Director of Public Prosecutions v Casey
[2020] VCC 878
•18 June 2020
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTIONCR 19-01444
CR-20-00591
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| DESMOND CASEY |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE LYON |
| WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
| DATE OF HEARING: | 11 June 2020 |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 18 June 2020 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Casey |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2020] VCC 878 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:DPP v Toomey [2006] VSCA 90; Bromley v R [2018] VSCA 329; Buckley v The Queen [2016] VSCA 222; DPP v Partington [2017] VCC 1540
Sentence:6 years and 3 months imprisonment, non-parole period 3 years and 3 months. s 6AAA 8 years and 6 months imprisonment with non-parole period of 6 years
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms S. Coombes | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Offender | Mr P. Tiwana | Dribbin & Brown Criminal Lawyers |
HIS HONOUR:
1Desmond Casey, you pleaded guilty to the following offences which carry the following maximum penalties.
Charge Nos. Charge Maximum Penalty 1, 2, 3 Indecent assault upon a male under 16 (s68(3A)) (1980) 5 years
4 Indecent assault with a person under 16 (s 44(1)) (1984) 5 years 5 Gross indecency with a person under 16 (under care/supervision) (s 50(1)(a)) (1984) 3 years 6, 7, 8 Sexual penetration with a person aged 10-16 (under care/supervision) (s 48(1)) (1984-1986) 15 years
2In addition, upon your conviction and sentences of imprisonment to be imposed on Charges 1 and 2 (and I tell you I will be imposing periods of imprisonment on these charges) you must be declared to be, and sentenced as, a serious sexual offender in respect to Charges 3 to 8 inclusive. The effect of this declaration is threefold. First, the law provides that I must regard the protection of the community as the principle purpose for which the sentence is imposed. Second, I must consider whether a disproportionate sentence should be imposed in order to achieve the purpose of protection of the community. And, thirdly, each sentence of imprisonment I impose is to be served cumulatively unless I direct otherwise.
3The prosecution does not seek the imposition of a disproportionate sentence or sentences in this case and I do not intend to do so. I will explain later.
4Further, as a consequence of your plea and conviction on these charges you will be registered under the Sex Offenders Registration Act and required to comply with reporting conditions for life.
5You have no prior convictions and no matters outstanding.
6The prosecution tendered an Amended Summary of Prosecution Opening as Exhibit A. A summary of your offending is as follows.
7You were born in 1946 and the offending occurred between 1980 and 1986, when you were aged between 33 to 40 years. At the time of your offending you were a teacher. Each of the young men that you abused was a young student at the school where you taught.
8The first young man was Logan Atkinson.[1] Mr Atkinson was in Year 8 and between the ages of 13 and 14 years when you committed your offences against him. At the time you were the Year 8 co-ordinator and you were aged 33 to 34 years at the time.
[1] A Pseudonym.
9It seems that Mr Atkinson was bullied and picked on at school. The expression used in the Crown opening was that you 'took him under your wing'. After discussing with Ms Coombes I realise now that they were the words Mr Atkinson used, but I made the point at the time I consider that term entirely inapposite. What occurred even before the offending was entirely inappropriate and clearly escalating towards sexual offending. Put in a single word, you groomed that young boy.
10On a dozen or so occasions you took him to Mordialloc beach and to a nudist beach for skin diving. He stayed overnight at your place and you supplied him with wine. On one occasion in late summer you both drove back from the beach, naked in your panel van, to your home address. The young man was in your bedroom, where you had adult pornographic magazines on your bed. You were both looking at the magazines and you masturbated until you ejaculated. This act is not charged but I recite it to show the extent of escalation and grooming you undertook of this young man that you were supposed to, as a teacher and by law, protect and positively mentor; all the more so for the fact that you offered him friendship from your adult position as a teacher and authority figure at a time when he was particularly vulnerable.
11The first charge of indecent assault on a male under 16 occurred some time in the year 1980 when, after skin diving at Mordialloc beach, you and Mr Atkinson returned to your home. You plied him with alcohol. Later that evening he was naked on your bed, lying on his stomach. You were also naked and you rubbed oil on his back with your hands. You straddled him and placed your erect penis between the cheeks of his bottom for a few minutes. After this you both slept in the same bed, naked.
12Charge 2 of indecent assault on a male under 16 occurred some time in the same year after you returned with Mr Atkinson from the beach. In the evening you were both naked in your bedroom and you inserted a candle into
Mr Atkinson's anus, which you moved up and down for a few minutes.13As an uncharged act you asked Mr Atkinson to do the same to you, which he did for a few minutes.
