R v RADFORD

In *R v Radford*, the Court of Criminal Appeal of South Australia considered an appeal against sentence. The appellant, Radford, had been convicted of rape and appealed the severity of the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, whether the discount for the guilty pleas was adequate, and whether the sentencing judge erred in rejecting the appellant's claim of memory loss regarding the offences.

The Court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, finding it to be severe but justifiably so. It emphasised that there is no sentencing tariff for rape and that each case must be determined on its individual facts. The Court noted the violent nature of the offending, the vulnerability of the victims, and the premeditation involved across two separate occasions as factors justifying the sentence. Furthermore, the Court found that the sentencing judge had adequately discounted the sentence for the guilty pleas, given they were entered late in the proceedings after a voir dire. The Court also found no basis to challenge the sentencing judge's rejection of the appellant's claimed memory loss.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.