R v Angell, Monique [2008] NSWDC 277

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: R v Angell, Monique [2008] NSWDC 277

JUDGMENT DATE: 9 October 2008

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Nicholson SC DCJ

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - sentencing - robbery in company - robbery, Form 1 - s.11 C(SP)Act bail interrupted by incarceration re earlier matters - unable to assess capacity to rehabilitate.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act

CASES CITED: Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610

PARTIES: Regina Monique Angell

FILE NUMBER(S): 2007/21/1137

COUNSEL: Defence: Ms J Ghabrial

SOLICITORS: Crown: Mr N. Borosh

JUDGMENT 1. The offender pleaded guilty before the Penrith District Court on 19 September 2007 before his Honour Knight to two counts of robbery in company, with a further count of robbery in company and one robbery to be taken into account on a Form 1. The offender was remanded in custody to 5 November 2007 at the Penrith District Court. On that date the matter came before me. I stood it over part heard to 21 November 2007. 2. On 21 November 2007 Ms Angell was released by me on s 11 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act bail. At the time I gave extensive reasons for taking the course I took and the terms of the s 11 bail were exposed by me at that time. The reasons I gave involved an examination of the facts, the objective seriousness of the offending conduct and an extensive review of the subjective features of the offender. My remarks made at that time are to be regarded as being incorporated in these remarks and as providing factors I have taken into account today in determining the sentencing disposition that I have determined. 3. Five months after her release on s.11 bail the offender was arrested in connection with an unrelated matter that is said to have had its origins in the events that occurred before the custody from which her s 11 bail order had released her. In respect of that matter (the newly arrested matter) she has been denied bail. She has been in custody on that matter from 3 April 2008 until today. Since her arrest on the matter the offender has been before Court, primarily on dates initially set for progress reports pursuant to the s 11 bail order. The purpose of those reports was intended to give the Court some insight into the offender's rehabilitation progress in the community. The matter has not been finalised sooner, because the offender's prospects for obtaining bail or perhaps of having the charge or charges dropped was unsettled. 4. If freedom was to be obtained for one reason or another it was anticipated Ms Angell would resume the s 11 bail given to her. The conditions of the s 11 bail were intended, among other things, to be stringent, concrete and focussed upon providing a basis for rehabilitation to occur. During the five and a half months some progress was made. There were, however, some matters I regarded as potential failures, which her counsel sought to explain as having no significance in terms of the overall rehabilitation. I will come to counsel's explanations in a moment. Because of the offender's arrest I am unable to say whether these areas I have described as possible failures were portents of worse to come or simply no more than hiccups on the way to rehabilitation. 5. Shortly after the s 11 bail the offender became pregnant, miscarried and became pregnant again. Her anticipated date of delivery is-- I put 15 October, but I see in your submissions you have got 15 November. GHABRIAL: Yes. 6. The view of her progress during the five months on s 11 bail is most favourably set out in the submissions of Ms Ghabrial, her counsel, in written submissions handed to me today. "3. Court set condition that she apply for TAFE course. Could not get into TAFE course so exercised ingenuity and went back to school to do Year 10, School certificate at Blacktown Youth College (refer to Probation & Parole Service progress report 27 March 2008). 4. Made application for and was placed on waiting list for personal support program with Centrelink.