Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Stanford, Vincent [2016] NSWSC 1434 Hearing dates: 11 October 2016 Decision date: 13 October 2016 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: Sentenced to imprisonment for life
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – murder – aggravated sexual assault – victim abducted and brutally attacked – disposal of deceased’s body and possessions – guilty pleas – young offender – no prior convictions – Autism Spectrum Disorder not causative of offending and does not reduce moral culpability – no remorse – Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 61 – offence in worst case category – culpability so extreme that maximum penalty appropriate – life imprisonment Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) s 15A
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 19A, 61J
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 21(1), 61(1)
Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW)Cases Cited: Adanguidi v R (2006) 167 A Crim R 295; [2006] NSWCCA 404
Fardon v Attorney General (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575; [2004] HCA 46
Gonzales v R (2007) 178 A Crim R 232; [2007] NSWCCA 321
Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447; [1987] HCA 46
Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
R v Arthurell (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 3 October 1991, unreported)
R v Baker (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 20 September 1995, unreported)
R v Garforth (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 23 May 1994; unreported)
R v Harris (2000) 50 NSWLR 409; [2000] NSWCCA 469
R v Hillsley (2006) 164 A Crim R 252; [2006] NSWCCA 312
R v Merritt (2004) 59 NSWLR 557; [2004] NSWCCA 19
R v Miles [2002] NSWCCA 276
R v Robinson [2002] NSWCCA 359
R v SLD (2003) 58 NSWLR 589; [2003] NSWCCA 310
R v Stanford, Marcus [2016] NSWSC 1174
R v Stani-Reginald [2013] NSWSC 567
R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309
R v Valera [2002] NSWCCA 50
R v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168; [2004] NSWCCA 131
Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14Category: Sentence Parties: Regina
Vincent StanfordRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Mr L Carr (Crown)
Ms J Manuell SC (Offender)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
David Davidge
File Number(s): 2015/104505
Judgment
-
HIS HONOUR: Vincent Stanford ("the offender") has pleaded guilty to the murder of Ms Stephanie Clare Scott. He has also pleaded guilty to having sexual intercourse with Ms Scott without her consent, knowing that she was not consenting, in circumstances of aggravation, namely that he deprived Ms Scott of her liberty. These offences occurred at Leeton High School on 5 April 2015.
Facts
-
The offender lived in Maiden Avenue, Leeton with his mother and older brother, Luke. He was employed as a casual cleaner and worked at a variety of locations including a number of schools and…
Continue reading R v Stanford, Vincent
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Stanford, Vincent [2016] NSWSC 1434
- Case
- [2016] NSWSC 1434
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the defendant’s young age, lack of prior convictions, and the presence of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). However, the court determined that while the ASD diagnosis provided context for the defendant's behaviour, it did not diminish his moral culpability for the crimes. Additionally, the court noted the absence of remorse exhibited by the defendant, which influenced their assessment of his culpability. Under section 61 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), the court categorised the offence as being in the worst case scenario due to its extreme nature. Consequently, the court concluded that the only appropriate penalty was the maximum sentence available under the law, which is life imprisonment.
Given the severity of the crimes and the factors considered, the court imposed a life sentence on the defendant. The court’s decision reflects a stringent approach to sentencing for such grave offences, ensuring that the punishment aligns with the culpability and the need for public protection.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.