A Sydney man whose terrorist-related plot included killing police officers and targeting government buildings earned a cut in his prison time.
In November 2017, then-24-year-old Jibryl Almaouie was jailed for 18 years and 10 months with a non-release period of 14 years and two months.
He pleaded guilty to conspiracy with Sulayman Khalid, a youth and others in 2014 to take action in preparation for a terrorist act to promote violent jihad.
He also conceded four gun offenses.
The NSW Criminal Court of Appeal on Friday reduced his sentence to 16 years and six months, with a non-release period of 12 years and six months.
Although the Supreme Court judge tried Almaouie in accordance with the applicable law at the time, the DPP admitted that – in light of a subsequent appellate decision – he had erred in his consideration of the guilty plea.
The appellate court said the concession is well founded and it re-judged Almaouie in accordance with the “Xiao” decision.
Khalid and the young man had already had their sentences cut according to the ruling that ruled that the utilitarian value of an indictment plea should be considered in federal offenses.
In the agreed facts for the plot, Khalid was described as the “leader” and Almaouie as “high in the group”.
The group’s crude plan involved killing police officers, targeting government buildings, supplying guns and engaging in guerrilla warfare with the help of an army of indigenous people whom they had converted to Islam.
In conversations and planning documents, they used codewords such as “banana” and “motorcycles” instead of guns. “Vombat” meant Khalid’s garage – their rendezvous.
Khalid also made a series of YouTube videos including one where he threatened secret service agencies around the world saying, “It is either you will become a Muslim, and you will believe in Allah, or you will die by the sword.”
Re-sensing Almaouie, the appellate court applied a 10 percent discount because of the utilitarian value of his guilty plea.
It also accepted that if it did not preclude his punishment, there would be an “unjustifiable inequality” between his and Khalid’s reduced punishment, due to Khalid’s greater role in the offense.
Australian Associated Press