchase a Melbourne night club. You doubted his loyalty to you.

44 Following the police discovery of your laboratory in Canterbury in July 2011, the contact between you and Faugere effectively stopped. You considered that meant that he was avoiding you. You noticed in the publicity about the police discovery of the Canterbury laboratory that the small jars in which the methylamphetamine was kept could not be seen and you assumed they had been removed by Yengo Faugere. You were interested to know where Faugere was and even attempted to monitor him by way of a GPS tracker with the assistance of Daniel Martin. That was not successful.

45 You then embarked on a plan to kill Faugere and commenced to make preparations to do so. You discussed with Daniel Martin what chemicals would dissolve a body. From the store Bunnings a variety of items were purchased on your behalf to use in the kidnap and killing of Faugere. These purchases represented the commencement of the planning for the murder of Faugere.

46 On 17 October 2011, Matthew Lowe purchased a 1992 Nissan Navara with cash using a false name. Ultimately the remains of Faugere were found in the back of that vehicle. On 18 October 2011, a Toyota Hi-Ace van was rented from Northpoint Car Rentals, which was later used in the kidnapping and killing of Faugere. Unknown to you, it was equipped with a GPS device and so its travel during the time it was used in this crime was recorded. After earlier visits to the premises at which Yengo Faugere was residing in Maribyrnong, at some time after 4:00am on 20 October, you and others who are not identified entered Faugere's premises and removed him to the Hi-Ace van. You were wearing balaclavas. Faugere was then forcibly taken out of the metropolitan area and ultimately to the Mansfield-Woods Point Road at Mansfield in excess of 200 kilometres away. The vehicle remained stationary in that location from just before 8:00am until after 2:30pm. It was the Crown case that Faugere was murdered by you in that location. Your accomplice, Matthew Lowe, was also found guilty of murder at the conclusion of his separate trial before Macaulay J on the basis of his participation in a joint criminal enterprise although not necessarily present when Faugere was killed. The evidence demonstrates that it was you who actually killed Faugere.

47 In a conversation between you and the witness, Lloyd Jenman, a man you had known since your schooling, you described to Jenman how you killed Faugere. The jury clearly accepted these conversations took place and that what you said was true. You first told Jenman that Faugere had stolen chemicals from you and had informed the police about your illegal activities in the manufacture of methylamphetamine. In January 2012, you told Jenman that you shot Faugere in the head and then brutalised and dismembered his body for the purpose of disposing of it which involved cutting off his arms and legs. You said you dissolved his body in acid and that you had also tried to sink it in an esky in Port Phillip Bay but the esky would not sink.

48 When the police executed a search warrant at the St Leonards property on 6 February 2012, they identified a large and sophisticated methylamphetamine laboratory as I have said. They also found a boat and the Nissan Navara to which I earlier referred. In the tray area of the Nissan Navara was a 44 gallon drum which contained arms and leg bones from the body of Yengo Faugere. It also contained other items which had been used in the kidnapping and murder of Faugere. Amongst the limbs found it was noted that the left and right wrists which were found were bound and the striations noted in the leg bones were consistent with the effect of a chain saw. By DNA analysis these remains were able to identified as part of the body of Yengo Faugere. His DNA profile was also found on a number of other items.

49 The prosecution case, which the jury accepted, was that Faugere was murdered by you using a Browning pistol. A bullet casing from that firearm was found in the pocket of some clothing located in the Nissan and the firerarm that fired that bullet was located at premises at 209/55 Cumberland Drive, Maribyrnong being the premises of yourself and Matthew Lowe.

50 Victim impact statements from Yengo Faugere's brother Emile and his mother Florence Pinto were presented to the Court. Those statements graphically highlight the suffering that family has been through. They know your reason for killing their family member based on your suspicion of him was wrong. They know the brutal manner in which this kidnapping and murder was carried out and the horror that goes with knowing the manner in which you dismembered Yengo Faugere's body in the cause of avoiding detection.

51 These two people will carry with them for the rest of their lives this memory. The impact on them is dramatic and perhaps for them at times overwhelming. In determining the sentence I should impose on you I have taken into account the impact of your crimes on these people.

52 You had determined to establish a very large enterprise to manufacture methylamphetamine for a significant profit you thought it could produce. You recruited a number of people to assist you. Your enterprise continued from mid-2011 until February 2012. In my opinion, the drug offences are very serious. Through that time you were thoroughly undeterred by knowing that the police were investigating your activities. You continued to move from place to place to avoid them, so strong was your ambition to make significant profits from the sale of drugs. Your counsel seemed to accept that you were obsessed with succeeding financially in this drug manufacturing operation. The evidence demonstrates that you were less successful than you hoped to be and that from time to time there were failures in the manufacturing process.

