R v Scott - [2019] NSWDC 526

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v SCOTT [2019] NSWDC 526
Hearing dates: 15 August 2019
Decision date: 15 August 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of seven years three months with a non-parole period of four years three months. For orders see [75] – [81].

Catchwords: CRIME – guilty plea during trial – multiple incidents.
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – late guilty plea - multiple incidents – numerous victims – firearms used – stranger’s home attacked – in company with others – separate & distinct domestic violence incident – breach of AVO - multiple sentences – accumulation – concurrence – totality considered – long history of offending – deprived upbringing – early uptake of illicit drugs use - still some prospects for future – rehabilitation – victims request mercy – parity - efforts required – special circumstances found.
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Cases Cited: R v Coe [2019] NSWDC 236
Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
Category: Sentence
Parties: Gregory Scott (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr G Hoare (for the offender)
Solicitors:
O’Brien Hudson Solicitors (for the offender)
Ms A Hughes, Solicitor Advocate(for the Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2017/00341263; 2017/00341270; 2017/00341292.

Judgment sentence – ex tempore revised

Offending behaviour

At about 9pm on 9 November 2017 a new silver Mitsubishi Outlander (SUV) pulled up outside Mr Camara’s house in Cringila, southern Wollongong. Camara went over to it and spoke to the driver, who he knew as Gregory Scott. Camara also recognised one of the two passengers as Brayden Stephens. Scott asked after a mutual friend, Andrew Coe: see R vCoe [2019] NSWDC 236.
During the conversation Scott pulled a shortened firearm from under the car seat and pointed it at Camara’s face saying, “Do you want one in the head?” Camara ran away yelling to his sister who had been walking from the house to the car, “Stop Raquel, he’s got a gun.” The car drove off.
Shortly afterwards the same car pulled up in a quiet street in Woonona, northern Wollongong. Three men left the vehicle and walked up a long side driveway to the back gate of the Sargeson family home. Tannith Sargeson, her brother Jack, her mother Meryll and a friend, Hannah, were in the back yard. Scott spoke to Tannith asking for her brother Mick. Tannith lied and said he was not there. She told Scott to “fuck off.” Jack Sargeson also told him to leave.
Scott then pulled out a shortened firearm and pointed it, first at Tannith and then at Jack. Tannith did not think the gun was real. She walked towards Scott who continued to threaten her with it. Jack went inside to get a weapon. Tannith and Scott ended up in the driveway. Mr Sargeson, their father, now deceased, was in the house. He called Triple‑0.
Scott yelled at…

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 Scott

Details

AGLC: R v Scott [2019] NSWDC 526
Case: [2019] NSWDC 526
Decision Date: 15 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Scott involved the defendant, Scott, who faced charges stemming from multiple criminal incidents. The court heard that Scott had entered guilty pleas during his trial, which involved numerous victims, the use of firearms, an attack on a stranger's home, and participation in activities alongside others. Additionally, there was a separate incident involving domestic violence, a breach of an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO), and multiple sentences to be considered. The court needed to determine the appropriate sentence considering these factors, including the lateness of Scott's guilty pleas, the totality of his offending history, and his prospects for rehabilitation.

The legal issues before the court included the consideration of the appropriate sentence for Scott's multiple offences, taking into account the timing of his guilty pleas, the nature and extent of his criminal activities, the harm caused to victims, and the relevance of his personal circumstances such as his deprived upbringing and early use of illicit drugs. The court also had to determine whether to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences, and whether special circumstances warranted a departure from the usual sentencing principles.

The court, in delivering its judgment, examined the totality of Scott's offending and his personal background. It recognised the severity of his crimes, including the use of firearms, the attack on a stranger's home, and the multiple victims involved. However, the court also considered Scott's late guilty pleas, his deprived upbringing, his early uptake of illicit drugs, and his potential for rehabilitation. The court found special circumstances that justified a sentence below the aggregate of the individual offences. Ultimately, the court imposed an aggregate sentence of seven years and three months, with a non-parole period of four years and three months.

The final orders of the court, detailed from [75] to [81], outlined the specific terms of the sentence, including the non-parole period and any additional conditions. The court's decision balanced the need for punishment and deterrence with the potential for Scott's rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of seven years three months with a non-parole period of four years three months. For orders see [75] – [81].

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 SCOTT [2019] NSWDC 526
Hearing dates:	15 August 2019
Decision date:	15 August 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of seven years three months with a non-parole period of four years three months. For orders see [75] – [81].
Catchwords:	CRIME – guilty plea during trial – multiple incidents. SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – late guilty plea - multiple incidents – numerous victims – firearms used – stranger’s home attacked – in company with others – separate & distinct domestic violence incident – breach of AVO - multiple sentences – accumulation – concurrence – totality considered – long history of offending – deprived upbringing – early uptake of illicit drugs use - still some prospects for future – rehabilitation – victims request mercy – parity - efforts required – special circumstances found.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	R v Coe [2019] NSWDC 236 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Gregory Scott (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr G Hoare (for the offender) Solicitors: O’Brien Hudson Solicitors (for the offender) Ms A Hughes, Solicitor Advocate(for the Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2017/00341263; 2017/00341270; 2017/00341292.