District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v WC [2013] NSWDC 197 Hearing dates: 14 January 2013, 8 March 2013, 28 March 2013 Decision date: 15 April 2013 Before: Letherbarrow SC DCJ Decision: Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of five years and six months with an effective non-parole period of three years and six months.
Catchwords: CRIME - Sentencing - aggravated sexual assault - relevance of statistics - offender's physical and mental health - protective custody - objective seriousness post Muldrock - relevance of good character in child sex cases Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900, s61M(2)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, s44(2)
Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Act 2008Cases Cited: R v AEM and others (2002) NSWCCA58
RWNB v R (2010) 202 ACrimR 209
Muldrock v the Queen [2011] 244CLR120
Stewart v R [2012] NSWCCA183
Bondwick v R [2010] NSWCCA 177
R v Rule (unreported) 25 November 1995 NSWCCA
R v PVM (2008) 187 ACrimR 29
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown
WC - OffenderRepresentation: Director of Public Prosecutions
Ms K Stares
Director of Public Prosecutions
Mr A Reetov - Legal Aid NSW
File Number(s): 2011/00268820 Publication restriction: Non-publication order as to names of complainant and accused
Judgment
Introduction
On 8 November 2012 the offender was found guilty at his trial before a jury at Parramatta District Court in relation to the three counts in the indictment presented against him. All three counts were offences of aggravated indecent assault laid pursuant to s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act for which the maximum penalty is ten years imprisonment. The legislation also provides for a standard non-parole period of eight years. These offences were committed by the offender on his stepdaughter, the complainant, in August 2011. The circumstance of aggravation in relation to each count was that the complainant was then aged under sixteen years of age, namely, twelve years. The offender was then aged thirty-nine.
The Sentence Hearing
Upon being found guilty I revoked the offender's bail and stood over his sentence hearing until 14 January 2013 at Sydney. On that date the offender became unwell after arriving at court but before the sentence hearing began and was taken to hospital. As a result, the sentence hearing was adjourned to Parramatta on 8 March last. On that occasion, the offender was represented, as he was at trial, by Ms Stares of counsel. The Crown Prosecutor who ran the trial was then unavailable and Ms Jeffery appeared in her place.
At the outset of the sentence hearing, the complainant read a victims impact statement, a copy of which became exhibit A. The Crown also tendered a copy of the offender's criminal and custodial histories which became exhibits B and C. On behalf of the offender a psychological report from Ms Rima Nasr, dated 21 December 2012 and a report from Dr Calvin Hsieh, cardiologist, dated 20 February 2013,…
Continue reading R v WC
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v WC [2013] NSWDC 197
- Case
- [2013] NSWDC 197
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court involved assessing the objective seriousness of the offence in light of the established principles, and determining the appropriate term and non-parole period for the defendant's imprisonment. The court had to balance the severity of the crime against the defendant's health issues and the possibility of rehabilitation, while also considering the need to protect the defendant from potential harm within the prison system.
In delivering the judgment, the court noted the significant trauma experienced by the victim and the severe breach of trust inherent in the offence. Despite acknowledging the defendant's good character and health issues, the court found that these factors did not sufficiently mitigate the gravity of the crime. The court emphasised the importance of deterrence and the need to protect the community from further harm. Ultimately, the court sentenced the defendant to a total term of imprisonment of five years and six months, with an effective non-parole period of three years and six months. This sentence reflects the court's consideration of both the aggravating and mitigating factors present in the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of five years and six months with an effective non-parole period of three years and six 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.