R v Scott - [2025] NSWDC 84

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Scott [2025] NSWDC 84
Hearing dates: 7 February 2025
Date of orders: 7 February 2025
Decision date: 07 February 2025
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC
Decision:
Sentence of imprisonment of 2 years 6 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 3 months

Catchwords:
CRIME — Violent offences — Reckless wounding — In company
SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Breach of conditional liberty — In company — Planned or organised criminal activity — Presence of child — Record of previous convictions
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty
SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Joint criminal enterprise — Assessing objective seriousness where offender’s role was less than the co-offender — General and specific deterrence — Maximum penalty and standard non-parole period — Moral culpability — Purposes of sentencing
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Aboriginal offender — Prior offending — Mental disorders — Drug addiction — Deprived childhood

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Johnson v R [2010] NSWCCA 124
Magaming v The Queen [2013] HCA 40; (2013) 252 CLR 381
Nasrallah v R [2021] NSWCCA 207
R v Breedon (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 3 December 1992, unrep)
R v Goundar [2001] NSWCCA 198
R v Scott [2019] NSWDC 526

Category: Sentence
Parties: Gregory Scott (the offender)
Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Booker (for the accused)
Solicitors:
J Loosley solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Morrisons Law (for the offender)

File Number(s): 2023/344595

JUDGMENT – ex tempore revised

Introduction

On the morning of 24 October 2023, Gregory Scott and Trevor Manton went to an address in southern Wollongong. Their reason for the visit remains obscure. When they arrived the resident and victim of this offence was working on his car at the front of his home. He intercepted the two men entering the gate that led to his garage. They said they wanted to speak to him “out the back”.
Scott went through the gate and immediately behaved in belligerent way towards the victim. They began pushing each other. The victim’s son saw what was happening. He saw Scott holding a steel mallet in his right hand. He saw Manton was armed with a small metal object described as a “shank”. The information before me indicates that the offender worked as a scaffolder where hammers and shanks are used.
The son went to the gate and kicked it closed. Manton was locked on the outside of the gate with Scott inside. The son tried to keep the gate shut as Manton bashed against it. Manton then picked up a large steel car stand and threw it over the gate in the direction of the victim. The stand hit him…

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 [2025] NSWDC 84
Case: [2025] NSWDC 84
Decision Date: 07 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Scott involved an individual, Scott, who was convicted of reckless wounding while in company. The matter was heard in the higher courts of Australia, with the specific court details not disclosed in the text. Scott's conviction arose from an incident where he participated in a planned and organised criminal activity, which resulted in the wounding of another person. The court had to consider various factors in determining an appropriate sentence, including aggravating and mitigating elements, as well as the principles of general and specific deterrence.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were the appropriate weight to be given to the aggravating factors, such as the breach of conditional liberty, the planned nature of the criminal activity, the presence of a child, and Scott's prior criminal record. On the other hand, the court also had to consider the mitigating factor of Scott's early guilty plea. The court had to balance these factors against the purposes of sentencing, including the objective seriousness of the offence, the need for general and specific deterrence, and the principles of moral culpability and proportionality.

In determining the sentence, the court meticulously evaluated the aggravating and mitigating factors. It found that while Scott's role in the crime was significant, it was less than that of his co-offenders. The court acknowledged Scott's guilty plea as a mitigating factor but emphasised the seriousness of the offence and the need for deterrence. After weighing all relevant considerations, the court sentenced Scott to imprisonment for a term of two years and six months, with a non-parole period of one year and three months. This decision reflects the court's attempt to balance the need for punishment and deterrence with the potential for rehabilitation and consideration of Scott's personal circumstances.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentence of imprisonment of 2 years 6 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 3 months

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 [2025] NSWDC 84
Hearing dates:	7 February 2025
Date of orders:	7 February 2025
Decision date:	07 February 2025
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC
Decision:	Sentence of imprisonment of 2 years 6 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 3 months
Catchwords:	CRIME — Violent offences — Reckless wounding — In company SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Breach of conditional liberty — In company — Planned or organised criminal activity — Presence of child — Record of previous convictions SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Joint criminal enterprise — Assessing objective seriousness where offender’s role was less than the co-offender — General and specific deterrence — Maximum penalty and standard non-parole period — Moral culpability — Purposes of sentencing SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Aboriginal offender — Prior offending — Mental disorders — Drug addiction — Deprived childhood
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Johnson v R [2010] NSWCCA 124 Magaming v The Queen [2013] HCA 40; (2013) 252 CLR 381 Nasrallah v R [2021] NSWCCA 207 R v Breedon (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 3 December 1992, unrep) R v Goundar [2001] NSWCCA 198 R v Scott [2019] NSWDC 526
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Gregory Scott (the offender) Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Representation:	Counsel: A Booker (for the accused) Solicitors: J Loosley solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Morrisons Law (for the offender)
File Number(s):	2023/344595