R v Saddler

Case [2008] NSWDC 48

Reported Decision:

 6 DCLR (NSW) 372

District Court


CITATION: R v Nigel Keith SADDLER [2008] NSWDC 48
HEARING DATE(S): 28 March 2008
 
JUDGMENT DATE: 
18 April 2008
JURISDICTION: Criminal
JUDGMENT OF: Berman SC DCJ
DECISION: (1) On the second and third charges the offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non parole period of two years and a head sentence of three years nine months to date from 22 Jul 2007.
(2) On the first charge, taking into account the matters on the Form 1, the offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non parole period of three years six months and a head sentence of five years to date from 22 July 2008.
(3) Thus the overall sentence is one of imprisonment for six years with a non parole period of four years six months. The offender will be eligible for release to parole on 21 Jan 2012.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - Form 1 - child pornography - COPINE Scale - gross abuse - exploitation of children - maximum penalty appropriate
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes Act 1900
CASES CITED: R v Jones (1999) 108 A Crim R 50.
R v Stroempl (1995) 105 CCC (3d) 187
Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447
Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465
Attorney General's Application Under S 37 Of The Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 Of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Police v Power [2007] NSWLC 1
Power v DPP, unreported DC (NSW) 19 July 2007
R v Fong (2002) 132 A Crim R 308
R v Oliver [2003] 1 Cr App R 28
Veen v The Queen [1979] HCA 7; (1979) 143 CLR 458
Neal v The Queen [1982] HCA 55; (1982) 149 CLR 305
Radenkovic v The Queen [1990] HCA 54; (1990) 170 CLR 623
Spaliviero v The Queen S55/1994 (13 October 1994)
Case v The Queen S93/1997 (1 May 1998)
Russell v The Queen S60/1997 (13 February 1998)
R v M (1990) 105 CCC (3d) 327
R v Thompson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
Mangos v DPP (SC Unreported 21 July 1995)
R v Wilkins (1988) 28 A Crim R 445
R v Price [2004] NSWCCA 186
R v Knight [2004] NSWCCA 145
PARTIES: Crown
Nigel Keith Saddler
FILE NUMBER(S): DC 08/11/0039
COUNSEL: S Flood (Accused)
SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Aboriginal Legal Services (Accused)

SENTENCE

Introduction

1 The offender stands to be sentenced for possessing an enormous quantity of child pornography of the most disturbing and depraved kind, showing the abuse of literally thousands of children.

2 He pleaded guilty to three counts of possessing child pornography. Those three counts cover 35,508 still images, 687 movie files and 77 archived photos. He asks also that I take into account other matters on a Form 1, in particular two further offences of possessing child pornography referring to even more items of child pornography. Some…

Continue reading R v Saddler

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Saddler [2008] NSWDC 48
Case
[2008] NSWDC 48
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Saddler involved a dispute concerning the appropriate sentencing for the defendant, Saddler, on charges related to child pornography. The matter was heard in a higher court, with the presiding judge tasked with determining the appropriate penalty for the offences committed. The defendant was charged with possessing and distributing child pornography, with the severity of the charges necessitating a thorough examination of the relevant legal principles.

The court had to decide several legal issues, including the applicability of the COPINE Scale in assessing the severity of the pornographic material, and whether the exploitation and gross abuse of children warranted the maximum penalty under the statute. The court also needed to consider the mitigating and aggravating factors presented by the defence and prosecution, respectively, to determine an appropriate sentence that balanced punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

In delivering the judgment, the court carefully considered the evidence and the arguments presented by both parties. The court found that the material involved in the charges constituted significant exploitation and gross abuse of children, warranting a severe penalty. The judge applied the COPINE Scale to assess the severity of the offences and determined that the maximum penalty was appropriate. The court also took into account the defendant's criminal history and the need for deterrence. The final sentence imposed was one of imprisonment for six years, with a non-parole period of four years and six months. The offender would be eligible for parole on 21 January 2012.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) On the second and third charges the offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non parole period of two years and a head sentence of three years nine months to date from 22 Jul 2007. (2) On the first charge, taking into account the matters on the Form 1, the offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non parole period of three years six months and a head sentence of five years to date from 22 July 2008. (3) Thus the overall sentence is one of imprisonment for six years with a non parole period of four years six months. The offender will be eligible for release to parole on 21 Jan 2012.

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.