R v Reid; ex parte - [2001] QCA 301

[2001] QCA 301

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
DAVIES JA
PHILIPPIDES J

CA No 85 of 2001

THE QUEEN

RONALD EDWARD REID Respondent

and

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND Appellant

BRISBANE

..DATE 26/07/2001

JUDGMENT

THE PRESIDENT: The respondent pleaded guilty in the
District Court at Brisbane on 16 March 2001 to one count of
indecent treatment of a child under 16 years and two counts
of stalking.He also pleaded guilty to a Commonwealth
summary offence of offensively using a telephone. He was
sentenced on each count to three years' probation with a
special condition that he comply with the recommendations of
Dr Curtis contained in paragraph 15.8 of Dr Curtis' report,
which was tendered at sentence as Exhibit 3 and which noted:
"Mr Reid should attend for regular physical cognitive and behavioural monitoring by Dr Gerald Whiting. He should also consult Dr Dan McLaughlin, Neurologist, again regarding the advisability of Aricept treatment which can delay the progress of dementing processes in some cases. Finally I note that there are hormonal maintenance treatments available on prescription to lower drives if there were to be a recurrence of the cerebrovascular incident and its sequelae. (Such recurrence and such an expression are now less likely than are other illness events.)"

No conviction was recorded and the respondent was also ordered not to communicate or to attempt to communicate with the complainants.

The appellant, The Attorney-General of Queensland, submits the sentence is manifestly inadequate in that it fails to reflect the gravity of the offences and to sufficiently consider general deterrence, placing too much weight on mitigating factors.

This case has some unusual features. The respondent was 70 years old at sentence and had no previous convictions. He was a well regarded former senior public servant who had been head of protocol in the Premier's Department. Many references were tendered attesting to his outstanding community service and good character. He had been actively involved in his church as a lay preacher since 1948 and has held lay positions in the church at local, State and national level. As a result of these charges, he informed his fellow parishioners of his conduct and resigned from all positions he held in the church.

He has also given outstanding service to the community through the Blue Nursing Association over many years. He was treasurer and chairman of its Sandgate centre from its inception in 1957 until 1998 when it was regionalised. He was made a life member of Blue Nurses in 1983 and was State Treasurer and Queensland Director-General from 1960 till 1990. He was National President of the Australian Council of Community Nursing from 1970 to 1980.

The three complainants were neighbours of the respondent, and all lived in a quiet cul-de-sac in an outer northern suburb. The complainant in the indecent treatment charge was aged 12 and collected stamps. The respondent called her over to give her some stamps and then asked if he could show her a tickly spot. The complainant followed him into his…

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 Reid; ex parte

Details

AGLC: R v Reid; ex parte [2001] QCA 301
Case: [2001] QCA 301
Decision Date: 26/07/2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of The Queen v. Ronald Edward Reid, the respondent appealed against the sentence imposed by the District Court at Brisbane, arguing it was manifestly inadequate. The respondent, a 70-year-old former senior public servant, pleaded guilty to indecent treatment of a child under 16 years, two counts of stalking, and offensively using a telephone. The District Court sentenced him to three years' probation with special conditions and did not record a conviction. The Attorney-General of Queensland appealed, arguing the sentence failed to reflect the gravity of the offences and did not sufficiently consider general deterrence.

The appeal raised the issue of whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate and whether the court erred in not recording a conviction. The Court of Appeal considered the respondent's age, good character, and significant health problems, but ultimately found that the offences were serious and warranted a conviction. The Court noted that while the respondent's physical and mental illness contributed to his offending behaviour, the offences remained serious, and the community had a right to know of them. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal to the extent of ordering that a conviction be recorded on all counts but otherwise confirmed the sentence imposed at first instance.

The final orders of the Court of Appeal were that a conviction be recorded on all counts, and the sentence of three years' probation with special conditions be otherwise confirmed. The Court of Appeal emphasized the importance of recording convictions in serious cases, particularly where the medical evidence does not demonstrate that the risk of reoffending is removed. The Court also highlighted the need for circumspection before interfering in the discretionary exercise of whether or not to record a conviction.

Orders