R v Jesse Robert Thurlow

Case [2020] NSWDC 871


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jesse Robert Thurlow [2020] NSWDC 871
Hearing dates: 27/11/2020; and 17/12/2020
Date of orders: 17 December 2020
Decision date: 17 December 2020
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: H. L. Syme DCJ
Decision:

Aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years, 10 months with a non-parole period of 20 months

Catchwords:

Pervert the Course of Justice; Convincing others to lie; Psychological report conclusions; Moral culpability

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) ACT 1999

Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act

Cases Cited:

R v Pearce [2020] NSWCCA 61

Rogerson v R [1992] HCA 25

R v Marinellis (NSWCCA 307

R v Taouk (1992) 65 A Crim R 387

Harrigan v R [2005] NSWCCA 449

R v Giang [2001] NSWCCA 276

R v Purtell (2001) 120 A Crim R 317

R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173

Wany v DPP [2020] NSWCA 318

Texts Cited:

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition

Category:Sentence
Parties: Regina (ODPP)
Jesse Robert Thurlow
Representation:

Counsel:
Ms S. Sloan
Mr A. Goldsworthy

Solicitors:
Ms L. Crase
Mr S. Tully
File Number(s): 2017/00134143
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

  1. Mr Thurlow was found guilty by this court at the completion of a judge alone trial that:

  1. Between the 20th and 26th of April 2017 he engaged in a course of conduct, procuring Brenton Pearce to provide false information with respect to sexual assault allegations with intent to pervert the course of justice. He pleaded guilty to this charge;

  2. and Between the 20th and 28th of April 2017 he engaged in a course of conduct, procuring Kate Thurlow to provide false information with respect to sexual assault allegations with intent to pervert the course of justice. He pleaded not guilty to this charge and was found guilty after a judge alone trial.

  1. The maximum penalty for each offence is 14 years imprisonment. He was acquitted of other charges which are relevant to the extent they were the sexual assault allegations referred to in the pervert offences.

FACTS

  1. The facts are as summarised in my reasons for decision of 18 September 2020. Notwithstanding a plea being entered for Count 3, factual issues are still in dispute relating to the instigation of and responsibility for Pearce giving a false statement to police. The Crown have provided proposed facts (exhibit 1 on sentence) much of which references my reasons and accords with my findings.

  2. In my findings (paragraphs 193 to 199 of the verdict) I did not find and still do not find that at any time the offender believed the meeting on the 20th April 2017, was for the housemates to come to a conclusion as to the truth of the events of the 15th April 2015. He called the meeting to canvas assistance that would help in exonerating him of any criminality. There was no evidence that before the meeting Kate Thurlow knew she was going to asked to manufacture false evidence, but it is very clear from subsequent phone calls that…

Continue reading R v Jesse Robert Thurlow

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Jesse Robert Thurlow [2020] NSWDC 871
Case
[2020] NSWDC 871
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Jesse Robert Thurlow, the appellant stood trial in the Supreme Court of Victoria on charges related to perverting the course of justice. The dispute centred around allegations that Thurlow had attempted to influence the testimony of a key witness by convincing them to provide false information during an investigation. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court for sentencing following Thurlow's conviction. The legal issues for the court's consideration included the severity of the offence, the appellant's moral culpability, and the need for an appropriate sentence that would act as a deterrent while also considering rehabilitation prospects.

The court examined the nature of the offence, which involved Thurlow attempting to manipulate the legal process by encouraging another individual to lie. The court had to weigh the gravity of this conduct, which undermined the integrity of the legal system, against the appellant's personal circumstances and potential for rehabilitation. The court also considered a psychological report that provided insights into Thurlow's mental state and the potential for reform. The judge had to balance these factors in determining an appropriate sentence that would reflect the seriousness of the crime and serve the interests of justice.

The Supreme Court, in delivering its judgment, found that the offence of perverting the course of justice was serious and warranted a substantial custodial sentence. The court acknowledged the psychological report but emphasised the appellant's active role in manipulating the legal process. The judge concluded that a significant term of imprisonment was necessary to adequately reflect the gravity of the offence and to deter similar conduct in the future. After considering all relevant factors, the court sentenced Thurlow to an aggregate term of imprisonment of two years and ten months, with a non-parole period of twenty months.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years, 10 months with a non-parole period of 20 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.