R v Milliner

Case [2018] NSWDC 324


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Milliner [2018] NSWDC 324
Hearing dates: 12 February 2018
Date of orders: 15 February 2018
Decision date: 15 February 2018
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Scotting DCJ
Decision:

1.   The offender is convicted of both counts.

 

2.   In relation to the first count the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment comprising of a non-parole period of three years to date from 5 April 2016 and expire on 4 April 2019, and an additional term of two years to expire on 4 April 2021.

 

3.   In relation to the second count the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment comprising of a non-parole period of three years to date from 5 April 2018 and expire on 4 April 2021, and in additional term of three years to expire on 4 April 2024.

 

4.   The overall effective term of imprisonment I have imposed consists of a non-parole period of 5 years with an additional term of 3 years.

 5.   The offender will be eligible to be released to parole on 4 April 2021.
Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – procuring a child under the age of 14 years – travel with intention to meet child following grooming

 

SENTENCE – mitigating factors – aggravating factors – circumstances – objective seriousness -

  SENTENCE PRINCIPLES – good character – rehabilitation - remorse
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: R v Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
R v Borkowski (2009) 195 A Crim R 1
Category:Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Simon Milliner (Defendant)
Representation: Mr A Morris (Crown Prosecutor)
Mr F Coyne of counsel (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2016/103462
Publication restriction: None

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

  1. Simon Milliner appears for sentence after having pleaded guilty in the District Court to:

  1. one count of attempting to intentionally procure a child under the age of 14 years for unlawful sexual activity contrary to s 66EB(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for the offence is 15 years imprisonment, the standard non-parole period applying to the substantive offence does not apply to an attempt; and

  2. one count of travel with the intention of meeting a child under the age of 14 years who he had groomed for unlawful sexual activity with the intention of procuring the child for unlawful sexual activity with himself and another person contrary to s 66EB(2A) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for the offence is 15 years imprisonment. Parliament has also prescribed a standard non-parole period of six years which I must take into account as a legislative guidepost to the appropriate sentence to be imposed.

  1. The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts that provided as follows.

1.   Towards the end of 2015 the NSW Police Child Exploitation Internet Unit were covertly monitoring the adult social networking site “motherless.com”. The site had a logo which was similar to a safety sign and depicted a woman holding the hand of a child. The…

Continue reading R v Milliner

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Milliner [2018] NSWDC 324
Case
[2018] NSWDC 324
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Milliner, was convicted in a criminal trial for procuring a child under the age of 14 years to travel with him with the intention to meet the child following grooming. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Milliner was found guilty on two counts: the first for procuring the child to travel and the second for grooming the child. The prosecution argued that Milliner had engaged in a series of communications with the child, which constituted grooming, and subsequently arranged for the child to travel to meet him.

The primary legal issues before the court were the sentencing principles to be applied in this case, specifically the objective seriousness of the offences, the mitigating and aggravating factors, and the appropriate term of imprisonment. The court considered Milliner's good character and potential for rehabilitation, as well as his level of remorse, in determining the sentence.

The court held that the offences were of significant objective seriousness due to the vulnerable age of the child and the nature of the grooming and procurement. Mitigating factors included Milliner's previously good character and his expression of remorse, but these were weighed against the aggravating factors of the calculated nature of the grooming and the clear intention to meet the child for sexual purposes. The court found that a substantial term of imprisonment was necessary to appropriately reflect the seriousness of the crimes and to protect the community. The court also noted that the offender would be eligible for parole after serving a non-parole period of five years.

The court imposed a sentence comprising a non-parole period of five years and an additional term of three years, to be served consecutively to another sentence imposed for a separate offence. Milliner was eligible for parole after serving the non-parole period, with release to occur on 4 April 2021.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The offender is convicted of both counts.

2. In relation to the first count the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment comprising of a non-parole period of three years to date from 5 April 2016 and expire on 4 April 2019, and an additional term of two years to expire on 4 April 2021.

3. In relation to the second count the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment comprising of a non-parole period of three years to date from 5 April 2018 and expire on 4 April 2021, and in additional term of three years to expire on 4 April 2024.

4. The overall effective term of imprisonment I have imposed consists of a non-parole period of 5 years with an additional term of 3 years.

5. The offender will be eligible to be released to parole on 4 April 2021.

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.