53 Then when you thought you knew that Yengo Faugure had both stolen your drugs and informed on you - about which you were completely wrong - you brutally kidnapped him and murdered him. To do that, on your account, you recruited assistance from a number of people who are not identifiable. Your crimes were committed for the purpose of advancing or protecting the drug enterprise you had established. More serious cases of murder are few and far between. As the Court of Appeal of this State observed in DPP v Borg[8], in which I note in passing I was the trial Judge, the Court said as follows:

A planned execution carried out for the sole purpose of protecting a criminal enterprise at least approached the worst case of an offence for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.[9]

54 In this case, I am satisfied that was significant part of the purpose, in addition to an element of punishment of Faugere for what you considered to be his betrayal. Further, as the prosecutor has submitted, this terrible killing was planned for some days beforehand. You had clearly thought about it carefully for some time before you did it. You sought advice on how it might be concealed. In addition, your offending is aggravated by your dismemberment of Faugere's body done for the purpose of concealing your crime.

55 The crimes of kidnapping and murder therefore require denunciation in the strongest terms and the community needs to understand that when a person is murdered in order to protect a substantial drug manufacturing enterprise conducted by the murderer, the punishment will be very significant indeed.

56 As I have earlier noted you pleaded guilty to the charges contained in the drug and firearm indictment and to the summary offence. Your pleas were entered at an early stage prior to the committal and avoided the need for witnesses to be called. I recognise that in you doing that there has been a utilitarian value and an acceptance of responsibility by you for that offending. That, of course, does not apply to the most serious offending of the kidnapping and murder of Yengo Faugere. As I have earlier noted, your defence in the murder and kidnapping trial was conducted on the basis that the killer of Yengo Faugere was the prosecution witness Lloyd Jenman and that was specifically put to him during cross-examination by your counsel (page 720). Clearly the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that was not what occurred and that you were Faugere's killer.

57 Your personal circumstances were outlined both in a report received from Dr Aaron Cunningham, forensic psychologist, and by your counsel, Mr Higham, during the course of his plea on your behalf.

58 You were born on 28 April 1983 and so you are now 31 years of age. You have two sisters - one older, one younger. You had a positive relationship with your mother but your relationship with your father was difficult. One of the difficult features was that in your early years you witnessed domestic violence at the hands of your father against your mother. When you tried to intervene you were also attacked.

59 When you were eight years of age your parents separated and, consequent upon your father's refusal to concede custody of you to your mother, you resided with your father. The arrangements in relation to your sisters varied to some degree but you lived with your father until you were seventeen.

60 You were very close to your maternal uncle but he died when you were 11 years old. Shortly after that happened it appears you were the victim of a sexual assault by a family friend which resulted in your father severely beating the offender. The rest of your time spent with your father appears to have had a predominantly negative effect on you for a variety of reasons.

61 Your education finished when you were 17 years old and you became estranged from your father a year or two later. Later, your professional interest was in cooking and being a chef. I have been provided with documents which record your progress in that field as an apprentice and academic records of your progress in the study of hospitality. You later worked in restaurants and catering and won awards for your work.

62 You began to take drugs at the age of 13, beginning with cannabis and progressing to other drugs such as cocaine. Unusually those experiences did not seem to lead to problems of addiction.

63 At the age of 19 you were arrested in possession of 20 ecstasy tablets and dealt with in the New South Wales District Court for the offence of knowingly taking part in supply. You were given a one year bond. Later you commenced a relationship with a woman to whom you were married for a short time. The relationship ended in 2009 and you and friends of yours came to Melbourne in 2010.

64 The reasonably thorough report prepared by Dr Cunningham provides an insight into you although it tells me very little about the drug and firearm offending that you admit to and nothing about the murder and kidnapping the jury found you guilty of because you still do not take responsibility for those offences and did not discuss it with him. As Dr Cunningham put it, you are "motivated to lodge an Appeal."

65 Dr Cunningham concluded that you do not suffer from any mental illness or intellectual impairment.

66 Your primary asset now is your family. Your mother has written a moving letter to the Court in which she commits to supporting you for as long as it takes for you to be released. She has outlined your history, your sporting ability and your achievements as a chef. She has described your family background and she has supported you throughout this case. In addition other testimonials have been provided which I have read. They include other members of your family and friends. Several of those people are witness to your talent as a chef. They paint a picture completely at odds with the conduct you engaged in, even that which you admit to. From that material it would seem that despite your release being many years away, there will in all likelihood be family support and employment for you when that occurs.

