STATE OF TASMANIA v ADAM JAMES BISHOP 29 AUGUST 2019
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PORTER AJ
Mr Bishop, the defendant, has pleaded guilty to one count of dangerous driving committed on Thursday 28 February 2019. I am also dealing with his pleas of guilty to summary charges of making off without payment, driving while not the holder of a licence, evading police (with aggravated circumstances), and failing to stop and stay at the scene of a crash. The facts of these matters are as follows. The starting point is the theft by the defendant on 25 February 2019 of a motor vehicle from the premises of an agency in New Town. Three days later at 11.40am the defendant was seen by police sitting in the stolen vehicle in a street in Lenah Valley. Having identified the defendant and the vehicle as having been stolen, an officer approached the driver’s side door. The defendant had locked it and started the engine when police approached. An officer told him to open the door and then tried to get into the vehicle to take the keys. At that point the defendant drove off at speed. That is the offence of evading police with aggravated circumstances. The officers pursued the defendant. He was travelling over the speed limit and ultimately police lost sight of him. Police units and the police helicopter were deployed. About half and hour later, the defendant was seen by another police officer driving along the Channel Highway. The officer took up a position behind the defendant’s vehicle who then sped up. The defendant drove around a number of streets in Kingston and Kingston Beach, followed by the police officer. The defendant was travelling at excessive speed and at one point drove passed a road worker who was holding up a stop sign. Several workers were on the road at this time. The location was near the beach and the area was busy. A short time later, at about 12.15pm, the defendant drove into a service station in Blackmans Bay. He put about 30 litres of fuel into the vehicle worth a total of about $50, and then drove off without paying. A number of police officers were in the area keeping a lookout for him. One officer was stopped at a major roundabout watching for traffic coming out of Blackmans Bay. He had with him a set of road spikes. As the defendant was seen to approach, the officer went to deploy the road spikes but the defendant turned hard left, engaged the handbrake and, in trying to execute a U-turn, slid sideways and lost control of the vehicle. The defendant then accelerated heavily across the continuous centre line and drove off in the opposite direction. As the defendant passed a school he was travelling at some 70 – 80 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. He overtook two vehicles. Another officer was then stationed at a nearby roundabout and a second attempt to use road spikes was made, but the defendant swerved into the oncoming traffic lane and drove around the device, going the wrong way through a roundabout and almost colliding with a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction. Police then lost sight of him. A short time later he was again seen driving in Kingston Beach. He drove through a red light and drove away. A short time later he was seen by police travelling on the Southern Outlet towards Hobart. His speed was estimated at about 140 km/h in a 100 km/h zone. He was weaving in and out of traffic. At one point he came up behind cars in two lanes and overtook the vehicles off the roadway on the left hand side. The defendant then left the Southern Outlet at the top of Mt Nelson. Police lost sight of him. A short time later he was seen driving at the bottom of the Nelson Road bends. Again road spikes were utilised. Again the defendant attempted to drive around them but the left front wheel was damaged. This notwithstanding, the defendant continued to drive. Road spikes were again deployed; the defendant again attempted to avoid the device, but the left front tyre was further damaged as were the rear tyres. The defendant continued to drive away at speed, going the wrong way around a roundabout in Churchill Avenue, causing the driver of an oncoming vehicle to brake heavily and swerve to avoid a collision. The defendant then drove along a number of streets in Sandy Bay, at one point driving on the wrong side of the road. Eventually he travelled towards Davey Street, a one way street, where he turned right onto that street and drove the wrong way in an easterly direction. Traffic was heavy and the defendant continued to drive in the face of that oncoming traffic. He was travelling at a low speed at around 15 km/h when, at about 12.55pm, he collided with two oncoming vehicles. He abandoned the vehicle and fled towards Anglesea Barracks but was chased down by a member of the public and held until police arrived. Much of this is evident from what I have said, but the particulars of dangerous driving are as follows:
1 Travelling at 65–70 km/h in a 50 km/h zone on Rattle Street, Lenah Valley.
2 Travelling at speed through an area where road workers were working on a roundabout in Pedder Street, Lenah Valley.
3 Overtaking vehicles at 65 km/h in a 40 km/h zone on Osborne Esplanade, Kingston Beach.
4 Failing to stop at a stop sign and travelling at speed through an area where road workers were working on Osborne Esplanade, Kingston Beach.
5 Performing a handbrake turn and losing control of the vehicle before accelerating heavily across a continuous centre line, causing vehicles travelling in both directions on the roadway to brake to avoid a collision. This was on Algona Road, Blackmans Bay.
6 Overtaking vehicles at 70-80 km/h in a 50 km/h zone on Roslyn Avenue, Kingston.
7 Failing to keep left by driving through a roundabout on the wrong side of the road, almost colliding with a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction, in order to avoid a vehicle immobiliser device. This was on Roslyn Avenue, Kingston.
8 Disobeying a red light on Beach Road, Kingston Beach.
9 Travelling at 140 km/h in the 100 km/h zone, weaving in and out of traffic and overtaking vehicles on the left, on the Southern Outlet.
10 Failing to keep left by swerving to the opposite side of the road, in order to avoid a vehicle immobilisation device, on Nelson Road, Sandy Bay.
11 Travelling at 60 to 80 km/h in a 50 km/h zone and failing to keep left by swerving to the opposite side of the road, in order to avoid a vehicle immobilisation device, on Nelson Road, Sandy Bay.
12 Failing to keep left by driving through a roundabout on the wrong side of the road, causing an oncoming vehicle to brake heavily and swerve to avoid a collision, on Alexander Street, Sandy Bay.
