STATE OF TASMANIA v SHANNON LEE BURRIDGE 29 APRIL 2021
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE WOOD J
Shannon Lee Burridge has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and pervert justice and also summary offences that arise from the same incident, being evade police contrary to s 11A(1) of the Police Powers (Vehicle Interception) Act 2000, and drive whilst not the holder of a driver licence.
At around 12:20am on 6 October 2019, police officers attempted to intercept a grey Hyundai Lantra station wagon on Birch Street in Kingston. The defendant, Ms Burridge, was driving and Natasha Hickey was in the front passenger seat. Ms Hickey’s partner and two males were in the rear passenger seats.
Police activated lights but the defendant failed to stop and accelerated to approximately 70 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. Multiple police cars were engaged and the defendant was observed in a course of dangerous driving that lasted around 15 minutes, over a distance of approximately 30 kms through Kingston, Blackman’s Bay, Margate, Howden, Tinderbox and Sandfly. It included the Channel Highway and other main sealed roads, as well as gravel roads. The details of this course of dangerous driving are as follows:
On Birch Street the defendant mounted the kerb before turning left onto Redwood Road without indicating. She drove at a speed of approximately 100 km/h, where the speed limit is 60 km/h. She turned left onto the Channel Highway without indicating, travelling at approximately 100 km/h in a 50 km/h area.
Police deployed a vehicle immobilisation device at the Channel Highway round-about with Algona Road. The defendant swerved violently, changing lanes without indicating to avoid the device.
She continued on the Channel Highway, on a number of occasions travelling at approximately 100 – 110 km/h where the speed limit was 90 km/h. She overtook a vehicle on a crest, crossing double white lines when it was unsafe to do so.
The defendant turned left onto Howden Road without indicating, travelling at a speed of 90 km/h. She turned onto Brightwater Road at the same speed, then onto Tinderbox Road, a gravel road, travelling on the incorrect side of the road as she did so at a speed of approximately 80 km/h. The speed limit for Howden Road, Brightwater Road and Tinderbox Road is 60 km/h.
Travelling on Tinderbox Road the defendant lost control of the vehicle at a left hand bend. She used the handbrake and spun the vehicle 180 degrees. Then she travelled back in the opposite direction at approximately 80 km/h. Police attempted to deploy an immobilisation device as the defendant travelled on Tinderbox Road. The device hit the windscreen and the defendant slowed before accelerating and turning right onto Brightwater Road without indicating.
The defendant then travelled onto Howden Road at a speed of approximately 90 km/h and failed to safely negotiate a left hand bend, narrowly missing a collision with an embankment. The defendant continued along Howden Road travelling at the same speed of 90 km/h.
The defendant turned left onto the Channel Highway without indicating, crossing over the double white line. As the vehicle was approaching Margate it was travelling at approximately 100 km/h where the speed limit reduces to 60 km/h.
The defendant turned into Sandfly Road, crossing a single white continuous line and travelling onto the incorrect side of the road. She continued driving at approximately 80 km/h along this road in a 60 km/h zone, before increasing her speed to 100 km/h where the speed limit is 90 km/h.
The police deployed an immobilisation device on Sandfly Road. The defendant drove over the spikes at approximately 100km/h, puncturing the front two tyres and then came to a stop.
During the course of driving the defendant was repeating that she could not go to gaol, and that she was going to lose her daughter. The defendant was encouraged and in fact, pressured to continue driving by the males in the rear passenger seats. Ms Hickey assisted the defendant’s driving by giving her some directions.
At some point during the driving, Ms Hickey told the defendant that she would take the blame. When the vehicle stopped, the defendant climbed over the front seat into the back seat and Ms Hickey got into the driver’s seat. Police officers attended soon afterwards and saw two males run into the bushland. They saw Ms Hickey in the driver’s seat, with the defendant and one of the males in the rear seats. Ms Hickey told police that she was the driver.
Ms Hickey was arrested and participated in a record of interview. She made full admissions to being the driver and to driving dangerously. She told police the defendant was in the front passenger seat.
The defendant told police she was in the backseat and asleep during the incident. She signed a statutory declaration stating that she was a passenger in the rear of the vehicle and that Ms Hickey was the driver.
On 8 October, the defendant exchanged a number of text messages with Ms Hickey. Ms Hickey expressed her resentment for the situation she was in, and saying she was not taking the blame. The defendant replied expressing her gratitude for what she had done and then stating “I’m absolutely petrified … I can’t go to jail … No way” and “I’m literally begging, willing to do anything. I’m terrified please don’t change your mind tash”.
