Where Verdins principles 5 and 6 are described only as 'arguable' in written submissions and are not specifically pressed in oral submissions, a sentencing judge is entitled to proceed on the basis that the offender does not rely on those principles. A psychologist's opinion that there is a 'risk' of imprisonment having a serious adverse effect, without describing the degree of risk as serious, is insufficient to enliven the sixth Verdins principle.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.