Koda and Romina
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
Koda tried to suicide shortly after he was charged with a criminal offence. His brain was starved of oxygen and he sustained an acquired brain injury (ABI).
He is totally dependent on his mother, Romina, who is his legal guardian.
Romina told the Royal Commission Koda always maintained he was innocent of the crime he was charged with. But following the ABI he has no memory of the alleged crime or the events leading up to it.
Koda’s lawyer advised him he would be found guilty if he went to trial.
‘[Koda] would go to prison for a very long time,’ the lawyer said. ‘His only chance was to plead guilty and get a light sentence for doing so.’
Romina said Koda ‘was frightened on hearing this and agreed to plead guilty’.
‘He was forced into a guilty charge because of a lack of memory and fear of being put away for a long time.’
At the first hearing the judge asked for more information about Koda, and delayed sentencing.
Romina sent a personal letter, an in-depth report from the head injury unit and letters from Koda’s NDIS therapists and doctors.
The occupational therapist [OT] stated Koda’s ABI ‘had affected his short-term memory, verbal comprehension, initiation of important tasks and ability to follow through on instructions without support’.
Koda needs constant reminders to eat and drink and take care of himself.
The OT noted Koda ‘experienced difficulties with keeping track of a conversation, understanding what is being said to him … [and] tends to agree with ideas he has not fully comprehended’.
The OT made it clear the NDIS ‘is not available to people who are incarcerated’ and the ‘stress of incarceration would hinder the rehabilitation process’.
Romina told the judge the ABI changed Koda completely. He is ‘the total opposite of what he used to be like’. He is ‘non-violent, never abusive’. He no longer smokes, drinks alcohol or frequents bars. He is ‘quiet, lacks confidence’, has low self-esteem and is introverted.
Romina said she feared Koda, being ‘a person of colour’ from a different cultural background, would be the victim of discrimination and abuse.
On the day of sentencing the judge said he had not received the documents and ordered a recess so he could read them. Romina said the judge was ‘angry’ and ‘on returning he was clearly still annoyed’.
The judge sentenced Koda to almost five years in prison.
‘[I] strongly believe if the judge had enough time to read the report and reflect, he would have made a different decision,’ Romina said.
The judge said Koda would get the ‘same care on inside as on the outside’, but Romina has recently visited Koda and this is not the case.
No-one reminds him to eat or drink. No-one reminds him to eat foods that are good for brain function. No-one reminds him about his personal self-care and hygiene. No-one reminds him to get enough sleep and make sure he has enough stimulating activities to do each day.
Koda doesn’t have access to occupational and speech therapy and the psychology sessions he was receiving.
Romina told us the prison is overcrowded and she wants people with disability to be ‘housed in a facility that will not neglect them but help them’.
‘When someone who is not a threat to society or has no indication of offending again, is sent to prison, what are their chances of returning to society a better person?’
Romina fears Koda ‘will either deteriorate to the point of no return or will die in there’.
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.