STATE OF TASMANIA v KIMBRA LEE HENDERSON 28 NOVEMBER 2024
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PORTER AJ
Kimbra Henderson, the defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of being an accessory after the fact of stealing a firearm. She was involved in the theft of firearms from a residence by two men, Jamie Blowfield and Travis Frankcombe. The bare facts of the offence are that on 1 January 2022, the defendant drove the two men to a property in Acton Park, the home of Joshua Lillie who at the time, was away working interstate. The two men got out of the car and went to the house, while the defendant waited in the car on the road outside. The two men were able to enter the house by removing a flyscreen on a window that was slightly ajar. They opened a gun safe with a set of keys that had been found, took four firearms, went out of the house the same way as they came in. As they were leaving the house, a vehicle approached, and an occupant shouted at them. They ran to the vehicle and the defendant drove away at speed. They soon reached a dead end of the road where it met bushland. Frankcombe left the car with the four firearms and ran into the bush, while Blowfield and the defendant remained in the vehicle. Frankcombe returned without the firearms and the defendant then drove the two men to the home of Blowfield’s sister in Rokeby, a distance of about 10 km or so. All were later driven to another suburb, and they went their separate ways. The stolen firearms were a .22 semi-automatic pistol, a .22 bolt action rifle, a 9mm semi-automatic pistol and an air rifle. Early the next morning, the defendant voluntarily surrendered herself to police. When interviewed she made full admissions. She said that Frankcombe had turned up at her house, asking for a lift to collect something and offered her money for it. She had lost her job and was struggling to pay the rent and she needed the money. He gave her directions as to where to go. She told police that she thought Frankcombe may have been seeing a female and did not know a burglary was to take place or that they were going to steal firearms. When the men ran to the car, she then saw what looked like a firearm. After they were driving away, she said that Frankcombe had asked her to take him home but she was in too much of a panic and drove them to Ms Blowfield’s house. The defendant told police that she had not seen Blowfield for about six months when they had broken up, but in the proceedings against him, this Court was told that he and the defendant were partners at the time. Of course, that would explain his presence at her house when Francombe arrived. Mr Blowfield has been dealt for his role; He has a record for offences of dishonesty and had been imprisoned for that type of offending. He was sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment wholly suspended on conditions and was made the subject of a community correction order for 18 months. Mr Frankcombe’s matter has been remitted to the Magistrates’ Court.
The defendant is now 43 years old; 40 at the time of the offending. She had a difficulty upbringing witnessing alcohol abuse and violence, although she remained close to both parents. She has six children, four with her long-term partner. The oldest child and another child both have mental health issues and the level of care for her family is described as “intensive”. At the time of this offending the defendant had some prior convictions for dishonesty and drug use, but of significance, in my view, is the absence of any record for a period of about five years between early 2017 and this offending. Afterwards, however, offending behaviour continues; mostly drug related. In November 2023 she was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment wholly suspended on conditions for three years for driving a motor vehicle whilst prescribed illicit drug was present in her body. She has had employment in the cleaning industry for a considerable period but is at present prevented from doing that work due to licence disqualification. She is in receipt of a carer’s pension but without work the financial situation is strained. At the time of this offending the defendant was a heavy user of methamphetamine. She had first used this drug quite a few years ago for a brief period but was able to abstain. However, her father, with whom she was close, died in 2020 and she was struggling with grief. A person offered her methamphetamine as a way of coping. She did find it effective, but she became dependent and her use escalated to a high level. At the time of the offending she was in the throes of addiction and needed money. More recently she has taken significant steps in drug rehabilitation. She has engaged with drug and alcohol counselling which she finds beneficial. She has reduced her illicit substance consumption very significantly. Although she told police that she thought Frankcombe did not know a burglary was to take place, it was accepted in the plea in mitigation that she was suspicious that there may have been something unlawful involved, but had no idea of what it was. From her plea it is established that she knew of the commission of a crime at the time of driving away. It was put, without dissent, that she was shocked when Frankcombe jumped in with a firearm and yelled at her to drive, and felt she had no choice. As no issue was taken, I proceed accordingly. It is strongly in the defendant’s favour that she voluntarily went to the police station, and it may be that the offenders would not have been very easily discovered, if at all, without her co-operation. It may be that some detail about her relationship with Mr Blowfield was misstated or withheld, but I do not regard that as significant. I also take into account the defendant’s plea of guilty. She was initially charged with the completed crime but as soon as the present indictment was finalised, a plea of guilty was indicated. There is also the absence of recorded offending for the lengthy period I mentioned earlier, and of course she is now the subject of a six month suspended term of imprisonment with two years yet to run on its operation. In terms of future offending that should act as a strong deterrent.
Ms Henderson, stealing firearms is a serious matter and a matter of significant community concern. Ordinarily, courts deal sternly with such matters. Stolen firearms inevitably end up being used in the commission of offences. Your crime is that of assisting others to avoid or escape punishment for stealing firearms. You did this by way of driving away from scene, then knowing what they had done. I accept that you were in a difficult situation. I accept that more broadly your personal circumstances at the time led to your involvement. Although attempting to deter others and condemning such criminal behaviour is important, in your case I do not think a term of imprisonment is required nor any immediate punishment a such. I think the public interest is better served by assisting your rehabilitation under the supervision of a probation officer. You are convicted of the crime. I make a community correction order for 18 months, conditions of which are that you be under the supervision of a probation officer for that time and attend educational and other programs, undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency and submit to testing for drug use, and submit to medical, psychiatric or psychological treatment, all as directed by a probation officer. You will have to report, in person or by telephone, to a probation officer at 75 Liverpool Street, Hobart. by 5.00pm Monday 2 December 2024. I make a compensation order in favour of Joshua Lillie for an amount to be assessed and adjourn that matter to a date to be fixed.