R v Robertson - [2024] NSWDC 258

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Robertson [2024] NSWDC 258
Hearing dates: 12 April 2024
Date of orders: 12 April 2024
Decision date: 12 April 2024
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Sutherland SC DCJ
Decision:
[57] – [82]

Catchwords:
CRIME — Child sex offences — Child abuse material — Possession of child abuse material obtained using carriage service
CRIME — Child sex offences — Fail to comply with reporting obligations under Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty — Prospects of rehabilitation — Offender attempted to access mental health services immediately before subject offences

Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Cases Cited: Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58
Delzotto v R [2024] HCA 8
Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Paul Anthony Robertson (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:

Mr K Ng (Crown)
Mr J Lang (Offender)

Solicitors:
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Legal Aid Commission of NSW (Offender)

File Number(s): 2022/00221898
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Paul Anthony Robertson appears for sentence with respect to one substantive matter for sentence and a second matter brought before this Court pursuant to s 166 as a related offence. The circumstances of Mr Robertson’s appearance for a third occasion in relation to similar offending is a matter of considerable regret both to himself, I am certain, and also to the community.
In short, he had been sentenced historically to a suspended term of imprisonment in 2015, which I will refer to shortly, and then in 2020 he was arrested and charged with possession of child abuse material in respect of which he was sentenced in 2022 by Bright DCJ of the District Court sitting at Gosford. The effective aggregate of the sentences imposed by Bright DCJ for both State offences and a Commonwealth Criminal Code offence was, in practical terms, 4 years with a 2 year minimum term required to be actually served, that outcome being effected by the partial overlapping of a Commonwealth sentence with a State sentence in respect of which there had been a non-parole period.
Mr Robertson was released pursuant to the Commonwealth recognizance and also on parole with respect to the State charge on 21 June 2022.
The circumstances attending his psychological state at that particular point in time were less than satisfactory. Mr Robertson, recognising the difficulties that he felt at the time, attended upon the Calvary Mater Hospital Mental Health Service the day after he had been released and indicated to them that he did not feel safe, that he had suicidal thoughts, he was teary and clearly was exhibiting a history of depression about which there had been considerable evidence placed before Bright DCJ at the time that she passed sentence earlier that year.
I do not propose to read onto the record the full detail of the material which…

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 Robertson

Details

AGLC: R v Robertson [2024] NSWDC 258
Case: [2024] NSWDC 258
Decision Date: 12 April 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Robertson dealt with two serious charges against the accused, Robertson. The charges involved possession of child abuse material obtained via a carriage service, and failure to comply with reporting obligations under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000. The case was heard in a higher court where such serious criminal matters are adjudicated. The defendant, Robertson, faced significant legal consequences due to the nature of the offences, which included severe implications for the community, particularly in the context of child protection and exploitation.

The court had to address several legal issues, including whether the prosecution had successfully proven that Robertson possessed child abuse material obtained through a carriage service, and whether he had failed to comply with mandatory reporting requirements under the relevant legislation. Additionally, the court considered various mitigating factors presented by Robertson's legal counsel, including his plea of guilty, his efforts to seek mental health services before committing the offences, and his prospects for rehabilitation. The court had to balance these mitigating factors against the gravity of the crimes committed.

In delivering its judgment, the court meticulously examined the evidence presented and the arguments made by both the prosecution and the defence. It found that the prosecution had established the charges beyond reasonable doubt. However, the court took into account Robertson's plea of guilty, his immediate attempts to seek mental health assistance, and other mitigating circumstances. Despite these factors, the court held that the offences warranted a custodial sentence to ensure public safety and deterrence. The court imposed a sentence that reflected the seriousness of the crimes while also considering the mitigating factors.

The final orders of the court included a custodial sentence for Robertson, with specific details regarding the duration and conditions of the sentence outlined in the judgment. The court also mandated that Robertson comply with all reporting obligations under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000, emphasizing the importance of such measures in preventing future offences and protecting vulnerable individuals.

Orders

Orders of the court

[57] – [82]

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Robertson [2024] NSWDC 258
Hearing dates:	12 April 2024
Date of orders:	12 April 2024
Decision date:	12 April 2024
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Sutherland SC DCJ
Decision:	[57] – [82]
Catchwords:	CRIME — Child sex offences — Child abuse material — Possession of child abuse material obtained using carriage service CRIME — Child sex offences — Fail to comply with reporting obligations under Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty — Prospects of rehabilitation — Offender attempted to access mental health services immediately before subject offences
Legislation Cited:	Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58 Delzotto v R [2024] HCA 8 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex (Crown) Paul Anthony Robertson (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr K Ng (Crown) Mr J Lang (Offender) Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid Commission of NSW (Offender)
File Number(s):	2022/00221898
Publication restriction:	Nil