R v Fenton

The appellant, in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, appealed against his conviction and sentence in relation to a series of charges involving a child. The appellant was found guilty of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child, three counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16, one count of common assault and five counts of rape. However, he was acquitted of one count of common assault and one count of assault occasioning bodily harm. The appellant argued that the verdicts of guilty were unreasonable because they were inconsistent with the acquittals. The appellant also sought to appeal against his sentence on the ground that it was manifestly excessive.

The court examined whether the verdicts of guilty were reasonable and rational in light of the acquittals. The court noted that there was a different quality to the complainant’s evidence in respect of the counts of which the appellant was acquitted, as opposed to the counts of which the appellant was convicted. The court found that the complainant’s evidence in respect of the counts of which the appellant was convicted was supported by other evidence, and that there was a rational basis for distinguishing between the verdicts. The court therefore dismissed the appeal against conviction. The court also considered the appellant’s appeal against sentence, and found that the sentence on count 1 was manifestly excessive. The court allowed the appeal against sentence on count 1 and substituted a sentence of nine years imprisonment with the parole eligibility date fixed at 26 June 2015.

The court refused the application for leave to appeal against sentence on counts 2 – 12. The court found that the sentence on counts 2 – 12 was not manifestly excessive or inadequate. The court set aside the sentence on count 1 and substituted a sentence of nine years imprisonment with the parole eligibility date fixed at 26 June 2015.