Supreme Court of Tasmania - Sentences STATE OF TASMANIA v GRAHAM CHRISTOPHER HALL

9 April 2008

COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE

EVANS J

The defendant is convicted on his plea of guilty to one charge of stealing and one charge of unlawfully injuring a public utility.

In early September 2007, the defendant drove from New Norfolk to the Liapootah Power Station to scavenge for scrap metal. Having noticed several coils of copper wire in a secure compound, he broke into the compound and removed 100kg of wire which he sold to a metal recycler. The value of the wire stolen is estimated at $2,000.

On 23 September 2007, the defendant and another drove to the Wayatinah tip looking for scrap metal. At the tip the defendant came upon a power pole on which there was a sign saying "Danger Live Wires Overhead – Do Not Climb" and above that sign there was a barbed wire guard to inhibit climbers. Incredibly, the defendant formed the view that the power lines supported by the pole were not live, and climbed it after cutting through the barbed wire guard. Upon reaching for one of the overhead lines with wire cutters, the defendant received an electric shock of 22,000 volts. The shock threw him from the pole and he landed some distance away, with serious burns to his legs and arms. He was transferred to hospital by ambulance and he received a number of skin grafts. He was an in-patient for three weeks. He was charged with unlawfully interfering with electrical infrastructure and trespass in relation to this incident, and those charges have been dealt with in the Court of Petty Sessions. The relevance of this incident to this sentencing hearing is that what subsequently occurred demonstrates how incorrigible the defendant is.

On 10 October 2007, the day after the defendant's release from hospital, when he was still swathed in bandages, he travelled to the Tungatinah Power Station, accompanied by two others. When searching for scrap metal in the vicinity of a building associated with the power station, the defendant observed overhead power lines. Not deterred by his former miscalculation, the defendant concluded that the power lines were no longer live, climbed the pole, and cut through a large copper cable. Although the cable was live, the defendant did not receive a shock. The cutting of the cable activated an emergency alarm and resulted in four of the five pipelines to the power station being shut down and consequent loss of supply to the State grid.

Two Hydro employees who responded to the alarm came upon the defendant, who denied being the perpetrator of the damage. They provided the police with details of what had occurred and when the defendant was interviewed on 16 October, he made full admissions.

As a consequence of the defendant's actions, the Tungatinah Power Station was taken out of service for approximately 24 hours at a cost to Hydro Tasmania estimated at $203,385 in lost power generation, plus repair costs of $5,836. As a consequence of this and prior incidents, Hydro Tasmania has also instigated security patrols at an on-going cost of $23,000 per month.

These circumstances, together with other information obtained in Hydro Tasmania's report to the Court reinforce the need that the sentence imposed on the defendant serve the needs of general deterrence.

I order that the assessment of the compensation payable by the defendant to Hydro Tasmania for his crimes be adjourned to a date to be fixed.

The defendant is 34 years of age. Besides convictions for traffic and drug related offences, he has prior convictions for being in possession of stolen property, stealing and burglary.

Whilst I recognise that the defendant neither intended nor anticipated the consequences of his actions at the Tungatinah Power Station, this does not relieve him from responsibility for them They flow directly from his irresponsible, criminal action. That he again interfered with a potentially live power wire the day after his release from hospital, where he had been treated for injuries suffered from interfering with a live wire, shows that considerations of personal deterrence are a significant factor to be borne in mind when sentencing the defendant. Another factor that I take into account is that the defendant involved two others, described as young friends, in his criminal stupidity.

The defendant is sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment. I order that he be eligible to apply for parole after serving twelve months of this sentence.

The levy fixed by the Victims of Crime Compensation Act for the defendant's offences is to be paid by him to a clerk of petty sessions within two months of his release from prison.

Submitted on 04/21/2008

Submitted by: Anonymous
Reference: Supreme Court of Tasmania 9 April 2008

Copyright © 2008 DarwinAwards.com

Bruce said:
Definitely Keep: Honorable Mention
Unbelievable that this dumb mook would go and try to electrocute himself a second time the day he's discharged from the hospital for the first failed attempt. Thanks for sending this in. I bet we hear from him again in a year or two after he's released from prison.

Chip said:
Definitely Keep: For Darwin's Eyes
Yet another collectable. Thanks.