Director of Public Prosecutions v Randall (a pseudonym)
[2022] VCC 74
•4 February 2022
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA CRIMINAL JURISDICTION | Revised Suitable for Publication |
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ALLEN RANDALL (a Pseudonym) |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE DOYLE |
| WHERE HELD: | Latrobe Valley |
| DATE OF TRIAL: | 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21 October 2021 |
| DATE OF PLEA: | 15 December 2021 |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 4 February 2022 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Randall (a pseudonym) |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VCC 74 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: SENTENCE - CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Incest – Indecent Act with a Child under 16 years – Attempted Incest – Serious Sex Offender
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1958 as amended by the Crimes (Sexual Offences) Act 1991 s 44(2); Crimes Act 1958 as amended by the Crimes (Rape) Act 1991; Sentencing Act 1991
Cases Cited:DPP v G [2002] VSCA 6
Sentence:Convicted and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 14 years and 8 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms C. Duckett | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr G. Chisholm | Slades & Parsons Solicitors |
HIS HONOUR:
1Allen Randall[1], on 22 October 2021, after a 10‑day trial, you were convicted by a jury of 16 charges of incest, one charge of indecent act with a child under the age of 16 and one charge of attempted incest arising from 15 incidents. The maximum penalties for these offences are as follows: incest, 25 years' imprisonment; attempted incest, 20 years' imprisonment; indecent act, 10 years' imprisonment.
[1] A pseudonym.
2You were born in April 1964, and you were aged between 30 and 41 years old at the time of the offending.
3The victims of your offences are Sania Hooper,[2] Lindsay Henry[3] and Mila Hooper.[4] These three were your stepdaughters. From approximately 1990 you were in a relationship with their mother, Marta Henry.[5] You moved in to live with Marta Henry[6] and her daughters at an address in Warragul in approximately 1992. This property was a farm owned by Marta Henry.
[2] A pseudonym.
[3] A pseudonym.
[4] A pseudonym.
[5] A pseudonym.
[6] A pseudonym.
4In addition to the three victims that I have named, Marta Henry had another daughter named Melissa Drew,[7] who also gave evidence at the trial and provided a victim impact statement.
[7] A pseudonym.
5From the time you came to live with Marta Henry and her daughters, the three victims regarded you as their father.
6Ms Henry died in 2017. Sania Hooper, Lindsay Henry and Mila Hooper all made their statements to the police in 2019.
Sania Hooper
7Sania Hooper is the oldest victim in this matter. She was born in 1982, and she was aged between 12 and 17 years old at the time of the offending. I will summarise the facts fairly briefly based on the transcript of evidence at the trial.
8The first occasion of offending against Sania Hooper took place in the hay shed on the property when she was approximately 12 or 13 years old. You took her down to the hay shed and you put your hands down her pants and forced your fingers inside her vagina. After this you said to her, 'You liked that, you little bitch', and you told her that she had enjoyed it. That is the basis of Charge 1 - incest. [8]
[8] VARE transcript, paragraph 60-78.
9On another occasion in the spare bedroom within the house you offended again. Originally, Sania had said in her VARE that this incident occurred in your bedroom but corrected this at the special hearing to the spare bedroom. On this occasion she could hear her siblings outside the window of the spare room, tapping on the wall and asking to be let inside. You had apparently locked them out of the house. On the bed, you performed oral sex on the victim and put your fingers inside her vagina. This is the basis of Charges 2 and 3 - incest.[9]
[9] VARE transcript, paragraph 104-115; Special Hearing transcript, page 63.
10The first occasion on which you sexually penetrated her vagina with your penis occurred in the tool-shed at the Warragul property. Sania gave evidence that at that location you kept condoms in a small wooden drawer. On this occasion you penetrated her vagina from behind with your penis. This is the basis of Charge 4 - incest.[10]
[10]VARE transcript, paragraph 206-211.
