R v SAQ - [2002] QCA 221

[2002] QCA 221

COURT OF APPEAL

DAVIES JA
WHITE J
WILSON J

CA No 62 of 2002

THE QUEEN

SAQ Appellant

BRISBANE

..DATE 21/06/2002

JUDGMENT

1

21062002 D.1 T4/PAF23 M/T COA147/2002

DAVIES JA: I will ask Wilson J to deliver her reasons

first.

WILSON J: This is an application for leave to appeal

against sentence. The applicant pleaded guilty to one count

of indecent treatment of a child under 16 with a

circumstance of aggravation, namely, that the child was

under 12. The offence was committed on the 29th of December

2000. The child was a 7 year old girl. The sentence

imposed was three years' imprisonment with no recommendation

for early eligibility for parole.

The applicant was born on the 21st of December 1959. At the

time of the offence he was a computer programmer by

occupation.

The applicant was the complainant's uncle by marriage. The

child's mother dropped her and her brother off at "Aunty

[M]’s" place so that they could spend time with their

cousins. Aunty M was the applicant's ex‑wife and the

cousins were the four children of that marriage.

The applicant came to his ex‑wife's house to visit his

children. The complainant's mother was aware that the

applicant had previously been sent to prison for child

molestation. However, she understood that her children and

the applicant's would be supervised at all times they were

in the company of the applicant.

2 JUDGMENT
21062002 D.1 T4/PAF23 M/T COA147/2002

In the computer room of the house, the applicant placed his

hands inside the complainant's shorts and underwear and

touched her on the vagina on five separate occasions within

a relatively short space of time. There was no digital

penetration. The child tried unsuccessfully to get away.

She later said that it felt "really nasty". Since this

happened, she has become distrustful of others, especially

males. According to her mother, she has become introverted

and "clingy", and given to outbursts of anger. She has

undergone counselling.

The applicant had a history of similar offences. On the 8th

of April 1989 he committed the offence of aggravated assault

of a sexual nature upon a child of 10 by touching her

vagina. He was sentenced to two years' probation and 240

hours' community service. Then on the 27th of September

1992 he committed two offences of indecent dealing with a

child under 12, namely a girl aged 9 whose vagina he

touched. He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment

which was reduced on appeal to two years.

According to Dr Ian Curtis, his treating psychiatrist, he

has the clinical disorder of paedophilia and a personality

disorder, schizoid schizotypal personality. His offending

has been intermittent and stereotypical, at times when he

has had no adult female partner, or when he has been in the

throes of being rejected by an adult female partner. He was

responding well to chemical castration with the anti‑

testosterone Androcur.

3 JUDGMENT

21062002 D.1 T4/PAF23 M/T COA147/2002
The sentencing Judge expressed some concern that the

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 SAQ

Details

AGLC: R v SAQ [2002] QCA 221
Case: [2002] QCA 221
Decision Date: 21 June 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v SAQ involves an application for leave to appeal against a sentence imposed for a conviction of indecent treatment of a child under 16, with an aggravating circumstance that the child was under 12. The appellant pleaded guilty to the offence and was sentenced to three years' imprisonment with no recommendation for early eligibility for parole. The legal issues for the court to decide included whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, and if the sentencing judge had appropriately considered the mitigating factors of the guilty plea, the appellant's history of similar offences, and the need for deterrence and community protection.

The court considered the precedents and found that while the sentence was near the top of the range, it was not outside the range of the sentencing judge's discretion. The court noted the mitigating factors of the guilty plea and the appellant's ongoing treatment for paedophilic disorder, but also highlighted the need for deterrence and protection of the community due to the appellant's history of similar offences. The court concluded that the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range and dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The judges agreed that the sentence, while high, was not manifestly excessive and appropriately balanced the mitigating factors with the need for deterrence and community protection.

Orders