R v Hemsworth

Case [2021] NSWDC 638


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hemsworth [2021] NSWDC 638
Hearing dates: 27 August 2021
Date of orders: 10 September 2021
Decision date: 10 September 2021
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Buscombe DCJ
Decision:

Aggregate sentence imposed one of 18 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13 years and 10 months

Catchwords:

CRIME — Violent offences — Cause grievous bodily harm with intent

CRIME — Parental responsibility — Failure to provide necessities of life

CRIME — Public justice offences — Do an act with intent to pervert course of justice

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 33(1)(b), 43A(2), 319,

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 25F

Cases Cited:

R v Nolan [2017] NSWCCA 91

Nasrallah v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 188

DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194

Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37

Category:Sentence
Parties: Brendan Ray Hemsworth (Offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Representation: Counsel:
Mr Davies (Offender)
Ms O’Meagher (Crown)
File Number(s): 2019/00153458
Publication restriction: Non-publication order in relation to victim’s name

SENTENCE

Introduction

  1. The offender stood trial by a jury in relation to an indictment containing four counts, the particulars of which I will shortly explain. The offender was convicted by the jury of count 1 and count 3. Count 2 was an alternative to count 1 so no verdict was taken on that count. The offender pleaded guilty to count 4 on the indictment at the commencement of the trial before the jury, having indicated a plea of guilty to that count in the Local Court. Count 1 contained an offence that between 8 March 2019 and 13 March 2019 at Iluka the offender caused grievous bodily harm to SH with intent to cause her grievous bodily harm. That is an offence under s 33(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 and has a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment and there is an applicable standard non‑parole period of seven years.

  2. Count 3 contained an offence that between 8 March and 13 March 2019 at Iluka the offender, being a person having parental responsibility for SH, intentionally and without reasonable excuse failed to provide SH with the necessities of life, namely, medical care and attention, and the result of that failure caused a danger of death to SH. That is an offence under s 43A(2) of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment and there is no applicable standard non‑parole period. Count 4 contained an offence that between 8 March and 23 May 2019 at Iluka the offender created and maintained a false alibi with the intention of avoiding prosecution in relation to the injuries inflicted upon SH, thereby intending to pervert the course of justice. That is an offence under s 319 of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment and there is no applicable standard non‑parole period.

The Facts

  1. Turning then to the facts. These being essentially sentence…

Continue reading R v Hemsworth

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Hemsworth [2021] NSWDC 638
Case
[2021] NSWDC 638
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Hemsworth, the defendant was convicted of a series of serious criminal offences including causing grievous bodily harm with intent, failure to provide the necessities of life, and perverting the course of justice. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The defendant was found to have assaulted his young child, resulting in severe injuries, and subsequently attempted to conceal the crime by providing false information to law enforcement.

The primary legal issues in the case centred around the interpretation and application of various criminal statutes. The court had to determine the extent of the defendant's culpability in each offence, the appropriate sentencing principles to apply, and whether the offences were interrelated in a manner that would warrant an aggregate sentence. The court also needed to consider the impact of the defendant's actions on the victim and the broader community.

The court found that the defendant's actions were deliberate and showed a clear disregard for the well-being of his child. It was held that the offences were interrelated and warranted an aggregate sentence. The court considered the seriousness of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the need to protect the community. After weighing these factors, the court imposed a sentence of 18 years and six months, with a non-parole period of 13 years and 10 months. This sentence reflects the gravity of the defendant's actions and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence imposed one of 18 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13 years and 10 months

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.