R v Carney

The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory heard an appeal regarding sentencing facts in a criminal case. The case involved the defendant, Thomas Earl Carney, who had been found guilty of two offences. The first offence was using electronic means to suggest to a young person, JA, that she take part in an act of a sexual nature. The second offence was engaging in sexual intercourse with JA, a person under the age of 16 years. The court was required to determine the facts of the second charge, specifically whether the sexual intercourse was constituted by penetration of JA's vagina by Mr Carney's penis or by his finger. The court considered the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defence, including testimonies from JA, her mother, a youth worker, a forensic medical practitioner, and Mr Carney himself. The court found inconsistencies and admitted lies in JA's testimony, leading to a reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of her account of the events on the night in question. Consequently, the court ruled that the sexual intercourse occurred as Mr Carney described it, namely, as digital penetration. The court based its decision on the principles of fact finding in sentencing matters and the need for the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Based on the court's findings, the final orders are as follows: Mr Carney be sentenced for the offences to which he has pleaded guilty on the basis of the facts determined in paragraphs 179-182.