DPP v WJW

In the case of DPP v WJW, the defendant was originally sentenced to a suspended prison term for engaging in a sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16. The relationship, which began when the victim was 12 years old but had the mental age of a nine-year-old, resulted in the victim becoming pregnant. The offender claimed to be "in love" with the victim, who considered him a "family friend." The original sentence was deemed manifestly inadequate and was quashed. The case returned for re-sentencing, taking into account the change in circumstances since the original sentence, specifically the unsuccessful attempted termination of the pregnancy and the subsequent birth of the child.

The primary legal issues addressed in the case were the adequacy of the original sentence and the appropriate sentence to be imposed following the change in circumstances. The court had to consider the nature and seriousness of the offence, the offender's culpability, and the potential impact of the change in circumstances on the offender's culpability and the sentence. The court also had to decide whether the birth of the child was a relevant factor in determining the new sentence.

The court, in reviewing the original sentence, found it manifestly inadequate and quashed it. In re-sentencing, the court considered the increased culpability of the offender due to the unsuccessful attempted termination of the pregnancy and the subsequent birth of the child. The court held that the birth of the child was a relevant factor in determining the new sentence, as it further highlighted the seriousness of the offender's conduct and the impact on the victim. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment, which was deemed appropriate in the circumstances. The court also noted that the original sentence was suspended as to two, indicating that it was still considered inadequate even with the change in circumstances.

The court made an order that the sentence of imprisonment be served in a way that the offender would spend two years in custody. The sentence was suspended as to two, meaning that the offender would not serve the entire sentence if they behaved well during the period of suspension.