Legal Research
Cases
R v Taylor

R v Taylor

Case [2023] NSWDC 577 14 December 2023

Criminal Liability

Child Sex Offences

Sexual Intercourse Without Consent

Sentencing

Circumstances of Aggravation

Victim Under Age of 16 Years

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Taylor [2023] NSWDC 577
Hearing dates: 6 December 2023
Decision date: 14 December 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Coleman SC DCJ
Decision:
(1) For the offences of which he was found guilty and the offence to which he pleaded guilty, the offender is convicted.
(2) The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment for a period of 20 years, with a non-parole period of 13 years, to date from 26 July 2021. The first date the offender is eligible for release to parole is 25 July 2034. The head sentence will expire on 25 July 2041.
(3) The indicative sentences are as follows:
(a) Count 1: 18 months imprisonment
(b) Count 2: 12 months imprisonment
(c) Count 3: 11 years imprisonment
(d) Count 5: 3 years 6 months imprisonment
(e) Count 6: 12 years imprisonment
(f) Count 7: 8 years imprisonment
(g) Count 8: 18 months imprisonment

Catchwords:
CRIME – Child sex offences – Multiple offences – Aggravated indecent assault – Sexual intercourse without consent – Circumstances of aggravation – Victim under the age of 16 years – Sentencing following trial

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61J, 61M, 114, 562AB
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 21B, 25AA, 25D, 53A

Cases Cited:
Bravo v R [2015] NSWCCA 302
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Cheung v R (2001) 209 CLR 1
Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47
Johnson v The Queen [2004] HCA 15
Jonson v R [2016] NSWCCA 286
Leach v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 1
McL v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452
R v Chan [2000] NSWCCA 345
R v Cranston [2023] NSWSC 1004
R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374
R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381
R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270
R v PGM [2008] NSWCCA 172
Savvas The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1
Strbak v The Queen (2020) 267 CLR 494
Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629

Category: Sentence
Parties: Director for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Sean Taylor (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
K Mulley (Crown)
S Doupe (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Offender)

File Number(s): 2021/00213316
Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 578A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and s 15A of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), there is a statutory non-publication order in regard to any matter which identifies the complainant or which is likely to lead to the identification of the complainant.

JUDGMENT

The offender, Sean Taylor, appears for sentence today after being found guilty by a jury on 17 May 2023 of six offences, namely:

One count of aggravated indecent assault, the relevant circumstance of aggravation being that the victim was under the age of 16 years (being count 2 on the indictment). This is an offence under s 61M(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment.

Three counts of aggravated sexual…

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 Taylor

Details

AGLC: R v Taylor [2023] NSWDC 577
Case: [2023] NSWDC 577
Decision Date: 14 December 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, the accused, Taylor, faced charges of multiple sexual offences involving a victim under the age of 16 years. The charges included aggravated indecent assault and sexual intercourse without consent. The case was heard following a trial where Taylor was found guilty on multiple counts and pleaded guilty to one count. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentences for each offence, considering the aggravating circumstances and the principles of justice.

The primary legal issues revolved around the appropriate sentencing for each of the charges, taking into account the severity of the offences and the aggravating factors. The court needed to balance the need for punishment with the principles of rehabilitation and deterrence, while also considering the impact of the offences on the victim. The court had to determine the indicative sentences for each offence and then aggregate them to form a total sentence, including a non-parole period.

The court considered various factors, including the nature and circumstances of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the offender's criminal history. In its reasoning, the court emphasised the gravity of the crimes committed against a minor, highlighting the need for a significant custodial sentence. The court also noted the importance of ensuring that the sentence would adequately reflect the seriousness of the offences and serve as a deterrent to the offender and others. The final sentence was structured to provide a robust custodial term with a substantial non-parole period to protect the community.

The court ordered that Taylor be convicted on all charges and sentenced to an aggregate term of 20 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 13 years. The detailed indicative sentences for each count were also specified, ensuring clarity on the individual components of the total sentence. The offender's eligibility for parole release was set to commence on 25 July 2034, with the head sentence expiring on 25 July 2041.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) For the offences of which he was found guilty and the offence to which he pleaded guilty, the offender is convicted.

(2) The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment for a period of 20 years, with a non-parole period of 13 years, to date from 26 July 2021. The first date the offender is eligible for release to parole is 25 July 2034. The head sentence will expire on 25 July 2041.

(3) The indicative sentences are as follows:

(a) Count 1: 18 months imprisonment

(b) Count 2: 12 months imprisonment

(d) Count 5: 3 years 6 months imprisonment

(e) Count 6: 12 years imprisonment

(f) Count 7: 8 years imprisonment

(g) Count 8: 18 months imprisonment

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Taylor [2023] NSWDC 577

Cases citing this decision · 0 of 0 shown

No citing cases yet.

