STATE OF TASMANIA v CARLY ELIZABETH LYON 7 AUGUST 2019
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE BRETT J
Ms Lyon, you have pleaded guilty to a number of offences relating to unlawfully setting fire to various items of property. The offences are one count of attempted arson, eight counts of unlawfully setting fire to property contrary to the Police Offences Act, two counts of lighting a fire on a day of total fire ban, and one count of unlawfully setting fire to property contrary to the Criminal Code.
You committed all of the offences overnight between 4 and 5 January 2019. At about 11pm on 4 January, you drove to the rural home of your uncle and aunt with the intention of setting fire to a shed on their property. The shed you had in mind was not there, but you doused an old disused chicken coop with methylated spirits with the intention of setting that building on fire. You were interrupted when an occupant of the property came to investigate and you drove away without lighting the fire. You told police that these people were on your “hit list” because you felt you had been treated differently by them to other members of your family.
At about 12:40 am on 5 January, you drove to the car park behind the office of Child Safety Services in the Launceston CBD with the intention of setting fire to a vehicle operated by that department. You located such a vehicle and you again used methylated spirts as an accelerant, and this time you were successful in setting the vehicle on fire. That vehicle was completely destroyed and another vehicle close by suffered significant damage. The fire also caused some damage to the nearby office building. You were motivated by the desire to seek retribution for wrongs which you felt had been perpetrated upon you by Child Safety Services. In particular, you were upset that your children, aged 10 and 4, had been taken into care some months before.
You were arrested later that day. When you were interviewed by police, you volunteered the commission of the balance of the offences. These included setting fire to vegetation on the side of the road in six different locations. You also set fire to fences in two other locations, one adjacent to a house, and then fences surrounding the Missiondale property at Evandale. It seems that most of these fires did not take significant hold and the damage was limited. However, the potential for serious damage, particularly as you were lighting these fires on a day of total fire ban, was obviously significant.
You are 36 years of age. Your counsel has outlined a significant history involving problems with mental health, self-harm and substance abuse. It seems that your life was at a very low point in the latter part of 2018. You were hospitalised after a suicide attempt, and it was at this time that your children were taken into care. After release from hospital, you were feeling hopeless and your drug use increased. You had obtained some work towards the end of the year but you largely spent the money you earned on purchasing drugs. You committed these offences when your psychological and emotional condition was still compromised and you were in the grip of serious drug use. You have been held in custody since your arrest on 5 January, and it seems that the time in custody, and the enforced abstinence from drugs, has been beneficial for you. Understandably, after your actions towards child safety services, it was difficult to see your children, but it seems now that some contact has been reinstated and you have some hope for the future. You are committed to working on your problems with the ultimate goal that your children will be returned to you.
You do not have a lengthy criminal history, but the convictions on your record have some relevance to the conduct on this occasion. I refer in particular to your conviction and sentence in 2008 for destroying property. That related to similar conduct, in particular an act of retribution which included damaging and ultimately setting fire to a church building. You received a sentence of actual imprisonment for that conduct. There are obvious parallels between your criminal behaviour on that occasion and the conduct with which I am dealing.
The crimes and offences to which you have pleaded guilty represent a serious course of criminal conduct. Although your psychological and emotional state was at a low ebb, it does not excuse your conduct. Further, your actions were deliberate and clearly premeditated. The attack on the children services vehicle is of particular concern. That department has an extremely difficult but very important responsibility. That responsibility is the protection of the safety and welfare of children. Officers of that department must be able to discharge that responsibility without fear of retribution from those disgruntled by their work. They are entitled to the protection of the court in this regard. Further, you caused significant damage particularly in relation to that crime, and I have already commented on the potential for far more widespread damage and destruction, if the other fires lit by you had taken hold. General deterrence is an important sentencing consideration.
In your favour, I will take into account your plea of guilty and your personal circumstances. Your conduct deserves the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment but I intend to suspend part of the sentence to provide you with incentive to reform and to facilitate support through supervision.
Accordingly, the orders I make are as follows:
1 You are convicted of the crimes and offences to which you have pleaded guilty;
2 In relation to all crimes and offences, with the exception of counts 10 and 11 on complaint 30069/19, you are sentenced to a global term of 18 months’ imprisonment, which will be backdated to 5 January 2019. The last nine months of that sentence will be suspended for a period of 18 months on the following conditions:
(a) That you are not to commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during that period.
(b) That you will be subject to the supervision of a probation officer. You must comply with this condition for a period of 18 months. That period will commence from when you lawfully cease to be imprisoned under this sentence. The Court notes that the conditions referred to in s 24(5B) of the Sentencing Act apply to this condition. These include that you must report to a probation officer within three clear days of the day that you lawfully cease to be imprisoned under the sentence. In addition to the core conditions the order shall also include the following special conditions. The 18 month period is what I refer to as the operational period of the order:
(i) you must, during the operational period of the order, attend educational and other programs as directed by the court or a probation officer;
(ii) you must, during the operational period of the order, submit to the supervision of a probation officer as required by the probation officer;
(iii) you must, during the operational period of the order, undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency as directed by a probation officer;
(iv) you must, during the operational period of the order, submit to testing for drug use as directed by a probation officer;
(v) you must, during the operational period of the order, undergo assessment and treatment for alcohol dependency as directed by a probation officer;
(vi) you must, during the operational period of the order, submit to testing for alcohol use as directed by a probation officer;
(vii) you must, during the operational period of the order, submit to medical, psychological or psychiatric assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer.
In relation to counts 10 and 11 on complaint 30069/19, I will not impose any further punishment. I note that they are not imprisonable offences. In making the decision not to impose any further punishment, I have taken into account the fact that you lit the various fires on a day of a total fire ban in the assessment of the penalty for the other offences, and that I should avoid imposing double punishment on you.
I make the compensation orders sought by the prosecution. In particular:
1 an order in favour of the Department of Health in the sum of $46,551.28
2 an order in favour of Esk View investments in an amount to be assessed
3 an order in favour of Joan O’Brien in respect of count two on the complaint in an amount to be assessed. Both of those assessments are adjourned sine die.