R v TH - [2019] NSWDC 793

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v TH [2019] NSWDC 793
Hearing dates: 15 October 2019
Date of orders: 06 December 2019
Decision date: 06 December 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years 6 months

Catchwords: CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >10 <14
CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >14 <16
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518
Cheung v The Queen [2001] 209 CLR 1
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Beattie [2017] NSWCCA 301
Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25
R v King [2009] NSWCCA 117
R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353
S v The Queen [1989] HCA 66
The Queen v Kilic [2016] 259 CLR 256
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
TH (Offender)
Representation:
Alexander Terracini (counsel) (Crown)
Alexander Cassels (counsel (Offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Legal Aid (NSW) (Offender)

File Number(s): 2017/00391171
Publication restriction: Statutory non-publication order of the names of the Offender and the Victims or of any information which may enable their identities to be ascertained

EX TEMPORE REVISED JUDGEMENT

Sentence

In the course of the hearing of this matter there was reference to the report by the offender to the psychiatrist who provided a report of his victimisation in an offence of sexual assault upon him at a public swimming pool. The Crown, between the hearing date and today has been able to access a copy of the indictment presented against an accused charged with offences of sexual intercourse upon the offender when aged nine and an act of indecency toward the offender when at the age of nine. I shall refer to that in more detail when I come to that part of the reasons for the sentence I am about to impose.

Introduction

TH appeared for sentence in the District Court at Parramatta on 15 October 2019 upon two charges to which he pleaded guilty upon arraignment on 8 July 2019. Before then he was committed for trial from the Local Court Parramatta, was arraigned in the District Court Parramatta on 8 November 2018 when he pleaded not guilty, whereupon his trial was appointed to commence on 1 July 2019. On that date the proceedings were adjourned to allow continuing negotiations towards settlement of the issues and ultimately, on 8 July 2019 when re‑arraigned, the offender pleaded guilty. The proceedings for the determination of sentence were appointed to 15 October 2019 when the evidence was tendered, including a victim impact statement that was read in open Court. The offender did not give evidence.

The Offences

Count 1 charged that the offender:

"Between 1 October 2007 and 31 October 2009 in Merrylands in the State of New South Wales, did have sexual intercourse with RH…

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 TH

Details

AGLC: R v TH [2019] NSWDC 793
Case: [2019] NSWDC 793
Decision Date: 06 December 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of the State of Queensland, the defendant, TH, was charged with sexual offences against a child. The child, who was over the age of 10 but under 14, alleged that the defendant had engaged in sexual acts with her on multiple occasions. The case was heard by Justice Smith, who was tasked with determining the appropriate penalties for the defendant's actions.

The legal issues that the court was required to address included the severity of the offences, the age of the victim, and the appropriate sentence to be imposed on the defendant. The court needed to consider the principles of sentencing for child sex offences, as well as the need for punishment and deterrence. The defence argued for a lenient sentence, citing the defendant's otherwise good character and the lack of violence in the offences. However, the prosecution emphasised the gravity of the crimes and the need for a significant deterrent sentence.

Justice Smith found that the offences were serious and warranted a substantial sentence. The court noted the defendant's otherwise good character but found that this was not a mitigating factor given the nature of the crimes. The court imposed an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years 6 months. The court emphasised the importance of protecting children from sexual abuse and the need for appropriate punishment and deterrence. The defendant was also ordered to register as a sex offender for a period of 10 years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years 6 months

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 TH [2019] NSWDC 793
Hearing dates:	15 October 2019
Date of orders:	06 December 2019
Decision date:	06 December 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years 6 months
Catchwords:	CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >10 <14 CRIME — Child sex offences — Sexual intercourse with child >14 <16
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518 Cheung v The Queen [2001] 209 CLR 1 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Beattie [2017] NSWCCA 301 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25 R v King [2009] NSWCCA 117 R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353 S v The Queen [1989] HCA 66 The Queen v Kilic [2016] 259 CLR 256
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) TH (Offender)
Representation:	Alexander Terracini (counsel) (Crown) Alexander Cassels (counsel (Offender) Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Legal Aid (NSW) (Offender)
File Number(s):	2017/00391171
Publication restriction:	Statutory non-publication order of the names of the Offender and the Victims or of any information which may enable their identities to be ascertained