RILEY, C J

STATE OF TASMANIA v CAMERON JAMES RILEY                                       BRETT J

COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE                                               23 OCTOBER 2019

Mr Riley, you have pleaded guilty to 1 count of assault and 1 count of stealing.

The crimes were committed by you on 23 August 2017. According to your counsel, the crimes were committed in the context of illicit drug dealing and this is consistent with the factual basis of sentencing asserted by the prosecution. The victim is a man, who was then aged 49. He had gone to the house where the crimes were committed in order to purchase drugs. He owed the drug dealer a debt in respect of drug purchases and, after arrival, he left the house to go to a bank in order to obtain money from his account to pay the debt. I am not sure about the nature of the relationship between the drug dealer and you, but there was clearly some association because you seem to have been acting on his behalf throughout this incident. Your counsel describes you and he as friends. The complainant returned from the bank without the required money, and it seems that you had the task, or at least took it upon yourself, to interrogate and terrorise him in an effort to obtain payment of the drug debt. You commenced with an angry interrogation which included threats of harm. When the complainant did not give you the answers you were seeking, you then inflicted a prolonged and brutal physical assault on him, which in effect amounted to a course of torture. The assault was apparently intended to force him to provide the required information and to punish him for not paying for the drugs. I infer that it was also intended to teach him a lesson about the need for payment in the future.

The details of what you did after the initial interrogation are as follows. You had the complainant turn out his pockets and stole the property which was produced by him. This consisted of $35 cash, a packet of cigarettes, a torch and his wallet which contained personal cards. You then took his mobile phone and checked the record of communications contained in it. Next, he was forced to remove all his clothing except for his underpants and he was forced to briefly lower his underwear so you could check if anything was hidden there. This was done in front of at least three other people, including the house owner, who were in the room apparently watching what was happening. After this, you made the complainant sit in a chair and then commenced the physical violence. You punched him to both sides of his face 15 times and then kicked him once to the left side of his face with significant force. You then stood behind the chair where he was sitting, placed the connecting chain of a pair of nunchucks around his throat, and applied pressure. As a result, he had trouble breathing, experienced convulsions and lost control of his bladder. You then took a picture of his beaten face with a mobile telephone. All of this took place in the presence of the other people, and over an extended period of time. It is suggested that that period was possibly several hours. Eventually, the complainant was able to leave and went to a nearby community centre where he was provided with assistance, and contact was made with police.

The complainant was taken by ambulance to hospital where he remained for observation and pain control for five days. His injuries included multiple bilateral facial bruises, grazes and cuts. There was also considerable swelling around the right eye and nasal bridge and bruising on his neck. He suffered fractures of the right mandible at the joint and of nasal bones. The injuries have healed but he has been left with a malocclusion of his teeth, that is likely to be permanent. He has provided an impact statement which asserts that the malocclusion causes problems with eating. In addition to the physical pain and discomfort he experienced after the assault, he suffers ongoing psychological problems, including anxiety and problems with sleeping.

You are 30 years of age. You have a concerning criminal history. That history is consistent with your counsel’s submission that the time of committing this offence, you were heavily involved in the illicit drug culture. You commenced offending as a youth and have offended consistently since that time. Your problem with illicit drugs is also longstanding. Your criminal record demonstrates a general disregard for the law. The offending is spread across a variety of offences, including serious drug matters, firearms and traffic offences. There are two prior convictions for common assault. You have been sentenced to actual and suspended imprisonment on a number of occasions. It would seem that rehabilitative options such as probation orders and suspended sentences have had little effect in terms of encouraging or achieving rehabilitation.

I regard the assault, in particular, as a serious example of that crime. Your assault on this man was brutal and degrading. You exacerbated his humiliation and the impact of the crime upon him by the context in which the violence was inflicted, which included perpetrating it in front of others, having him remove his clothing so that he could be searched and then photographing him. The prolonged nature of the beating would also have exacerbated his terror and the general impact upon him. You demonstrated a clear propensity for cruelty and violence. Further, it is apparent from the facts and confirmed by your counsel in any event that you were affected by drugs during the course of these events. Of course, this does not mitigate or even explain your conduct. On the contrary, I regard the fact that you were affected by drugs, and that you were inflicting this violence as a means of collecting a drug debt, as factors which seriously aggravate your culpability. Your injection of drugs and their effect on you had the capacity to remove any inhibitions you may have felt about beating this man. The purposeful and prolonged nature of the attack removes any suggestion that it was spontaneous, provoked or in some way explainable by the circumstances. Your use of violence as means of enforcing the payment of debts within the context of illicit drug dealing adds a sinister aspect to your conduct. These factors suggest that both general deterrence and personal deterrence are important sentencing considerations.

There is little available to you in the way of mitigation. Your plea of guilty was indicated to the prosecution 15 minutes before the listed commencement of the trial. The complainant and his mother, who were to be called as witnesses by the prosecution, had been briefed and were at court ready to give evidence. I have been told that they were experiencing considerable stress in anticipation of giving evidence, and this stress was only relieved at the last minute. It states the obvious that by pleading guilty they did not need to actually give evidence but, in the circumstances, that utilitarian benefit deserves little mitigatory weight. You have not demonstrated any remorse for your conduct nor any real interest in reform.

The only matter that may operate in your favour is the question of totality. You are currently serving a sentence of six years’ imprisonment which was imposed on 16 May 2019 for conduct completely unrelated to the crimes for which I must impose sentence. The crimes in question were rape, three counts of sexual intercourse person under 17 years and supplying a controlled drug to a child. A non-parole period of three years and six months was imposed as part of that sentencing order. I am told that your conviction for those crimes is under appeal, but I think I have no option other than to assume that the conviction will remain intact and you will serve the sentence, when I am assessing its impact in respect of the application of the principles of totality. Having said this, the only role which totality has to play in this case is an overall assessment of the combined effect of the sentences to ensure that it is proportionate to the overall criminal conduct, and not unduly crushing having regard to your prospects. In this regard, I bear in mind that the sentences have been and will be imposed for completely separate and discrete episodes of criminal conduct. I will provide for totality in both my assessment of the head sentence and by providing for early release on parole. The non-parole order will also take into account the prospect that after spending some years in prison, you may develop a commitment to reform, and it will provide the Parole Board with the opportunity to respond to evidence of any such commitment.

Cameron Riley, you are convicted of the crimes to which you have pleaded guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for a global term of three years. That sentence will be served cumulatively upon the sentence which you are currently serving. You will not be eligible for parole until you have served one half of this sentence.

I make a compensation order in favour of Michael Wayne Dickkenberg in the sum of $400.