Regina v Cooper [2006] NSWSC 609

Reported Decision : 58 ACSR 83

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Regina v Cooper [2006] NSWSC 609

HEARING DATE(S) : 22/8/05 to 31/10/05

JUDGMENT DATE : 23 June 2006

JUDGMENT OF : James J at 1

DECISION : On Counts 7 to 10 - Fixed term of imprisonment for 2-1/2 years; On Counts 11 and 12 - fixed term of imprisonment for 2 years; On Count 13 - fixed term of imprisonment for 1-1/2 years; On Counts 1 to 6 - imprisonment for 5 years with non-parole period of 2 years; Earliest parole date 30 October 2010 ; (See paragraph 274 for all details)

CATCHWORDS : Criminal Law - Sentencing - Bribery - False Statements - Crimes Act s178 BB - s249B (2)(b)

Crimes Act LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act Criminal Procedure Act Corporations Act

CASES CITED : R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610

PARTIES : Regina Bradley David Cooper

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2004/2718

COUNSEL : L. P. Robberds QC - Crown A. J. Bellanto QC - Prisoner

SOLICITORS : Commonwealth DPP - Crown Uther Webster & Evans - Prisoner

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

JAMES J

23 June 2006

2004/2718 REGINA v Bradley David COOPER

SENTENCE 1 HIS HONOUR: On 31 October 2005, after a trial presided over by me, the jury found the prisoner Bradley David Cooper guilty on all of the thirteen counts in the indictment which had been presented against him. 2 The first count in the indictment charged the prisoner with having on 3 December 2000 corruptly offered to give William Herbert Howard an agent of HIH Casualty & General Insurance Limited (to which I will refer as "HIH C&G") a benefit, namely cash and employment by a company associated with the prisoner, the expectation of which would tend to influence Mr Howard to show favour to companies associated with the prisoner in relation to the affairs of HIH C&G, namely in the processing of claims by those companies. 3 Each of counts 2 to 6 in the indictment charged the prisoner with having corruptly given Mr Howard a benefit, namely an amount of cash, the receipt of which by Mr Howard would tend to influence Mr Howard to show favour to companies associated with the prisoner in the manner alleged in the first count. 4 The offences charged in the first six counts in the indictment were all offences under s 249B(2)(b) of the Crimes Act for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for seven years. These offences can conveniently be referred to as "the bribery offences". 5 In each of the remaining counts in the indictment, that is counts 7 to 13, the prisoner was charged with having published a statement to HIH C&G which he knew to be false in a material particular, with the intent to obtain a financial advantage for another person, being a company associated with the prisoner. The offences charged in counts 7 to 13 were all offences under s 178BB of the Crimes Act for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for five years. These offences can conveniently be referred to as "the false statement offences". 6 The proceedings for the sentencing of the prisoner have been protracted, due mainly to the desire of the parties to collect and adduce evidence for the proceedings on sentence beyond the evidence given in the trial, to put detailed written submissions on sentence and to put oral submissions on sentence. On 2 December 2005 the Crown Prosecutor handed up lengthy written submissions and made oral submissions. On 30 March 2006 counsel for the prisoner tendered certain documentary evidence, referred to written submissions which had been lodged and made oral submissions. On 19 May 2006 counsel for the prisoner tendered further documentary evidence and made further oral submissions. I received written submissions from the Crown in reply to the prisoner's written submissions. 7 The prisoner, who had previously been on bail, went into custody on 31 October 2005 after the jury returned their verdicts of guilty and he has since remained in custody as a remand prisoner. 8 The prisoner did not give evidence at the trial and did not give evidence in the proceedings on sentence. 9 As the sentencing judge it is part of my function to determine the facts relevant to sentencing for each of the offences for which the prisoner is to be sentenced. I am mindful that facts adverse to the prisoner must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, whereas facts favourable to the prisoner need only be proved on the balance of probabilities. It may be the case that on some matters the evidence available to me does not permit me to make any finding.