11A further occasion of penile-vaginal penetration took place when Sania Hooper was in the shower. You entered the shower while she was in there and you began patting her hair and touching her body. You penetrated her vagina from behind. She was upset and she was crying. This is the basis of Charge 5 - incest.
12A particularly brazen incident took place when the family was all together, watching a movie on TV in the living room. You were on the couch with Sania. The others were sitting on the floor or at the other end of the couch. You lay behind Sania and sexually penetrated her vagina with your penis while the movie was playing. She described being paralysed with fear and disbelief. This is the basis of Charge 6 - incest.[11]
[11] VARE transcript, paragraph 183-198.
13On another occasion in the horse stables, at the back of the shed, you forced Sania to perform oral sex on you. You pushed her head down and put your penis in her mouth. This is the basis of Charge 7 - incest.
14Your offending against Sania Hooper stopped when she moved away from her mother and sisters to live with her biological father in Orbost when she was approximately 17. She moved to get away from you and your offending.
Lindsay Henry
15Turning now to Lindsay Henry, the first occasion on which you sexually abused Lindsay took place in the lounge room when she was about eight years of age. You asked her to sit down and watch a movie with you. In her evidence she said it was about lunchtime and the daytime movies had started playing. You asked her to sit beside you and then you were spooning her from behind. You put your right hand over her shoulder, holding her, and you kept trying to put your left hand into her pants. She was wearing tracksuit pants, a T-shirt and a windcheater. She squirmed away from you, but you kept on pushing and reaching down to her vagina. You commenced touching the top of her vagina between the lips and rubbing around in that area. This continued until she stopped wriggling and fighting you. You then held your hand there and you said she was a good girl and that she had done the right thing. You removed your hand and watched the rest of the movie. You again told her she had 'done good'. There was no one else in the house. This is the basis of Charge 8 - incest.[12]
[12] Trial transcript, page 53 – 54.
16About a week and a half later you were spooning Lindsay in the lounge room. You held her with your left hand and touched her with your right hand. You rubbed her vagina and held her until she stopped moving. You then penetrated her vagina with your finger. You took your hand out and either licked or put saliva on your middle finger to lubricate it, before again inserting your finger into her vagina. She said it felt like you had cupped her pelvic bone and that you inserted your finger in and out. This went on for about 20 minutes while she tried to get away from you. That is the basis of Charge 9 - incest.[13]
[13] Trial Transcript, page 55-56.
17On another occasion Lindsay was in her bedroom which she shared with her three sisters. Family friends were in the kitchen, which was next to the bedroom. They said they wanted to take Lindsay to a festival for her 10th birthday. You left the kitchen and came to the bedroom. You asked if anyone was awake. You asked, 'Does anyone want ice cream?' Lindsay responded because she was the only child awake. You walked into the bedroom and grabbed her left arm with your right hand and placed your other hand on her stomach. You said, ’they want to take you to a festival'. You started moving your hand down into her pants and rubbing her vagina. You inserted your finger and cupped her pelvic bone and said, 'Won't that be good. You'll be a good girl for them like you are for me'. This went on for about 30 seconds before you left the bedroom, obtained a jumper and walked back past the bedroom door, putting your jumper on as you entered the kitchen to make it appear that all you did was go and get jumper. This is the basis of Charge 10 - incest.[14]
[14] Trial Transcript, page 57-59.
18A further occasion took place when you took Lindsay to Darnum to assist you cladding a shed owned by family friends. When you arrived at the shed with the victim, you began groping her breasts whilst masturbating.[15] You put your hand down her pants and inserted your finger into her vagina. That is the basis of Charge 11 - incest.
[15] Trial Transcript, page 83-84.
19Also at Darnum when Lindsay was with you to clad the shed, a storm took place during the night. You drove with Lindsay to the check on the shed and see that the tin sheets were holding. On that occasion you groped her breasts and masturbated yourself, while inserting your finger into her vagina. Again you told her she was being a good girl and that she was beautiful. You apparently ejaculated on the ground. That is the basis of Charge 12 - incest.[16]
[16] Trial Transcript, page 84 – 85.
