R v JD

Case [2011] NSWDC 256


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v JD [2011] NSWDC 256
Hearing dates:12 December 2011
Decision date: 21 December 2011
Before: Letherbarrow SC DCJ
Decision:

Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of six years and an effective nonparole period of four years

Catchwords: CRIME - Sentencing - agrravated indecent assault - aggravated sexual intercourse without consent - hardship - health of parents - whether exceptional circumstances - prior good character of little relevance in matters involving sexual offences against children - regard to sentencing patterns at time of offences
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900, s61M(2), s61J(1)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, s44(2)
Cases Cited: R v Edwards (1996) A Crim R 510
R v Hart [1999] NSWCA 2004
R v Alla [2004] NSWCCA 378
R v Wood [2005] NSWCCA 233
R v Lo, R v Ouang [2004] NSWCCA 382
R v Capper [2000] NSWCCA 63
R v Tobias [2001] NSWCCA 522
Le v R [2006] NSWCCA 136
R v Rhule unreported, 25 July 1995 NSWCCA
R v Muldoon unreported, 13 December 1990, NSWCCA
R v H (1983) 3 A Crim R 53
R v JCW [2000] NSWCCA 209
MJL v R [2007] NSWCCA 261
R v MJR (2002) 54 NSWLR 368
R v Moon (2000) 117 A Crim R 497 at 511
Fisher v R (1989) 40 A Crim R 442
Georgopolous v R [2010] NSWCCA 246
Sivill v R [2009] NSWCCA 286
Khoury v R [2011] NSWCCA 118
Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357
Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610
Bonwick v R [2010] NSWCCA 177
Category:Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown
JD - Offender
Representation: Director of Public Prosecutions
Higgins
Director of Public Prosecutions
Nikola Velcic & Associates
File Number(s):2010/392776
Publication restriction:Non-publication order as to names of complainant and accused

Judgment

  1. HIS HONOUR: On 1 November 2010 the offender was found guilty at his trial before a jury on all four counts in the indictment. All such counts relate to offences committed against his daughter, the complainant, between January 2002 and May 2006 when she was aged between five and ten years and the offender was aged between forty-one and forty-six years.

  1. The first, second and fourth counts are offences of aggravated indecent assault and fall under s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act, 1900, for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for ten years. It is agreed that there is no standard nonparole period relating to any of these offences, as whilst they were introduced during the relevant period averred to in the indictment, the evidence does not establish when during such periods the offences were committed.

  1. The circumstance of aggravation for counts 1 and 2 was that the complainant was under ten years of age at the time, namely five or six years. The circumstance of aggravation for count 4 was the complainant was under ten years at the time, namely seven, eight or nine years.

  1. The third count is a offence of aggravated sexual…

Continue reading R v JD

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v JD [2011] NSWDC 256
Case
[2011] NSWDC 256
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the defendant, identified as JD, who was found guilty of aggravated indecent assault and aggravated sexual intercourse without consent. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of the state. The prosecution brought the case forward, and JD faced sentencing for his crimes.

The legal issues before the court were whether there were exceptional circumstances warranting a reduced sentence and the relevance of the defendant's prior good character in sentencing. The court also considered the sentencing patterns at the time of the offences. The defence argued for a lesser sentence due to the hardship it would cause JD's parents, who were in poor health, and the mitigating factor of JD's previously unblemished record.

The court acknowledged the hardship that a custodial sentence would cause JD's parents but noted that prior good character held little relevance in cases involving sexual offences against children. The court took into account the severity of the offences and the sentencing patterns at the time of the offences. It concluded that, despite the exceptional circumstances, a significant term of imprisonment was necessary to appropriately reflect the gravity of the crimes committed. The defendant was sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of six years, with an effective nonparole period of four years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of six years and an effective nonparole period of four years

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.