14Your offending against Charles Palmer[2] commenced with gaining his trust through his friend, Mr Atkinson, and a lead up of sexualised behaviour.
Mr Palmer was 13 years old at the time of your offending in 1980. Mr Palmer and Mr Atkinson were friends. You took them both to a nudist beach, where you all removed your clothes and swam. Afterwards, you took both boys back to your home and provided them with pornographic magazines.Mr Atkinson began to masturbate. You supplied the boys with lubricant and condoms and told them they could practice. They both masturbated as you watched. You bought fish and chips for their dinner and supplied both boys with cans of vodka and orange.[2] A Pseudonym.
15Charge 3 occurred later that evening. Mr Palmer ended up blacking out from alcohol consumption. He woke to find you licking and kissing his nipples. He told police that he felt disgusted but was probably incapable of stopping you and went back to sleep.
16Mr Palmer never saw you or Mr Atkinson again.
17I turn now to the offending against Susan Wilson.[3] As I stated to Ms Wilson during the plea, to ensure there is no misunderstanding of the situation as it then existed I will refer to her previous male gender at the time of your offending. Similarly to Mr Atkinson, Sam Wilson[4] (as he then was) was emotionally vulnerable after getting into trouble and being teased at his previous school. He started at the school you taught at in 1984 in Year 9, when he was 14 years old. Due to his interest in maths and computers he joined a computer group at school which was run by you.
[3] A Pseudonym.
[4] A Pseudonym.
18As you gained Sam Wilson's trust you commenced to sexualise your conversations and activities with him. You showed him pornographic magazines and you told him that you would masturbate looking at those magazines, and you told him about your genitals. You then commenced sexualising your conduct with him. You attended a local pool and as you both changed you compared your penis to his. At the pool you initiated a so-called 'game' where you pulled down Sam Wilson's Speedos. You encouraged him to do the same to you, characterising this activity as a game. You further encouraged Sam Wilson into sexual arousal by telling him to put his penis against the spa. You sat so your erect penises were touching.
19Charge 4 occurred at this time, when you commenced rubbing Sam Wilson's penis and pulling his foreskin over the head of your penis. He noticed that you had a strawberry birthmark on the inside of your upper left thigh, near your crotch area, which was later used to identify you in the course of a medical examination conducted after your arrest.
20Charge 5 is a charge of gross indecency. At some point between 1 April and 30 June 1984 at school, and after the occurrence of Charge 4, you told Sam Wilson to masturbate your penis. He did so, and masturbated his own penis at the same time. You ejaculated into his hand.
21Charge 6 is a charge of sexual penetration of a child under your supervision, care or authority. At a time between 1 April and 10 December 1984, after a computer class, you asked Sam Wilson to suck your penis. Mr Wilson did so until you told him to stop. After that point you masturbated until you ejaculated in his presence. This aspect of your conduct was uncharged.
22Charge 7 is a charge of sexual penetration with a person between the age of 10 and 16 years under your care, supervision or authority, and it occurred in the same time frame as that for Charge 6 but on a different occasion, at a fitness centre. Whilst in the swimming pool you pulled down Sam Wilson's Speedos and inserted his penis into your mouth for a few seconds whilst you were underwater.
23Charge 8 is a representative charge of sexual penetration with a person between the age of 10 and 16 years under your care, supervision or authority. It encompasses offending on the same day as Charge 7 and also another two incidents of sexual penetration.
24After the swimming pool offending which I have just described the pair of you left the fitness centre and drove to an industrial carpark. The first aspect of Charge 8 occurred in your car in the car park, when you inserted your penis into Sam Wilson's anus. You wore a condom during this offending.
25After you withdrew your penis Sam Wilson saw semen inside the condom and blood on the outside of the condom.
26The second incident of sexual penetration constituting part of Charge 8 occurred between 1 October and 31 December 1985. You were housesitting for your sister. You took Sam Wilson to your sister's house and again penetrated his anus with your penis for approximately five minutes, until you ejaculated.
27The third incident of sexual penetration constituting part of the representative Charge 8 occurred between 1 January and 28 March 1986. On that occasion you took Sam Wilson to a nudist beach, where you both removed your clothes. After a period of time you rubbed his penis until he became erect. He then lay down and inserted your erect penis into his anus for about five minutes before you ejaculated.