Ms Hickey made a statement to police on 16 October 2019 stating that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle. Ms Hickey told police it had been her idea that she should take the blame.
On 31 October 2019, the defendant was arrested and participated in a record of interview. She made full admissions to her conduct of dangerous driving and pervert justice. She told police that she had been the driver. She did not hold a licence. She had previously held a learner licence but it had expired.
She said that when she saw police lights behind her in Birch Street she “freaked out” because she has prior driving charges. During the driving, the males in the backseat were telling her not to stop, one of them was carrying Ice. At one point when she locked the brakes on Howden Road, she was going to stop, but one of the males in the backseat was screaming at her not to stop and she drove off. She was scared and petrified throughout the driving because she knew she had made a huge mistake and was scared of getting caught. She was not intoxicated and not under the influence of any illicit substances. She described her dangerous driving as “appalling” and “stupid”.
In relation to her conduct of perverting justice she made full admissions to police, stating her statutory declaration was false. Ms Hickey had offered to take the blame because the defendant had prior driving offences, and Ms Hickey did not have any. She told police that Ms Hickey had done the right thing in telling the truth.
The defendant was 24 years of age at the time of offending. She has a prior conviction for learner driver driving unaccompanied by a licenced driver and two for drive while disqualified, the first committed in 2014 and the second in 2016. On both occasions the penalty imposed was a fine and disqualification. She also has a prior conviction for drive whilst her driver licence was suspended. The court again imposed a fine and period of licence disqualification.
The defendant has a four year old daughter who is her primary, if not her exclusive focus and concern. She is exceptionally anxious about the prospect of incarceration and separation from her daughter.
I have a report from Dr Georgina O’Donnell who provides information about the defendant’s mental state at the time of her offending and since. The defendant has a history of anxiety and depression symptoms.
She drove in a state of acute stress and anxiety. She was a reluctant offender, as I have mentioned, pressured by the men in the back of the vehicle to keep driving and to avoid being apprehended by police. In Dr O’Donnell’s opinion, she was in a state of panic at the time she drove. Her panic impaired her ability to exercise appropriate judgment and make calm and rational choices, and reduced her moral culpability to a degree.
However, it must be emphasised that as the driver, you were responsible for your driving and the consequences of whatever situation you found yourself in. You were also responsible for your decision to drive when you had no licence and had never qualified for a driver licence.
Fortunately, there was no collision and no motorists had to take evasive action. But there was the potential for harm, and there were moments in your driving where if a vehicle had been on the road, the motorist and any passengers as well as your passengers would have been at grave risk. You understand the potential that existed for terrible harm.
I note that in relation to the crime of pervert justice, your wrongdoing arose from your fear of incarceration and the impact on your daughter. I note that genuine fear can be seen in the text messages referred to.
You have already experienced some punishing consequences arising from your wrong-doing. You are extremely anxious about the situation you are in and, as I have mentioned, the prospect of separation from your daughter. You have been living with that distress and anxiety for well over 12 months and it has weighed heavily upon you. I have the benefit of a pre-sentence report which indicates your distress. Dr O’Donnell states you present with clinically significant symptoms of Panic Disorder. You are overwhelmed by the current charges and the prospect of imprisonment. Your symptoms are acute and there is the prospect, according to Dr O’Donnell that your condition may further deteriorate if you are sentenced to a term of imprisonment.
There is no question that you are genuinely remorseful. You have expressed a high level of distress regarding the mistakes you have made and their impact on other people. Your regret and remorse are mitigatory.
The defendant spent 19 days in custody as a result of breaching her bail in March 2020. She is now so anxious in relation to her bail conditions that she spends most of her time at home.
The defendant is consulting her general practitioner regarding anxiety and depression symptoms, a mental health plan has been prepared and she has been referred to a psychologist and is willing to engage in psychological treatment.
I take into account the defendant’s plea of guilty and acceptance of responsibility. She has cut ties with associates who had a negative influence upon her and is living a quiet life with her daughter.
