R v Packer

The case of R v Packer involved an appeal by the Crown against the sentence imposed on the respondent who had been convicted of twelve sexual offences against two young foreign nationals. These offences included sexual assaults, recording and disseminating intimate videos, and threats to disseminate such content. The Crown argued that the sentence was inadequate and failed to sufficiently account for the substantial emotional harm caused to the victims. The appeal was heard in the court of appeal where several legal issues were to be determined.

The court was required to decide whether the sentencing judge had failed to adequately consider the emotional harm suffered by the victims as an aggravating factor under section 21A(2)(g) of the Crimes Sentencing Procedure Act. Additionally, the court had to determine if the sentencing judge had misapplied the principle of totality in setting the aggregate sentence. The Crown also argued that the sentence was manifestly inadequate, given the substantial emotional harm experienced by the victims, which extended beyond what could ordinarily be expected. This included the victims' alienation from their families and friends in Nepal.

The court found that the sentencing judge had indeed failed to properly consider the substantial emotional harm as an aggravating factor, which should have applied to all charges. This oversight resulted in an aggregate sentence that was manifestly inadequate. Consequently, the appeal was allowed. The court resentenced the respondent, taking into account the substantial emotional harm suffered by the victims. This resentenced the respondent to a term that was deemed appropriate given the gravity of the offences and the harm caused.