STATE OF TASMANIA v RICKY SMITH-TOWNS 9 AUGUST 2019
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE BRETT J
Mr Smith-Towns, a jury has found you guilty of one count of robbery.
The jury’s verdict does not completely resolve the factual basis of sentencing, in my view. Accordingly, I must do so. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the facts largely accord with the version provided in evidence by the complainant. I accept the complainant’s evidence. His testimony had the ring of truth and is largely consistent with the complaints made by him at the time to others. Further, it was apparent that he had no particular axe to grind with you, and did not seem to be particularly happy about being required to give evidence. Finally, I do not accept the version of events which you provided in your interview. Your assertion to police that you did not take the bicycle was clearly false, having regard to your return of it to the complainant two months before the commencement of the trial, together with the apology.
Accordingly, I find the facts to be these. On the day of the crime, 12 October 2018, you came across the complainant by chance. I accept that your actions thereafter were not premeditated, and that this was a spontaneous action. I accept also that your motive in attacking him in the first place was to seek retribution based on your belief that he had been contacting your partner inappropriately. However, I also accept that events then transpired as he described. You punched him in the face, knocking him off his bicycle. Then, when he was on the ground you took the bicycle away. I am not completely sure when you decided to keep it, but I am satisfied that you had no real intention at any time of returning it to him. Your suggestion, which he agreed with, that he come over to you to take it back was at best mockery and at worst, an enticement to have him come closer so you could continue to assault him. I am satisfied that you retained possession of the bicycle until approximately two months ago, when you decided to return the bicycle to him. It would seem from his evidence that he accepted your apology as genuine. I will also accept the apology as such. The complainant did indicate that as a result of that conversation he did not want the matter to proceed but, of course, it was not his decision, and as I have already said, in my view the State correctly acted in the public interest by continuing the prosecution.
You are 27 years of age and have a lengthy criminal record. You commenced offending when, by my calculation, you were 16 years of age. Since that time, you have committed numerous and diverse offences, including a number of serious offences of dishonesty. There is also a history of violent offending. In 2010, you were sentenced by this Court to imprisonment for one count of Criminal Code assault. You were again sentenced for such a crime in May 2016. The first in time involved a particularly brutal assault committed in public in response to a perceived insult by a man against your mother. There are parallels between that conduct and the conduct in respect of the crime with which I am dealing. The second involved your assistance to other prisoners who were committing a serious assault on a correctional officer. I accept that that crime did not involve any actual violence administered by you. You also have a conviction for the summary offence of aggravated assault, which seems to have been committed in 2015. I also observe from your criminal history that you have been offered the leniency of a suspended sentence on more than one occasion, but in respect of each such sentence, have eventually been resentenced because of the breach of the terms of suspension. In respect of this crime, your culpability is aggravated by the fact that at the time of its commission, you were subject to a suspended sentence. That sentence has since been activated for other reasons.
I have regard to your personal circumstances as outlined this morning by your counsel. I note that you have had difficulties in your life. Initially with respect to the misuse of alcohol and then subsequently you became involved with illicit drugs. I have no doubt that that explains a lot of your offending behaviour. I accept that, as you sit here today, you desperately want to overcome any ongoing problem you have in relation to drugs, and I have no doubt that you are committed to your family and you want to live a law abiding life. But, quite frankly sir, that outcome is in your hands, and you have to make better decisions. You did not make a good decision on this occasion.
I do regard this crime seriously. I accept that the complainant did not suffer injury, that it might be seen that the theft of a bicycle is a relatively modest crime in the scheme of things. I accept also that this was not premeditated and and you did eventually return his property. However, as is usually the case, crimes involving robbery are actually crimes against people more so than property. This is clearly applicable in respect of this crime. You committed an act of arrogant thuggery designed to achieve retribution because you believed that you had been wronged by the complainant. General deterrence is a relevant sentencing consideration. Further, particularly having regard to your record of prior offending and the fact that you committed this crime while subject to a suspended sentence and soon after release from imprisonment for other matters, there is a need for specific deterrence.
Ricky Smith-Towns, you are convicted of the crime of which you have been found guilty and sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment. That sentence will commence from 8 August 2019. You will not be eligible for parole until you have served six months of that sentence.