R -v- WESTERN [2001] WASCA 194
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2001] WASCA 194 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:31/2001 | 14 JUNE 2001 | |
| Coram: | WALLWORK J STEYTLER J MILLER J | 27/06/01 | |
| 22 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed Sentence increased to 4-1/2 years' imprisonment | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | THE QUEEN HAROLD WESTERN |
Catchwords: | Sentence Crown appeal Having a sexual relationship with a girl under the age of 16 years Offender 66 years of age Sexual relationship extending over 18 months Child aged 11 to 12 years at time of offences Offender suffering brain damage with significant cognitive impairment Whether sentence of 2 years' imprisonment manifestly inadequate |
Legislation: | Criminal Code, s 321A Criminal Law (Mentally Impaired Defendants) Act 1996, s 9 |
Case References: | Dempsey v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960059; 9 February 1996 Kakai v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990082; 23 February 1999 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 R v Dinsdale (2000) 115 A Crim R 558 R v Grein [1989] WAR 178 R v H (1993) 66 A Crim R 505 R v Kiltie (1974) 9 SASR 452 R v Lauritson (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 R v Leucus (1995) 78 A Crim R 40 R v Tait (1979) 46 FLR 386 R v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970625; 21 November 1997 R v Wright (1997) 93 A Crim R 48 The Queen v Masolatti [1976] 14 SASR 124 Watson v The Queen [2000] WASCA 119 Britten v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940079; 21 February 1994 R v GP (1997) 93 A Crim R 351 Hogermeer v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970385; 8 August 1997 Indich v The Queen [1999] WASCA 146 Kirk v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980067; 17 February 1998 Leslie v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940080; 21 February 1994 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 M v The Queen [1999] WASCA 52 Mooney [1978] 2 Crim LJ 351 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Munro [2000] WASCA 285 R v Pinder (1992) 8 WAR 19 R v Westall, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980287; 27 May 1998 R v Wozencroft, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 6606; 25 February 1987 Steuart v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 950486; 15 September 1995 Symonds v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980616; 28 October 1998 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : R -v- WESTERN [2001] WASCA 194 CORAM : WALLWORK J
- STEYTLER J
MILLER J
Continue reading R v Western
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- R v Western [2001] WASCA 194
- Case
- [2001] WASCA 194
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of R v Western, the Crown appealed the sentence of the respondent, who had been found guilty of having a sexual relationship with a girl under the age of 16 years. The offender, who was 66 years old at the time of sentencing, had engaged in the relationship over a period of 18 months with the child, who was aged between 11 and 12 years during the offences. The offender suffered from brain damage resulting in significant cognitive impairment. The Crown argued that the sentence of 2 years' imprisonment was manifestly inadequate.
The central legal issue for the court was whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly inadequate given the gravity of the offender's crimes and his cognitive impairments. The court had to balance the need to protect the community and deter similar offences with the offender's significant cognitive impairment and the need for rehabilitation.
The court found that the trial judge had not sufficiently considered the gravity of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the offender's cognitive impairment. The appellate court emphasised the importance of deterrence and the need to protect young children from sexual exploitation. Given these factors, the court determined that the original sentence of 2 years' imprisonment was manifestly inadequate. The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was increased to 4-1/2 years' imprisonment.
The central legal issue for the court was whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly inadequate given the gravity of the offender's crimes and his cognitive impairments. The court had to balance the need to protect the community and deter similar offences with the offender's significant cognitive impairment and the need for rehabilitation.
The court found that the trial judge had not sufficiently considered the gravity of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the offender's cognitive impairment. The appellate court emphasised the importance of deterrence and the need to protect young children from sexual exploitation. Given these factors, the court determined that the original sentence of 2 years' imprisonment was manifestly inadequate. The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was increased to 4-1/2 years' imprisonment.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Sentence increased to 4-1/2 years' 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.