67 It is tragic that with your ability and your family support you will now forfeit potentially the best years of your life. However, there may well be some prospects for your rehabilitation. You will have a very significant period to reflect on what you have done.

68 Overall, there is little that mitigates your very serious conduct. Significantly, apart from your desire to succeed by making significant sums of money from the sale of drugs, there is very little that explains how you were able to commit such a planned and callous killing.

69 The drug and firearms charges to which you have pleaded guilty have a number of significant features. They are obviously deliberate and as carefully planned as you could make them. You were the primary motivator for the establishment of clandestine laboratories and you were apparently disinterested in the consequences of the police discovering your activities. As the prosecutor accepted, your aspirations in relation to the drug manufacture were well ahead of the actual success. Nonetheless it was a significant operation and there were efforts to refine the manufacturing technique in order to increase the output of methylamphetamine.

70 To your credit, you, like Martin, Frankland and Kaje pleaded guilty to the drug and, in your case, firearms offences. Each of them was sentenced on the basis that, in addition to their plea of guilty, they gave an undertaking to the Court to assist the prosecution concerning the prosecution of the murder trial against you. Each of them was subservient to you in the drug enterprise and acted at your direction. It was your enterprise, primarily established for your enrichment.

71 The charges of murder and kidnapping of which you have been found guilty by the jury are, as I said earlier, callous and horrifying. You still do not accept responsibility for killing Faugere so there can be no considerations of remorse in the sentence imposed on you for those offences. The community must be genuinely affronted that people like you can kill for such thoroughly despicable reasons.

72 The role of general and specific deterrence is significant in this case. The fact that over a period of days, as you planned how Yengo Faugere would be kidnapped and murdered, you did not once stop to hesitate about doing such a terrible thing to another human being. All you could contemplate was either punishment of Faugere and/or protection of your drug business.

73 As far as the drug offences are concerned, as I earlier noted you seemed unconcerned at the police interest in your activities and I assume you concluded that you could defeat them. You failed but the impunity with which you pushed on says a lot about your disregard for the law. Nonetheless you have pleaded guilty to those charges and accepted responsibility for your offending.

74 In accordance with the principle of totality, I have endeavoured to formulate a sentence that is just and appropriate for the whole of your offending. I have reviewed the total effective sentence with that in mind.

On the charge of murder of Yengo Faugere you will be sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 28 years ('Charge A').

On the charge of kidnapping Yengo Faugere you will be sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 12 years ('Charge B')

On the charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence not less than a large commercial quantity you will be sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of 7 years ('Charge C').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered category D Longarm you will be sentenced to a period of 18 months imprisonment ('Charge D').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered category A Longarm you will be sentenced to a period of 9 months imprisonment ('Charge E').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered handgun you will be sentenced to a period of 3 years imprisonment ('Charge F').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered category B Longarm you will be sentenced to a period of 18 months imprisonment ('Charge G').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered category D Longarm you will be sentenced to a period of 18 months imprisonment ('Charge H').

On the charge of possession of an unregistered category D Longarm you will be sentenced to a period of 18 months imprisonment ('Charge I').

On the summary charge of possession of a stun gun you will be sentenced to 3 months imprisonment ('Charge J').

75 I direct that 2 years of the sentence on charge B be served cumulatively with the sentence on charge A. I direct that 2 years of the sentence on charge C also be served cumulatively with the sentence on charge A. I direct that the sentences on charges D to J be served concurrently with the sentence on charge A.

76 That results in a total effective sentence of 32 years imprisonment. I fix a period of 25 years before you are eligible to apply for release on parole.

77 I have determined that your pre-sentence detention is a period of 948 days including this day and pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act 1991 I declare that such period is to be reckoned as a period of imprisonment already served under this sentence.

Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991

78 Pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that had you not pleaded guilty to the charges included on the second indictment and identified by me as charges C to I, the total effective sentence I would have imposed on you would have been a period of 34 years imprisonment and I would have fixed a minimum period of 26 years before you would have been eligible to apply for release on parole.

79 On 15 August 2014 I pronounced consent orders in relation to an application for compensation pursuant to s 86 of the Sentencing Act.

80 The prosecutor has sought disposal, retention and forfeiture orders which you have not opposed and, accordingly, I will make those orders.

[1] Crimes Act 1958, s 3.

[2] Ibid, s 63A.

[3] Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, s 71.

[4] Firearms Act 1996, s 6A(2).

[5] Ibid, s 6A(1).

[7] Control of Weapons Act 1990, s 5AA.

[8] [2013] VSCA 181