STATE OF TASMANIA v WAYNE JOHN BENJAMIN 25 FEBRUARY 2022
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE ESTCOURT J
The defendant, Wayne John Benjamin has pleaded guilty to with dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime.
The complainant, Ivan Gray, owned a property at an address in Moonah in which he kept four vintage vehicles, including a Customline.
The complainant last attended the property in about January 2018 and all vehicles were inside the garage.
Between 19 February 2019 and early March that year, a person by the name of Hedley Auksorius received messages from the defendant and his nephew Dylan Benjamin, enquiring as to whether he would be interested in purchasing various car parts and shells. Mr Auksorius owns a business called “Tassie Relics”, through which he buys and sells second hand items and antique collectables.
He ended up purchasing all 4 shells of the complainant’s cars, at different times, for a total of $5,500. He estimated that he spent a further $2,500 on various parts from the car. He picked up the cars from the address, the last purchase being around the end of April 2019.
As a result of seeing a photograph online of the shell of his Customline for sale, the complainant attended the address in Moonah and checked the garage. All four of his vehicles had been stolen and he saw that a sheet of iron had been moved from the rear of the garage which had allowed access to the inside of the shed. He called police.
On 14 May 2019, police attended the business Tassie Relics and spoke with Mr Auksorius. He provided police with records of lengthy Facebook conversations he had with Mr Benjamin. Both he and all of the purchasers of the vehicles were of the belief that the purchases were legitimate.
On Thursday 16 May 2019 police arrested the defendant and Mr. Benjamin. At the conclusion of his interview, the defendant was charged and bailed.
Mr Auksorius told police that the defendant was the person he dealt with the most when they were all together but he identified Mr Dylan Benjamin as the person who was “clearly calling the shots”.
All four motor vehicles were recovered in different conditions, however all had numerous parts missing and will not be able to be restored to their original conditions. The value of the vehicles is now significantly less. They were not insured.
The State’s case is that Dylan Benjamin was responsible for the burglary of the shed and stealing the car parts and the defendant Wayne Benjamin subsequently provided some of the car parts to Mr Auksorious, at the request of Mr Dylan Benjamin and received payment for the parts. He was also present on the occasions when Mr Auksorius collected and purchased the four car shells. The State asserts that the defendant dealt with the property when there were reasonable grounds to suspect the property was the proceeds of crime.
Pursuant to s 68(1) of the Sentencing Act 1997, a compensation order is sought in favour of Ivan Gray, in an amount to be assessed. I make that order and adjourn the assessment.
A pre-sentence report states that the defendant described the offending involved his nephew coercing him into taking the stolen car parts to a second hand car place. He stated his nephew was putting pressure on him constantly and threatening that if I he didn’t help ‘he would punch his head in and bash him. The defendant stated that he spoke with his nephew in an attempt to dissuade him from his involvement but re-iterated he was unable to say no to him as he has experienced his nephew carrying out threats to him before.
The defendant stated that neither he, nor his nephew were using any substances at the time and he only complied with his nephew’s demands because he did not want to be assaulted. He acknowledges that he should not have committed the crime but again he stated he was feeling under pressure. He described his attitude as very remorseful towards the victim for losing his cars and stated if he could turn back time, he would never have done it. The action he has taken to date to address his offending behaviour is to make a concerted effort to keep out of trouble
This is accepted by the State, or at least not contested.
The defendant is 37 years old. He has no relevant prior convictions, and indeed as I have noted very few brushes with the law at all. He concedes that he was reckless in terms of his dealings but he was not involved in the breaking into of the shed or the stripping of the vehicles. It is submitted that his responsibility not as high as Dylan Benjamin. The State does not say otherwise.
Dylan Benjamin was charged with burglary and stealing and received community based orders not including any community service.
The defendant is assessed as suitable for community service.
In view of the defendant’s age and in all of these circumstance a sentence of imprisonment would be appropriate. However, having regard to parity I make a community correction order. The defendant is convicted. I make a community correction order with an operational period of two years, a condition of that order will be that during the operational period of the order, he complete 49 hours of community service. Mr Benjamin you are to report to Community Corrections office at Highfield House on the corner of Bathurst Street and Murray Street by 12.00 noon on Monday 28 February 2022.