Partygoer slapped with extra community service

Thursday 25 July 2019

A 27-year-old, who partied a little too hard the night before a community service session, has been handed an extra five hours' work after showing up drunk.

Liam Nicholas Cragg received 90 hours of Community Service in April 2019 after he was charged for having no insurance.

He appeared in Magistrate’s Court again on 19 July following a breach of his community service order. He had been referred back to Court by the Assistant Community Service Manager after not complying with the requirements of the order by failing “to keep appointments as directed.”

Advocate Luke Sette, defending, said Cragg admitted the breach and urged the court to allow him to continue his order without an additional penalty, describing the breach as “a minor slip-up.”

Pictured: Cragg said he felt tired on the day of his session but not under the influence, contrary to what the Community Service team said.

He told the Assistant Magistrate, Peter Harris, that Cragg had been very open with the Community Service team. He explained his client wanted to attend a party the night before one of his community service sessions was scheduled, and asked the staff if he was allowed to go.

While the service was “very accommodating of his wishes”, Advocate Sette said that Cragg didn’t heed the advice they had given him “to be sensible with his use of alcohol.”

The advocate went on to say that, despite this “error of judgment”, Cragg still attended the working session. “He felt tired, but he didn’t feel to be quite under the influence as described by the team leader. He however accepts the judgment made by the team leader.”

He said that Cragg had contacted the Assistant Community Service Manager as well as the Community Service team to apologise for what had happened and “the inconvenience caused by his actions.” Advocate Sette apologised again to the team and the Court on behalf of Cragg.

Pictured: Cragg sought permission from the Community Service team to go to the party.

Advocate Sette said this was the first time Cragg had slipped off in his order and argued that in other circumstances the breach would have been dealt by way of a warning, without reporting it to Court.

He told Court Cragg had completed “a meaningful portion of his order with limited supervision” and had “a good working relationship with the team.”

‘’He doesn’t want to himself before Court again,” Advocate Sette said. “He doesn’t want to be an inconvenience to the Court.”

Returning his sentence, the Assistant Magistrate told Cragg that he had to be sensible the night before a session otherwise it would impact on the work the Community Service managers do to manage their team.

Pictured: The Assistant Magistrate told Cragg he wouldn't have been able to go to the party if he had been in prison.

“You did the right thing, you asked permission and you made a mistake,” he said.

Acknowledging that Cragg had otherwise been compliant with his order, he allowed the order to continue, but chose to add a “small penalty” of five hours.

“Do the work,” he told Cragg before he left court, adding: “Remember that if you had gone to prison you wouldn’t have been to the party.”