District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Owen [2021] NSWDC 421 Hearing dates: 13 August 2021 Decision date: 19 August 2021 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Haesler SC DCJ Decision: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years. Non parole period of 1 year 6 months.
Catchwords: CRIME- Recklessly cause grievous bodily harm – one punch attack - alcohol fuelled street violence
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence –
one punch - no premeditation - early plea acceptance of responsibility - serious harm caused – victim suffers traumatic brain injury - victim impact - strong case in mitigation - offender of good character - victim and offender have overcome many difficulties in life - tragedy for both parties – application of principle- consistency in sentencing – utility of general deterrence - need for full time custody - special circumstances - victim vindication - retribution
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited: Hili v The Queen, (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HC 45
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120
Munda v Western Australia [2013] HCA 38
Pattalis v R [2013] NSWCCA 171
Queen v Pham (2015) 256 CLR 550: [2015] HCA 39
R v Loveridge [2014] NSWCCA [120]
R v Mitchell; R v Gallagher [2007] NSWCCA 296
R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704
R vTuala [2015] NSWCCA 8
Category: Sentence Parties: Tyson Tauteka Owen (the offender)
Director of Public ProsecutionsRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Mr B Clark (for the offender)
Kells Lawyers ( (for the offender)
Ms T Lasschuit (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s): 2020/00320002
sentence
Introduction
-
In the early hours of the morning of 8 November 2020 in Wollongong’s Crown Street a relatively minor altercation between two groups of men escalated; leaving one, Nkululeko Moyo, with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) and the other, Tyson Owen, facing a lengthy term of imprisonment. Both Mr Moyo and Owen had overcome some adversity in their respective lives. Both are men of promise. Both of their lives have been irrevocably changed by one incident of alcohol fuelled violence.
-
Owen is for sentence today having accepted his guilt to a charge of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm: s35(2) Crimes Act 1900. That offence carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Parliament has fixed a standard non-parole period of 4 years for an offence that, taking into account only the objective factors affecting the relative seriousness of that offence, is in the middle of the range of seriousness. The sentence to be imposed reflects a reduction of 25% to take into account the utilitarian value of the offender’s early guilty plea: s 25D Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (C(SP) Act).
Agreed facts
-
There are agreed facts before the court. And, the incident and what preceded it, were captured on…
Continue reading R v Owen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Owen [2021] NSWDC 421
- Case
- [2021] NSWDC 421
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to balance various legal considerations, including the nature of the offence, the level of harm inflicted, the defendant's culpability, and mitigating factors presented in the case. Specifically, the court needed to assess whether the attack was premeditated, the extent of the harm caused, the defendant's acceptance of responsibility, and the personal circumstances of both the offender and the victim. It was also necessary to weigh the principles of consistency in sentencing, general deterrence, and the specific circumstances that might warrant a departure from the usual sentencing norms.
In delivering its judgment, the court recognised that while the offence was serious and resulted in significant harm, there were mitigating factors to be considered. The defendant had no prior criminal history, had shown remorse, and there was evidence of personal difficulties faced by both parties. The court emphasised the importance of consistency in sentencing but also acknowledged the need to consider the unique aspects of this case. Ultimately, the court determined that the defendant should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, with a non-parole period, to balance the need for retribution, deterrence, and the rehabilitation of the offender.
The court ordered that the defendant be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years, with a non-parole period of one year and six months. This decision reflects the court's consideration of the relevant factors and the need to achieve a just outcome in the circumstances of the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years. Non parole period of 1 year 6 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.