These are serious crimes which ordinarily would attract an actual term of imprisonment. I have made comments about the seriousness of the dangerous driving. The crime of pervert justice is a relatively serious example designed to cover up and enable you to avoid responsibility for a serious crime. Such conduct undermines the proper course of justice. If not for Ms Hickey’s change of heart, you may have avoided criminal responsibility altogether which would have been a grave matter. It also meant that you could not be tested for alcohol and illicit substances. While there is no suggestion that you were so affected, the police should have had the opportunity to investigate that. I note that once confronted with your crime, you cooperated and accepted full responsibility which has aided the administration of justice.
General and personal deterrence are important sentencing considerations for these crimes. Usually lengthy actual terms of imprisonment would be required. However, because of your relative young age, the mitigating personal circumstances, the lack of prior convictions for crimes such as these, and the indications that you are profoundly affected by your offending and deterred from future offending, I have adopted an exceptional course.
You have been assessed as suitable for a home detention order and a community correction order involving supervision. I have decided that these sentencing options are appropriate in your particular case.
This order can only be imposed if the Court would have sentenced the offender to a term of imprisonment, actual or suspended. That condition is undoubtedly met here. A home detention order can only be in place for a maximum of 18 months. Home detention is a new order that is properly regarded as a type of imprisonment: DPP v King [2020] TASCCA 8. Because it is served in a person’s home, it is obviously less onerous than serving that term in a prison. But still, home detention is by its nature a very onerous sentence: DPP v King at [32] per Blow CJ, [52]–[55] per Wood J and at [139] per Estcourt J. It is a sentence that is punitive in its effect and yet also allows rehabilitation to be promoted.
Shannon Lee Burridge, I record convictions on all crimes and offences. For the crime of dangerous driving I impose a home detention order for 10 months. I note your consent. This order is to take effect from tomorrow. The core conditions of a home detention order apply during this period, including that you must:
- Not commit an offence that is punishable by imprisonment.
- Reside at the home detention premises at [address stated].
- During all of the operational period of the order (a period of 10 months commencing tomorrow) you must submit to electronic monitoring, including by wearing or carrying an electronic device.
- During that period that you are required to submit to electronic monitoring:
- You must not remove, tamper with, damage, disable or interfere with the proper functioning of any electronic device or equipment used for the purpose of electronic monitoring;
- You must not allow anyone else to remove, tamper with, damage, disable or interfere with the proper functioning of any electronic device or equipment used for the purpose of electronic monitoring;
- You must comply with all reasonable and lawful directions given to you in relation to the electronic monitoring, including in relation to the installation , attachment or operation of a device, or a system, used for the purposes of electronic monitoring by:
- a police officer;
- a probation officer or proscribed officer; or
- another person whose functions involve the installation or operation of a device, or a system, used for the purposes of electronic monitoring.
I impose special conditions of the home detention order:
- You must, during the operational period of the order, remain at [address stated] at all times unless approved by a probation officer.
- You must attend the Community Corrections office at Highfield House tomorrow morning at 9:30 for induction with respect to this order;
- You must, during the operational period of this order, maintain in operating condition an active mobile phone service, provide the contact details to Community Corrections and be accessible for contact through this device at all times.
- You must submit to the supervision of a Community Corrections officer as required by that officer;
- You must not, during the operational period of the order, take any illicit or prohibited substances. Illicit or prohibited substances include:
- Any controlled drug as defined by the Misuse of Drugs Act
- Any medication containing an Opiate, Benzodiazepine, Bupropion, Hydrochloride or Pseudoephedrine, unless you provide written evidence from your medical professional that you have been prescribed the relevant medication.
In relation to the crime of pervert justice, I impose a community correction order. I regard that as appropriate in all the circumstances. You must comply with the order for a period of 30 months. You must not commit an offence punishable by imprisonment for that period. The core conditions of the order require you to report to a probation officer, at Community Corrections in Hobart tomorrow. In addition I impose the following special condition that you must submit to the supervision of a probation officer for 18 months from today.
Further, for the crime of dangerous driving I impose a period of licence disqualification of two years.
In relation to the offence of evade police I must impose a separate penalty. I impose the minimum fine of $1720 and a period of licence disqualification of six months in addition to the two years disqualification just imposed. In relation to this particular offence I impose an additional two month period of home detention, so a home detention order in exactly the same terms as that imposed for the dangerous driving to commence at the conclusion of that first order of 10 months. This is a total of 12 months home detention.
For the offence of driving whilst not the holder of a driver licence, I impose a fine of $100 and disqualification of three months, two months to be cumulative to the term of two years and six months. So the total period of disqualification is two years and eight months. Your licence is suspended.