R v Maguire (No. 1) - [2022] NSWDC 92

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Maguire (No. 1) [2022] NSWDC 92
Hearing dates: 09–12, 15–19, 22–24, 26, 29, 30 November 2021, 01–03, 06–10, 13, 17 December 2021
Date of orders: 18 February 2022
Decision date: 18 February 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:
The accused is found guilty of each count on the indictment

Catchwords:
CRIME — Child sex offences — Child abuse material — Production
CRIME — Child sex offences — Procuring or grooming child for unlawful sexual activity
CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >10 <14
CRIME — Sexual offences — Act of indecency
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judge alone
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judge alone — Reasons of trial judge

Legislation Cited:
CrimesAct1900
Criminal Legislation Amendment (Child Sexual Abuse) Act 2018 No. 33
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Evidence Act 1995
Evidence (Tendency and Coincidence) Act 2020 No 8

Cases Cited:
Ewen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117
Fleming v R (1998) 117 CLR 250
GG v R [2010] 79 NSWLR 194; 204 A Crim R 125; [2010] NSWCCA 230; BC201007553
Liberato v The Queen 1985 159 CLR 507
R v Asst Record of Kingston 1969 2QB 58
R v Chonka [2000] NSWCCA 466
R v Eade [2002] NSWCCA 257
R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82
R v Massie [1999] VR 542
R vMurray (1987) 11 NSWLR 12
Young v Cassels (1914) 33 NZLR 852
Yuen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117
Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234

Texts Cited:
Hansard Legislative Assembly 25 February 2020

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Raymond John Maguire (Accused)
Representation:
Rosheehan O’Meagher (Crown Prosecutor)
Emanuell Conditsis (Solicitor Advocate for the Accused at trial)
Michal Mantaj (Solicitor Advocate for the Accused for judgement)
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Conditsis Lawyers (Accused)

File Number(s): 2018/00080289 & 2018/00264850
Publication restriction: Statutory non-publication order of the names of the complainants and of any information which may enable their identities to be ascertained

REVISED JUDGEMENT

This is the judgement following the Judge Alone Trial of Raymond John Maguire.

INTRODUCTION

On Tuesday 9 November 2021, Raymond John Maguire represented by Mr Conditsis appeared for trial in the District Court, Sydney upon an indictment alleging 15 offences in respect of three complainants. I shall refer to the complainants by their initials to protect them from identification.

AMENDMENTS TO COUNTS 1, 8, 10 AND 11

Upon arraignment before me, the accused pleaded not guilty to each count and thereafter the matter proceeded with arguments upon pre-trial issues. In due course, the trial proceeded as a judge alone trial during which certain counts were amended by an adjustment of the range of dates in which it was alleged the misconduct occurred, though the allegation of misconduct upon which the charges were formed remained constant.
The amendments sought and made were not opposed by the accused.
The first amendments were sought on 23 November 2021 for counts 1 and 8, at…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Maguire (No. 1) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2022] NSWDC 92
Decision Date: 18 February 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Maguire, the defendant was prosecuted for various offences relating to child sex offences. The charges included the production of child abuse material, procuring or grooming a child for unlawful sexual activity, and sexual intercourse with a child over the age of 10. The case was heard by a judge alone in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The defendant faced a comprehensive indictment that detailed multiple instances of child abuse and exploitation, necessitating a thorough examination of the evidence and the application of relevant criminal laws.

The legal issues before the court encompassed the interpretation and application of provisions related to child sex offences, including the production of child abuse material, the grooming of a child for unlawful sexual activity, and sexual intercourse with a child over the age of 10. The court was required to assess whether the prosecution had established the necessary elements of each offence beyond reasonable doubt, considering the evidence presented and the legal standards applicable to such serious allegations. Additionally, the court had to consider the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimonies.

In delivering the judgment, the trial judge meticulously analysed the evidence, highlighting the gravity of the offences and the importance of protecting children from sexual exploitation. The judge found that the prosecution had successfully proven each charge against the defendant, taking into account the detailed testimonies of the victims and other corroborating evidence. The court emphasised the need for stringent penalties and appropriate rehabilitation measures for the defendant to prevent further harm to children. The judge concluded that the defendant was guilty of each count on the indictment, reflecting the court's commitment to upholding the law and ensuring justice for the victims.

Orders

Orders of the court

The accused is found guilty of each count on the indictment

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 Maguire (No. 1) [2022] NSWDC 92
Hearing dates:	09–12, 15–19, 22–24, 26, 29, 30 November 2021, 01–03, 06–10, 13, 17 December 2021
Date of orders:	18 February 2022
Decision date:	18 February 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:	The accused is found guilty of each count on the indictment
Catchwords:	CRIME — Child sex offences — Child abuse material — Production CRIME — Child sex offences — Procuring or grooming child for unlawful sexual activity CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >10 <14 CRIME — Sexual offences — Act of indecency CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judge alone CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judge alone — Reasons of trial judge
Legislation Cited:	CrimesAct1900 Criminal Legislation Amendment (Child Sexual Abuse) Act 2018 No. 33 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Evidence Act 1995 Evidence (Tendency and Coincidence) Act 2020 No 8
Cases Cited:	Ewen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117 Fleming v R (1998) 117 CLR 250 GG v R [2010] 79 NSWLR 194; 204 A Crim R 125; [2010] NSWCCA 230; BC201007553 Liberato v The Queen 1985 159 CLR 507 R v Asst Record of Kingston 1969 2QB 58 R v Chonka [2000] NSWCCA 466 R v Eade [2002] NSWCCA 257 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 R v Massie [1999] VR 542 R vMurray (1987) 11 NSWLR 12 Young v Cassels (1914) 33 NZLR 852 Yuen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117 Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234
Texts Cited:	Hansard Legislative Assembly 25 February 2020
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Raymond John Maguire (Accused)
Representation:	Rosheehan O’Meagher (Crown Prosecutor) Emanuell Conditsis (Solicitor Advocate for the Accused at trial) Michal Mantaj (Solicitor Advocate for the Accused for judgement) Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Conditsis Lawyers (Accused)
File Number(s):	2018/00080289 & 2018/00264850
Publication restriction:	Statutory non-publication order of the names of the complainants and of any information which may enable their identities to be ascertained