R v Sturt (a pseudonym) - [2022] NSWDC 155

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Sturt (a pseudonym) [2022] NSWDC 155
Hearing dates: 26 April 2022
Date of orders: 26 April 2022
Decision date: 26 April 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Grant DCJ
Decision:
Orders at [58]

Catchwords:
SENTENCING – bestiality – dog – man’s best friend – Ollie the dog knots and rims offender – child pornography – form 1 offences – prior good character – upstanding citizen – excellent prospects of rehabilitation – genuine remorse

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985
Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:
DPP v Garside [2016] VSCA 74
DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215
DPP v Walton [2020] VCC 1839
DPP v Zarb (2014) 46 VR 832
Minehan v R [2010] NSWCCA 140
Mouscas v R [2008] NSWCCA 181
R v Anning [2014] NSW DC 359
R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89
R v De Leeuw [2015] NSWCCA 183
R v Mammone [2006] NSWCCA 138
R v Miao [2016] NSWDC 181
R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Charles Sturt (a pseudonym)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr John Davidson (offender)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Cater & Blumer Solicitors (offender)

File Number(s): 2021/00068869
Publication restriction: Non-publication order for the identity of the offender

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

Charles Sturt is to be sentenced for a single charge of bestiality, contrary to s 79 of the Crimes Act1900. The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment.
There are a number of other related offences on a s 166 certificate. They are as follows:

possess unauthorised firearm, contrary to s 7A(1) of the Firearms Act1996. The maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment.

supply prohibited drug more than the indictable quantity but being equal to or less than the commercial quantity, contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985. The maximum penalty is 15 years imprisonment.

disseminate child abuse material contrary to s 91H(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment.

possess child abuse material contrary to s 91H(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is ten years imprisonment.

Further, there are two charges referable to the possession of the unauthorised firearm (sequence 2) that are to be taken into account on a form 1.
The maximum penalties are important guideposts in the assessment of the sentence. A sentencing judge should steer by the maximum penalties, but not aim for them.

PLEA OF GUILTY

A plea of guilty was accepted by the local court magistrate in committal proceedings for the offences. As such, the offender is entitled to have his sentence reduced by 25% for his early plea in accordance with s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act1999.

THE FACTS

There is an extensive agreed facts document. In summary, the facts are these:
The offender was experiencing problems with his computer. He contacted a computer…

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 Sturt (a pseudonym)

Details

AGLC: R v Sturt (a pseudonym) [2022] NSWDC 155
Case: [2022] NSWDC 155
Decision Date: 26 April 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Sturt, the accused was prosecuted for engaging in bestiality with his dog, Ollie, and producing child pornography. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had engaged in sexual acts with his dog, and had also produced and possessed child pornography. The defendant pleaded guilty to the charges and the court proceeded to sentencing.

The legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentence for the defendant's crimes, taking into account his prior good character, upstanding citizenship, excellent prospects of rehabilitation, and genuine remorse. The court considered the severity of the crimes, and the need to balance the need for punishment with the need to rehabilitate the offender. The court also considered the impact of the crimes on the victim, the community, and the defendant himself.

The court found that the defendant's crimes were serious and had caused significant harm to the victim and the community. However, the court also found that the defendant had prior good character, upstanding citizenship, excellent prospects of rehabilitation, and genuine remorse. The court considered these factors in mitigation of sentence, and ultimately sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period. The court also made orders for the defendant to be subject to a number of other conditions, including a sex offender registration order, a good behaviour bond, and a counselling order. These orders are detailed at [58].

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders at [58]

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 Sturt (a pseudonym) [2022] NSWDC 155
Hearing dates:	26 April 2022
Date of orders:	26 April 2022
Decision date:	26 April 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Grant DCJ
Decision:	Orders at [58]
Catchwords:	SENTENCING – bestiality – dog – man’s best friend – Ollie the dog knots and rims offender – child pornography – form 1 offences – prior good character – upstanding citizen – excellent prospects of rehabilitation – genuine remorse
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 Firearms Act 1996
Cases Cited:	DPP v Garside [2016] VSCA 74 DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215 DPP v Walton [2020] VCC 1839 DPP v Zarb (2014) 46 VR 832 Minehan v R [2010] NSWCCA 140 Mouscas v R [2008] NSWCCA 181 R v Anning [2014] NSW DC 359 R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89 R v De Leeuw [2015] NSWCCA 183 R v Mammone [2006] NSWCCA 138 R v Miao [2016] NSWDC 181 R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Charles Sturt (a pseudonym)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr John Davidson (offender) Solicitors: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Cater & Blumer Solicitors (offender)
File Number(s):	2021/00068869
Publication restriction:	Non-publication order for the identity of the offender