R v Hidic

[2017] ACTSC 307

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Hidic

Citation:

[2017] ACTSC 307

Hearing Dates:

25 August 2017, 13 October 2017

DecisionDates:

25 August 2017, 13 October 2017

Before:

Murrell CJ

Decision:

Sentenced to two years and seven months’ imprisonment to be served by intensive correction order with 300 hours of community service work.

Reparation order made in the sum of $13,560.20.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – offences against the person – recklessly inflict grievous bodily harm – one punch attack – team sport – whether and to what extent sentence should include period of full-time imprisonment – nature of intensive correction orders  

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 7, 11(3), 33, 110

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 20

Cases Cited:

Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520

R v Amosa [2015] ACTSC 34
R v EL [2016] ACTSC 241
R v Myles [2017] ACTSC 194
R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; 256 CLR 550
R v Sharma [2016] ACTSC 180
R v Smith [2016] ACTSC 330

Sharma v the Queen [2017] ACTCA 8

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Kerim Hidic (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

Ms S Saikal-Skea (Crown)

Mr J Moffett (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)  

Sharman Robertson Solicitors (Offender)

File Number:

SCC 247 of 2016

MURRELL CJ:

1. On 14 July 2017, a jury found that the offender had recklessly inflicted grievous bodily harm on the victim, contrary to s 20 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (Crimes Act). 

1. The maximum penalty for an offence against s 20 is 13 years' imprisonment.

Facts

1. On 16 December 2015, the offender and the victim played a game of futsal at the Australian National University.  They were members of competing teams; the victim was a member of the Big Ball team and the offender was the goalkeeper for the Kolo Football Club (Kolo FC). 

1. As the game progressed, the play became rough.  There were heated exchanges between the offender and the number 7 player for the Big Ball team.  Two Kolo FC spectators, who were friends of the offender, became involved.  Others then joined in the aggressive verbal exchange. The victim did not engage in the exchange. 

1. Eventually, the referee terminated the game. 

1. As the victim was walking towards the exit, he realised that a scuffle had developed behind him that involved his team mates and younger brother.  He turned back.  He saw that a Kolo FC supporter was fighting a Big Ball player.  The victim grabbed the Kolo FC supporter from behind in a bear hug and began to pull him away from the Big Ball player in an attempt to separate the two men.

1. The offender saw the victim holding his friend.  He ran up and punched the victim in the face.  The victim did not see the offender’s approach, nor did he anticipate the punch.  The victim fell to the ground and assumed a foetal…