Appeal allowed. Sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment substituted for 2 year suspended sentence.
PDF Version
Parties:
THE QUEEN STEPHEN ALLAN JONES
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Possession of child pornography In excess of 162,000 images on CD Roms and hard drives of computer In excess of 80,600 different images Whether suspended sentence of 2 years' imprisonment appropriate Sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment substituted
R v Follows [1997] 2 All ER 548 R v Grein [1989] WAR 178 R v Liddington (1977) 18 WAR 394 R v Rudd, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940630; 10 November 1994 R v Russell (1986) 8 Cr App R (S) 368 R v Stroempl (1995) 105 CCC (3d) 187 Britten v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940079; 21 February 1994 R v Dao, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990015; 22 January 1999 R v Dickson, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990203; 23 April 1999 R v Dinsdale, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990021; 2 February 1999 R v GP (1997) 18 WAR 196 R v Osenkowski (1982) 13 SASR 212 R v Percy [1975] Tas SR 62 R v Raggett (1990) 50 A Crim R 41 R v Ritchie, unreported; Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division); [1997] OJ No 5564; 18 September 1997 R v Thomas (1997) 96 A Crim R 32 R v Valentini (1980) 2 A Crim R 170
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : R -v- JONES [1999] WASCA 24 CORAM : KENNEDY J
IPP J WALLWORK J
HEARD : 5 MAY 1999 DELIVERED : 24 MAY 1999 FILE NO/S : CCA 18 of 1999 BETWEEN : THE QUEEN
Appellant
AND
STEPHEN ALLAN JONES Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Possession of child pornography - In excess of 162,000 images on CD Roms and hard drives of computer - In excess of 80,600 different images - Whether suspended sentence of 2 years' imprisonment appropriate - Sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment substituted
Appeal allowed. Sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment substituted for 2 year suspended sentence.
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr R E Cock QC & Ms T R Watt Respondent : Mr R A Mazza
Solicitors:
Appellant : Acting State Director of Public Prosecutions Respondent : Mazza & Mazza
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s): R v Follows [1997] 2 All ER 548 R v Grein [1989] WAR 178 R v Liddington (1977) 18 WAR 394 R v Rudd, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940630; 10 November…
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 Jones
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Jones [1999] WASCA 24
Case
[1999] WASCA 24
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of R v Jones involved an appeal against the sentencing of the defendant, who had been convicted for possession of a substantial quantity of child pornography. The defendant was found to have over 162,000 images on CD Roms and hard drives of a computer, with more than 80,600 different images. The trial judge had imposed a sentence of two years' imprisonment, suspended for three years. The issue before the court was whether this sentence was appropriate in the circumstances of the case, and whether the sentence should be altered.
The court considered various factors in determining the appropriate sentence, including the severity of the offence, the defendant's criminal history, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court noted that possession of child pornography was a serious offence with significant social consequences, and that the large quantity of material in this case indicated a high level of culpability. The court also noted that the defendant had no prior criminal history and had shown remorse for his actions. However, the court ultimately determined that a suspended sentence was not appropriate in this case, given the seriousness of the offence and the need to deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
The court substituted a sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment for the original suspended sentence, finding that this was a more appropriate punishment in the circumstances. The court emphasised the importance of sending a strong message that possession of child pornography would not be tolerated, and that those who engage in such conduct will be punished. The court also noted that the defendant's lack of criminal history and expression of remorse were mitigating factors that could be taken into account in determining the appropriate sentence.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal be allowed, and that the sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment be substituted for the original sentence of two years' imprisonment, suspended for three years. The court emphasised the need for appropriate sentencing in cases of possession of child pornography, and the importance of balancing the need for deterrence and punishment with the need for rehabilitation and consideration of mitigating factors.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed. Sentence of 18 months immediate imprisonment substituted for 2 year suspended sentence.