20When Lindsay was aged around 11 you took her to the hay shed. You bolted the door from the inside so no one could see inside. Initially you made her stand while you groped her and put your hands down her pants. You penetrated her vagina with you finger and licked your finger whilst masturbating. You then put a rug on the ground and told her to lie down. When she was lying down, you tried to insert your penis. You were unsuccessful, so you tried to push harder. She screamed and tried to get away from you. She said you pushed your penis so hard that it bent and you hurt yourself. She was in incredible pain. She told you she did not like it. You responded that it would be better and not as painful next time. You told her she was a good girl. This is the basis of Charge 13 - attempted incest. [17]
[17] Trial Transcript, page 64 – 69.
21But when you were unable to insert your penis into her vagina, you forced the victim to give you oral sex. This started with her having to open her mouth, with you rubbing your penis so that her lips covered the tip of your penis until you ejaculated. She gagged, retched and spat your ejaculate from her mouth. This is the basis of Charge 14 - incest.[18]
[18] Trial Transcript, page 64 – 65.
22She gave evidence of a further occasion when she was about 15 years old. You took her to the hay shed and laid a horse rug on the ground. You pushed her down and took off her pants and underwear. She had her period at the time. You pushed your penis inside her vagina. There was blood everywhere and all over the horse rug. You used her mother's jumper and your T-shirt to clean up before putting the bloodstained clothes into a sack used for collecting rubbish. You burnt the sack that afternoon. That is the basis of Charge 18.[19]
[19] Trial Transcript, page 98.
Mila Hooper
23The third victim in the matter is Mila Hooper. Mila was born in 1988 and she was aged between 13 and 17 at the time of the offending.
24When she was between 12 and 14 years old and she was cleaning the horse stables on the property, you approached her and offered to clean the stables for her if she watched you masturbate. She was disgusted and told you to 'Fuck off. That's disgusting'. As she walked out of the stables, you pulled your pants down to masturbate. Your penis was erect. You said, 'Well, it doesn't matter if you watch or not; I'm going to do it anyway'. She walked to the furthest corner of the farm and cried. She stayed there until she could recollect herself. That is the basis of Charge 20, indecent act.[20]
[20] Trial Transcript, page 337.
25When Mila Hooper was 16 years old she received a $1,000 mobile phone bill from Telstra. You approached her in the house and told her that if she would like the phone bill to disappear there was a way that you could help her if she helped you. When you were in the house with her alone you took her to your bedroom and said words to the effect of, 'Do you want the phone bill to disappear', and offered to pay for half of the phone bill. You told her to pull down her pants. You bent her over the bed. You pulled your pants down with an erect penis and penetrated her from behind. She said you did not use a condom. She was crying. When you withdrew, you ejaculated into your hands and walked into the bathroom. She retreated to her bedroom where she hid in the wardrobe. When she came out of her bedroom, she saw you washing your hands in the basin. That is the basis of Charge 21.[21]
[21] Trial Transcript, page 340-341.
26Broadly speaking the evidence in this case discloses your offending in an atmosphere of domination and control by you reinforced by your threatening and aggressive behaviour. This was the subject of evidence at the trial, and I do not propose to repeat all that was said. There was also evidence of other uncharged sexual activity. My summary does not do justice to the full context and circumstances in which the offending took place in this case.
27Mila Hooper gave evidence that you said to her on numerous occasions that if she told anyone you would go away for a long time and that her mother would lose the farm and that she and her sisters would have nothing and that it would all be her fault.
28Sania Hooper said that you made threats to her over the period in which the offending took place and said if you told anyone you would kill her. She said she knew you had guns and ammunition on the property, and she believed that to be true. She said this in her VARE.