28Sam Wilson complained to a nun between 1984 and 1985 that you were 'doing stuff' to him but she shrugged him off. After transitioning, Susan Wilson complained to the police in 2019. In the course of a pretext call on
26 March 2019 you admitted your sexual encounters with Sam Wilson, as he then was.29You were arrested on 23 April 2019 and interviewed but denied any sexual offending against Sam Wilson. You did, however, plead guilty to the charges relating to Sam Wilson at the earliest opportunity.
30The charges relating to Logan Atkinson and Charles Palmer were filed on 12 March 2020 and resolved at the earliest opportunity on 24 April 2020. It is to your credit that you have expedited matters to get this plea on so quickly in these very difficult times.
31Logan Atkinson, Charles Palmer and Susan Wilson all made victim impact statements. It is apparent that your offending has had a lifelong effect on all three. I shall say some things about Susan Wilson and the statement before me in a moment, however for the present it is enough to say that your actions have had a lifetime effect of inhibiting their enjoyment of life, and of the intimacy of relationships with partners.
32Susan Wilson chose to read her impact statement to the court. As I said at the time, it was harrowing listening to it. It must indeed have been harrowing to live it.
33The criminal law prohibits sexual offending, and specifically sexual offending against children, with the objective of upholding the fundamental right of every person to make decisions about their own sexual behaviour and to choose not to engage in sexual activity. It protects children from the harms which premature sexual activity causes, thereby protecting children from their own immaturity. The prohibition is intended to deter others who may consider engaging in sexual activity with a child.
34The absolute prohibition on sexual activity with a child under the age of 16 presumes that sexual activity which occurs with a child before a child reaches an age at which they can give meaningful consent causes harm, which is long-lasting and serious and manifests itself in both physical and psychological forms. Therefore, the harm to your victim is presumed irrespective of whether a child purportedly consented or appreciated the acts in full in a particular case.
35The experience of the criminal law is that the rehabilitation of those young persons who were the subject of sexual abuse may often be more difficult to achieve than that of the perpetrator. Frequently the damage will be more profound and a long time will pass before it can be addressed at all. In the meantime, childhood will be destroyed, self-esteem damaged, educational and career opportunities lost and, the capacity to form and maintain relationships seriously impaired - and for those observations I refer to DPP v Toomey. I fear that this is the case here, perhaps in respect to all three of your targets.
36I applaud the courage and tenacity of each of these three persons coming forward; not just in speaking to the police but in each making an impact statement. For those that are listening, I hope you have noticed that I have done my best so far to avoid using the word 'victim'. Each of these persons may have been the target of your abuse, but I hope that they each have the ability to heal and put what you did behind them.
37It is apparent in each case of your offending against Mr Atkinson, Mr Palmer and Ms Wilson that your harm to them was real and profound.
38I take into account those charges where you are specified to have had the care, supervision or authority over the young person involved. For those charges your breach of trust – that is, your exploitation of your role as a teacher – cannot be used to aggravate or increase the seriousness of the offending or the seriousness of the sentence I impose upon you.
39I note, however, that your offending involved multiple boys. In each case you were over 20 years older than them and therefore more than double their age. In some instances you plied them with alcohol.
40Charge 8 is a representative charge. As Mr Tiwana submitted, the three instances of penetration enable me to see the charge in its wider context, but you are to be sentenced only for one offence. In other words, a representative charge enables me to take into account other instances of the same conduct which prevent any argument, for example, that the offending was a single instance or it came 'out of the blue'.
41Overall, your offending is very serious, predatory and exploitative conduct. Putting aside legal details and averments on the indictment, the fact is that it was your position as a teacher and mentor that provided you with the opportunity to meet each of these vulnerable young men, to manipulate them, and to subject them to your own lascivious desires. You told the forensic psychologist, Pamela Matthews, that you were confused about your sexuality at this time. Make no mistake, paedophilia is not ascribable to a confusion about sexuality. You set your moral compass to zero. Your actions deserve the denunciation of the community. The community abhors the sexual exploitation of children. Your actions, no matter how long ago, deserve the utter condemnation of all right minded people. Your conduct, even with the passage of so much time, must be met by principles of deterrence, just punishment and protection of the community. As I said at the beginning of these remarks, for the fact that you are to be sentenced as a serious sexual offender, protection of the community becomes a principal sentencing factor on those particular charges.