Cases cited in this decision · 16 of 16 shown

R v Cranston
[2023] NSWSC 1004 Para 3

…an offender after a verdict, the relevant principles with respect to findings of fact for sentence were recently set out by Payne JA in R v Cranston [2023] NSWSC 1004 at [3] as follows:…
Strbak v The Queen
[2020] HCA 10 Para 4

…ities: Olbrich at [27]-[28]; Leach v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 1; [2007] HCA 3 at [41]; Filippou at [64], [66]; Strbak v The Queen (2020) 267 CLR 494; [2020] HCA 10 at [32];…
Jonson v R
[2016] NSWCCA 286 Para 41

…Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) (‘CSPA’)). I reject the offender’s counsel’s submission that this aggravating factor does not apply. In Jonson v R [2016] NSWCCA 286, it was held that this aggravating factor can apply whether or not the offender is an intruder or is entitled to be in the home, including if he or she lived…
Bravo v R
[2015] NSWCCA 302 Para 114

…d deleterious effect on the victims for many years, if not the whole of their lives. Psychological damage may follow (see the discussion in Bravo v R [2015] NSWCCA 302 at [48] and the authorities there cited).…
Filippou v The Queen
[2015] HCA 29 Para 2

…In that case, the sentencer must leave that matter to one side and proceed on the basis of what can be found: Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47; [2015] HCA 29 at [70];…
Bugmy v The Queen
[2013] HCA 37 Para 98

…I do not accept that the offender’s upbringing was such that amounts to profound deprivation to enliven the principles in Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571. The evidence ended with the only relevant matters from the early childhood of the offender which could be said to go to this deprivation were his exposure to…
R v PGM
[2008] NSWCCA 172 Para 37

…In regard to sentencing for offences of indecent assault, the Crown referred to R v PGM [2008] NSWCCA 172 and submitted that it is of considerable significance when assessing the objective seriousness of the indecent assault of a child to consider the actual character of the assault, including the degree of physical…
Leach v The Queen
[2007] HCA 3 Para 4

…offender seeks to rely on a fact, the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities: Olbrich at [27]-[28]; Leach v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 1; [2007] HCA 3 at [41]; Filippou at [64], [66]; Strbak v The Queen (2020) 267 CLR 494; [2020] HCA 10 at [32];…
R v MAK
[2006] NSWCCA 381 Para 120

…for all of the offences and avoid a crushing sentence: see Johnson v The Queen [2004] HCA 15, McL v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452 at [15] and R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381.…
Johnson v The Queen
[2004] HCA 15 Para 120

…behaviour of the offender, ask myself what is the appropriate sentence for all of the offences and avoid a crushing sentence: see Johnson v The Queen [2004] HCA 15, McL v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452 at [15] and R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381.…
Weininger v The Queen
[2003] HCA 14 Para 1

…relevant to the issues that will inform the sentence: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 at [1]; Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629; [2003] HCA 14 at [16]-[17]; R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 at 378;…
Cheung v The Queen
[2001] HCA 67 Para 5

…erdict of guilty, the sentencer is constrained to making findings of fact that are consistent with the jury’s verdict: Cheung v R (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67 at [14], approving Isaacs at 376-377;…
R H McL v The Queen
[2000] HCA 46 Para 120

…myself what is the appropriate sentence for all of the offences and avoid a crushing sentence: see Johnson v The Queen [2004] HCA 15, McL v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452 at [15] and R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381.…
R v Chan
[2000] NSWCCA 345 Para 121

…sure that the ultimate sentence imposed is appropriate for the totality of the offending and to the offender’s personal circumstances: see R v Chan [2000] NSWCCA 345.…
R v Olbrich
[1999] HCA 54 Para 1

…judge has a duty to make, as far as possible, findings of fact relevant to the issues that will inform the sentence: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 at [1]; Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629; [2003] HCA 14 at [16]-[17]; R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 at 378;…
Savvas v R
[1995] HCA 29 Para 7

…Within this constraint, the sentencer can make findings as they see fit: Savvas v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1 at 8. There is no requirement to accept all of the Crown’s case as put to the jury: Cheung at [7]. Nor is the judge required to take a view of the facts most favourable to the offender: Isaacs at 377D.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
21A, 21B, 25AA, 25D, 3A, 53A 13 mentions (from Para 41)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
114, 562AB, 61J, 61M 5 mentions (from Para 1)
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW)
1 mention

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Taylor [2023] NSWDC 577
Hearing dates:	6 December 2023
Decision date:	14 December 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Coleman SC DCJ
Decision:	(1) For the offences of which he was found guilty and the offence to which he pleaded guilty, the offender is convicted. (2) The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment for a period of 20 years, with a non-parole period of 13 years, to date from 26 July 2021. The first date the offender is eligible for release to parole is 25 July 2034. The head sentence will expire on 25 July 2041. (3) The indicative sentences are as follows: (a) Count 1: 18 months imprisonment (b) Count 2: 12 months imprisonment (c) Count 3: 11 years imprisonment (d) Count 5: 3 years 6 months imprisonment (e) Count 6: 12 years imprisonment (f) Count 7: 8 years imprisonment (g) Count 8: 18 months imprisonment
Catchwords:	CRIME – Child sex offences – Multiple offences – Aggravated indecent assault – Sexual intercourse without consent – Circumstances of aggravation – Victim under the age of 16 years – Sentencing following trial
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61J, 61M, 114, 562AB Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 21B, 25AA, 25D, 53A
Cases Cited:	Bravo v R [2015] NSWCCA 302 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Cheung v R (2001) 209 CLR 1 Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47 Johnson v The Queen [2004] HCA 15 Jonson v R [2016] NSWCCA 286 Leach v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 1 McL v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452 R v Chan [2000] NSWCCA 345 R v Cranston [2023] NSWSC 1004 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 R v PGM [2008] NSWCCA 172 Savvas The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1 Strbak v The Queen (2020) 267 CLR 494 Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Director for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Sean Taylor (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: K Mulley (Crown) S Doupe (Offender) Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Legal Aid NSW (Offender)
File Number(s):	2021/00213316
Publication restriction:	Pursuant to s 578A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and s 15A of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), there is a statutory non-publication order in regard to any matter which identifies the complainant or which is likely to lead to the identification of the complainant.