SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Roy (No 4) |
Citation: | [2025] ACTSC 449 |
Hearing Date: | 22 August 2025 |
Decision Date: | 2 October 2025 |
Before: | McCallum CJ |
Decision: | (1) I convict you of each of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty. (2) For the offence in count 1 of possessing child abuse material via a carriage service contrary to s 474.22A(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth), I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 March 2025 and expiring on 8 September 2027. (3) For the offence in count 2 of using a carriage service for sexual activity with a person under 16 years of age contrary to s 474.25A(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 September 2027 and expiring on 8 March 2030. (4) For the offence in count 3 of using a carriage service for sexual activity with a person under 16 years of age contrary to s 474.25A(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 March 2030 and expiring on 8 September 2032. (5) For the offence in count 4 of producing child exploitation material contrary to s 64A of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for one year and eight months commencing on 9 March 2030 and expiring on 8 November 2031. (6) For the offence in count 5 of accessing child abuse material using a carriage service contrary to s 474.22(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 September 2032 and expiring on 8 March 2035. (7) I fix a non-parole period of seven years commencing on 9 March 2025 and expiring on 8 March 2032. |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – offence of possession of child abuse material – offence of using a carriage service for sexual activity with a person under 16 years – offence of producing child exploitation material – offence of accessing child abuse material – where the material is in the upper range of seriousness for offences of this kind – where forensic psychologist had the opinion the offender experienced denial – where proceedings experienced delay – where plea of guilty came after an adverse ruling on pre-trial application |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), ss 10, 64A Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), Pt 1B, ss 16A, 16BA, 17A, 19AB, 20 Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), Ch 4, ss 10, 33 Criminal Code (Cth), ss 474.19(1), 474.22(1), 474.22A(1), 474.25A(1) |
Cases Cited: | Adamson v The Queen [2015] VSCA 194; 47 VR 268 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De la Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; 79 NSWLR 1 |
Continue reading R v Roy (No 4)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Roy (No 4) [2025] ACTSC 449
- Case
- [2025] ACTSC 449
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were the sentencing of Roy for the offences to which he had pleaded guilty. The court needed to consider the seriousness of the offences, the delay in proceedings, and the defendant's lack of remorse, as well as the expert opinion of a forensic psychologist who diagnosed Roy with denial regarding his actions. The court also needed to determine the appropriate sentence, including whether to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences and the length of the non-parole period.
The court considered the gravity of the offences, which were in the upper range of seriousness for such crimes. The court found that the offences involved significant exploitation and abuse of children, which warranted severe punishment. The delay in proceedings was partly attributed to the defendant's initial lack of cooperation, which led to a lengthy investigation and pre-trial applications. The court also noted the expert opinion that Roy exhibited denial, which complicated the assessment of his culpability and the risk of reoffending. After considering all these factors, the court imposed a total sentence of ten years and four months, with a non-parole period of seven years.
The final orders included convictions for all charges and specific sentences for each offence, with certain sentences to run concurrently. The non-parole period was set to commence on 9 March 2025 and expire on 8 March 2032.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) I convict you of each of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty.
(2) For the offence in count 1 of possessing child abuse material via a carriage service contrary to s 474.22A(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth), I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 March 2025 and expiring on 8 September 2027.
(3) For the offence in count 2 of using a carriage service for sexual activity with a person under 16 years of age contrary to s 474.25A(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 September 2027 and expiring on 8 March 2030.
(4) For the offence in count 3 of using a carriage service for sexual activity with a person under 16 years of age contrary to s 474.25A(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 March 2030 and expiring on 8 September 2032.
(5) For the offence in count 4 of producing child exploitation material contrary to s 64A of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for one year and eight months commencing on 9 March 2030 and expiring on 8 November 2031.
(6) For the offence in count 5 of accessing child abuse material using a carriage service contrary to s 474.22(1) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for two years and six months commencing on 9 September 2032 and expiring on 8 March 2035.
(7) I fix a non-parole period of seven years commencing on 9 March 2025 and expiring on 8 March 2032.
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.