42I turn now to your personal circumstances.
43You are 73 years of age and were born in 1946. You are the youngest of three siblings. Your brothers are still alive and your oldest brother is in ill-health.
44You were a student in the Catholic education system and at age 14 you went to boarding school in order to commence training as a brother. You were only allowed home during the Christmas breaks. You completed your secondary education in 1964.
45After school you undertook teacher training at De La Salle Training College and then completed a Bachelor of Arts at Macquarie University.
46In all, you spent 12 years in New South Wales. You felt isolated from the outside world and from your family and normal social relationships. Despite your feelings and a desire to leave the Catholic order you felt to do so would be a betrayal to your God.
47Eventually, however - at age 26 - you left the order and returned to Melbourne. You worked as a teacher at a Catholic college, as I have said, for 14 years between 1974 and 1988. It was whilst you were teaching at this Catholic college that your offending occurred.
48During the teaching course you completed a Bachelor of Education, a Master of Education and a Graduate Diploma of Computing.
49You married your wife in 1984. You have been married for 36 years and you have two adult children.
50After you left the Catholic college where you were teaching in 1989 you commenced as a lecturer in computer programming at Monash University. You worked there for 24 years until 2012, when you retired. Over the years you were promoted to senior lecturer and Deputy Head of the Faculty of Information Technology. The reference from another professor speaks of your good career at Monash over the years, although I note the reference was written without knowledge of your offending behaviour.
51You completed a doctoral degree and you were awarded your PhD in 1995.
52You are now supported by your wife and two children and their partners. Your wife has endured a significant bout of ill health and is undergoing treatment for cancer. Although her health and condition are presently stable, her condition is not curable. Naturally, you worry about her health and feel the burden of not being able to support her in her time of greatest need.
53Your wife, daughter, son and his partner all provided references which speak of you in loving and supportive terms. Interestingly, none speak at all of your offending and none speak of you discussing the concept of remorse with them.
54You have also remained a parishioner and contributor at your local church. A reference was provided, again, but without knowledge of your offending.
55You have suffered some health issues in recent years including high cholesterol, high blood pressure, arthritis neuropathy in your feet and non-melanoma skin cancer.
56You were assessed by forensic psychologist Pamela Matthews. In her 20 page report, Ms Matthews reported that you told her that you were uncertain of your sexuality at the time of your offending. You told Ms Matthews that when you look back on your offending against Mr Atkinson and Mr Palmer, you are appalled at your behaviour and you wish that you had realised the effect and harm your behaviour had caused them and their families.
57In an earlier report dated 29 October 2019, Ms Matthews reported that you acknowledged the terrible hurt and trauma that you had caused to Ms Wilson.
58Ms Matthews concludes that you would have been diagnosed as paraphilic at the time of your offending, but this is no longer evident and would not have been evident for decades. Ms Matthews notes that leading up to your offending, between adolescence and your mid-20s, you struggled to understand your sexuality and had no intimate relationships in this period. She considers the fact that you have been constantly married for 36 years and enjoyed a close relationship with your wife as relevant to the ultimate conclusions as to your risk of recidivism.
59After testing and a very careful review of the material and your circumstances, Ms Matthews concludes that you present as a very low risk of reoffending in a similar manner. She considers your age and many years since your offending reduces your risk to being that of 'unlikely'. I accept this conclusion.
60Ms Matthews notes that you have presented as increasingly depressed but that you do not present with a personality disorder or psychopathy. You do have some thoughts of suicide and Ms Matthews expresses some concern at this.
61Mr Tiwana, of counsel - who appeared on your behalf - submitted that the following matters should mitigate your sentence:
·First, delay. He submitted there has been a delay of over 30 years in the bringing of these complaints and it was submitted that you were a different man to when you committed these offences many years ago, being now completely rehabilitated. Mr Tiwana referred to Bromley v R in support of this submission;
·Next, your age. You are 73 years of age and it is likely that the time spent in custody will comprise a significant portion of the remainder of your life;
·Third, it was submitted that I should take into account the burden of imprisonment. It was submitted that prison will be significantly more difficult for you given your age, the fact that this will be your first time in prison, your numerous health issues, and the ongoing restrictions on visits and movement due to COVID-19 lockdown. It was submitted that you feel the burden of not being able to care for your wife, the difficulties that she will face not having you as her primary caregiver and that this responsibility will now fall on your children. I was told that in accordance with the report of Pamela Matthews you are struggling with depression on the basis of your wife's illness and your inability to support her;
·Fourth, Mr Tiwana turned to your prospects of rehabilitation. Your risk of reoffending has been assessed by Ms Matthews as very low. You have not reoffended over the decades. It was submitted you pose no real risk of reoffending;
·Fifth, Mr Tiwana turned to the issue that was raised by the Crown as to whether or not your good character was of assistance in committing the offending. I will have more to say about that in a moment; and
·Ultimately, Mr Tiwana submitted that I should use these factors to impose a somewhat lower than normal non-parole period.
