R v Veronica Eliana SALAS-COLLARD [2013] NSWSC 1188

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Veronica Eliana SALAS-COLLARD [2013] NSWSC 1188 Hearing dates: 6 - 7, 11 - 15, 18 - 27 March 2013, 2 - 5, 8 - 12 April 2013 and 5 July 2013 Decision date: 30 August 2013 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Adams J Decision: The offender is to enter into a good behaviour bond for a period of two years subject to the condition that, during the term of the bond the offender will be of good behaviour and will appear before the Court if called upon to do so at any time during the term of the bond. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - accessory after the fact to murder - principles - wide sentencing range available - lower category of seriousness - impact of the mental state of the offender Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: R v Hawken (1986) 27 A Crim R 32 R v Cowen [2008] NSWSC 104 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina Veronica Eliana Salas-Collard Representation: Counsel: G J Tabuteau (Crown) N S Carroll (Offender) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) George Sten & Co Solicitors (Offender) File Number(s): 2010/417840

Judgment

Introduction 1On 12 April 2013, following a trial the offender, Veronica Eliana Salas-Collard, was found guilty of being an accessory after the fact to murder, an offence under s 349(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 carrying a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 25 years. No standard non-parole period applies to this offence. The offender has asked the Court to take into account (and I do so) under a Form 1 another charge of being an accessory after the fact, in this case, to an offence of aggravated breaking and entering which, under the applicable section of the Crimes Act renders the offender liable to imprisonment for a maximum of 5 years. Again, such an offence is not one carrying a standard non-parole period. Each offence was allegedly committed between 1 December 2010 and 16 December 2010 and, essentially, involved assisting her then boyfriend (aged 17 at the time) to evade police, he having committed the offences in company with another young man. It is important to note that it is, and could not be, suggested that the offender was in any way at all involved in either the murder or the aggravated breaking and entering. However, it is of course necessary to briefly describe these offences.