R v Darke

Case [2021] NSWDC 377


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Darke [2021] NSWDC 377
Hearing dates: 12 October 2020; 27 November 2020, 11 December 2020
Decision date: 15 February 2021
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: M Adams ADCJ
Decision:

The offender is sentenced to a period of imprisonment for a period of 3 years, to be released after serving 2 years.

The Offender would therefore be released after serving 2 years on a recognisance pursuant to s.20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act, subject to the following conditions:

1. An amount of security of $1, without sureties; and

2. The offender is to be of good behaviour for a period of 3 years upon his release

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW- Sentence – 16BA schedule – Attempt to procure a child to engage in sexual activity with another person outside Australia – Use carriage service to solicit and transmit child pornography material – Child Internet Exploitation Unit – Persistent Neurocognitive Disorder [Acquired Brain Injury] – Persistent Depressive Disorder – Alcohol Use Disorder – Personality Disorder – Offender kept in strict protection

Legislation Cited:

Criminal Code (Cth)

Criminal Code of Canada

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth),

Category:Sentence
Parties: The Crown
Jason David Darke
Representation:

Counsel:
W. Fitzsimmons – The Crown
N. Mikhaiel – The offender

Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth)
File Number(s): 2018/42703
Publication restriction:

There is to be no publication of the name of the complainant or any material which may tend to identify the complainant

Judgment

Introduction

  1. The offender is before the Court for sentence for the offence, in substance, of attempting to procure a child to engage in sexual activity with another person outside Australia, contrary to s 272.14(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth), for which the penalty is a maximum term of 15 years imprisonment. He seeks to have taken into account (by way of a Schedule under s 16BA) two other (connected) offences, of using a carriage service to solicit and transmit child pornography material, contrary to s 474.19(1)(a)(iii) and (iv), for each of which the penalty is also a maximum term of 15 years. These offences occurred between 5 August 2016 and 11 September 2016.

  2. The offender was arrested on 7 February 2018 and granted bail on 10 September 2019, but he remained in custody until 14 October 2019. On 19 February 2020, bail was revoked. He has been in custody since then.

  3. The offender was committed for trial on 26 June 2019 and his trial listed to commence on 10 February 2020 in the District Court. A plea of guilty was entered to the index offence on 11 February 2020. Earlier negotiations had taken place between prosecution and defence in which the offender had agreed to plead guilty to the two Schedule offences in full satisfaction of the prosecution. This was rejected. It is submitted, in substance, that there was a real legal issue to be determined in relation to the index offence, namely whether the conduct engaged in needed to be contact directly with the child as distinct…

Continue reading R v Darke

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Darke [2021] NSWDC 377
Case
[2021] NSWDC 377
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Darke involves an individual who was charged with attempting to procure a child to engage in sexual activity with another person outside Australia. The offender also used a carriage service to solicit and transmit child pornography material. This case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The matter was brought before the court for sentencing after the offender pleaded guilty to the charges.

The legal issues before the court were primarily focused on determining an appropriate sentence for the offender, taking into account the relevant legislation, specifically the 16BA schedule. The court also had to consider the offender's health and mental conditions, including Persistent Neurocognitive Disorder (Acquired Brain Injury), Persistent Depressive Disorder, Alcohol Use Disorder, and Personality Disorder. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the offender should be kept in strict protection.

The court found that the offender's crimes were serious, but it also considered his health and mental conditions, as well as his history of substance abuse. The court concluded that a custodial sentence was necessary but balanced it with the need for rehabilitation. The offender was sentenced to a period of imprisonment for a period of three years, to be released after serving two years. The court imposed conditions upon the offender's release, including a requirement for him to be of good behaviour for a period of three years. The offender is also to be subject to strict protection.

In summary, the Supreme Court of Victoria sentenced the offender to a three-year prison term, with a release after serving two years. The court also imposed conditions for the offender's release, including a requirement for him to be of good behaviour for three years and subject to strict protection.

Orders

Orders of the court

The offender is sentenced to a period of imprisonment for a period of 3 years, to be released after serving 2 years.

The Offender would therefore be released after serving 2 years on a recognisance pursuant to s.20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act, subject to the following conditions:

1. An amount of security of $1, without sureties; and

2. The offender is to be of good behaviour for a period of 3 years upon his release

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.