STATE OF TASMANIA v JAKE CHRISTOPHER MORGAN 2 AUGUST 2024
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Jake Morgan, you plead guilty to aggravated assault. I also agreed to deal with the associated summary charges of evading police, driving without a licence, failing to comply with a requirement for the taking of blood for analysis, stealing and possessing a controlled drug.
All of the offences were committed on 27 May 2023. The police had been looking for you and learned that you were at the Launceston Country Club. Just before 1.00 am a number of police officers in three separate vehicles went there to arrest you. When they arrived you were sitting in the driver’s seat of a vehicle in the car park. They spotted you even though you tried to hide by ducking down. There was a female in the front passenger seat. Constable Aldrin Pietersz was one of the police officers. As one of his colleagues approached the driver’s door of your car he approached the passenger side. He opened the front passenger door and shouted at you to get out of the car. It quickly became obvious that you did not intend to comply. You started the car and began to reverse out of the parking spot, accelerating as you did so. Because Constable Pietersz was standing between opened door and the car he was, as you reversed, carried along by the door and knocked to the ground. While he was on the ground one of the wheels came very close to his head and he narrowly avoided being driven over. You then drove out of the car park at speed, thereby evading the police.
By driving the car so that the door dragged Constable Pietersz along and knocked him to the ground you committed an assault. The State accepts that your assault was reckless and not intentional. It was an aggravated assault because it was committed to resist or prevent your lawful apprehension.
You were found at 2.30 am hiding under a bed in a house in South Launceston. You were in possession of 0.23 grams of methylamphetamine. At the police station you were directed to provide a sample of your blood pursuant to the Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1970, s 10, but you failed to do so. You have never held a driver licence. When you were interviewed you admitted having stolen a small quantity of alcohol from a bottle shop in Devonport.
You are now aged almost 27. I was asked to consider making a drug treatment order. I would decline to do so for two principal reasons. I do not think that the actual bodily harm suffered by Constable Pietersz, to which I will refer in a moment, was minor harm. Regardless of that conclusion, a drug treatment order is not an appropriate sentence because it does not sufficiently address the need for punishment and general and specific deterrence.
You have a considerable criminal record including for dishonesty, violence and breaches of court orders. You have prior convictions in Tasmania for abusing, resisting and assaulting police. In 2016 and 2017 in Victoria you were sentenced for offences including assaulting an emergency worker, resisting and assaulting police, assault, criminal damage, recklessly causing injury and refusing a breath test. In September 2020, back in Tasmania, you were sentenced to imprisonment for 21 months, part of which was suspended, for a serious family violence assault. In December 2022 you were sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months from 6 April 2022 for multiple breaches of bail and family violence orders, assault, attempting to escape, dishonesty and driving offences. On 15 November 2023 a further term of four months from 27 May 2023 was imposed for more dishonesty offences committed following your release. The convictions imposed on that last occasion are not prior convictions for sentencing purposes but provide some indication of whether there is some genuine prospect of rehabilitation and a continuing need to protect the public.
The community relies heavily on the police for its safety and security. They are entitled to such protection as a court is able to provide through the imposition of sentences which uphold their authority and punish persons who threaten their safety. You did not intentionally drive your car at Constable Pietersz. As your counsel put it, you did not use the car as a weapon. However your plea on the basis of recklessness involves an admission that you realised the likelihood that the car would come into contact with him and acted regardless of the risk. You claimed that you were not aware that the police were there to arrest you, but when they approached and shouted at you, you panicked and decided that you wanted to leave as quickly as possible. I do not see that these factors lessen your culpability very much. It would have been obvious to any reasonable and responsible person that to drive as you did put Constable Pietersz, positioned as he was behind the door, at considerable risk. You chose to risk his safety to pursue your self-interest in avoiding apprehension. All of that is made plain by the body worn camera and CCTV footage I was shown. The assault was yet another demonstration of your long held disdain for the law and for authority. The same can be said about your refusal to provide a blood sample and the fact that you were driving at all. The quantity of methylamphetamine you had in your possession was consistent with personal use, but it is also proper to assume that your refusal to provide a blood sample was influenced by your fear that the presence of alcohol or a drug may be disclosed. There should be no benefit to offenders from a refusal.
The impact on Constable Pietersz has been significant. He had immediate left sided abdominal and right elbow pain. He was taken to hospital but discharged the next day. He had intermittent headaches, pain in his neck, back, abdomen and elbow for a week. He was off work for two weeks. He made a full recovery from his physical injuries but there are also psychological effects. He was fearful that he would be driven over. For months he had flashbacks of the incident, lost sleep and became angry. He has substantially recovered but remains hyper vigilant at work.
Your plea of guilty is in your favour. It was entered as soon as the State accepted that this was not an intentional assault. It avoids the need for a trial and indicates an acceptance of responsibility. I am not satisfied that, in your case, it indicates any remorse. I am required to impose a separate sentence for evading police. That offence carries some overlap with the factor which aggravates the assault, but there is substantial separate criminality. You would have been released from your most recent sentence on 27 September 2023 so the sentence I impose will commence then. I take into account the total effect of that sentence and the sentences I will impose. I will allow the eligibility for parole but not until you have served the term which sufficiently addresses the need for punishment and deterrence.
Jake Morgan, you are convicted on the indictment and on complaint 32507/23, counts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. On count 1, stealing, in light of the other sentences I am about to impose, I make no further order. On count 4, driving without a licence, you are disqualified from driving for three months from your release. On count 6, possessing methylamphetamine, you are sentenced to imprisonment for one month from 27 September 2023. On count 5, refusing the taking of blood, you are sentenced to imprisonment for two months also from 27 September 2023 and disqualified from driving for one year from your release. On count 3, evade police, you are sentenced to imprisonment for four months cumulative to the terms just imposed and disqualified from driving for two years from your release. For each of those terms of imprisonment you are not eligible for parole until you have served half the term. On the indictment, the aggravated assault, you are sentenced to imprisonment for 12 months cumulative to the terms just imposed. In respect to that term you are not eligible for parole until you have served nine months.
The result is a total term of imprisonment of 18 months from 27 September 2023 with eligibility for parole after having served 12 months of that term, and disqualification from driving for two years from your release.