R v T - [1993] QCA 194

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL [1993] QCA 194

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 68 of 1993

Brisbane

[R v. T]

BETWEEN

THE QUEEN

- and -

Respondent

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND

Appellant

The President
Mr. Justice Pincus
Mr. Justice Thomas

Judgment delivered 31/05/93.

Joint reasons for judgment delivered by Fitzgerald, P. and Thomas, J. Separate reasons delivered by Pincus, J.A., dissenting as to appeal against sentence.

APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION DISMISSED.

APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE DISMISSED.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - sentence - sexual relationship with child - 4 years with recommendation for parole after 9 months
Counsel:T. Rafter instructed by Legal Aid Office for T
B. Butler instructed by Director of Prosecutions for Attorney-General of Queensland

Hearing Date: 12 May 1993

THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 68 of 1993

Brisbane

Before The President
Mr. Justice Pincus
Mr. Justice Thomas

[R. v. T]

THE QUEEN

Respondent

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND

Appellant

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - FITZGERALD P. AND THOMAS J.

Judgment delivered 31/05/93.

This is an appeal against conviction of four counts of indecent treatment of a child and one count of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child. There is also an appeal by the Attorney-General on the ground of inadequacy of sentence.
The case involves the sexual molestation of a step child (K) between the age of 9 and 12. The period in question is between December 1989 and November 1992. The appellant married K’s mother in 1987. There were three children, of whom K and her older brother, A were from a former union of the mother. A further child, J was born to the appellant and to the mother in 1986.
K’s evidence was that when she was aged 9 the appellant commenced coming into her bedroom at night. He would lie on top of her and feel her private parts. This, on K’s evidence, occurred three times a week and sometimes three times in the one night. The more serious incidents described by her included two occasions when he placed his penis between her legs and ejaculated and another occasion when he placed his finger into her vagina. There were occasions when he induced her to fondle his penis and when he licked her vagina and sucked her breasts. Count 4 describes an occasion in November 1992 when he kissed her on the outside of her togs in the area of vagina. This count seems to be included as the last sexual dealing before K made her complaint. She was examined by a doctor on 13 November 1992 who found no evidence of trauma to her genitalia but her hymen was not intact.
The appellant did not give evidence or call evidence.
Ground 1 alleges that the verdicts are unsafe and unsatisfactory. The first point that is made is the absence of fresh complaint. It is said that this is significant because there was an occasion in 1990 when the police were investigating sexual impropriety by the headmaster of the…

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 T

Details

AGLC: R v T [1993] QCA 194
Case: [1993] QCA 194
Decision Date: 31 May 1993

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court was an appeal by the accused, referred to as T, against both his conviction and the sentence imposed upon him. T was convicted of engaging in a sexual relationship with a child, a crime that carries significant societal repercussions. The court of appeal was tasked with determining whether the trial court's findings and the resulting sentence were appropriate under the circumstances presented.

The legal issues central to the appeal were twofold. First, the court had to consider whether the trial court's decision to convict T was supported by the evidence. This required a review of the trial process, the admissibility of evidence, and whether the prosecution had proven the elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. Second, the court had to evaluate the severity and appropriateness of the sentence, considering the nature of the crime, the age of the victim, and any mitigating factors presented.

In dismissing both the appeal against conviction and the appeal against sentence, the court found that the trial judge had correctly applied the law and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The court also determined that the sentence of four years with a recommendation for parole after nine months was appropriate, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the need for both punishment and rehabilitation. The appeal was thus unsuccessful on both counts.

No further orders were made, as the appeals were dismissed in their entirety. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court remained in place, affirming the gravity of T's actions and the court's commitment to protecting the vulnerable.

Orders

Orders of the court

APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION DISMISSED.

APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE DISMISSED.

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.