Freeman v The Queen

Freeman appealed against his conviction and sentence for the murder of his infant daughter, motivated by spousal revenge, to the Court of Appeal. The case was initially dismissed by a single judge, but Freeman elected to have it heard by the Full Bench. The primary legal issue was whether the non-parole period of 32 years was manifestly excessive, given the nature of the crime and the applicant’s psychological condition and prospects for rehabilitation. The court also considered whether the non-parole periods in other similar cases could be seen as demonstrating a manifest excess.

The court found that the non-parole period imposed was not manifestly excessive. It held that the sentencing judge had properly considered the factors relevant to the case, including the heinous nature of the crime, the motive of spousal revenge, and the evidence of the applicant's psychological condition. The court emphasised the importance of the individual circumstances of each case and concluded that the sentence was proportionate and appropriate. The Full Bench found no error in the sentencing judge's assessment of Freeman's psychological illness and prospects of rehabilitation, nor did it find any point of principle that warranted further appeal. The application was dismissed.

There were no orders to be made as the application was dismissed.