R v Neil Gordon Camm; R v Harold Charles Cary; R v Brendan Matthew Godfrey [2008] NSWDC 162

R v Neil Gordon Camm; R v Harold Charles Cary; R v Brendan Matthew Godfrey [2008] NSWDC 162

The offences were serious frauds on a Commonwealth entity involving $2.1 million of ATSIC funds and required imprisonment because the scheme was sophisticated, dishonest and deprived ATSIC funds intended for Aboriginal and Islander people. Sentences differed because Watson was the architect, Camm was more culpable than Cary due to his knowledge and essential role in arranging valuations and using his company as intermediary, Cary was essential but less sophisticated and influenced by Watson, and Godfrey had a lesser role and was entitled to a substantial allowance for his guilty plea and subjective circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty for Camm and Cary and Guilty Plea by Godfrey
Outcome
Camm, Cary and Godfrey were each sentenced to imprisonment, with different release conditions reflecting culpability and subjective factors.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'conspiracy' 'dishonestly Obtaining a Gain From a Commonwealth Entity' 'fraud on a Commonwealth Entity' 'relative Culpability of Co Offenders']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'conspiracy' 'dishonestly Obtaining a Gain From a Commonwealth Entity' 'fraud on a Commonwealth Entity' 'relative Culpability of Co Offenders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty for Camm and Cary and Guilty Plea by Godfrey

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentences should be imposed on Neil Gordon Camm, Harold Charles Cary and Brendan Matthew Godfrey for their respective involvement in a scheme or conspiracy to obtain a gain dishonestly from ATSIC.' 'What relative culpability should be attributed to each offender in light of Watson being found to be the architect and prime mover of the scheme.' 'Whether the seriousness of the fraud permitted any alternative to sentences of imprisonment.' "What effect should be given to Godfrey's plea of guilty and to subjective matters including character, health, family impact, contrition and repayment or settlement of proceeds claims."]

Ratio Decidendi

The offences were serious frauds on a Commonwealth entity involving $2.1 million of ATSIC funds and required imprisonment because the scheme was sophisticated, dishonest and deprived ATSIC funds intended for Aboriginal and Islander people. Sentences differed because Watson was the architect, Camm was more culpable than Cary due to his knowledge and essential role in arranging valuations and using his company as intermediary, Cary was essential but less sophisticated and influenced by Watson, and Godfrey had a lesser role and was entitled to a substantial allowance for his guilty plea and subjective circumstances.

Court Disposition

Camm, Cary and Godfrey were each sentenced to imprisonment, with different release conditions reflecting culpability and subjective factors.

Orders

  • ['Neil Gordon Camm is sentenced to four years imprisonment commencing 16 May 2008 and expiring 15 May 2012 with a non-parole period of two and a half years expiring on 15 November 2010.' 'Harold Charles Cary is sentenced to three years imprisonment commencing 16 May 2008 and expiring 15 May 2011, to be released on...