29She referred to another occasion later in time. She had had a brain haemorrhage and she was staying at the family home in Warragul. You reinforced to her that you had guns on the property, but she argued with you that you told her you had sold those guns a long time ago.
30Lindsay Henry also said that you made it very clear to her that going against you had huge retributions. That was in the context that you would destroy items that she owned and burned things. So that was some of the contextual material in terms of the offences.
Victim impact statements
31In this matter four victim impact statements were tendered and read at the plea hearing. They were all eloquent expressions of the profound and wide-ranging effects of what you did to the victims in this case over many years.
32Sania Hooper said she was not able to put into words the full impact your crimes have had on her life. She described the first offence as ‘The day you took her dignity and self-worth and set her life on a trajectory filled with pain and suffering’. She said your offending caused her to lose interest in her education and she began skipping school and using marijuana. Later on when she attempted to return to school, she found it difficult to concentrate because of trauma, emotion and anxiety. She left her family and her friends to flee from your abuse. She described that her first real intimate relationship was one which was with an older person and was physically and emotionally violent. She described her life as being one led ‘purely by survival' as a result of your offending. It is no exaggeration to say that your offending irrevocably and negatively changed the course of her life, as with all the victims in this case.
33Lindsay Henry said she now suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression. She outlined the ongoing psychological treatment she has undertaken to reduce the impact of your offending, and other issues she has had such as eating disorders, panic attacks, difficulty sleeping, performing daily tasks. She spoke of distrust in relationships with other people because of your offending and anxiety that you would return and carry out threats against her. She described having to relocate and reduce contact with friends and discontinue hobbies out of fear. She said her relationship with her partner requires daily work because of problems with intimacy and commitment caused by your offending. Your offending caused her difficulty concentrating at school and applying herself to pursue further education. She referred to the overwhelming sadness of having to tell people about the private parts of her life and the impacts on her mental health, which she said has deteriorated since going to police and having to give evidence in court.
34Mila Hooper, who was very reluctant to go the police about your offending, described the impact of having to talk about your offending publicly, making her statements and giving evidence in court. She said it has taken a significant toll on her mental state. She suffers, in her words, from a void of emotions as a result of your offending. As a child she had night terrors. She still has trouble sleeping. As a parent herself she said she cannot imagine how anyone could do to a child what you did to her.
35Melissa Drew gave evidence on the trial. She said she hopes your offending will not impact how she raises her child. She constantly thinks about your crimes, wondering if she could have prevented you from further offending if she had spoken up earlier. She described feelings of shame and embarrassment as a child and emphasised the lost time with her eldest sister Sania Hooper, because of your crimes.
36The impact of your offending has been multifaceted, profound and enduring for the victims and is a very significant matter in sentencing in this case.
Gravity
37Mr Randall, your offending was objectively very grave; this is obvious. The crime of incest carries a maximum penalty of 25 years, reflecting its seriousness. It is rightly regarded as abhorrent by the community. Your offending involved a fundamental breach of parental trust and responsibility. Instead of protecting your young stepdaughters, you preyed on them, essentially one after the other, causing them serious harm.
38In DPP v G, [22] Winneke P said this of the crime of incest:
This court has, in recent years, had cause to remark on the prevalence of the crime of incest in the community, its capacity to erode decency of family life and the trust and confidence of its young victims. It is a crime which obliges the court to punish it with principles of general deterrence, denunciation and protection of young persons at the forefront of sentencing purposes. … The insidious effects of the crime of incest upon its victims should be recognised by those who are privileged to exercise parental care and the community is entitled to expect that those who exercise such care, will not abuse the trust and confidence reposed in them by those in their charge. Parents and those in loco parentis who fail to exercise the restraint which the community expects of them, and who give in to their own sexual gratification, must expect to be severely and appropriately punished.[23]
[22] DPP v G [2002] VSCA 6.
[23] Ibid, [11].
39This is what you did. You gave in to your own sexual gratification and you did so over approximately 10 years.
