R v Douglas (a pseudonym)

Case [2025] NSWDC 126


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Douglas (a pseudonym) [2025] NSWDC 126
Hearing dates: 06 December 2024
Date of orders: 06 March 2025
Decision date: 06 March 2025
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Sutherland SC DCJ
Decision:

Aggregate sentence of 16 years with a non-parole period of 12 years, at [335].

Catchwords:

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Findings of fact after jury trial — Offender convicted of 17 of the 29 counts at trial.

CRIME — 17 counts of domestic violence offences — Sexual assault — Common assault — Assault occasioning —Intimidation.

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Continued denial of all offending — No remorse — Cannot find good prospects of rehabilitation.

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Impact of totality when offending occurred over a period of 20 years across two relationships.

SENTENCING — Standard non-parole period for aggravated sexual assault applicable for mid-range offending.

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Abbas v R [2024] NSWCCA 228

Ali v R [2010] NSWCCA 35

Alseedi v R [2009] NSWCCA 185

Armstrong v R [2017] NSWCCA 323

Attorney-General for Tasmania v O [2004] TASSC 53

Baker v R [2022] NSWCCA 195

BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159; 201 A Crim R 379

Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 387; (2013) 249 CLR 571

Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; (2001) 209 CLR 1

Doolan v R [2006] NSWCCA 29; (2006) 160 A Crim R 54

Gallegos v R [1999] WASCA 191

Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38

Parker v The Queen (Tasmanian Court of Criminal Appeal, 21 July 1994, BC9400423)

Patsan v R [2018] NSWCCA 129

R v Berry [2000] NSWCCA 451

R v Brown (1992) 73 CCC (3d) 242

R v Chehab [2015] NSWCCA 44

R v Cortese [2013] NSWCCA 148

R v Devine (Tasmanian Supreme Court, 5 July 1993, unreported)

R v DN [2023] NSWCCA 39

R v Dunn (2004) 144 A Crim R 180

R v Egge [2020] NSWDC 277

R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267

R v Fernando (1992) 76 A Crim R 58

R v Glen (Court of Criminal Appeal, 19 December 1994, BC9403423)

R v Greene [2001] NSWCCA 258

R v Hamid [2006] NSWCCA 302; 164 A Crim R 179

R v Hendricks [2011] NSWCCA 203

R v Holder; R v Johnston [1983] 3 NSWLR 245

R v Lardner (Court of Criminal Appeal, 10 September 1998, unreported)

R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 167 A Crim R 159

R v Matthews [2023] NSWDC 611

R v Ross (Court of Criminal Appeal, 20 November 1996, unreported)

R v Rowe (1996) 89 A Crim R 467

R v Saleh [2023] NSWDC 444

R v Stephens [2024] NSWCCA 170

R v Tadrosse [2005] NSWCCA 145; (2005) 65 NSWLR 740

R v Todd [1982] 2 NSWLR 517

R v Tuala [2015] NSWCCA 8

R…

Continue reading R v Douglas (a pseudonym)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Douglas (a pseudonym) [2025] NSWDC 126
Case
[2025] NSWDC 126
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Douglas, the defendant was convicted on 17 out of 29 charges of domestic violence offences, including sexual assault, common assault, assault occasioning, and intimidation. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for the defendant, considering the totality of the offending, which spanned over a period of 20 years across two relationships. The defendant had denied all charges and showed no remorse, making it difficult for the court to find any prospects of rehabilitation.

The court had to decide whether the standard non-parole period for aggravated sexual assault was appropriate for the mid-range offending in this case. The defendant's denial of all charges and lack of remorse had to be considered, along with the severity and frequency of the offences. The court also had to weigh the impact of the offending over a long period of time and across two relationships.

The court found that the defendant's continued denial of all offending and lack of remorse meant that there were no good prospects of rehabilitation. The court also considered the impact of the offending over a long period of time and across two relationships, which had a significant impact on the victims. The court determined that the standard non-parole period for aggravated sexual assault was appropriate for the mid-range offending in this case. The court sentenced the defendant to an aggregate sentence of 16 years with a non-parole period of 12 years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of 16 years with a non-parole period of 12 years, at [335].

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.