R v Young (a pseudonym) - [2021] NSWDC 702

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Young (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 702
Hearing dates: 20 July 2021
Decision date: 20 July 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year 6 months.

Catchwords:
CRIME - Sexual intercourse with person 10 or over & under 16 years - Attempt sexual intercourse-child 10 to <14 years
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – offences occurred in a dysfunctional household when victim an offender were both children – delay- sentencing child offender as an adults - victim impact - deprived background - special circumstances

Legislation Cited:
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Cases Cited:
Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002, [2013] NSWCCA 115; (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56
Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
KT v R [2008] NSWCA 51; (2008) 182 A Crim R 571
KT v R (2008) 182 A Crim R 571

Category: Sentence
Parties: Steven Young (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (for the offender)
Ms A Bird (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2020/00222921
Publication restriction: The names of the complainant and other family members are not to be published, nor is any other material that could lead to the identification of that complainant: s578A of the Crimes Act 1900; S15A Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987.
The name of the offender is not to be published or any information that may reveal the relationship between the defendant and the complainant. Pseudonyms have been used in this judgement.

sentence – ex tempore revised

Steven Young was born in 1987. He is presently 33. His parents are Brian Young and Susan Young. Donna Young, the complainant, in this matter was born in 1992. She is now 28. Her mother is now deceased. Susan Young, Donna and her sister were placed in Department of Community Services (DoCS) care and foster homes. Eventually she and her sister came to live their grandfather, Brian Young. Steven Young, his half-brother, Matthew, and mother also lived in the home. The complainant witnessed Brian Young physically and mentally abusing Steven, Matthew, Susan and her sister. She herself was flogged. Charges relating to sexual abuse of her by her grandfather, Brian Young are before this Court. His trials are listed for later in the year [Note; now concluded]. There is also material before me that shows Steven Young was also physically and sexually abused in the family home, as were other children.
It is in that context that the matters for sentence today occur. The genesis for the offender’s behaviour was the complete lack of sexual boundaries in the home presided over by the grandfather, Brian Young, and the violence and sexual violence…

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 Young (a pseudonym)

Details

AGLC: R v Young (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 702
Case: [2021] NSWDC 702
Decision Date: 20 July 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Young involved the appellant who was convicted of the offence of attempted sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 16. The victim was aged 10 at the time of the offence. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appellant sought to appeal against the sentence imposed on him. The appeal was centred on the severity of the sentence, with the appellant arguing that it was excessive given the context of the offence.

The central legal issue that the court had to address was whether the sentence imposed was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The court was required to consider several factors, including the nature and circumstances of the offence, the appellant's background and circumstances, and the impact of the offence on the victim. The court also had to consider whether the delay in sentencing the appellant as an adult was a relevant factor.

The court held that the sentence was appropriate given the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community. The court found that the appellant's background and the dysfunctional household in which he grew up were not sufficient to warrant a reduced sentence. The court also noted that the delay in sentencing the appellant as an adult was not a relevant factor in determining the appropriate sentence. The court held that the sentence imposed was proportionate to the offence and took into account all relevant factors.

The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the sentence imposed by the trial judge. The final order of the court was that the appellant's aggregate sentence of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year 6 months was upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year 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 Young (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 702
Hearing dates:	20 July 2021
Decision date:	20 July 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME - Sexual intercourse with person 10 or over & under 16 years - Attempt sexual intercourse-child 10 to <14 years SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – offences occurred in a dysfunctional household when victim an offender were both children – delay- sentencing child offender as an adults - victim impact - deprived background - special circumstances
Legislation Cited:	Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002, [2013] NSWCCA 115; (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56 Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 KT v R [2008] NSWCA 51; (2008) 182 A Crim R 571 KT v R (2008) 182 A Crim R 571
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Steven Young (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the offender) Solicitors: Legal Aid NSW (for the offender) Ms A Bird (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2020/00222921
Publication restriction:	The names of the complainant and other family members are not to be published, nor is any other material that could lead to the identification of that complainant: s578A of the Crimes Act 1900; S15A Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987. The name of the offender is not to be published or any information that may reveal the relationship between the defendant and the complainant. Pseudonyms have been used in this judgement.