R v Scott

Case [2022] NSWDC 663


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Scott [2022] NSWDC 663
Hearing dates: 28/6/22-7/7/22, 14/7/22, 30/9/22, 21/10/22
Date of orders: 21/10/22
Decision date: 21 October 2022
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Bourke SC DCJ
Decision:

Convicted and sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of 1 year 10 months (12/2/21-11/12/22).

I note that the offender is currently serving an existing head sentence for other offences, which expires on 12/3/27. Whether or not the offender is release to parole on 11/12/22 will be a matter for the State Parole Authority to determine.

Catchwords:

Crime – Sentence – Male teacher have homosexual intercourse with male pupil aged between 10 and 18

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:

R v Obbens [2022] NSWCCA 109

R v Todd [1982] 2 NSWLR 517

Category:Sentence
Parties: NSW DPP – Crown
Peter Wayne Scott - Offender
Representation: Mr J Mehta for Crown
Mr Z Khan for Offender
File Number(s): 20/341820
Publication restriction: Non-publication order in relation to the identity of the victim and any other witnesses who were children at the time of the offence.

sentence

  1. The offender stood trial on a judge alone trial before myself from 28 June 2022 until 7 July 2022 on two charges. The first one being that between 1 and 31 December 1984 he unlawfully caused the complainant to ingest a stupefying drug with the intent to enable him to commit an indictable offence of sexual assault. The second charge being that between those same dates he did have homosexual intercourse with the complainant, a male person above the age of ten and under the age of 18 years, namely 16 years of age, during a time when the offender worked as a school teacher at Cromer High School and the complainant was a pupil.

FACTS

  1. On 14 July 2022 I found the offender not guilty of count 1 but guilty of count 2. The maximum penalty for that offence is 14 years imprisonment. The maximum penalty is of course an important guidepost in the sentencing exercise, to which I have had regard.

  2. The facts must be determined based on the evidence at trial. Any matters in aggravation must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and matters in mitigation, on the balance of probabilities. The detailed facts are taken from my verdict and reasons of 14 July 2022, but in essence the relevant facts for sentence are as follows.

  3. The offender was born on 13 November 1950 and was 34 years of age at the time of the offence. In 1984 he worked as a teacher at Cromer High School. The complainant was born in 1968 and started year 7 in 1981 at Cromer High School. In 1983 when he was in year 9 the complainant started taking part in extracurricular activities, which included school musicals and it was through his participation in these that he met the offender. The complainant became involved in a rock band in which he was the…

Continue reading R v Scott

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Scott [2022] NSWDC 663
Case
[2022] NSWDC 663
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Scott involved the defendant, a male teacher, who was convicted of engaging in homosexual intercourse with a male pupil aged between 10 and 18 years old. The matter was heard and determined by the relevant court. The primary issue for the court was to determine the appropriate sentence for the defendant's criminal conduct, taking into account the severity and nature of the offence.

The court was tasked with considering the principles of sentencing for crimes of this nature, including the need to protect the community and deter similar conduct, as well as the principles of proportionality and rehabilitation. The court also had to consider the defendant's background, including his previous criminal history and the impact of the offence on the victim and their family. The court found that the defendant's actions were a serious breach of trust and caused significant harm to the victim, and that a custodial sentence was necessary to achieve the aims of sentencing.

After careful consideration of the relevant factors, the court sentenced the defendant to a fixed term of imprisonment of 1 year and 10 months, to be served from 12 February 2021 to 11 December 2022. The court noted that the defendant was currently serving a separate head sentence for other offences, which expires on 12 March 2027. The court left it to the State Parole Authority to determine whether or not the defendant should be released on parole on 11 December 2022.

Orders

Orders of the court

Convicted and sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of 1 year 10 months (12/2/21-11/12/22).

I note that the offender is currently serving an existing head sentence for other offences, which expires on 12/3/27. Whether or not the offender is release to parole on 11/12/22 will be a matter for the State Parole Authority to determine.

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.