District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Selby [2022] NSWDC 583 Hearing dates: 26 September 2022 Date of orders: 24 November 2022 Decision date: 24 November 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [164].
Catchwords: CRIME – sentence – possess or control child abuse material – use carriage service to access child abuse material – use carriage service to transmit child pornography material – use carriage service to produce child abuse material with intention that the material by used by another person to commit an offence against 474.22 – s16BA schedule offence
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
Cases Cited: Minehan v R (2010) 201 A Crim R 243; [2010] NSWCCA 140
R v Burton [2020] NSWCCA 127
R v Cahyadi [2007] NSWCCA 1
R v Edwards [2019] QCA 15
R v Fuller [2010] NSWCCA 192
R v Hutchinson [2018] NSWCCA 152
Category: Sentence Parties: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
James Ronald SelbyRepresentation: Counsel:
P. McEniery (Crown)
M. McAuliffe (Offender)
File Number(s): 2021/266233 Publication restriction: 1. Pursuant to ss 7(a), 8(1)(c)(d) and (e) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), (“the Act”) the publication of information tending to reveal the identity of James Ronald SELBY’s (the Offender) nephew, or that there is any allegation of offending involving the Offender’s nephew (who is under the age of 18 years), including but not limited to, the matters at paragraphs [5(xi)], [5(xii)], [5(xiii)] and [24] of the Agreed Statement of Facts tendered by the Crown at the sentence hearing, is prohibited. The order includes paragraphs [6(x)-(xiii)], [11], [55], [76] and [136].
2. Order 1 does not prohibit or restrict the disclosure of the information to the following:
a. The Offender or his legal representatives;
b. An officer or legal representative from the Commonwealth DPP;
c. The Australian Federal Police; or
d. Any other Commonwealth Government agency.3. Order 1 does not apply to any oral or written submissions made by legal representatives for the Crown or the Offender in this or any further proceedings in relation to the matter 2021/00266233.
4. This Order is to operate throughout the Commonwealth of Australia.
5. This Order is to apply until further order of the Court.
REMARKS ON SENTENCE
-
The offender was born in 1979 and he is to be sentenced in respect of the following eight offences, to which he has pleaded guilty.
Seq
Offence
Description
Date
Maximum penalty
1
Section 474.22A Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
Possess or control child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service
17 September 2021
15 years imprisonment
2
Section 474.22(1) Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
Use carriage service to access child abuse material
3 September 2021
15 years imprisonment
5
Section 474.19(1) Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
Use carriage service to transmit child pornography material
5 May 2014 to 19 December 2015
15 years imprisonment
9
Section 474.19(1)
Continue reading R v Selby
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Selby [2022] NSWDC 583
- Case
- [2022] NSWDC 583
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to address the legal principles that govern sentencing for offences of this nature, particularly considering the seriousness and aggravating factors involved. It was necessary to evaluate the gravity of the crimes, the respondent's culpability, and the potential deterrent effect of the sentence. Additionally, the court had to consider the respondent's personal circumstances, including any mitigating factors, to ensure a just outcome.
The Court of Criminal Appeal found that the original sentence did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the crimes committed. The respondent's actions demonstrated a significant level of depravity and a disregard for the welfare of children. The use of a carriage service to access, transmit, and produce child abuse material indicated a sophisticated and persistent involvement in these activities. The court concluded that a full-time custodial sentence was necessary to achieve the aims of denunciation, deterrence, and protection of the community. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was affirmed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [164].
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.