40The legal prohibition on sexual activity with children and the maximum penalty for its contravention are intended to deter others who may consider engaging in such conduct.
41The prohibition on sexual activity with a child under the age of 16 presumes that sexual activity which occurs 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. In this case it is plain from the victim impact statements that the serious harm the law presumes has occurred in relation to each of the victims.
42Your offending took place over years with each victim, commencing in each case from a tender age. Lindsay Henry was just eight when you commenced offending against her. The offending was frequent, and it was brazen, as exemplified, for instance, by the offence which occurred when the two friends were over, offering to take Lindsay to a festival. The offence against Sania in the lounge room involved a penile-vaginal penetration in front of the whole family.
43Your moral culpability is high. You bear sole responsibility for inflicting this abuse on three of your daughters from young ages and for years on end. Your offending only really stopped when the victims stood up to you or they left home.
44Sentences at the upper of the range are usually imposed in relation to multiple offences with several victims that have taken place over a long period. This is such a case.
45Your conduct was sustained with multiple acts of penetration over an extended period of time, particularly in relation to Sania Hooper and Lindsay Henry. As I said earlier, overall, the offences took place over 10 years.
46You gave the victims at times specific instructions on what you wanted them to do sexually and some of your conduct, such as saying to Sania Hooper that she had enjoyed your abuse and to Lindsay Henry that she was “doing the right thing” and she was a “good girl”, was designed to normalise your behaviour and sexualise your daughters. You persuaded Mila Hooper, for instance, to submit to your abuse by offering to pay her phone bill.
47I am satisfied that your acts were accompanied on occasions by threats to ensure the silence of the victims and that the offending took place against a background of your controlling and intimidating behaviour against the family.
48Unprotected sexual activity, which exposes the victim to the risk of pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases, is also relevant to the seriousness of the offences. In this case, on some occasions, you did not use a condom. Sania Hooper gave evidence of a conversation with you where she told you she believed she might be pregnant. You told her that she would have to tell her mother she was pregnant to a boyfriend and have an abortion and you purchased a pregnancy test for her.
49There is nothing really to mitigate your offending in this case. Although you have no similar prior convictions, that factor cannot spare you from the severity of the sentence that must be imposed in this case. You maintained a plea of not guilty and Mr Chisholm is therefore not able to point to remorse as a factor in mitigation.
50The sentencing principles of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment assume considerable importance in this case.
Personal circumstances
51Turning to your personal circumstances, you are now 57 years old. You were born in Wagga Wagga. Your father was a violent man. Your mother separated from him when you were very young. Apparently back in the 1960s your father, as I understand it, committed a murder and an assault, and your mother moved from New South Wales to Melbourne. When you were three years old she relocated to Western Australia and re-partnered with a man who thereafter was effectively your father. Your parents were Jehovah’s Witnesses, and you described a strict childhood. Since being remanded after the jury verdict you have had some contact with your mother but none with your stepfather. You have siblings, including three brothers, in Western Australia, but you have not had much contact with them because you have now lived in Victoria for many years.
52You have had three significant relationships in your life. Between the ages of 25 and 27 you were with a woman named Maria Rhodes[24]. From 27 until Ms Henry died you were with her, although the exact status of your relationship over her last years is a little unclear. Thereafter you formed a relationship with a woman whom you had met in America. She left Australia and returned to America after you had been charged with the offences of which the jury convicted you, at least some of those offences.
[24] A pseudonym.
53Your education finished in Year 10. You then worked as a plasterer and a concreter for your stepfather. You were aged 15 when you started working. When you were 17 years of age you worked as a tiler. You have always worked. You have a solid history of employment throughout your adult life.
54Most recently you worked for a Dairy Co-Op. You have various educational qualifications connected with that work. Tendered was a letter of assistance from your employer there, confirming that you worked there since 2010.
