AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 11 February 2025

R v Najdoski

[2025] NSWDC 129

Fraud & dishonestyTheft & property
CRIMINAL LAW SENTENCE POSTAL WORKER SIGNIFICANT BREACH OF TRUST NEED FOR GENERAL DETERRENCE DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION

Citation: R v Najdoski [2025] NSWDC 129
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 11 February 2025
Judge: Berman SC ADCJ

Background

The offender was a postal worker employed by Australia Post for 16 years. Over approximately 18 months, he systematically removed parcels and letters from incoming mail cages during the course of his employment, concealing them in his delivery vehicle and taking them home. CCTV footage captured him doing this on at least 11 separate occasions.

Police executed a search warrant at his home in May 2023 and discovered a substantial collection of misappropriated items, including foreign currency, designer goods, watches, diamonds, jewellery, mobile phones, passports, and a small quantity of border-controlled drugs. The total value of goods recovered was approximately $239,882. The offender made admissions to police and acknowledged he had also sold some stolen property prior to the search.

The offender faced three charges: dishonestly appropriating articles in the course of the post, dealing with money believed to be proceeds of crime (approximately $40,000 in cash from the sale of stolen tobacco), and possessing border-controlled drugs. He had no prior convictions.

  • What sentence was appropriate for each of the three offences, having regard to the objective gravity of the conduct?
  • What weight should be given to the offender's personal circumstances, including his previous good character, mental health, and caring responsibilities?
  • Whether the offender's claim that financial hardship caused by Covid drove his offending was credible and should mitigate the sentence.
  • Whether the offender was eligible to serve his sentence by way of an Intensive Corrections Order (a community-based alternative to full-time imprisonment).
  • The importance of general deterrence in the context of postal worker dishonesty.

Decision

The court found the misappropriation offending to be objectively serious. Key aggravating features included the significant value of the goods, the prolonged duration of the offending, the large number of separate criminal acts, and the fact that the offender only stopped when caught. Most significantly, the court identified the breach of trust as a central feature: the offender exploited the confidence that his employer and the public placed in Australia Post employees to deliver their parcels honestly.

General deterrence was identified as the paramount sentencing consideration. The court noted that postal workers typically work alone and have ready access to large volumes of parcels, a situation amplified by the growth in online shopping. The need to protect the integrity of the postal system required a sentence that would deter others in similar positions.

The court accepted that the offender had a genuine history of good character, supported by character references and the absence of prior convictions. However, it placed limited weight on his claimed financial hardship as the cause of his offending. The psychological report revealed elevated scores for impression management and self-deception, and the court observed that a person truly driven by need would not have held onto large amounts of cash and unsold goods. The psychological diagnoses of depression and anxiety were also made at the time of the report, with no corresponding diagnosis at the time of the offences.

Taking all matters into account, including the offender's mental health, rehabilitation steps, and the potential impact of imprisonment on his dependent mother and brother, the court nonetheless concluded that an Intensive Corrections Order was inappropriate. A full-time custodial sentence was required to reflect the seriousness of the offending and the importance of general deterrence.

Orders Made

  • Dishonestly appropriating articles in the post: Imprisonment for 2 years, commencing 11 February 2025.
  • Dealing in proceeds of crime: Imprisonment for 9 months, commencing 11 August 2026 (cumulative).
  • Possessing border-controlled drugs: Imprisonment for 2 months, commencing 11 February 2025 (concurrent).
  • Total sentence: 2 years and 3 months, expiring 10 May 2027.
  • Non-parole period: 15 months in custody, with release on a Recognizance Release Order on 10 May 2026.
  • Recognizance Release Order conditions: Good behaviour bond of $1,000 (without security) for 2 years from the date of release.

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court treated breach of trust as the most significant aggravating factor where a long-serving employee exploited his position to systematically steal from parcels over an 18-month period.
  • General deterrence carries particular weight in postal worker dishonesty cases, given that delivery workers operate largely unsupervised and have access to high volumes of valuable goods.
  • A psychological report that reveals elevated scores for impression management and self-deception may substantially reduce the weight accorded to the offender's self-reported motivations and expressions of remorse.
  • Claims that financial pressure caused by Covid drove the offending were undermined by the offender's retention of large amounts of cash and unsold property, pointing to greed rather than need.
  • Previous good character, caring responsibilities, and mental health diagnoses did not, in combination, displace the need for a full-time custodial sentence where the offending was systematic, prolonged, and constituted a serious breach of trust.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Commonwealth Crimes Act (relating to offences concerning articles in the post and proceeds of crime)
- NSW Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act

Cases:
- Vamadevan v The King [2024] NSWCCA 223