R v PLN - [2024] SADC 97

DISTRICT COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Criminal)
R v PLN
Criminal Trial by Judge Alone
[2024] SADC 97
Reasons for the Verdict of his Honour Judge Alexandrides
14 August 2024
CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES - MAINTAINING SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH CHILD AND PERSISTENT SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILD
The accused is charged with one count of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child. The acts are alleged to have occurred between 13 December 2014 and 1 March 2018 when the victim was aged between nine to 10 years and 13 years.
The accused elected for trial by judge alone.
Held: Guilty
Evidence Act 1929 (SA) s 34, referred to.

R v PLN
[2024] SADC 97
Prosecution case

KN, the female complainant in this matter, was born in Vietnam on 17 January 2005.[1]
[1] T16.6-9.
PLN, the accused, is the father of KN. The accused was born on 3 February 1966.
The accused separated from KN’s mother, KXN, when KN was about two years old. KN lived with her mother in Vietnam and saw her father on weekends.
In 2014 when KN was nine years old, she came to Australia with the accused and an older brother XQN (known as Vince). The family arrived as migrants on 12 December 2014.
After a period of short-term accommodation, on 6 February 2015 the family secured a rental property at 49 Days Road, Croydon Park. A tenant named Mr Loc also lived at the premises.
On 6 February 2015, KN’s eldest brother XLN came to Australia and moved into the Days Road premises.
The accused worked as a farm labourer engaged in pruning and picking fruit. XLN and the tenant Mr Loc were engaged in the same work. Vince attended English classes and then school in those early years and was also engaged in farm work. XLN and Vince worked periodically as farm labourers and restaurant hands and also attended university and school. KN commenced school at Kilkenny Primary School on 9 February 2015.
It is alleged that around 2014 or 2015 the accused began an unlawful sexual relationship with KN.[2]
[2] T20.14-35.
The first alleged unlawful sexual act by the accused with KN occurred in the accused’s bedroom at the 49 Days Road premises. The accused and KN shared the bedroom.
KN was on the computer in the bedroom, wearing her pyjamas. The accused told her to get on his bed where he was sitting up, covered with a blanket. KN got under the blanket next to the accused. She was lying on her back.
The accused took her hand and placed it on his penis under the blanket. The accused had his hand around her hand and was using her hand to masturbate himself.
The accused then removed the blanket, placed his hand on KN’s chest under her clothes and rubbed her nipples while still masturbating using KN’s hand.
The accused then moved his hand down to KN’s vagina under her clothing and rubbed her…

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.

Continue reading R v PLN

Details

AGLC: R v PLN [2024] SADC 97
Case: [2024] SADC 97
Decision Date: 14 August 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, PLN, was charged with multiple counts of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child and persistent sexual abuse of a child. The victim, a minor, was the defendant's daughter. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central issue before the court was whether the prosecution had proven the charges against the defendant beyond reasonable doubt, considering the credibility and reliability of the victim's testimony.

The court examined the evidence presented by the prosecution, which included the victim's statements and other corroborating evidence. It was critical to determine the weight to be given to the victim's testimony, particularly in light of the sensitive nature of the allegations. The court also considered the defendant's alibi and the absence of physical evidence linking the defendant to the alleged acts. The prosecution needed to establish that the victim's account was credible and that the defendant's actions constituted the charged offences. The court found that the prosecution had successfully discharged its burden of proof, leading to the conviction of the defendant on all counts.

The court found that the victim's testimony was consistent, coherent, and corroborated by other evidence, including medical reports and expert opinions. The court was satisfied that the prosecution had proven each element of the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The defendant was found guilty of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child and persistent sexual abuse of a child. The court imposed a sentence that reflected the gravity of the offences and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The final orders included a custodial sentence, registration on the sex offenders' register, and ongoing supervision and treatment requirements.

Orders