District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Mould [2020] NSWDC 670 Hearing dates: 25 September 2020 Date of orders: 02 October 2020 Decision date: 02 October 2020 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Neilson DCJ Decision: Imprisonment 7 years 6 months NPP 3 years 9 months.
Catchwords: CRIME – SENTENCE
30 charges of common assault, one charge of assault OABH, 11 charges of produce child abuse material and one charge of possession of child abuse material – Form 1 contained further 7 charges of common assault and a further charge of possession of child abuse material.
Physical (not sexual) child abuse – Offender had been a baseball coach and/or manager for over 30 years – Physically abused young males he was coaching/managing to “toughen them up”, to deal with competitive sports and the vicissitudes of life – Some of the abuse recorded by video camera and kept by him, but not distributed, not replayed – Offender aged 70 at time of arrest, 71 at sentence – Numerous medical problems – Suffering from high functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder – Lacked insight into how offending behaviour could affect the mental health of his victims – Otherwise of good character – Given his age, medical conditions and character custody would be very onerous for offender – Appropriate case for aggregate sentence – Special circumstances – Discussion of relevance of offender’s motive.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited: McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94
Category: Sentence Parties: Stuart Angus Mould (Offender)
Regina (Crown)Representation: Counsel:
Givorshner (Offender)
Walkowiak (Crown)
File Number(s): 2019/00268381 Publication restriction: Nil.
Judgment
-
HIS HONOUR: Stuart Angus Mould stands for sentence after admitting a large number of crimes. The offender is better known as Angus or Gus Mould, who was arrested for these offences on 28 August 2019. He was then 70 years old. He is now 71 years old. He has pleaded guilty to 30 charges of common assault, one charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, 11 charges of the production of child abuse material, and one charge of possessing child abuse material, He also asks me to take into account on a Form 1 seven further common assaults and one further charge of the possession of child abuse material.
-
There are 15 known victims of the offender’s crimes, five of whom have provided victim impact statements. When before me last Friday, I handed down to the representatives of the parties a schedule listing the names of the known victims and the pseudonyms that I would use to identify them. That schedule has now been typed and a copy of it has been given to the lawyers and any victims present. I have indicated on that schedule which victims have provided victim impact statements. The original of that document will be MFI D1.
-
The victims, both known and unknown, are male. With one exception, at the time of each offence the victims were minors, that is, under the age of 18 years. At the time of the various…
Continue reading R v Mould
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Mould [2020] NSWDC 670
- Case
- [2020] NSWDC 670
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were the determination of an appropriate aggregate sentence for the multiple offences and the consideration of special circumstances, including Mould's motive for the abuse. The court had to balance the need for punishment and deterrence with the impracticality and potential harm of imposing a custodial sentence on Mould given his age and medical conditions. The relevance of Mould's motive to "toughen up" the victims was also a critical factor in the sentencing deliberation.
The court concluded that while the offences were serious, Mould's age, medical problems, and lack of insight into the impact of his actions warranted a non-custodial sentence. The court opted for a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months, followed by a further 3 years and 9 months of imprisonment to be served on home detention or good behaviour bond. This decision reflected a recognition of the gravity of the offences while also considering the unique circumstances of the offender.
The court's final orders included a sentence of imprisonment for a total of 7 years and 6 months, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months. Mould was to serve the remaining term on home detention or a good behaviour bond. This decision underscores the court's consideration of both the severity of the offences and the personal circumstances of the offender in arriving at a just and appropriate sentence.
Orders
Orders of the court
Imprisonment 7 years 6 months NPP 3 years 9 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.