R v Sirl (No 2) - [2019] ACTSC 388

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Sirl (No 2)
Citation:	[2019] ACTSC 388
Hearing Dates:	9 December 2019
DecisionDate:	12 December 2019
Before:	Burns J
Decision:	See [39]-[44]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – sexual intercourse without consent – recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm – found guilty by jury – extensive criminal history – prospects for rehabilitation guarded
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) ss 20(1), 54(1)
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Robert Glen Sirl (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel T Hickey (Crown) K Musgrove (Offender)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) McKenna Taylor (Offender)
File Number:	SCC 19 of 2019

BURNS J:

Robert Sirl, on 11 September 2019 you were found guilty by a jury of one offence of sexual intercourse without consent and one offence of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm. It is my responsibility to sentence you for these offences.

Conviction for these offences also means that you are in breach of two Good Behaviour Orders imposed on 9 July 2018 in the ACT Magistrates Court and I must also deal with you for those breaches.

The maximum penalty for the offence of sexual intercourse without consent, contrary to s 54(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (the Crimes Act), is 12 years' imprisonment. The maximum penalty for the offence of recklessly inflicting grievous body harm, contrary to s 20(1) of the Crimes Act, is 13 years' imprisonment.

The facts

Following a finding of guilt at a trial by jury, it is for the Court to determine the facts upon which an offender is to be sentenced. Such facts must be consistent with the verdicts returned by the jury. They must also be arrived at to the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. You knew the victim of these offences as a fellow resident at the caravan park where you lived. You had previously had a casual sexual relationship with her. At about 11:00 pm on 9 August 2018, you rang the victim and asked her if she wanted to purchase some cannabis.

The victim went to your residence to buy cannabis. At your residence, you provided her with coffee which had methylamphetamine in it. Shortly after this, you told the victim that there was a large amount of money missing from your residence and that she was not allowed to leave until it had been found. The victim helped you to search, during which you both entered the bedroom of the residence. You said to the victim that “[w]e’re going to have some fun first”.

You pushed her onto the bed on her back. You pulled off her pants and flipped her over onto her stomach. She made it clear to you that she did not want to have sex with you. You were holding her down by her neck, making it difficult for her to see what was happening. You inserted your penis into her vagina and had sexual intercourse with her. While…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Sirl (No 2) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2019] ACTSC 388
Decision Date: 12 December 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Sirl, the respondent was charged with two counts of sexual intercourse without consent and one count of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the respondent was found guilty by a jury on all counts. The central issue before the court was to determine the appropriate sentence for the respondent, who had an extensive criminal history and whose prospects for rehabilitation were considered guarded.

The court had to weigh various factors in determining the sentence, including the gravity of the offences, the need for deterrence and denunciation, and the respondent's prospects for rehabilitation. The respondent's criminal history was significant, with numerous prior convictions for violent and non-violent offences. The court also considered the impact of the offences on the victims, who suffered significant physical and psychological harm.

The court ultimately determined that the offences were of high severity and warranted a substantial custodial sentence. However, the court also considered the respondent's limited prospects for rehabilitation and the need to protect the community. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment with a non-parole period, taking into account the aggravating and mitigating factors in the case. The court also made orders for the respondent to participate in rehabilitation programs and to comply with other conditions aimed at reducing the risk of reoffending.

The court's reasoning and outcome reflect the importance of balancing the needs of justice, including the protection of victims and the community, with the need to consider the individual circumstances of the offender and their potential for rehabilitation. The final orders of the court are set out in paragraphs [39] to [44] of the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [39]-[44]

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.