R v Irwin - [2020] NSWDC 199

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Irwin [2020] NSWDC 199
Hearing dates: 14 April 2020
Decision date: 14 April 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Colefax SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate term of imprisonment of 10 years with a non parole period of 7 years 6 months.

Catchwords: CRIME - SENTENCE - failing to report obligations - take and detain with intent to commit serious indictable offence - intentionally sexually touching a child under 10 years of age.
Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW), s17(1), Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 86(1)(a1) and 66DA.
Category: Sentence
Parties:
Regina (Crown)
Christopher Irwin (Offender)
Representation:
Mr Diggins (ODPP Campbelltown)
Mr Townsend (Solicitor for the offender)

File Number(s): 2019/171603
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Christopher Irwin you appear for sentence today in relation to four offences.
Two of those offences are failing to comply with reporting obligations under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act, s 17(1). The maximum penalty for each of those offences is 5 years imprisonment and there is no standard non parole period.
One of those offences is that of take and detain with intent to commit a serious indictable offence, namely sexual intercourse with a child under 10 years of age. This offence involves a contravention of s 86(1)(a1) of the Crimes Act. The maximum penalty for that offence is 14 years imprisonment. There is no standard non-parole period.
The fourth and final offence is that of intentionally sexually touching a child under 10 years of age. This involves a contravention of s 66DA of the Crimes Act. The maximum penalty for that offence is 16 years imprisonment and there is a standard non-parole period of 8 years imprisonment.
The facts surrounding your offending conduct are contained in an agreed statement of facts and other material placed before the Court.
Slightly recast by me as to style but not substance, the facts are as follows.
On 21 February 2014 you were sentenced by another judge of this Court for using a carriage service to access child pornography. You had used a phone of yours to undertake Google searches of child pornography and disturbingly search items engaged by you included terms such as “kiddie rape porn”, “schoolkid rape porn” and “kiddie incest pictures”.
On the occasion the police searched your phone they found on it a story which fell within category 5 of the Child Exploitation Tracking System (a system which unfortunately is no longer in use; it has been replaced by a less than satisfactory substitute). Category 5 of the CETS scale was concerned with sadism, humiliation or bestiality. I have been given an extract of that story which I have no intention of repeating, except to say that it is a very disturbing piece of material.
For that offence you received a term of imprisonment.
Because of the nature of that offence, you were placed on the Child Protection Register. As at May 2019 you were to remain on that register until 21 February 2022.
In…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Irwin

Details

AGLC: R v Irwin [2020] NSWDC 199
Case: [2020] NSWDC 199
Decision Date: 14 April 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Irwin was before the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the appellant faced charges of failing to report obligations, taking and detaining with intent to commit a serious indictable offence, and intentionally sexually touching a child under 10 years of age. The appellant had previously been convicted of serious sexual offences against children and had breached his parole conditions by failing to report to his parole officer and leaving the state without permission. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for these offences, taking into account the appellant's criminal history and the need to protect the community.

The legal issues before the court included the appropriate weight to be given to the appellant's criminal history, the seriousness of the current offences, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court also had to consider the principles of proportionality and consistency in sentencing. The appellant argued that his previous convictions should not be given significant weight, as they were historical and he had demonstrated some rehabilitation efforts. However, the prosecution submitted that the appellant's criminal history and the seriousness of the current offences warranted a substantial sentence.

The court found that the appellant's criminal history was a significant aggravating factor, and the current offences demonstrated a clear pattern of offending against children. The court also noted the need for deterrence and to protect the community from the appellant's offending. The court determined that an aggregate term of imprisonment of 10 years with a non-parole period of 7 years 6 months was appropriate, taking into account the need for punishment, deterrence, and community protection. The court emphasised the importance of the appellant's rehabilitation and the need for ongoing monitoring and support to prevent reoffending.

The court ordered that the appellant be imprisoned for an aggregate term of 10 years with a non-parole period of 7 years 6 months. The court also ordered that the appellant be subject to ongoing monitoring and support upon release from prison, to assist with his rehabilitation and prevent reoffending. The court emphasised the importance of protecting the community and ensuring that the appellant receives appropriate treatment and support to address his offending behaviour.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate term of imprisonment of 10 years with a non parole period of 7 years 6 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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Irwin [2020] NSWDC 199
Hearing dates:	14 April 2020
Decision date:	14 April 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Colefax SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate term of imprisonment of 10 years with a non parole period of 7 years 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME - SENTENCE - failing to report obligations - take and detain with intent to commit serious indictable offence - intentionally sexually touching a child under 10 years of age.
Legislation Cited:	Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW), s17(1), Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 86(1)(a1) and 66DA.
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Christopher Irwin (Offender)
Representation:	Mr Diggins (ODPP Campbelltown) Mr Townsend (Solicitor for the offender)
File Number(s):	2019/171603
Publication restriction:	Nil