62After making submissions as to the objective gravity of your offending and the relevance of various sentencing principles - all of which I have already discussed - Ms Coombes, on behalf of the prosecution, submitted:
·First, that the early plea of guilty should be accepted as having utilitarian benefit. It has saved those that you abused from having to give difficult evidence at committal and trial. I certainly accept that;
·Second, remorse. It was submitted that whilst you have expressed some remorse it is qualified due to the statements you made to Ms Matthews regarding the giving away of your moral code and the fact that you 'just wanted to have a bit of fun';
·Third, Ms Coombes submitted that your prospects for rehabilitation, given the fact that you have not offended over the last 34 years, is favourable to you;
·Fourth, Ms Coombes submitted that totality is a relevant consideration on the charges, and I agree;
·Fifth, Ms Coombes made a submission as to the application of s.5AA of the Sentencing Act. I will say something about that in a moment; and
·Ms Coombes provided me with the cases of Buckley and Partington.
63I need to say something about some of the submissions raised as to previous good character.
Previous Good Character
64Section 5(2) of the Sentencing Act requires a court to have regard to factors in the sentencing consideration including an offender's previous character.
65Section 5AA of the Sentencing Act provides, notwithstanding s.5(2):
A court must not have regard to the offender's previous good character, or lack of previous findings of guilt or convictions, if the court is satisfied the offender's previous good character, or lack of previous findings of guilt or convictions, was of assistance to the offender in the commission of the offence.
66Now, of course a small part of the defence case – and it was only a small part – was that at the time of the offending you had no prior convictions. A more important part of the defence case, but for different reasons, is that you have no convictions or offences committed after 1986.
67A large part of the Crown case is that your offending was committed by you as an adult, and as a teacher, in breach of the trust of the young persons involved, and in some circumstances where the young person was under your care, supervision or authority.
68Both parties agree that the offending was committed decades ago and since that time you have led a quiet, productive and law-abiding life of some 34 years.
69Now, I can imagine s.5AA could play a significant role in a sentencing consideration if the offending was committed by a person of hitherto good character in recent times, but its use may be more limited when the offending occurred, as it did here, between 1980 and 1986.
70The provision only becomes effective if your good character was ‘of assistance’ to you in the commission of the offence. In my view, this issue is somewhat academic because the fact is that you were already a teacher. It was from that role and that standing that you were able to undertake the grooming and secure the trust of each young person, which put you in a position where you could abuse them.
71After that, the fact is – that is, after the commission of the first crime – you can claim no good character whatsoever. What you have is the concealment of your abhorrent and despicable criminal offending for 40 years. If I had any doubt about this then the fact that you kept offending over the next six years extinguishes that doubt.
72In my view the real use of the fact that you have not offended for 34 years is not a question of character but, as Ms Matthews concludes, a factor to be used in the assessment of your prospects for your rehabilitation.
Delay
73In the same way I do not consider the delay in its usual sense to be a factor which you can claim in mitigation. Delay occurred because you concealed the truth for so long. These young men who you abused cannot be blamed for not coming forward any earlier. The courage it has taken for them to come forward at all is remarkable. For years young men such as these faced the fact that they were unlikely to be believed. Ms Wilson had exactly that experience at the hands of the Catholic church. You cannot take any particular credit for the life that you have led over the last 34 years. Those young persons have lived the same experience you inflicted upon them, but from a very different perspective to you, over that whole period.
Burden of imprisonment
74I accept the fact that at 73 years of age you have been imprisoned for the first time (excluding those first few days on remand). That fact, coupled with your wife's illness, your own physical and mental health problems, the isolation you face based on your reception into custody after the plea last week and the restrictions COVID-19 has forced on the prison system, all operate to make the time you have spent in custody, and the time that you face ahead of you, very difficult.
75I note in passing that your advancing age alone cannot justify or underpin the imposition of a shorter sentence than the circumstances warrant, even where that sentence may take up a considerable portion of your remaining life.
