R v Jackson; Ex Parte - [2001] QCA 445

[2001] QCA 445

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
DAVIES JA
AMBROSE J

CA No 206 of 2001

THE QUEEN

GEORGE ARTHUR JACKSON Respondent

and

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND Appellant

BRISBANE

..DATE 16/10/2001

JUDGMENT

THE PRESIDENT: Judge of Appeal Davies will deliver his

reasons first.

DAVIES JA: This is an appeal by the Attorney-General against a sentence imposed on the respondent in the District Court at Ipswich on 13 July this year. The sentence was one of four years imprisonment wholly suspended for an operational period of five years. It was imposed for nine offences of indecent treatment of a girl under 14 years and five of indecent treatment of the same girl under 16 years of age.

The offences occurred between October 1979 and October 1987. At the time the first of them was committed the complainant girl was only eight years of age. She was 15 when the last of them was committed. The appellant during this period was aged between 43 and 54 years of age. He is now 64. The complainant's present age is about 27.

Over the period of time to which I have referred the offences appeared to gradually escalate in seriousness. They commenced by touching the complainant in her genital area, then exposing his penis to the complainant, then touching both in the breast and genital area, then showing the complainant a pornographic movie and, finally, on a number of occasions removing her underpants and licking her in her vaginal area. None of these offences involved penetration of the complainant, simulated intercourse or masturbation to ejaculation.

I do not wish, by anything I have just said, to understate the seriousness or frequency of these offences. However, it is necessary to place them in perspective in relation to other cases of a more invasive or disgusting kind with which courts unfortunately have to deal. I have read the evidence thoroughly with respect to all of the counts and I have taken that into account in what I am about to say.

It is unsurprising that the commission of these offences over such a sustained period has had a considerable psychological effect on the complainant. No doubt that has been exacerbated by the discrepancy in age between her and the respondent and the position of trust in which, as against her, the respondent held. The respondent conducted a Sunday School class at a church which the complainant attended and the relationship between them started from this. It was plainly a relationship in which the complainant felt unable to protest to the respondent or complain about his conduct to others.

The complainant provided to the Court a very moving victim impact statement in which she outlined her feelings of isolation, insecurity and withdrawal. She spoke of her fear and her inability to sleep and, even as an adult, her continuing depression which occasionally made her life unbearable. She has received counselling from time to time over the last decade.

It is most unfortunate that the sentencing judge…

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 Jackson; Ex Parte

Details

AGLC: R v Jackson; Ex Parte [2001] QCA 445
Case: [2001] QCA 445
Decision Date: 16/10/2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal by the Attorney-General against a sentence imposed on George Arthur Jackson was heard in the Court of Appeal. The respondent was convicted for multiple offences of indecent treatment of a girl under 14 and under 16 years of age, committed between 1979 and 1987. The Court had to decide whether the sentence of four years imprisonment, wholly suspended for five years, was manifestly inadequate given the unique circumstances of the case.

The Court considered several factors that distinguished this case from others, including the significant period of time that had elapsed since the last offence, the respondent's apparent rehabilitation over an 11-year period, his remorse and cooperation with the police, and the public disgrace he suffered within his church and community. The Court found that the respondent had made substantial progress in his rehabilitation, evidenced by his attendance at a self-help group for sex offenders and positive feedback from those who had observed his progress. The Court also noted the unusual extent of the respondent's remorse and cooperation with the authorities, as well as the public disgrace he had endured. These factors led the Court to conclude that the sentence, when considered as a whole, was not manifestly inadequate.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision of the District Court to impose a wholly suspended sentence. The judges agreed that the exceptional circumstances of the case, particularly the respondent's long-term rehabilitation and remorse, justified the sentence imposed. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence stood as not manifestly inadequate.

Orders