R v Bunny Bannister [2019] NSWDC 37

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Bunny Bannister [2019] NSWDC 37 Hearing dates: 23 November 2018 Decision date: 01 March 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [60] Catchwords: Supply prohibited drug greater than a large commercial quantity Legislation Cited: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Cases Cited: Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144 Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Bunny Bannister (Offender) Representation: Counsel: C Young (Trial Advocate) Ms N Mikhaiel (Offender)

Solicitors: File Number(s): 15/353686 Publication restriction: Nil

remarks on sentence 1. The offender pleaded guilty on 23 April 2017 to a charge of take part in a supply of prohibited drug of greater than large commercial quantity, namely, 67.477 kilograms of methylamphetamine, pursuant to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 ("DMTA"), and s 29 of the DMTA. The maximum penalty proscribed for the offence is life imprisonment and/or a fine of 5000 penalty units. There is a Standard Non-Parole Period proscribed of 15 years imprisonment. 2. The offence occurred between 9 November 2015 and 2 December 2015. The offender was one of a number of Malaysian citizens involved in a drug trafficking operation in Australia. Three co-offenders have already been sentenced, and the offender is to be sentenced along with two other co‑offenders, Chung Keat Chong and Chee Hui Tiew.

The sentence hearing 1. The sentence hearing took place on 23 November 2018. Exhibit A was a co‑offender bundle which comprised the Indictments, Agreed Statements of Fact, criminal antecedents, if any, of each of the co-offenders. It also contained the Remarks on Sentence in respect of Chin Hung Ho and Kam Fee Seong, together with the transcript of sentence in the Magistrate's Court of a further co-offender, Yoke Yee Hoh. Those remarks will be referred to below as they are relevant to the application of principles of parity in the sentencing process. 2. The Crown Sentence Summary became Ex B. It included an Agreed Statement of Facts which may be summarised as follows. 3. In October 2015, police began a controlled operation to investigate a Malaysian controlled syndicate involved in trafficking methylamphetamine, operating in Australia. The operation involved a civil participant. 4. The offender arrived in Australia from Malaysia on 25 October 2015. He first stayed on the Gold Coast and then flew to Sydney where he resided in premises at Burwood with the co-offender Chee Hui Tiew. 5. On 27 November 2015, the co-offender Tiew delivered two boxes of shelves containing methylamphetamine to the civil participant, who delivered them to the co-offender Ho at premises at Fairfield. On 1 December 2015, police executed a search warrant at those premises and seized 5.904 kilograms of methylamphetamine which had been extracted by the co-offender Ho from the wax blocks of shelves. 6. On 1 December 2015, police also executed a search warrant at the Burwood residence. They located there 12 boxes of the same appearance as the two other boxes. The 12 boxes contained shelves of the same appearance as those impregnated with methylamphetamine that had been seized at Fairfield. Analysis found that the shelves contained a combined total of 60.125 kilograms of pure methylamphetamine. 7. The offender was at the residence when police executed the search and attempted to flee by jumping from the balcony of the residence onto an adjoining neighbour's balcony. After being spoken to by police, he was arrested shortly thereafter. The amount of $2,150.00 was located in the premises in $50 notes. 8. The offender participated in an ERISP interview and agreed that on arrest, the offender knew that there were 14 boxes in the unit with drugs. He stated that two had been taken out by his friend and that he did not know what type of drug was contained in the boxes. The offender made the following further admissions: * He was offered $5000 to "take care of the thing", and he stayed at the house; * He did not receive any money however, but his food was paid for. * The offender stated that he only touched the boxes when they were moved from the factory to the apartment (this was consistent with the forensic evidence). * When his friend left with the two boxes, he did not go with him. * He met the co-offender Tiew in the Westfield Mall after he translated for him; they became friends and Tiew offered him a room and a job. * The sum of $2,150.00 was his personal cash. 1. The offender was shown a surveillance photograph of a male at the location where the two boxes were delivered to the civil participant. The offender agreed that he was depicted in that photograph. 2. The offender's role was one of storeman to the boxes containing the drugs, at times when the co-offender Tiew was not present at the residence. At the times that Tiew was not present, the offender was in constructive but not actual possession of the drugs. 3. The offender offered to plead to the charge in its present form by letter emailed to the Prosecution on 3 April 2018. 4. Exhibit B also contained a statement by Detective Sergeant Michael Van Eyk, purporting to be an expert opinion as to the price guide for methylamphetamine in New South Wales for the year 2015. In his opinion, a kilogram of methylamphetamine would be sold at that time for between $120,000 and $200,000. 5. The offender had no criminal antecedents.