55You do have a prior criminal history, but it is largely for violence and dishonesty offending. It is relevant, but only to a small degree, given the different nature of the offences involved. It cannot be said you have got an unblemished record, but it is not a significant matter for sentencing in this case.
References
56I have received a reference from a friend of yours. He described you as a loyal and devoted friend over many years. He said you have become very sad as a result of your life collapsing because of these charges.
57A further reference was provided from a friend. She knew you when you were both children and refers to her experiences with you, all of which she says were positive. She says, based on those experiences, this offending was unbelievable to her.
Psychological report
58There is a psychological report from Lynda Oates. She saw you from back in May 2019 for mixed depression and anxiety. You had some 14 counselling sessions with her. She said that you presented with anxiety and depression. She said you were devastated when the allegations were raised. At that time, you were concerned about your reputation, including your standing in the community as a youth sports instructor.
59In December 2019 you posted on social media that you were going to kill yourself. Apparently, you took an overdose. You were then admitted to ICU, where you stayed for seven days, then you were moved to the general ward for assessment. You were discharged on 30 December 2019. It was at that time that your partner left and returned to America.
60Ms Oates administered tests for depression and anxiety. She said, somewhat surprisingly, you were in the normal range. She thought that may have been in part due to the medication you were taking at that time.
61There is nothing in Ms Oates' report that is of great significance to sentencing in this case and nothing relied upon by Mr Chisholm.
COVID-19
62In formulating sentence in this matter, I have taken into account the restrictive conditions in the prison which prevail in response to the pandemic. That is a matter that will increase the burden of your imprisonment for at least some time into the future.
Delay, specific deterrence and prospects of rehabilitation
63I have also taken into account the time you spent in the police station cells as a difficult period, those cells being unsuitable for an extended stay; you were there from 10 October to 22 October. I have also taken into account that you were required to undergo quarantine in isolation thereafter.
64This offending occurred now many years ago, no record of reoffending in that period.
65The delay does not significantly mitigate in this case. It is not uncommon for offences of victims of sexual offences, particularly of this gravity, to take an extended period before they are in a position where they can report the matter. That was clear enough in this case.
66However, Mr Chisholm has submitted that the historical nature of the offending and the fact that you have not offended for many years now moderates the need for specific deterrence. Whilst specific deterrence remains a sentencing principle of some importance, I accept Mr Chisholm's submission that it is moderated by that factor.
67As far as your prospects of rehabilitation go, it is very difficult in the context of this extremely serious offending, where you have maintained denials of the offending, to really assess your prospects of rehabilitation. In my view if you were in a situation of proximity to younger females you remain a risk for reoffending.
Totality
68The totality principle requires that your overall sentence remains just and proportionate to the totality of your offending. In this case I must try to avoid a crushing sentence, particularly having regard to your age, now 57. The sentence I impose will run for a substantial percentage of the remainder of your life.
69To comply with the totality principle in this case I have both moderated to a degree the length of the individual sentences and the periods of cumulation. I have found this necessary to avoid a crushing sentence.
70You are to be sentenced as a serious sexual offender for all charges other than Charges 1 and 2. This is because periods of imprisonment will be imposed for those charges triggering the operation of the serious sexual offender provisions. The prosecution does not seek a disproportionate sentence, but the Sentencing Act requires that sentences imposed where you are a serious sex offender are to be cumulative unless otherwise ordered. Therefore, the totality principle in sentencing for those charges is modified to an extent but not excluded. It remains significant in sentencing in this case. For the charges where you are a serious sexual offender, community protection becomes the principal sentencing purpose.
71In fixing the orders for cumulation I have also taken into account the occasions where charges arose from the same incident; and the need to reflect the gravity of separate offending against each victim.
72As I remarked earlier sentencing principles of general deterrence, denunciation, just punishment, community protection and to an extent specific deterrence all dictate very lengthy terms of imprisonment for your appalling offending.
Sentence
73For Charge 1 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years.
74For Charge 2 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years.