76I especially accept that you will find the separation from your wife, and the guilt you feel for not being there as her primary caregiver, a great burden, and a greater burden than most in the prison system face. I will take that into account.
77Mr Tiwana conceded that exceptional circumstances had not been demonstrated to rely upon family hardship. He properly pointed out that your wife will not be left without support. Rather, he relies upon the burden of your guilt and the anxiety it places on you. I accept this as a proper basis for extending some mitigation.
Remorse
78I consider that you have demonstrated remorse, or at least insight into your offending and some empathy for those you abused. I find this in your statements to Pamela Matthews. I accept those statements because of the very detailed work and the number of times Ms Matthews interviewed you in order to undertake her assessment of your psychological condition. I also accept the statements to her as expressions of remorse because they came, in each instance, after you had read the statements of each of those young persons you had abused. It seems to me that you had given some real thought to the matter by the time you came to speak to Ms Matthews and I note that you spoke to her on four occasions.
79I take into account her conscientious approach to supplying a report on this matter and I take into account that I assume she thought very deeply before she has put those matters in her report.
80Now, further – and contrary to the Crown's submissions – I accept your observation to Ms Matthews about losing your moral compass was a further observation supporting the proposition that you do have insight into your offending.
81In the circumstances, and relying largely on the assessment of Pamela Matthews and the fact that you have a good pro-social network about you, I consider you have good prospects for your rehabilitation. This can only be enhanced by your advancing age and the fact that the opportunity to commit further offences has been removed from you. Moreover, the community can take comfort from the fact that the onerous reporting conditions of the Sex Offenders Registration Act provide a further protective factor.
82Mr Casey, I sentence you as follows:
Charge Nos. Charge Maximum Penalty Sentence Cumulation 1 Indecent assault upon a male under 16 (s68(3A)) (1980) 5 years
15 months 3 months 2 Indecent assault upon a male under 16 (s68(3A)) (1980 5 years
20 months 6 months Serious Sexual Offender 3 Indecent assault upon a male under 16 (s68(3A)) (1980 5 years
3 months 1 month 4 Indecent assault with a person under 16 (s 44(1)) (1984) 5 years 20 months 4 months 5 Gross indecency with a person under 16 (under care/supervision) (s 50(1)(a)) (1984) 3 years 16 months 4 months 6, 7, 8 Sexual penetration with a person aged 10-16 (under care/supervision) (s 48(1)) (1984-1986) 15 years 3 years 9 months 7 Sexual penetration with a person aged 10-16 (under care/supervision) (s 48(1)) (1984-1986) 15 years 3 years 9 months 8 Sexual penetration with a person aged 10-16 (under care/supervision) (s 48(1)) (1984-1986) Representative charge 15 years 3 years 3 months Base TES 6 years 3 month NPP 3 years 3 months
83Following your conviction on Charges 1 and 2, I declare you to be a serious sexual offender, and I order that fact be entered into the records of the court.
84The total effective sentence is a sentence of six years and three months. I order that you serve a non-parole period of three years and three months.
85I declare the pre-sentence detention of 11 days excluding today reckoned as already served.
86But for the plea of guilty to these charges I would have imposed an overall sentence of eight and a half years with six years to serve.
87I have already declared you to be a serious sexual offender and I also note that you are now to be registered on the Sexual Offenders Registration list for life.
88The obligations of reporting are indeed very onerous. There is a deal of paperwork that goes with that. I am not in a position to provide you with that paperwork now, Mr Casey, but I will simply note that I have mentioned this to you. It is a matter that Mr Tiwana and your instructing solicitors will raise with you in due course. Now, Ms Coombes, are there any other orders sought?
89MS COOMBES: No, Your Honour.
90HIS HONOUR: Is there any other matter from your perspective?
91MS COOMBES: No, Your Honour.
92HIS HONOUR: Mr Tiwana, is there anything to raise from your perspective?
93MR TIWANA: No. Thank you, Your Honour.
94HIS HONOUR: To those that are listening, I want to say the sentencing process is rarely a process from which anyone who has been the subject of abuse takes any comfort. The sentencing process is not designed in that way; it is not a retributive type process. The criminal law operates in a different way to that. I simply hope that going forward into the future you are able to move forward and to get something back of your lives and put this matter behind you. All right. With that, if there's nothing else I will adjourn.
---
0
4
0