13 Travelling on the incorrect side of the road, on Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay.
14 Mounting a traffic island, overtaking a line of vehicles waiting at a traffic light and traveling on the incorrect side of the road, causing oncoming traffic to swerve to avoid a collision, on Byron Street, Sandy Bay.
15 Driving against the flow of traffic and colliding with two vehicles, on Davey Street, Hobart.
I am told that the total distance covered by the course of driving is a little in excess of 50 kilometres. The defendant does not hold a driver’s licence. At the time he was on bail in relation to dishonesty offences pending in the Magistrates Court. He was in breach of that bail by failing to obey a curfew and by failing to report as required. After his arrest on this matter, an oral fluid sample was taken from him, the analysis of which revealed the presence of methylamphetamine. When interviewed, he said he was in Lenah Valley to meet his drug dealer. When he realised the police were approaching, he locked the doors, started the engine and drove off. Generally, he made full admissions in relation to his conduct. He has been in custody since being arrested. No one seems to have been injured as a result of any of this. There are no victim impact statements, but no doubt the Davey Street collisions were a shock to the drivers involved. The vehicles were insured and have been repaired.
The defendant is now 31 years old. He has a very lengthy record starting in 1999. In the main the convictions are for matters of dishonesty, although there is regular bail offending and some breaches of community service orders. He was convicted of driving whilst disqualified in 2009, and in 2018 for driving without a licence and driving with an illicit drug present in the system. He has been the subject of suspended and actual terms of imprisonment. In 2015, mostly for offences of dishonesty, he was sentenced to 20 months’ imprisonment in respect of which he was paroled in January 2016, with that parole being revoked only about three weeks later. On 30 December 2018 by way of resentencing for matters of dishonesty, fresh matters of dishonesty and for breaching bail, he was sentenced to seven months’ imprisonment the execution of four months of which was suspended on conditions for two years. Accordingly, this offending was done in breach of a condition of a suspension. Further relevant personal circumstances are as follows. His parents separated when he was very young and he had significant behavioural problems. Regrettably, when he was 7 years old, he was struck by a car and has ongoing chronic pain issues. Highly prominent in his history is a longstanding substance abuse problem. His dishonesty relates to obtaining money for drugs. He has what was described as an on and off relationship with a woman which started when he was 19. They have a 6 year old child. She has no involvement with drugs and has attempted to prove guidance to him. Various attempts at rehabilitation over the years have failed. He has had the benefit of two drug treatment orders, in respect of which I am told he attempted to do his best, but did not succeed. That ultimately led to his partner withdrawing her support and he found himself without accommodation. Shortly before these events, contact with his daughter was withdrawn. His substance abuse worsened as a result. The defendant’s counsel frankly said there was very little to be said for the events. It seems to be the case that he did not intentionally drive the wrong way in Davey Street, but made a mistake. Counsel pointed out that he made significant admissions. I am told that he is still motivated and “desperate” to attempt rehabilitation. He felt at a very low ebb in the period before this offending. He has some incentive to reform due to the fact that his mother is ill and he wants to be able to care for her. I take into account the pleas of guilty. They were not made at the earliest opportunity as there were ongoing discussions about the particulars, and the Crown was told at an early time that the matter would be a plea of guilty. The pleas have utilitarian value, and the defendant is entitled to some discount as a result. Although the defendant’s record of driving offences is not particularly serious, that he persistently commits crimes in spite of suspended and actual terms of imprisonment, and a period on parole, is significant. Further, being the subject of a suspended term of imprisonment did not deter him. His drug addiction is at the heart of his offending but there is a need to give full weight to the requirements for specific deterrence and community protection. Parliament has now made dangerous driving a crime, widened the scope of the offence of evading police, and increased the penalties to be imposed for that offence. General deterrence and denunciation of this type of conduct are prominent factors. I must impose a separate sentence in respect of the evading police, but otherwise I bear in mind that the sentence must reflect the overall criminality of the behaviour.
Mr Bishop, I have set out some of the relevant considerations involved in this matter. This is a most serious example of this type of offence. First, to put things in context, you should not have been driving at all. You were driving a stolen motor vehicle. As to the driving, you persisted in driving over a very considerable distance, and which involved multiple instances of actual danger and high risk. The risk of serious consequences to other road users and pedestrians was indeed very high, although fortunately they did not materialise. Many people were put at risk. Several police officers were involved in the attempt at apprehending you. Having first evaded the police by driving away from them, much of the subsequent driving conduct was deliberately done to avoid being caught. You repeatedly ignored police attempts to stop you. That shows a high disregard for authority, and the motivation adds a factor of desperation to the driving, and hence adds to the potential danger. You had also used methylamphetamine, further adding to the dangers you posed. I take into account the little that can be said in your favour. On the evading police charge you are convicted and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment to commence on 28 February 2019. On the dangerous driving and remaining matters you are convicted and sentenced to three years and six months’ imprisonment to be served cumulatively to the first term. I order that you not be eligible for parole until you have served two years.* I order that you be disqualified from driving for a period of three years to commence on the date of your release.
[*NOTE: On 24 September 2019, pursuant to s 94(2)(a) and 3(a) of the Sentencing Act 1997, Porter AJ varied the sentence so that it complied with s 17(2)(b) of that Act. In place of the order that the defendant not be eligible for parole until he has served two years, his Honour ordered that the defendant not be eligible for parole in respect of the first sentence (three months), and that he not be eligible for parole in respect of the second sentence (three years and six months) until he has served 21 months.]