75For Charge 3 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years.
76For Charge 4 of incest, in this instance involving penile-vaginal penetration, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years and six months.
77For Charge 5, again penile-vaginal penetration, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years and six months.
78For Charge 6, this is the offence in the lounge room of penile-vaginal penetration, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years and six months. That is the base sentence.
79For Charge 7 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for six years.
80Turning to the charges relating to Lindsay Henry, for Charge 8 you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years.
81For Charge 9 you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years.
82For Charge 10 you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years.
83For Charge 11 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period six years.
84For Charge 12 of incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years.
85For Charge 13 of attempted incest you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of five years.
86For Charge 14 you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years.
87For Charge 18 of penile-vaginal penetration in the hay shed you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years and six months.
88In relation to Mila Hooper, Charge 20 of indecent act, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of two years.
89In relation to Charge 21 you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of six years and six months.
90I will make the following orders for cumulation. These orders are orders for cumulation on the base sentence, which is Charge 6, and on each other.
| Charge no. | Charge Description | Sentence | Cumulation |
| Offending against Sania Hooper | |||
| 1 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina on the first occasion in the hay shed. | 6 years | 6 months |
| 2 | Incest - Inserted tongue into the victim’s vagina when sisters were locked out of the house. (same occasion as Charge 3). | 6 years | 3 months |
| 3 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina when sisters were locked out of the house. (same occasion as Charge 4). | 6 years | 9 months |
| 4 | Incest - Inserted penis into the victim’s vagina in the tool shed. | 6 years 6 months | 9 months |
| 5 | Incest- Inserted penis into the victim’s vagina in the bathroom. | 6 years 6 months | 9 months |
| 6 | Incest - Inserted penis into the victim’s vagina on the couch watching TV. | 6 years 6 months | |
| 7 | Incest - Introduced penis into the victim’s mouth in the horse stables. | 6 years | 9 months |
| Offending against Lindsay Henry | |||
| 8 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina while watching a Country and Western movie on the couch. | 6 years | 12 months |
| 9 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina on the couch in the living room during which you sucked your finger. | 6 years | 12 months |
| 10 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina in the victim’s bedroom after asking, ‘who want’s ice cream?’. | 6 years | 12 months |
| 11 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina at the horse shed of friends in Darnum where additional screws were added to the cladding. | 6 years | 12 months |
| 12 | Incest - Inserted finger into the victim’s vagina at the horse shed in Darnum during a storm. | 6 years | 12 months |
| 13 | Attempted Incest - Attempted to insert penis into the victim’s vagina in the hayshed (same occasion as Charge 14). | 5 years | 6 months |
| 14 | Incest - Introduced penis into the victim’s mouth in the hayshed (same occasion as Charge 13). | 6 years | 6 months |
| 18 | Incest - Inserted penis into the victim’s vagina in the hayshed where you lay a horse rug and the victim had her period. | 6 years and 6 months | 18 months |
| Offending against Mila Hooper | |||
| 20 | Indecent Act - Exposed penis to the victim by masturbating in front of the victim and proposed sexual favour in exchange for cleaning the horse stables. | 2 years | 3 months |
| 21 | Incest - Inserted penis into the victim’s vagina in exchange for payment of the victim’s phone bill. | 6 years and 6 months | 24 months |
| TES: 20 years NPP: 14 years 8 months PSD: 117 days reckoned as already served | |||
91On my maths that should add up to a total effective sentence of 20 years.
92I fix a minimum non-parole period in this matter of 14 years and eight months.
93I declare 117 days of pre‑sentence detention to be administratively deducted from the sentence that I have imposed.
94Mr Randall, by reason of the convictions in this matter you will become a registered sex offender and the reporting period is for life. You will be provided with documentation in relation to that. It will have to be signed. There will have to be an acknowledgement signed. I do not believe we can do that over this video link, it will have to be sent to the prison and signed and returned.
0
2
0